Codeshare synchronization within the major alliances (version 2019)
Being in a partnership with other airlines means that the airline has to inform its partners about all own schedule updates in time, and the partner has to react and reflect the impact of the partner’s schedule updates in its own schedule as well. We created a schedule analysis of the members of Star Alliance, Oneworld and Skyteam regarding their codeshare agreements. Read here what we found out.
As the airline industry is among one of the most competitive, airlines often enter into codeshare agreements – whereby partners mutually agree on common routes and flight numbers to generate additional revenue and improve operating margins. Codeshare co-operations between airlines are reflected in the schedules with different Data Element Identifiers (DEI). The operating carrier labels its own operating flight wanted to be offered for a certain partner with a DEI 010 identifying the respective marketing flight. The codeshare partner has to build the according marketing flight as a kind of mirror image using the Data Element Identifier 050.
In our blog post from January 31, 2017 (see here), we already reported about the codeshare synchronization between the members of the major alliances. Back then, we created an analysis of all major alliances for the upcoming six months based on the OAG schedule (see picture below).
How is the situation now, approximately two and a half years later?
Based on the OAG schedule from May 20, 2019, we again created a schedule analysis of the members of the major alliances for the upcoming six months regarding their codeshare agreements.
In the analyzed period, the Star Alliance members have the highest amount of legs in co-operation with 3,941,705 legs in total, followed by SkyTeam (3,274,333) and Oneworld (2,022,730).
Star Alliance and SkyTeam show significant growth rates for their codeshare agreements, whereby Oneworld is with 6% quite moderate.
The picture in terms of schedule synchronization is nowadays nearly similar to 2017. The values in terms of major discrepancies range from 0.14% to 4.74% overall, whereby the figures regarding minor errors go from 0.18% to 0.88%, as visible in the chart as of June 2019.
Although Star Alliance has the highest amount of data to manage, the schedules again show the best quality regarding codeshare synchronization.
Tool support is a success factor
The question is: Why is Star Alliance ahead of the other ones in terms of schedule quality? As written in the previous blog articles about schedule and codeshare management, the success is based on the combination of knowledge, established processes and used tools.
If you have a closer look to the used tools at the airlines of the alliances, you can detect the following findings:
Star Alliance has the best quality. In Star Alliance, most of the members are using a tool, whereby 60% of the members are using a tool of the same provider. Just 15% have no tool in place.
On the second place is Oneworld. Nearly 50% of the members have no system for codeshare management in place. Approximately 25% are using a tool of the same provider, followed by 10% of the members which are using the tool of another provider.
SkyTeam members show the highest “out-of-synchronization” rates. More than 50% are using no tool support, and the majority of the rest is using the product of the same provider.
Obviously, there are significant differences in the strength or power of the used tools. But overall the observer can see: Powerful tool support is essential to be successful in codeshare business.