Ciro From Brazil, joined Aug 1999, 662 posts, RR: 7 Posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 6414 times:
Dear all,
I am certainly aware of all the anti-trust constraints, however it should not be very far away the possibility to join American and United Airlines in a single entity.
That would create, by far, the most powerful airline in the world; covering the most important routes as well as the major airport hubs in the US.
Of course, such merging move could not be as radical... A proposed code-sharing plan, following Continental - Delta - Northwest's path, would do it fine.
It could also create a unique opportunity to let American to join Star Alliance. From what I have heard, there are quite a lot of pessimism going on with Oneworld nowadays.
Finally, going back to that anti-trust topic, the low-cost sector in the US is progressing in a way that it can soon have a much greater chunks of the domestic market divided among the 5 or so largest airlines from this segment. It still quite fragmented, but nevertheless, consolidation will be required among all the players, including the big legacy guys.
Cheers!
The fastest way to become a millionaire in the airline business is to start as a billionaire.
777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11310 posts, RR: 17 Reply 1, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6362 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Well for starters it would be VERY anti-competitive. It would also create the biggest and most powerful airline in terms of finances in the US which would mean the other legacy carriers would have no hope, unless they also merged with a competitior. It would give the LCCs a real run for their money.
Algoz From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 130 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6319 times:
A UA/CO merger would make more sense geographically in my opinion. American is a direct competitor for UA whereas CO would compliment, especially in the case of international flying.
Broke From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, RR: 4 Reply 3, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6218 times:
A direct merger results in the liabilities of the weaker partner being assumed by the new company. There is no good financial reason why American and United should merge. If United are not to survive, it would leave a void that would rapidly be filled by other operators. The only area where this void would last any time at all is on the international routes where frequencies are limited and require bilateral governmental approval.
The big operators are so large now that they are extremely difficult to manage efficiently, especially with the typical management style of total control by a central management core.
A cooperative management style, a la Southwest, is rare and everyone wants to be like Southwest in everyway but the one that is the core of their success.
HlywdCatft From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 7 Reply 5, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 6107 times:
Its kind of funny how there is only one American that posted on this so far.
UA and AA would not be allowed like was said, the two largest carriers would put everyone else out of business. AA really had to pull some strings just to take over TWA.
Algoz, UA and CO wouldnt work either for many reasons...
A. Who would take over who? UA is under Ch.11
B. No fleet commonality other than the 757-200 and the 777-200
C. Northwest still has some say what Continental does I believe stemming from their part ownership back in the 90s
If CO were to merge with anyone it would probably be Delta, and neither airline are in the position to merge with the other. I highly doubt the government would allow that merger anyway.
Cessna172RG From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 744 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5999 times:
"B. No fleet commonality other than the 757-200 and the 777-200"
Well, there's a bit more than that.
The 777-200 for sure...
The 757, yes...
CO and UA both operate the 767, however CO operates the -200 variant where United operates the -300 (if not the -200 as well).
Continental and United both operate the 737-500 and the 737-300.
That's just a minor detail.
Not sure what would come of such a merger, however, let alone if it were to take place. More likely than not, one of the two (AA or UA) will fail and the other will dominate before the other buys one out. I just can't see either one of the carriers giving in and getting "mushy" with the other to agitate a joining of forces.
Then again, in the cartoons, we often hear "if you can't beat 'em, join em."
LMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5976 times:
I can think of nothing that would be as disastorous for both companies than a merger. Besides, it's highly doubtful that the government would allow the merger of the number one and number two airlines to take place anyway.
Even though both AA and UAL operate the 757, 767 and 777 they are powered by different engines. Another headache to contend with.
NYCAAer From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 660 posts, RR: 4 Reply 9, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5838 times:
A combined AA-UA would most likely be forced to give up slots at ORD and LHR, 2 airports that neither would want lose any market share.
I could see a merger between CO and NW in terms of their route structures, but they operate different equipment, so it wouldn't work. Maybe a CO-DL merger, which was looked at by both carriers a while back.
NWAskyteam From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 75 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5776 times:
Major airline mergers in the US are a thing of the past. They are incredibly complex and costly to pull off. It would most likely be a a big compnay swallowing up a small company ala AA-Reno Air.
Trickijedi From United States of America, joined May 2001, 3266 posts, RR: 5 Reply 11, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 5744 times:
SFOintern From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 770 posts, RR: 5 Reply 13, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5504 times:
Man, that'd be horrible for us consumers. We need competition! It keeps prices down! It keeps quality up!!
Warszawa From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 726 posts, RR: 7 Reply 14, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5214 times:
Keep in mind:
CO 757s = RR Engines, UA = PW, AA = RR
CO 772 = GE Engines, UA = PW, AA = RR
CO 762 = GE Engines, UA = PW, AA = GE
UA 763 = PW Engines, AA = GE
Not only that... but the differences in the aircraft between each airline ( UAL = 737's and A319's/320's versus CO's 737 NG's, versus AA's hundreds of MD-8X's )
Would never happen, thats a guarantee.
Flying a plane is no diff. from riding a bicycle. Its just a lot harder to put baseball cards in the spokes. -'Airplane'
Jrodri1 From Peru, joined Jul 2004, 6 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5069 times:
Financially....
1) UA in Ch.11 still means that anyone buying/merging (CO or AA) would inherit some of the liabilities (why would anyone do this?).
2) Best way to overcome this is to do an asset acquisition (possibly during liquidation in Ch. 7). In such a sale, all liabilities (except for some very specific liabilities) are bought "free and clear" of any further liens through a 363 asset sale.
Summary: UA and US business plans unlikely to hold under debtholder pressure, who are probably inclined to recover some $$ through an asset sale if situation further deteriorates (as currently happening).
N1120a From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 17, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4097 times:
If AA bought UA, the livery might stay the same, as AA has the oldest surviving US airline livery. Then again, this would never happen. The DOT would not let UA and US merge, there is no chance at AA and UA. Beyond that, there are no real financial benefits to it
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Tango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3725 posts, RR: 31 Reply 18, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4052 times:
That would create, by far, the most powerful airline in the world; covering the most important routes as well as the major airport hubs in the US.
Wrong....!!! what it would create is an even more unwieldy, unmanageable, out-of-control monstosity than each of the individual airlines have already become in their present forms. It would be the most powerful airline in the world only to the extent the U.S. government would bail it out (courtesy of taxpayers) and rescue it from the inexorable tendency for the hypothetical United American Airlines to implode and collapse under its own weight.
DfwRevolution From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 4034 times:
I am certainly aware of all the anti-trust constraints, however it should not be very far away the possibility to join American and United Airlines in a single entity.
If you think that... you are sorely mistaken. Not achancein *hell*.... did I emphasis that enough
-Why would AA take on UA's debt just as they are becoming financially stable?
-Why would two companies with radically different fleets merge?
It's just *totally* irrationaly.
Finally, going back to that anti-trust topic, the low-cost sector in the US is progressing in a way that it can soon have a much greater chunks of the domestic market divided among the 5 or so largest airlines from this segment.
Remains to be seen, but AA and CO are proving that major carries can make a profit in volite market conditions, and as they get stronger and stronger, they will be in a much better position to fight the LCCs.
LCCs won't take over the world, AA won't take over the world. There will be a balance, and IMO, it has been artifically infalted in the direction of the LCCs... AA has trimmed down and will slowly start taking back its customers.
Zrs70 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 2872 posts, RR: 10 Reply 20, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3885 times:
While everyone talks about fleet commonality, I don't recall any merger where fleet commonality was truly a factor. Mind you, it SHOULD ideally be considered. But it has never been a true factor.
AZjetgeek From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 235 posts, RR: 2 Reply 21, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3866 times:
A UA-AA merger has as much chance of occurring as a snowball has of surviving a day in Phoenix in July.
Those who say it's anti-competitive are correct, but let's not forget that we're dealing with an administration in Washington, D.C. that LOVES big business. Anti-competitive mergers were allowed left and right under Reagan (Sec of Trans Elizabeth Dole). The tie-in is that Reagan was also a supporter of big business - the bigger, the better.
That having been said, UA would likely have to emerge from Chapt 11 before it would become an attractive "target" for AA. AA was crying financial tears within the past several months. Merging with UA might drag down both legacy carriers. I say "might" because it's not always easy to tell when an airline is being truthful about its fiscal health.
Even if all conditions were in favor of such a merger, I would certainly oppose it. The United States does not need a "super airline". It needs airlines that are focused as much on providing great service and amicable relationships with employees as they are of the bottom line.
LTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12331 posts, RR: 12 Reply 22, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3827 times:
The only way I could see this is if there was to be another 9/11 like disaster involving airlines like multiple suricide hijackings, multiple a/c blown up with bombs or ground to air missles or the destruction of a significant area of a city by WMD's (chemical/nuclear/bio). Then the govenment in effect would take over the airlines for a period of time, force mergers, consolidate airlines and provide significant subsidies to keep a certain level of service to keep the economy going.
Airways6max From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 494 posts, RR: 0 Reply 23, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3705 times:
I don't think a UA/AA merger is in the cards. They essentially have identical route networks--however I note that UA has a more extensive Pacific network than AA but a merger between the two would not be in the cards. Nor would a UA/CO merger--again, too much similarity of networks. US is up its ears in debt and no airline would want to assume this much debt. They'll wait around for US to go under and then snap up its assets.
Nwdc10 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (8 years 8 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3613 times:
It won't happen. I like the name United American Airlines though. United won't buy American by the way. I was just mentioning i like the name United American. Robert NWDC10
25 UA777222: Ahhh what a dream. With their common fleets (777,757,767,737) and AA's American Hubs and UA's International destinations.............. I think AA woul
26 WindowSeat: Man, that'd be horrible for us consumers. We need competition! It keeps prices down! It keeps quality up!! unfortunately, with the new 'wise' economy
27 NWDC10: I do belive airline quality service is poor EXCEPT for QX. I ALWAYS have the best service from them. Robert NWDC10
28 HlywdCatft: A good part of the reason that AA is suffering right now is its take over of a very much in debt TWA. If AA took over United, it would wipe AA out and
29 NWDC10: UA would be a very heavy anchor for AA. Both would probably go down. AA would not be able to stay afloat if they bought UA. Robert NWDC10
30 Ckfred: First of all, there is absolutely no way that DOT and DOJ approve a AA/UA merger. The merged carrier would control 88% of the traffic at ORD. SFO and
31 Ifly2eat: And tomorrow we can discuss "what if the sun rises in the west and sets in the east." Really people don't you have better things to do with your time?
32 Andrewuber: AA / UA merger? Isn't that kinda like merging Alabama and Auburn? Or perhaps the NY Yankess and the Florida Marlins? Hmmmmm
33 Ciro: This is a little article to spice the conversation a little bit. http://www.speednews.com/stw/default.html See article titled "MBA: American Airlines
34 Ciro: After all, this was not such a "crazy, non-sense" postings. From: http://www.speednews.com/stw/default.html "MBA: American Airlines Should Take Over U
Sponsor Message: 
From Brazil, joined Aug 1999, 662 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11310 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 130 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 1322 posts, 
From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, 
From Peru, joined Jul 2004, 6 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
