In November 2020, plans were announced for a massive airline merger, between Korea’s two largest airlines. This has been one of the most drawn out airline mergers ever, as over four years later, the deal still hasn’t been finalized. However, that’s expected to change soon, and it will have major implications for aviation in Asia and beyond.
In this post:
Basics of Korean Air’s plan to acquire Asiana Airlines
Shortly after the start of the pandemic, SkyTeam’s Korean Air announced plans to acquire Star Alliance’s Asiana Airlines, in a deal that’s valued at $1.6 billion. At the time, Korean Air was the world’s 18th largest airline, and the plan was for the combined airline to become the 10th largest in the world.
Here are the financial terms of the takeover that were announced at the time, which were complicated due to the ownership structures of the two companies:
- Korean Air planned to raise ~$2.25 billion via rights offerings
- Of that money, ~$1.35 billion would be spent to buy new shares to be sold to Asiana, and the balance would be spent on Asiana perpetual bonds
- Korean Development Bank, the main creditor of Asiana Airlines, would inject ~$722 million into Hanjin KAL, through a rights offering and convertible bonds; in other words, both former parent companies would still have a stake in the combined airline
In many ways, the merger at the time was inevitable due to the impacts of the pandemic. However, arguably there was long term merit to it beyond that.
The truth is that the financial situation at Korean Air and Asiana Airlines was problematic since long before the pandemic. South Korea has a population of around 50 million people, and the country has two full service airlines, making it one of the few countries of its size with two full service airlines.
That doesn’t even begin to address all the competition in South Korea from both foreign airlines and low cost carriers. The deal was probably particularly beneficial for Asiana, which had been on the brink of collapse following the start of the pandemic. In September 2020, the airline received a cash injection from creditors, after the previous largest shareholder pulled out of a sale.
This delayed merger should be finalized soon
As you’d expect, airline mergers don’t get approved overnight. When the merger was first announced, the plan was for the deal to be finalized by the second half of 2021, so the expectation was that it would take around a year.
Everything ended up being way more drawn out than that. The reason is because the deal needs approval from 14 different regulatory authorities, and this has been really slow to happen. There’s finally some major progress on that front, as the merger has now received the green light from 13 of 14 regulators.
At this point, the United States is the last remaining country that needs to approve the deal, and the expectation is that this will happen in the coming weeks, by the end of 2024. So while we don’t know exactly when the merger will happen, there’s finally a light at the end of the tunnel.
In the process of getting approval from so many regulators, Korean Air and Asiana have had to make quite some concessions. This ranges from selling Asiana’s cargo business, to transferring routes to Europe to domestic competitor T’Way Air, and much more.
What to expect from the new Korean Air
With this merger close to being finalized, what should we expect from the combined airline? First of all, while the two brands will continue to operate separately for the time being, the long term plan is for Korean Air to be the surviving brand, and for Asiana to disappear.
For that matter, the two carriers also have low cost subsidiaries — Korean Air has Jin Air, while Asiana has Air Busan and Air Seoul. The plan is for Jin Air to absorb both Air Busan and Air Seoul, making that quite a large carrier. Jin Air will likely then be bigger than Korea’s two other major low cost carriers, Jeju Air and T’Way Air.
When it comes to commercial arrangements, Korean Air’s partnerships are expected to survive, and not Asiana’s. This means that the combined airline will be part of SkyTeam, and Asiana will leave Star Alliance. Keep in mind that Korean Air and Delta have a joint venture, and cooperate very closely.
So this merger is great news for Delta, given that Korean Air’s network out of Seoul Incheon will get even bigger, and Delta is big in funneling its Asia traffic through that airport (I’m so happy I can write something positive about Delta, so that there’s no meltdown in the comments section!).
When it comes to passenger fleets, Korean Air currently has a fleet of 135 aircraft, while Asiana has a fleet of 69 aircraft. Between the mainline fleets of the two airlines, there are currently A220-300s, A321s, A321neos, A330-300s, A350-900s, A380s, 737 MAX 8s, 737-800s, 737-900s, 747-8s, 777-200s, 777-300s, 787-9s, and 787-10s.
So as you can see, there’s a lot of complexity there. A couple of thoughts:
- Korean Air is undergoing quite the fleet modernization, as it’s currently taking delivery of A321neos, 737 MAX 8s, and 787-10s, and has A350-900s, A350-1000s, and 777-9s, on order
- For those of us who are fans of A380s and 747-8s, Korean Air’s plan is to retire A380s in the coming years, and keep the 747-8s until the early 2030s
Bottom line
Over four years ago, Korean Air and Asiana Airlines announced plans to merge, creating a new mega-airline. While this was initially supposed to happen within a year, there have been major delays due to regulatory approval. Fortunately this process seems to almost be complete, and the expectation is that the merger will be finalized this month.
This is good news for SkyTeam and bad news for Star Alliance, and probably bad news for consumers on the whole, given that a competitor is being eliminated. Then again, for a country of Korea’s size, two full service airlines may be a bit of an overkill.
It’s going to be really interesting to see how the integration between the two airlines works out, as it’s quite a project. Since Korean Air has a major fleet modernization planned, I imagine we’ll see older aircraft retired pretty aggressively in the coming years.
What do you make of Korean Air’s acquisition of Asiana?
So exactly who is saying that the US will give approval by the end of the year? Right now, without any kind of a hint at a source, I think it's the pixies who live in Ben's head. I wouldn't have published this until some kind of official notice from Washington came out.
And as for your alliance freaks, with Star, you'll go far. With Sky, you'll probably die. With DL, you'll burn in hell.
Not a biased commenter with a one-eyed view of their team, terminally afraid that their choice will be outshone by some other airline. Any other airline. No, sir-ee!
I’ve flown with both KE and OZ and neither has impressed me. KE were very meh on both the ground and in the air. OZ were fine in the air, even upgrading me to their “we don’t sell first class anymore” business suite seat, but their ground experience was worse than lackluster. The OZ lounges at ICN were grim.
Yeah, KE is definitely among the least compelling East Asian partners. They're fine, but not good. Would prefer ANA, JAL, CX, BR, among others on similar trips
and the growth of DL's TPAC system alongside KE is coming alongside the growth of what will move from a focus city to a hub in AUS over the next 5 years. Add on further int'l growth at BOS, SEA and LAX and DL has alot that will take place at it moves to its 100 year celebration and beyond.
pathetic lunatic
From a genuione place, do you have any idea how the US Asiana flights will be handled?
I can't imagine them all being axed, otherwise, what would Korean Air do with all those extra widebodies?
My guess work is that a lot of them are kept like SEA, SFO, etc. LAX might be replaced w/ a Delta metal flight though?
Death to Delta and all who gladly fly her.
They won't have enough gates in AUS for anything but a focus city... and it's not even relevant to this post idiot
The implications of the US allowing the KE/OZ merger to go through without limitations would seem to say that the present size of KE plus OZ in the US plus the size of the JV with DL and any growth potential is not limited - or at least can be managed with very limited slot adjustments.
The combination of KE plus OZ across the Atlantic moves them far beyond the size of any other carrier...
The implications of the US allowing the KE/OZ merger to go through without limitations would seem to say that the present size of KE plus OZ in the US plus the size of the JV with DL and any growth potential is not limited - or at least can be managed with very limited slot adjustments.
The combination of KE plus OZ across the Atlantic moves them far beyond the size of any other carrier in their home country to the US; given how much DL is growing in ICN and will continue to do so both as new routes are added and as A350-1000s enter service will create a powerhouse that no other carrier or alliance can match.
Add in that DL will grow in E. Asia to other countries but as part of the JV and it is not at all unrealistic to think that DL could take the dominant position across the Pacific between its own metal and its JV
DL and KE could have an unforgettable Christmas of 2024.
they dont have any flights over the atlantic though
Star Alliance lately has not done so well. First, it lost SAS and soon will lose Asiana to SkyTeam. Latety, there is not really any good news for Star customers. United does not cooperate well with Singapore or EVA. It depends on the JV with ANA, which does not serve many destinations in Southeast Asia. Short routes, like Ha Noi to HongKong or Ho Chi Minh to Kula Lumpur require long connection and 35,000 miles...
Star Alliance lately has not done so well. First, it lost SAS and soon will lose Asiana to SkyTeam. Latety, there is not really any good news for Star customers. United does not cooperate well with Singapore or EVA. It depends on the JV with ANA, which does not serve many destinations in Southeast Asia. Short routes, like Ha Noi to HongKong or Ho Chi Minh to Kula Lumpur require long connection and 35,000 miles for a one-way award ticket, which are ridiculous to customers. Star Alliance seems to lose Southeast Asia marketshare to others. And in the last few years, it has not added any new exciting members to the alliance.
I was just thinking the same.
@Ben any thoughts on Star Alliance and where they are headed?
On another note, a post on the value of alliances and how they have changed over time could be interesting as well.
You mean United loses Southeast Asia. Singapore Airlines dominates that market in terms of full service carriers.
My point is how many times one books a trip from US and see a codeshare or connecting involving Singapore, EVA, Air China? Rarely. One would see United/ANA most of the times.
Star Alliance is very strong in Asia. From my place in Indonesia we fly Star airlines almost exclusively, except domestic in Indonesia. For regional and long haul we have Sq, Nh, Tg, Tk, Eva and other choices, all quite good. For some shorter point to point we might use Air Asia or similar airlines who are not part of any alliance. But generally Star airlines are much more available for us than Sky or Oneworld.
Why the reflexive blame for United?
In the '90s-'10s, it was SQ who rebuffed UA's multiple attempts at a closer cooperation, in favor of US, AS, and even briefly DL.
Like who?
Star will gain ITA soon, stealing it from SkyTeam after LH purchase
ITA has very little value as part of a JV to N. America compared to even SK which switched alliances.
Italy is a large local market but there are and will be restrictions on what AZ and UA can do as part of a JV while that does not appear to be the case at least so far with KE/OZ and DL in the ICN market.
Hey, Timbits, your precious SAS wasn't a part of the Star joint venture across the Atlantic. alITAlia will be as part of LHG. Suck it up.
Korean Air and the Korean development bank have waited a long time to finalize this deal. It will rearrange the air service market in Asia and yes Delta will benefit. I expect we will see new routes announced by Korean and Delta in the next few weeks. ICN is simply the best positioned hub in Asia to grow.
Star Alliance loosing clout and size, bit by bit. Adding ITA does not help much, they need a strong middle east carrier (TK sucks due to poor ground service, IST being a super-long-taxi mess, stressfull boarding and very inconsistent onboard product)
I agree TK needs to get its act together. They are too much under political influence. It employs too many Erdoğa cronies, who are loyal to him but have no idea how to run an airline.
it's unfortunate because TK has so much promise now that they've moved to the new airport... such an upgrade over Ataturk
I hated the new mega terminal, makes me wonder how bad the old airport was.
What is wrong with the new terminal?
I just hope VS don’t put the awful B787 on the route when they get the green light to start services.
Yeah I don't understand why VS keeps bringing that terrible product everytime they launch a new route.
It's 2024, VS need to get w/ the program and update their seats.
RIP Asiana and their beautiful livery.
It appears that KE got a verbal notice from DOJ that they won't sue the merger. Hard to believe but KE said so according to news outlets. Still expecting some conditions from the US but the merger is basically done by now.
Someone mentioned ICN terminal situation. ICN just finished phase 4 expansion, opening something this week, with T2 being twice larger. The plan is to move Asiana and its LCCs into T2. The...
It appears that KE got a verbal notice from DOJ that they won't sue the merger. Hard to believe but KE said so according to news outlets. Still expecting some conditions from the US but the merger is basically done by now.
Someone mentioned ICN terminal situation. ICN just finished phase 4 expansion, opening something this week, with T2 being twice larger. The plan is to move Asiana and its LCCs into T2. The expanded terminal still 'merges' at the central part of T2, meaning crowded central area and people flow issue that Ben recently pointed out will be worse.
Not hard to believe at all, considering that even with the merged airline and the j/v with DL, you'll still have all three other US longhaul airlines serving ICN from at least 3 different gateways, with nothing stopping them from expanding to additional gateways if they chose.
USA-ROK have open skies, and ICN isn't particularly constrained, so there's little reason for competitive concern, in an antitrust context............... long as no...
Not hard to believe at all, considering that even with the merged airline and the j/v with DL, you'll still have all three other US longhaul airlines serving ICN from at least 3 different gateways, with nothing stopping them from expanding to additional gateways if they chose.
USA-ROK have open skies, and ICN isn't particularly constrained, so there's little reason for competitive concern, in an antitrust context............... long as no one brings up the topic of nonstops to Busan. ;)
I love how Ben bubble rapped the comment section for the resident Delta psycho after he threw a fit yesterday.
I have no opinion as to whether or not this should be approved, but I am confident in my opinion that this is terrible for those playing the frequent flyer game. Asiana has for years been one of the easiest and cheapest redemptions to Asia, even having excellent availability using Avianca miles. But I have never been able to redeem anything on Korean and they screwed Chase card holders by removing the ability to transfer...
I have no opinion as to whether or not this should be approved, but I am confident in my opinion that this is terrible for those playing the frequent flyer game. Asiana has for years been one of the easiest and cheapest redemptions to Asia, even having excellent availability using Avianca miles. But I have never been able to redeem anything on Korean and they screwed Chase card holders by removing the ability to transfer Chase miles into their system with little or no warning.
For those of us whose main interest in Korea-based airlines is about award redemption for flights to Asia, the merger isn't good news for two reasons:
1) OZ's US routes completely overlap with KE's, so they'll likely be cut.
2) Transferability of Mariott points to OZ will likely end (KE disallowed the transfer to its own program earlier this year).
I wonder what'll happen to people booked on Asiana's scheduled routes when the merger happens. Lots of 75k Aeroplan redemptions to be had on Asiana metal.
Would they really just axe all of the US routes? If so, where would they utilize their widebodies else on? I think there's a case to be made for there to be multiple ICN flights a day from certain hubs.
I can see KE maintaining the additional Asiana flights...
I wonder what'll happen to people booked on Asiana's scheduled routes when the merger happens. Lots of 75k Aeroplan redemptions to be had on Asiana metal.
Would they really just axe all of the US routes? If so, where would they utilize their widebodies else on? I think there's a case to be made for there to be multiple ICN flights a day from certain hubs.
I can see KE maintaining the additional Asiana flights along the West Coast, modelling how ANA/JAL have multiple daily flights along w/ their JV partners. SFO/SEA might remain, don't know about LAX maybe Delta launches their LAX-ICN flight to replace Asiana?
What I wonder is how the A321neos fit in all of this as they're equipped with 2 different engines. Since KE will be the operating carrier, do they operate the 2 engines simultaneously or slowly get rid of them? The 777s and A350s can easily be integrated as they use the same engines and they have plenty of life left in them in both carriers. The A350s can easily reconfigured to KE spec. Everything else...
What I wonder is how the A321neos fit in all of this as they're equipped with 2 different engines. Since KE will be the operating carrier, do they operate the 2 engines simultaneously or slowly get rid of them? The 777s and A350s can easily be integrated as they use the same engines and they have plenty of life left in them in both carriers. The A350s can easily reconfigured to KE spec. Everything else is on their way out.
Once they're fully integrated, would they be able to fit in Terminal 2 with its partners there as well or they'll have to move back to Terminal 1?
I’m wondering the same re: terminals. As of now freely flowing between the two terminals isn’t allowed - wonder if that will change as I don’t think T2 can support both without significant consolidation.
The combined carrier will downsize routes as they a lot of them overlap, but the amount of aircraft is another story. When JAL merged with JAS in '04, they held on to their 777s till 2020 (and they were delivered in '96).
Looking at both of their 777s age, majority of OZs 777s have been delivered between mid-07 to mid-2013 so plenty of life left in them while KEs 2ERs have been delivered between...
The combined carrier will downsize routes as they a lot of them overlap, but the amount of aircraft is another story. When JAL merged with JAS in '04, they held on to their 777s till 2020 (and they were delivered in '96).
Looking at both of their 777s age, majority of OZs 777s have been delivered between mid-07 to mid-2013 so plenty of life left in them while KEs 2ERs have been delivered between '07-'08. But with the 787s and A350s coming in, they can easily be retired.
KE and OZ's 777 and A350 do NOT use the same engines, A350 is RR, 772ER are PW4090, 77W are GE90
What I meant was that they can easily be integrated as the A350s use Rolls while the 777/A330 use Pratts. The neos use either CFMs (for OZ) or Pratts (for KE).
For the amount of neos coming in, it'll be interesting to watch what they decide to do.
In case if Proximanova spreads a false information again, I'll inform that OZ 777s all have a flatbed business class, with all seats having a direct aisle access. So don't worry about it, although Proximanova keeps faking that it features 2-3-2 angled seats.
Not a surprise, if you think about where is he coming from tho.
But KE 772s and some 77Ws have such seats inside.
Avoid those planes. And their A380s.
In case if Proximanova spreads a false information again, I'll inform that OZ 777s all have a flatbed business class, with all seats having a direct aisle access. So don't worry about it, although Proximanova keeps faking that it features 2-3-2 angled seats.
Not a surprise, if you think about where is he coming from tho.
But KE 772s and some 77Ws have such seats inside.
Avoid those planes. And their A380s.
How did they gain a five-star rating with such hardwares, maybe with some momey?
Happy travels.
Awaiting the comments
Why does the us have to give approval?
The airlines are not required to get U.S. approval, but if the merged entity wants to be able to serve the U.S., they needed to seek U.S. approval. Same as with the E.U. Or China for that matter.
It's not so much that they need it to serve the US, it's that the US (and other nations whom the merged airline would serve) may have competitive concerns that require concessions/divestments/etc.
Also, there's the issue of things such as slots, airport facilities, etc where the bilateral agreement may simply allow for inheritance by the surviving entity, or (as in some countries) require the surviving company to put some/all of them back into a pool...
It's not so much that they need it to serve the US, it's that the US (and other nations whom the merged airline would serve) may have competitive concerns that require concessions/divestments/etc.
Also, there's the issue of things such as slots, airport facilities, etc where the bilateral agreement may simply allow for inheritance by the surviving entity, or (as in some countries) require the surviving company to put some/all of them back into a pool to be re-bid or re-purchased.
Thus, it's better to just get all of this stuff out of the way BEFORE pushing through a merger; rather than have a hasty merger, but then get blindsided by such requirements.
P.S. btw, one of the main reasons that companies like Air France and KLM decided to remain separate operations held by a unified entity, is to avoid having to go through all of this.
Not every country has bilateral treaty with the single unified EU, and as such may still have French rights and Dutch rights for example, which would have to be renegotiated (and potentially lost) if AF/KL were to ever merge certificates into an actual single airline.
@Mather why just point out U.S. approval? You do not have an issue with the approval from 13 other regulators? They won’t need it if they just want to drop all of their operations to the U.S.
Really, this has been one of the longest-drawn-out mergers I’ve ever seen, and seems to drag on endlessly along with the process of Oman Air joining Oneworld. For comparison, it took just over 3 years between the Tata Group announcing its takeover of Air India (October 2021) and the cessation of the Vistara brand (November 2024) after being folded into AI.
Not only will Korean and Asiana merge as such, but so will their respective...
Really, this has been one of the longest-drawn-out mergers I’ve ever seen, and seems to drag on endlessly along with the process of Oman Air joining Oneworld. For comparison, it took just over 3 years between the Tata Group announcing its takeover of Air India (October 2021) and the cessation of the Vistara brand (November 2024) after being folded into AI.
Not only will Korean and Asiana merge as such, but so will their respective low-cost subsidiaries, Jin Air for KE and Air Busan and Air Seoul for OZ — in the same way that AirAsia India was merged into Air India Express. That will further delay the process, given that Busan’s municipal government will be far from pleased that its ‘hometown’ airline will no longer exist.
Moreover, I have to imagine that a new livery and logo will be unveiled at some point in 2025–26, just like Air India had done in 2023, and in fact a trademark for a new logo was revealed in January 2022. I also observed in Ben’s recent KE A321neo review that there’s a new font at the bottom of the moving map, in the ‘Distance Travelled’ section — exactly the same font as the new logo trademark — which hints at a new custom corporate font for KE.
Moreover South Korea has a large number of independent low-cost carriers, far more than Japan or Taiwan, aside from the ones owned by KE and OZ. While T’Way Air has so far been the main beneficiary, other players like Jeju Air, Eastar Jet and the all-787 operator Air Premia will also need to amp up their game with there being only one full-service carrier going forward. Meanwhile Taiwan shows no signs of having any of its three FSCs (BR, CI and JX) merging with any of the others any time soon, which is surprising to say the very least. I can hear the sound of masonry coming below, but I’ll pay no attention to it!
Disappointing, but expected. Asiana's branding is so much more exciting and I really enjoyed the flights I took with them over the summer, in anticipation of this news. They will be sorely missed.
@Proximanova
I don't need your or anyone's attention, how sad that you tried to act cool but turned out to be different.
Nice try.
You seem to not have any idea about the difference between a friendly and a hostile mergers.
AI-UK merger would take shorter time, because Tata owns both.
But because KE-OZ merger is between two separate parties and the majority of voices from in and out of the...
@Proximanova
I don't need your or anyone's attention, how sad that you tried to act cool but turned out to be different.
Nice try.
You seem to not have any idea about the difference between a friendly and a hostile mergers.
AI-UK merger would take shorter time, because Tata owns both.
But because KE-OZ merger is between two separate parties and the majority of voices from in and out of the nation were against it, it had to took so long.
But of course you didn't give a damn, because you thought it was a chance to denounce Korea once again.
Another nice try.
Verdict:
Nice try, you aren't fooling anyone here.
It's crazy that you do all of those in a good conscience.
If South Korea having 2 full service carriers is an overkill, how do you explain Taiwan having three?
@ Glen -- You're absolutely right that Taiwan is the one exception, and is able to have three carriers, despite having so much smaller of a population. The airlines do really well with connecting traffic, and manage to be profitable.
For whatever reason, it's something that most other markets just can't sustain, and that's also evident based on Korean Air and Asiana's historical financial results.
I don't think it's an exception. It's overkill and will eventually show.
Just a revenge business because papa can't be satisfied.
For now, it's good for customers.
i would imagine it has something to do with
1) TSMC. Its biggest customers are all on the US west coast, which probably explains why there are 13x daily flights to SFO/LAX/SEA between CI/BR/JX (and even a 1x daily flight to ONT on CI). There were already strong links between Taiwan and the US tech industry pre-AI boom, but the explosion in demand for advanced chips has probably turbocharged O/D business travel even more.
...i would imagine it has something to do with
1) TSMC. Its biggest customers are all on the US west coast, which probably explains why there are 13x daily flights to SFO/LAX/SEA between CI/BR/JX (and even a 1x daily flight to ONT on CI). There were already strong links between Taiwan and the US tech industry pre-AI boom, but the explosion in demand for advanced chips has probably turbocharged O/D business travel even more.
2) It also appears that the limited nonstop capacity between China and the US has been largely to the gain of the taiwanese airlines. I might attribute to this to the fact that Chinese pax prefer flying on airlines that speak Chinese. I will say, KE does serve a ton more second and third tier cities in China than BR or CI, but most of the profits being made is probably on lucrative long haul business traffic out of places like Shanghai, Beijing, Guangzhou.
3) TPE is also (IMO) a marginally better gateway to southeast Asia than ICN. For example, SFO -> TPE -> BKK is 14 hours on the first leg and 4 hours on the second, while SFO -> ICN -> BKK is 13 hours and 6 hours - a saving of 1 hour. Personally, if I need to connect, I usually prefer 1 long leg and 1 short leg, versus 1 medium-long leg and 1 medium-short leg.
It's a very important fact here. Taiwanese carriers speak Mandarin, therefore they can communicate natively with the many Chinese nationals that fly transpacific. There are well over a billion Chinese nationals in the world vs a sum total of 50M South Koreans.
Cathay Pacific is also seeing a huge resurgence. At the end of the day, for many of the elderly and foreigners, they are more comfortable with communicating in Mandarin, therefore, they end up...
It's a very important fact here. Taiwanese carriers speak Mandarin, therefore they can communicate natively with the many Chinese nationals that fly transpacific. There are well over a billion Chinese nationals in the world vs a sum total of 50M South Koreans.
Cathay Pacific is also seeing a huge resurgence. At the end of the day, for many of the elderly and foreigners, they are more comfortable with communicating in Mandarin, therefore, they end up being the preferred choice on both sides of the ocean.
Furthermore, I think it helps that CI/BR/JX, while all full service, are relatively smaller carriers than KE/ANA/JAL individually. And CI/BR/JX don't need to worry about domestic operations whatsover.
Finally, Taiwan has vastly higher PPP, around $77k vs Japan's $50k, South Korea at $63k. Which helps a lot for cost structures.