Airline alliance Oneworld is playing catch-up in tech integration
Initially, Oneworld expects the platform to facilitate cross-airline boarding passes on multi-airline itineraries so that flyers can board flights using whichever airline's app they prefer.
Later, Oneworld expects the platform to facilitate cross-airline bag-tracking and lounge access, said Oneworld CEO Nat Pieper during a press briefing in late June.
Oneworld has lagged behind competitors SkyTeam and Star Alliance on cross-airline integrations. SkyTeam, for example, was already facilitating multi-airline check-in last summer on 95% of the group's global volume, CEO Patrick Roux said at the time.
Pieper said that progress has quickened over the past several months in the alliance, whose largest members are American Airlines, British Airways, Alaska Airlines, Qatar Airways and Japan Airlines. Oneworld's other members are Cathay Pacific, Fiji Airways, Finnair, Iberia, Malaysia Airlines, Oman Air, Qantas, Royal Air Maroc, Royal Jordanian and Sri Lankan Airlines.
Malaysia and Sri Lankan became the first two airlines to integrate into the Oneworld common platform last November. Currently eight airlines have integrated. Oneworld hasn't made the entire list public, but the largest airline to have done so is Qatar, Pieper said.
Crucially, he said, American and British Airways will be integrated by the end of the summer, boosting momentum and scale. American alone accounts for more than 43% of the seats on offer by Oneworld airlines this month, Cirium schedule data shows.
Pieper says that there is peer pressure between Oneworld CEOs to integrate into the platform.
"Once you build momentum, others are more willing to produce," he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Can Microsoft Stock Hit $680 in 2025?
In the wake of its blockbuster fiscal 2025 performance driven by surging Azure and artificial intelligence (AI)-related growth, Microsoft (MSFT) has sparked optimism among analysts about further upside potential. While the stock recently climbed to its 52-week high of $555.45 on July 31, some bullish forecasts are even targeting the elusive $680 mark, which is the current Street high and a level that would represent a 30% upside from current prices. But alongside this enthusiasm, tempered by cautious macroeconomic headwinds, is $680 a realistic milestone for Microsoft or a stretch too far? More News from Barchart UnitedHealth Stock Soars as Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Discloses $1.57B Stake Palantir CEO Alex Karp Sees More Gains Ahead With America-Focused Growth Strategy, Calls U.S. The 'Leader of the Free World' Lucid Motors Is Caught in a Tariff Trap. Is LCID Stock More Likely to Hit $1 or $7 in 2025? Get exclusive insights with the FREE Barchart Brief newsletter. Subscribe now for quick, incisive midday market analysis you won't find anywhere else. About Microsoft Stock Microsoft, headquartered in Redmond, Washington, is a global technology leader known for its expansive portfolio that spans software, cloud computing, AI, gaming, and enterprise solutions. Microsoft has evolved from a dominant operating system provider into a powerhouse across multiple tech verticals. In recent years, Microsoft has aggressively expanded its presence in AI, including a deep partnership with OpenAI, integrating advanced AI capabilities across its product suite. The company boasts a market cap of approximately $3.9 trillion, reflecting its heavyweight status and making it one of the most valuable public companies in the world. MSFT's share price has demonstrated solid resilience and upward momentum throughout 2025, closing the last session at $522.48. On a year‑to‑date (YTD) basis, the stock has delivered a gain of 24%, significantly outperforming broader market indexes like the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite's ($NASX) 12% returns. Driving this momentum is Microsoft's commanding position in cloud and AI, robust financial performance, a strategic expansion through AI infrastructure, and a growing dominance in enterprise AI offerings, which have fueled investor confidence and lifted its market valuation. Microsoft has consistently commanded a premium price tag and is currently trading at 34.95 times forward earnings, higher than many of its industry peers and its historical average. Solid Financial Performance On July 30, Microsoft published its financial results for the fourth quarter ended June 30 and the full fiscal year. The company closed FY2025 with a strong performance across all segments, anchored by impressive momentum in cloud and AI. In Q4 FY2025, the company achieved $76.4 billion in revenue, marking an 18% year‑over‑year (YoY) increase, alongside net income of $27.2 billion, a 24% rise and EPS of $3.65, also up 24%, all significantly surpassing analysts' expectations. The Intelligent Cloud segment delivered standout performance, with revenue hitting $29.9 billion, marking a 26% increase, driven by Azure and other cloud services growth. Microsoft Cloud overall soared to $46.7 billion, up 27%, while Productivity & Business Processes climbed 16% YoY to $33.1 billion, and More Personal Computing rose 9% to $13.5 billion. For the full fiscal year, Microsoft posted $281.7 billion in revenue, a 15% increase over the prior year, and net income of $101.8 billion, up 16%. Operating income rose 17% from the prior year to $128.5 billion, reflecting strong across-the-board growth and a refined cost structure. Its EPS rose 16% YoY to $13.64. Guidance provided painted a confident outlook for the year ahead. The company confirmed that capital expenditures would surpass $30 billion in Q1 as Microsoft scales its AI infrastructure, while maintaining expectations for double-digit growth in both revenue and operating income in FY2026. Analysts remain optimistic as they predict EPS to be around $15.32 for fiscal 2026, up 12.3% YoY, before surging by another 16.8% annually to $17.89 in fiscal 2027. What Do Analysts Expect for Microsoft Stock? Following Microsoft's robust Q4 FY2025 earnings release, analysts have grown increasingly bullish on the stock, with Citi leading the charge by raising its target to a Street-high of $680, up from a previous level, while maintaining a 'Buy' rating. Citi cited Microsoft's standout Q4 performance, particularly Azure's accelerating growth and the company's leadership in AI monetization, as key drivers of its more optimistic outlook. Also, Jefferies raised its price target on Microsoft to $675 from $600, maintaining a 'Buy' rating and naming it a top pick after a strong fiscal Q4, highlighting Azure's impressive 39% growth and robust forward-looking indicators. UBS also joined the optimism, as it raised its price target on Microsoft to $650 from $600, maintaining a 'Buy' rating after strong quarterly results, including 39% Azure growth, impressive backlog and bookings, and solid margins, suggesting potential AI-driven momentum behind Azure's accelerating performance. Overall, MSFT has a consensus 'Strong Buy' rating. Of the 46 analysts covering the stock, 39 advise a 'Strong Buy,' five suggest a 'Moderate Buy,' and the remaining two analysts are on the sidelines, giving it a 'Hold' rating. The average analyst price target for MSFT is $622.25, indicating a potential upside of 19%. Meanwhile, Citi's Street-high target price of $680 suggests that the stock could rally as much as 30%. On the date of publication, Subhasree Kar did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Forbes
16 minutes ago
- Forbes
Target Ends Ulta Deal As Shop-In-Shops Face Strategy-Or-Stopgap Moment
A Week That Changed The Shop-In-Shop Narrative Three headlines in rapid succession this month have shifted the conversation around shop-in-shop strategy: the Target x Ulta split, Claire's bankruptcy, and the Best Buy × IKEA launch. Together, they mark a turning point for the model, away from blanket expansion and toward disciplined, results-driven partnerships. It also highlights that shop-in-shops are not a fix for underlying weaknesses but can work when the synergy is Rise Of Shop-In-Shops Retailers have long used shop-in-shop partnerships to boost traffic and broaden assortments, but the format surged between 2020 and 2022. Target, Kohl's, Macy's and others have leaned into in-store boutiques from recognized brands, hoping to spark visits and incremental sales. Early results were promising. Hosting a popular brand often lifted traffic and softened slower periods, leading some analysts to call the format the next evolution of the department store. By 2023, though, results were mixed. Partnerships drove growth in select categories but rarely fixed broader performance issues. Target and Kohl's, despite high-profile collaborations, still faced sluggish sales. The question became whether the trend had peaked. The model wasn't new; Sephora's 2006 debut inside JCPenney proved a lifeline for its beauty business, but its post-pandemic revival was rapid. Kohl's struck deals with Amazon for returns and with Sephora for beauty. Target rolled out Disney and Apple shop-in-shops, plus Levi's in apparel. Lowe's piloted Petco sections. Macy's revived Toys 'R' Us via in-store toy shops. Momentum was fueled by necessity. Retailers emerging from lockdowns needed fresh reasons to get shoppers back in-store. Partnerships offered new categories without having to build internal expertise, and investor reaction was often positive. Early data backed the excitement: Target credited in-store partners with 'pivotal' contributions to 2022 growth, noting that Disney shop locations saw higher traffic. Kohl's reported high-single-digit sales lifts in Sephora locations. These wins drove a rush to replicate the model, until uneven execution and shifting strategies started to reveal its limits. But as the initial excitement faded, retailers discovered that borrowed credibility has its limits. Why Borrowed Brand Power Has A Shelf Life Retailers from JCPenney, Kohl's, and Macy's to Target have leaned on shop-in-shops to boost traffic, with mixed outcomes. Macy's partnership with Toys 'R' Us brought attention to its toy aisles but hasn't halted share erosion. JCPenney's long-running Sephora alliance ultimately unraveled when Sephora shifted to Kohl's, showing how quickly credibility can move with the partner. Sephora at Kohl's saw rapid early growth, generating strong consumer excitement and reaching $1.8 billion in annual sales in 2024. As the partnership expanded nationwide, sales momentum slowed, with comparable beauty sales in Kohl's stores growing just 13% year-over-year in Q4 2024 and net Sephora sales increasing only 6% in Q1 2025. This deceleration marks a shift from the explosive gains seen in the initial rollout to more moderate, mature growth as most stores now offer Sephora. Even well-matched partnerships can stall. Target's recent breakup with Ulta is the latest reminder that shop-in-shops are no cure-all. Ulta continues to grow in its own channels, but the Target tie-up hit limits as store overlap capped expansion and inconsistent execution diluted the prestige experience. Across these examples, one constant emerges: brand adjacency can open doors, but without operational discipline and sustained relevance, the initial lift fades. When More Stores Can't Save A Failing Business Model Claire's bankruptcy shows that a wide shop-in-shop footprint cannot offset deeper structural weaknesses. Despite a presence across Walmart, Kohl's, Macy's, and more, the accessories retailer was already overextended and struggling with slowing mall traffic, higher interest rates, and tariff pressures. Competition from faster-moving rivals like Lovisa added further pressure. The additional floor space improved visibility but did not translate into long-term viability. By the time it filed for bankruptcy, its second in recent history, Claire's faced heavy debt, store closures that could reach 1,100 U.S. locations, and a fading brand proposition. Its trajectory illustrates how the shop-in-shop model can broaden reach but is ineffective without strong underlying brand health and a sustainable business model. The Best Buy x IKEA Formula: When 1+1 Actually Equals 3 Some partnerships start with a clear, mutual value proposition, and Best Buy x IKEA is one of them. Best Buy's strength in appliances and smart home technology pairs naturally with IKEA's kitchen planning and design expertise, offering customers a more complete solution. The in-store format lets shoppers visualize and plan an entire kitchen, then seamlessly add appliances to their purchase. The rollout is intentionally slow and regional, beginning in select markets to test integration and refine the customer experience before scaling. This phased approach allows the partners to fine-tune operations, from cross-trained staff to digital planning tools, and to ensure the merchandising feels seamless between brands. Although it's too early to call the collaboration a success, it stands out for having a built-in rationale for cross-selling and a customer journey that feels cohesive from the outset, qualities many past shop-in-shop ventures have lacked. The Target x Ulta Split: More Than A Target Story It may be tempting to frame the Target x Ulta breakup this month as another casualty of Target's ongoing challenges, the signs were there months ago. Back in April, Ulta had already slowed its rollout within Target, citing uneven returns and operational friction in certain locations. For Ulta, international expansion and new market entries now promise higher growth potential. For Target, the exit clears space to double down on its own beauty strategy, much as it did when it replaced its Barnes & Noble shop-in-shops with its own in-house book department. The breakup isn't just about one retailer's performance, but underscores a key truth: the most resilient partnerships are those that evolve with market and brand strategies. Why Walmart Chose to Build Rather Than Borrow Target's pivot mirrors a move its largest competitor has already made. Walmart bypassed outside beauty partnerships entirely by launching its own 'Beauty Bar' concept, designed to elevate the category from within. The initiative reflects a broader strategy of owning customer experience end-to-end, controlling merchandising, branding, and margin without splitting the category spotlight. While shop-in-shops can create buzz and bring in new customers, Walmart's approach suggests that in-house development may offer more control, consistency, and long-term brand equity, particularly in categories with strong repeat purchase behavior. The Executive's Guide to Partnership Due Diligence For retail executives, the difference between shop-in-shops and shop-in-slops comes down to rigorous due diligence on several critical factors: Shop-in-shops can deliver early traffic lifts, but incremental gains often taper off once the novelty wears off. Saturation of locations, especially in overlapping markets, can limit growth potential. Without regular refreshes, customer engagement can fade quickly. Each partner brings its own growth goals, operational standards, and merchandising strategies. If these diverge over time, as with Ulta shifting focus to international markets while Target faced broader category challenges, the partnership's relevance can erode. The performance of the host retailer heavily influences the outcome. Even if the shop-in-shop brand is thriving elsewhere, weak foot traffic, poor execution, or inconsistent service in the host environment can undermine results. While attaching to a strong brand can temporarily boost credibility, it does not replace the need for a distinctive in-house value proposition. Relying too heavily on an external partner risks weakening the host's own brand equity. Partnerships should be structured with clear off-ramps. Retailers that have successfully transitioned, like Target replacing Barnes & Noble with its own book department, use the experience and category insights gained to build internal capabilities. Aligning supply chains, staff training, and merchandising processes is critical. Poor fit between partners can lead to inconsistent execution, harming both brands. Issues in the Kohl's x Amazon partnership have been heavily covered. Shop-in-shops work best when the categories naturally complement each other, creating cross-selling opportunities (e.g., Best Buy × IKEA) rather than forcing unrelated adjacencies. Partnerships increasingly need to extend beyond physical space. Integrating loyalty programs, digital try-ons, or unified customer data can drive deeper engagement and measurable ROI. The Verdict: Strategy Or Stopgap? The retail industry just witnessed a master class in strategic discipline. The Target x Ulta wind-down shows that even headline partnerships have a shelf life if they cannot adapt. Target announced its Warby Parker collaboration in February, months before publicly ending the Ulta partnership in August. The new partnership will integrate digital booking and try-on tools into a physical retail setting, targeting markets underserved in optical. This collaboration will test whether Target has learned to architect partnerships for longevity rather than repeat the execution issues that plagued the Ulta relationship. Other retailers are taking different approaches entirely. Walmart chose to build rather than buy credibility. Best Buy x IKEA, while promising on paper, remains in its pilot stage and is still a concept to watch rather than a proven win. Meanwhile, Claire's collapsed under the weight of partnerships that looked impressive on paper but couldn't fix fundamental flaws. For retail executives, the message is unmistakable: The era of shop-in-shops as a quick fix is over. What remains are the hard choices that separate strategic partnerships from costly distractions. The winners will be those who treat these ventures like any other major investment with rigorous due diligence, clear success metrics, and the courage to exit when the numbers don't add up. Losers will find themselves trapped in partnerships that drain resources while competitors build proprietary advantages. Because in retail's new reality, borrowed credibility has an expiration date, but strategic discipline never goes out of style. The question every CEO should ask isn't "Should we do a shop-in-shop?" It's "Can we afford not to have this capability in-house?" The companies that answer honestly and act decisively will own their categories while competitors are still shopping for partners.
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Should You Buy, Sell, or Hold Block Stock After Its Post-Earnings Pop?
Block's (XYZ) stock surge following its Q2 earnings presents a mixed picture for investors. In the June quarter, the fintech company reported revenue of $6.05 billion vs. estimates of $6.31 billion, while earnings fell short at $0.62 per share versus estimates of $0.69 per share. However, strong operational metrics told a different story. Block's gross profit jumped 14% to $2.54 billion, exceeding analyst estimates of $2.46 billion. More importantly, Block raised full-year gross profit guidance to $10.17 billion, representing 14% growth and above its previous forecast of $9.96 billion. Square's payment volume grew 10% to $64.25 billion, demonstrating continued market share gains despite intensifying competition from Toast (TOST) and Fiserv's (FI) Clover. More News from Barchart Why This Cannabis Penny Stock Could Be Wall Street's Next Meme Trade Breakout Apple Stock Is Gaining Momentum, Is AAPL Stock a Buy? Peter Thiel-Backed Bullish Is About to IPO. Should You Buy BLSH Stock? Get exclusive insights with the FREE Barchart Brief newsletter. Subscribe now for quick, incisive midday market analysis you won't find anywhere else. Net income in Q2 more than doubled to $538.5 million, showcasing improved profitability. The company's strong guidance for Q3 gross profit growth of 16% and expectations for 20% operating margins indicate that management is confident in Block's execution. Is Block Stock a Good Buy Right Now? Block's second-quarter earnings call revealed a company hitting its stride through accelerated product development and strategic execution. CEO Jack Dorsey emphasized the transformative impact of increased shipping velocity, highlighting the rapid three-month development cycle for Cash App Pools, a complex feature enabling group money pooling that extends beyond the Cash App network to include Apple Pay (AAPL) and Google Pay (GOOG) (GOOGL) users. The company's artificial intelligence investments are proving transformative, as internal AI coding tools like 'Goose' have accelerated developer productivity and enabled near-zero-cost experimentation. This technological infrastructure is fueling Block's ability to deliver customer value faster while maintaining its focus on the core network effects that originally made Cash App successful. Cash App's banking strategy is gaining traction, with 8 million active users either depositing paychecks or spending over $500 monthly, a 16% year-over-year increase. These high-engagement customers generate over $250 in annualized gross profit per user, triple Cash App's blended average, demonstrating the platform's value as a primary banking relationship. The lending portfolio continues expanding responsibly, with Borrow reaching 6 million monthly active users and $18 billion in annualized originations. Block's proprietary credit scoring model enables approval of 38% more customers compared to traditional VantageScore metrics while maintaining loss rates under 3%. The recent migration to Square Financial Services for loan origination enhances unit economics and provides greater operational control. Square's go-to-market investments are delivering strong returns, with field sales teams showing 5-6 quarter payback periods and the strongest new volume growth since Q3 2021. The launch of Square Handheld hardware and Square AI dashboard tools positions the platform competitively across restaurant, retail, and service verticals. Block's commitment to accepting emerging payment methods, including Bitcoin (BTCUSD) and stablecoins, reinforces its strategy of enabling sellers to capture every transaction opportunity. The company's focus on next-generation financial tools positions it well for sustained growth as product velocity continues accelerating. Is XYX Stock Undervalued? While the earnings pop reflects optimism about raised guidance, Block stock still faces revenue headwinds and competitive pressures. XYZ stock's year-to-date 9.5% decline suggests market skepticism, but improving profitability metrics and market share gains in key verticals provide reasons for cautious optimism. Analysts tracking Block stock forecast sales to rise from $24.1 billion in 2024 to $39.55 billion in 2029. In this period, free cash flow is forecast to improve from $1.55 billion to $5 billion. If XYZ stock is priced at 20 times forward FCF, which is reasonable, it could gain over 120% from current levels over the next four years. Of the 42 analysts covering XYZ stock, 26 recommend 'Strong Buy,' four recommend 'Moderate Buy,' seven recommend 'Hold,' and five recommend 'Strong Sell.' The average Block stock price target is $80.61, roughly 5% above the current price. On the date of publication, Aditya Raghunath did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
