Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What If Lorenzo Bought National?  
User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5002 posts, RR: 21
Posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3506 times:

As is well known, Frank Lorenzo put National Airlines into play and ended up losing the bidding war to Pan Am. He then turned his attention as well as the money he earned from the National stock he owned towards Continental. The result of that merger is also well documented.
My question is: If Lorenzo had succeeded in merging Texas Internatonal with National, and Pan Am was forced to look elswhere for an instant domestic system, how much do you think this would have changed the current US airline landscape?




Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBluewave 707 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3152 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3490 times:

Wow, that is an interesting question.

Merging Texas International & National would have created a big network of domestic travel. Actually, with the smaller routes that TI had, it would have benefitted PA as well.

You had three airlines 1) a growing regional carrier, 2) a mid-size domestic carrier [with some int'l routes], and 3) a major international airline. PA might have had better success. I emphasize might, because even if all this occurred, would this have prevented PA103? Which was the "iceberg" that sank the mighty "Clipper".

In theory, a combination of all three would have given AA, TW and UA especially more competition.



"The best use of your life will be to so live your life, that the use of your life will outlive your life" -- D Severn
User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5002 posts, RR: 21
Reply 2, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3481 times:

Well thanks, but I think you missed the point. Pan Am ended up with National, which was a disaster. If TI and NA had merged, PA would have been left out of that and been forced to find another domestic merger candidate. Who would they have looked at and would it have changed the current landscape much? It's doubtful at that point a 3-way merger would have been allowed.


Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3802 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3454 times:

What if Frank Lorenzo had bought National?

He would have plundered and pillaged it for his own personal gain, exactly as he did with every airline in which he had controlling interest.


User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3446 times:

I don't understand PA103 as being the Iceberg that sank the clipper. I thought that was a terrorist act. It didn't have anything to do with the safety of the airline.... did it?

User currently offlineIsitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 24
Reply 5, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3393 times:

If Frankie would have NOT been involved with EA and picked NA, I think Pan AM would have looked at EA. But go back in history. Ea was picked by Loenzo because they were in dire straight and needed a white knight. The EA board thought that was Frank, and went with his Texas Inter'l offer. Frank was really Darth Vader, not a white knight and the rest in history.
ALSO...Pan Am never turned a profit after buying NA in 80. NEVER! They slowly sold everything off through the 80's and, yes I think Flight 103 was the spike in the heart of that company. Financialy, they were nose down down long before flt103.



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineN312RC From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 2682 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 3359 times:

Not to mention how PA botched the integration of the PA and NA workforces..... Creating two "teams" of employees just screwed everything up.

I think if Lorenzo bought National he would have stayed away from Eastern. He would have done the same thing he did at EA though, pillage the company like a Viking invader. Rip it apart limb by limb till there was nothing left.



Fly Delta's Big Jets!
User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5002 posts, RR: 21
Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 3350 times:

He was going for "critical mass" when he went after EA. A TI/NA merger would have achieved what TI/CO did in terms of network: IAH hub, with MIA instead of the DEN hub and a nice presence on the Eastern Seaboard, PLUS Heathrow and several other Euro cities. What he would have done after that is anybodys guess but I don't believe he would have torn up the National system the way he later did EA.
Without NA, Pan Am would have looked for another merger partner, and I think EA was much too large for them to absorb at the time. If they had waited a bit, they could of had Republic (and I mean the Republic with the full blown North Central, Southern and Hughes Airwest systems, which would have nicely covered all their gateways, and they might not have needed to sell the Pacific to United, which after all was the transaction that started the 1980's merger mania)



Next Up: STL-LGA-RIC-ATL-STL
User currently offlineCody From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1932 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3318 times:

I like this question and I too have pondered it. I think National would still be here today had TI bought them. They would have still have the combined National/Texas International Houston hub. The PEOPLExpress merger would have still happened because Texas Air bought PEOPLExpress. The Frontier purchase would also have happened. New York Air would still have been combined into the mass as well. Then, as you have seen throughout history, Denver would have been abandoned, Newark and Houston would have been built up. The Miami operation is the wild card. Gordon Bethune (I assume he would have been hired) may not have seen a need for a Miami hub. Therefore, I think MIA would have been downsized in favor of Houston. So what you have is Continental of today, except it would be called National. I almost forgot....Cleveland. It would be a National hub because Lorenzo set that up for Continental. He would have set it up for National as well. Eastern would still have been bought by Texas Air. Now, the mystery is, "what would have become of Continental? Would Pan Am have purchased them? Maybe. It would have given Pan Am a hub in Houston, Denver, and a little focus on LAX. It may have been a better fit for Pan Am, than National was. So to finalize my theory, we would have exactly what we have today, except National would be where Continental is and Continental would be gone.

User currently offlineSrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3281 times:

The main reason why Texas Air Corp. bought Eastern was for the System One Reservations System. Once he (Lorenzo) was able to get a hold of that, he really did not care about the rest of EAL. System One was one of the few parts of Eastern worth any money, other than the Eastern Shuttle.


If National had ended up being owned by Texas Air Corp, Pan Am would have gone after either Continental, Braniff, or Eastern (whichever two that did not get picked up by PA would have gone bust within a decade). Pan Am would have still failed, because they still would have made the same mistakes no matter which airline they picked up. Texas Air Corp. would have probably picked up another airline or two as well, PeoplExpress and Western. Delta would have made a run at PSA and Alaska Airlines.


User currently offlineAirways6max From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3262 times:

National and Texas Int'l probably would have been merged into one airline known as National. National would have gotten a larger domestic network and it would probably still be around as a big domestic airline. Pan Am probably still would have gone broke--Flight 103 happened because Pan Am was negligent in checking baggage for bombs, not because of bad luck.

User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13510 posts, RR: 62
Reply 11, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3233 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Here's another interesting point to ponder:

Assume TI goes after NA, beating out PA. PA goes in search of another domestic carrier.

Let's assume EA and RC were potential partners. EA was too big, and had the same bloated infrastructure that PA had - it would be the equivalent of tying two anchors together and expecting the result to be a life raft.

RC however, had lower costs and a pretty decent route system that would have complemented PA nicely.

So let's assume a PA/RC marriage gets pulled off. Odds are that they'd be fairly successful, not hemorrhaging cash anywhere near as fast as PA did after picking up NA.

End result? A large international carrier, with a decent domestic system feeding its Transatlantic and Transpacific routes.

Here's a point to ponder, though:

Assuming PA would be thriving after the purchase of RC, that would mean they would not need to sell their Pacific route system to UA.

UA had a crippling strike in 1985 that some argue they wouldn't have survived had it not been for their Pacific feed.

So...where would UA be today had Lorenzo bought National?



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13510 posts, RR: 62
Reply 12, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3168 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

So...where would UA be today had Lorenzo bought National?

C'mon folks, I'm curious...I'd like to hear what people think would have unfolded for UA and other majors had Lorenzo bought NA instead of PA.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineCody From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1932 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3133 times:

OK, I think Continental and Pan Am would have merged.........not Republic and Pan Am. I also think Continental would have fit better with Pan Am in terms of route structure. Costs may have been a little too high though. But anyway, the Pan Am/Continental operation would have had a pretty good domestic feed to both Asia and they easily could have reorganized it a little to better feed Europe and Latin America. Hubs would have been in Denver, Guam, Tokyo, Honolulu, Miami, JFK and some big city service to LAX and SFO. The people in charge would have forced the combined entity to give up some of Asia

Now getting to United. They still would have gotten the rights for Seattle to Tokyo. That was not part of the Pan Am deal. The open route authorities left from the Pan Am/Continental merger would have allowed United to pick and choose their gateway cities to better suite them. More nonstop service from ORD, SFO and perhaps even IAD later down the line. They would have had no interest in serving Asia from JFK (an inherited Pan Am route). I think the strike would have eventually worked itself out just like it did. The combined Pan Am/Continental would have faltered from United's more economic Asian routes (no stopping in Guam or HNL) and eventually would have folded. So basically, Lorenzo's purchase of National would have had a more positive effect on UAL than UAL's purchase of pan Am's routes. That's what I think.


User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13510 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3107 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Cody -

While I understand your way of thinking, one thing I'm confused by is this:

The open route authorities left from the Pan Am/Continental merger would have allowed United to pick and choose their gateway cities to better suite them. More nonstop service from ORD, SFO and perhaps even IAD later down the line....The combined Pan Am/Continental would have faltered from United's more economic Asian routes (no stopping in Guam or HNL)

Precisely where UA would have gotten more Asian routes than a combined PA/CO would have? The dominant carriers between the U.S. and Asia are UA and NW - UA inheriting their Pacific ops from PA.

So without that, how would UA have built a large Pacific presence? AA, DL, and the other U.S. carriers (CO excluded, thanks to Air Mike) haven't managed to successfully build up the Pacific since deregulation - how do you propose UA would have done this?



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineTexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4273 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 3083 times:

EA CO AS:
Very interesting idea of Pan Am purchasing Republic, especially since they served more domestic destinations than any other airline for a little while in the early 1980s. It certainly would have given Pan Am a domestic route structure, which they desperately wanted, but it probably would have helped Pan Am more to acquire someone with feeds into the NYC/MIA area (Eastern) or the West Coast (Continental) to allow better connections to the international destinations.
As far as UA, that truly is a good question. As you stated, UA would not have the Pacific routes and likely would not have Heathrow. It is hard to imagine. As long as they continued to build up ORD, though, they would probably have been ok for a while. Also, the 1985 strike may have been averted or ended quickly because of the lack of available cash. United would still be a major player in the domestic market, but have no idea where they might stand in the international market.
And the same question could be asked of Delta, could it not? DL bought a good amount of Pan Am assets, most notably the Shuttle and the European routes. Where would DL be if this had occured? Obviously still a major player domestically, but they would still have to be picking their way in and out of European markets.

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13510 posts, RR: 62
Reply 16, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3054 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

And the same question could be asked of Delta, could it not? DL bought a good amount of Pan Am assets, most notably the Shuttle and the European routes. Where would DL be if this had occured?

Definitely! You raise another very valid question as well! The "what if?" scenarios are so interesting to ponder.

It's probably safe to assume that DL would still pick up WA and everything that went with it - SLC, LAX, and lots of Western U.S. and Mexico operations - but they pared them down, save for SLC.

So the "in play" carriers at this point would be Frontier, PeoplExpress, and New York Air.

Everyone knew AA wanted more West Coast ops, and Frontier would have been an attractive target. This would have had AA and UA battling each other at both ORD as well as DEN!

PeoplExpress and New York Air? I can see EA going there if the money could have been arranged. Would it have worked? That's another story.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineEsajh From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3036 times:

I read this thread and I am hurt. But what hurts more, is the realization so many of you forgot the thousands of employees that the only man found UNFIT to run an airline, Frank Lorenzo, destroyed. The hundreds of thousands that directly and indirectly were affected by this man and how those good people seem to be forgotten. First, for all of the speculators out there I suggest you read something about Lorenzo’s history “Grounded” by Aaron Bernstein, “Hard Landings” by Thomas Petzinger, or “Flying the Line, Part 2”; before you state all these unreal assertions.

First thing you need to know that Lorenzo NEVER intended to buy National (his own words, read Grounded and Hard Landings!) His intent was to amass sufficient money to do what he did. To complete his agenda! To finish his “Final Solution!”

Let me give some of you, that don’t know the facts, the truth as they EXISTED and not as some want them to exist. This is about Pan Am, National and Lorenzo. The facts will help you see where most of your speculations just won’t play out.

On April 13, 1966, Juan Trippe placed the largest commercial aircraft order in aviation history at that time, $525 million, for 25 Boeing 747 jets. This equates to $6.94 billion in 2002 dollars based upon the relative share of GDP. Pan Am had to pony up $265 million in cash ($3.51 billion in 2002) on top of the cash $197 million ($2.6 billion today) they had to put up for the 19 B-707 they ordered. Trippe and Peter Grace (co-founder of Eastern) had a falling out and sold all their shares in Panagra (their South American operation) to Braniff. By December 1971 Pan Am cut its workforce in half and the Shah of Iran offered to buy the company but was struck down by the government. Pan Am made several attempts to merge, first with American and then with Delta and United. All those carriers turned down Pan Am and the feud between Pan Am and Eastern would not allow any talking what so ever. By the mid 70s interest rates were climbing and by 1978 Pan Am was paying in excess of 20% APR for their HUGH debt and constant losses from falling revenue and increased diverse competition.

CEO Sewell went after National in hopes to solve a myriad of problems the biggest of which was to level the playing field. Lorenzo, the weasel he is, smelled the blood and saw an opportunity to make a lot of money for himself.

At that time TI was a nothing company with only a few old DC-9s flying out of Texas. Lorenzo’s shell companies Jet Capital and Texas Air Crop had only $1.8 million when they started this shell game. Alfred Kahn & Phil Bakes (from the old CAB) sat on the TXI board and gave them valuable routes in EWR, NYC, DCA, BOS and others. Lorenzo used these routes on the New York Air operation and borrowed money from Chase Manhattan Bank to “make the war” for National. The Chase money was virtually interest free with liberal “terms of payment.”

National’s stock was worth about $17 at the time Pan Am wanted to buy the operation. The $19.50 original offers for National WOULD HAVE been accepted by the board had Lorenzo not come in. With taxpayer money and slip-shod operations, Lorenzo ran the price of the stock up to over $50 a share. Lorenzo made a mint and got the critical cash mass needed to destroy the airline industry. Pan Am paid outlandish interest rates for the company had an unserviceable debt and the end was inevitable.

Secondly, Lorenzo had a Hitler-ish attitude toward the American worker (well any workers.) He had a zeal toward the worker the way Hitler had a zeal toward the Jews! It is far to in depth to discuss here but suffice it to say he would do, say or act however he wanted.

So for the speculators, Pan Am was dead by the time Lorenzo slammed the debt on them. Their debt was compounded by a myriad of things. The order for the B-747s at a time when the international aviation market was dropping like a rock. The fuel crises of 73-74 and the mandatory route they had. The deregulation of the domestic airlines which allowed strong house domestic airlines to operate in the international arena (Delta, National, etc.) Interest rates that ran over 20% and increased landing rights for foreign airlines in the USA. When Lorenzo came in it was all over. The results of Pan Am would have been the same UNLESS Lorenzo did not kill the bird. With the proper price for National (and some internal synergy) it may have survived.

As for the other merger combinations it is crazy. Most do not understand the hatred many of these individuals had for each other and under NO way would they operate together. There were some heavy hitters out there and names like Trippe, Six, Laker, Grace, CR Smith, even Rickenbacker (until 1963), Frye, Hughes, Woolman, etc. would not merge the way some Harvard been-counter will today for personal wealth.

Not until the junk bond yuppies of the 80s came around would the airline industry do what many are suggesting. But by then the downfall of the carriers was already written just like Pan Am was basically written in the late 60s and early 70s with Lorenzo sealing the casket!


User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13510 posts, RR: 62
Reply 18, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3006 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

National’s stock was worth about $17 at the time Pan Am wanted to buy the operation. The $19.50 original offers for National WOULD HAVE been accepted by the board had Lorenzo not come in. With taxpayer money and slip-shod operations, Lorenzo ran the price of the stock up to over $50 a share.

I'm sorry, but your argument misses one key point:

Pan Am did not have to buy National if they felt the price was too high.

Did Frank Lorenzo run up the price? Yes. Was PA under any obligation to pay it? Nope. They elected to pay that price, as they still felt the NA purchase was worth it.

They were wrong - but while I don't care for the man, their mistake isn't Frank Lorenzo's fault.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineEsajh From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2990 times:

"Pan Am did not have to buy National if they felt the price was too high".

Actually that is not correct. Did anyone have a gun at the Board’s collective head and say “buy it at that price.” Absolutely not! Would Pan Am survived without the purchase, Absolutely Not!

The point is, and I tried to make it quickly, Pan Am had to get domestic flying IMMEDIATELY. They tried with the American merger etc. but none of those airlines were having it.

Why did they have to have a domestic operation? They had NONE at all and the USA domestic operation was the only thing that was making money in the world. Carriers could add one or two international markets at their leisure but each market basically stuck a nail into Pan Am. They could not compete with anyone.

Let’s say National added MIA-CDG, which they did. That flight competes with Pan Am’s MIA-CDG flight. However, if a passenger is flying from MCO to CDG whom does he use in 1979? He takes National from MCO to MIA and then National from MIA to CDG. Pan Am can not fly the passenger to MCO. Now when Delta adds ATL-LGW they compete with Pan Am’s ATL-LGW flight. But when a passenger wants to fly from MSY to LGW he flies MSY-ATL-LGW on Delta, Pan Am has no MSY-ATL segment.

The paradigm that left Pan Am out was that domestic airlines always fed international airlines and international airlines fed domestic airlines. They were two different animals and did not compete. Now that changed and left Pan Am out. Now domestic airlines did not need the international airline because they could fly that themselves if they wanted to or give it to the international carrier until they could fly it themselves. The international carrier could not respond to every domestic carrier that did that because there were far too many.

I know the standard argument is that with de-regulation they could have started any domestic route. While sounding fine, how? The nation just opened the floodgates. If every domestic airline added one international flight to their already existing domestic route structure Pan Am would have had to add thousands of flights. Also the US just authorized the flights of many new foreign airlines. That added to Pan Am’s problems. They needed many new planes, crews, gate space, counter space etc. No they could not do it but if they did not do it they would have been out of business in a much shorter time. The only chance they had was the merger!

Since there was literally no other carrier large enough that would have considered the merger, National was it and Lorenzo knew it!


User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13510 posts, RR: 62
Reply 20, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2985 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

You're arguing semantics now. The fact remains that while PA may have needed to purchase NA, they did not have to buy them if they felt the price would have bankrupted them.

The BOD chose, and chose poorly.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineEsajh From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2969 times:

It is not semantics at all. You say that if they KNEW. Well we have the luxury of hindsight, but what they did know was they would be out of business without the merger. That is the only thing they knew. You don’t say it is too expensive so we will go out of business. No you say it is too expensive but I have to have it to try and stay in business.

Think of it this way and maybe you will understand. The doctor tells you that your 5-year old daughter has cancer. She will die without an operations. Your doctor tells you it will cost $100,000 and you decide to take out a loan on your house to pay for it. When you get ready to have the operation the doctor tells you the price went up because the hospital had some things going on. It will now cost you $500,000 for the operation.

You know you can not afford $500k. You don’t have the credit, nor equity in your house. You will have to pay higher interest rates to the hospital because of your situation. Now you know your daughter will die without the operation, she may die with it and you may go bankrupt trying to pay for it. But what you DO know is she WILL die without it! Those other things MAY happen, but she will die without it!

Now, years later, I say, well no one forced you to have the operation if you knew it was going to bankrupt you. It is semantics that you are arguing. Well I disagree. You did what you did to save your daughter and Pan Am was a child to many people.


User currently offlineTexan From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 4273 posts, RR: 52
Reply 22, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2966 times:

Esajh:
I have read Petzinger's book and enjoyed it thoroughly. I do not think people have forgotten what Lorenzo did to the employees at the airlines he acquired nor to the names of the airlines he acquired. To be banned from ever again running an airline means you really have to have screwed up everything, which Lorenzo did. The thing we're really discussing here is IF Lorenzo had won the bidding war to acquire National, what would the reprecusions have been throughout the industry? I understand that he is a very evil man, but his acquisition of National could have come to pass. If it had, which other carrier would Pan Am have attempted to buy, because they obviously needed to get domestic as fast as possible. We're just going with the "what if" machine for a little bit to see how today's airlines could look had the Pan Am/National deal not occured, with no disrespect at all shown toward the thousands of people who had to suffer through Frank Lorenzo. I'm very sorry if any of the posts seemed to show that anybody forgot about Lorenzo's atrocious actions while running Texas Air Group. And I agree, people like Six and Feldman would not have sold out for personal wealth. Unfortunately, Lorenzo did not give them a chance to hold out.

Texan



"I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library."
User currently offlineWGW2707 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 1197 posts, RR: 35
Reply 23, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2942 times:

This topic is loosing focus...what started as a purely intellectual exercise in analyzing what the industry would look like had Texas International acquired National instead of Pan Am has turned into a thread dedicated to Lorenzo-bashing. Without wishing to interject an opinion on Lorenzo I would like to suggest that we just set that controversial matter aside and focus on analyzing what the industry might look like.

There have been some intriguing theories posted on this thread. A PA+RC merger does indeed sound interesting as it would have hugely expanded Pan Am's domestic operations. It's also interesting to speculate where Continental, Eastern, Delta and United would be under this scenario. One airline I don't think would be affected too heavily is American, which purchased their LHR slots from TWA and which in general was not influenced by the deterioration of Pan Am.

I wonder whether or not Eastern would still be around, since Lorenzo would probably not be acquiring them under this scenario, already posessing the National route network on the east coast. Perhaps the incredibly confrontational labor/management relationship would have quited down or perhaps another airline would have acquired them...

-WGW2707


User currently offlineIflewrepublic From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 537 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (10 years 5 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2920 times:

What's interesting to note is that several people have tossed around the idea of Republic merging with Pan Am and all the "what if" scenarios that went with it. My question is this...Had Pan Am purchased Republic, what would have happened to Northwest? Who would have purchased the Red-Tail? Eastern? Or would Northwest have purchased someone else?

I just added this since I saw Delta and Western come up a few times.

It would be interesting to set everything in motion in different arenas and then stand back and watch what happened.

Iflewrepublic.



Aviation is proof that, given the will, we have the capacity to achieve the impossible.
25 WGW2707 : I don't think Delta+Western would have been affected by this deal as Delta didn't take over anything from Pan Am until 1991. Delta would still be arou
26 Justplanesmart : One thing to remember in all this is that Continental and Western were looking to merge when Texas Air Corporation starting buying Continental's stock
27 TriStarEnvy : Spectacular discussion! THIS is why I joined Anet.
28 EA CO AS : One thing to remember in all this is that Continental and Western were looking to merge when Texas Air Corporation starting buying Continental's stock
29 Db777 : What I thought was really strange was Eastern's entry into the bidding frenzy for National. They produced pretty documents showing how such a merged a
30 OzarkD9S : Eastern went after NA as a spoiler, they didn't want Pan Am on their (at the time) prime NE-Florida routes. This was before EA landed Braniff's Latin
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What If? Eastern And National Had Merged posted Thu Apr 6 2006 03:32:28 by Kkfla737
What If NW Bought The Old Midway Airlines? posted Fri Aug 5 2005 20:11:39 by 7E72004
National Airlines (the Original), What If...... posted Wed Apr 13 2005 03:37:00 by Thomasphoto60
What If Piedmont Had Bought US? posted Thu Nov 20 2003 21:10:13 by Iflyatldl
What If AA Let Me Board Without A Visa? posted Thu Dec 7 2006 18:07:30 by Super80
DC Market: What If...? posted Wed Dec 6 2006 23:52:04 by Cactus742
Crazy Talk: What If Southwest Bid For USAirways? posted Fri Nov 17 2006 17:37:42 by LawnDart
What If! (Supersonic Transports) posted Wed Nov 15 2006 02:28:34 by Bringiton
What If DL Merged With Pan Am? posted Wed Oct 18 2006 03:00:43 by AeroMaxx
If Boeing Bought The A380 Program posted Tue Oct 17 2006 04:27:46 by FL370