COERJ145 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 1 Posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3878 times:
With the ongoing merger between HP and US, could some of these possible mergers work?
All of these combo's have simiar route structures, fleet commentality, and each possible airline would benefit from the mergers by gaining more cities to support their routes. I can't find any good matches for NW, or UA. Any Suggustions?
Flyibaby From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1018 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3826 times:
B6 is too sure of themselves to merge with anyone, and I think they can afford to be. They keep adding aircraft and keeping the LF around 90% and keep pulling off a profit, even with the fuel costs. I don't see them doing anything other than on their own.
JetBlueAtJFK From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1687 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3823 times:
Quoting Flyibaby (Reply 3): B6 is too sure of themselves to merge with anyone, and I think they can afford to be. They keep adding aircraft and keeping the LF around 90% and keep pulling off a profit, even with the fuel costs. I don't see them doing anything other than on their own.
Ok, so I think FL and YX, would be ok... but they could do better. They both are focused on the same region (east and midwest-FL not so much)
US+UA could work, they already codeshare so...
UA+CO-CO strong on east and Europe, while UA is strong on EAST, WEST (Kind of) and the PACIFIC for sure.
Ramerinianair From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 1486 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3809 times:
AirTran's code is FL. I think that the only one who can merge with AA would be UA since they have the common ORD hub and large ops in JFK and LGA. This would consolidate some routes and instead of competing, they could dominate. Of course, there would be the anti-trust thing. They have mostly Boeing fleets and the vast domestic presence of AA could boost feed the pacific dominance of UA. They are both the only ones who are allowed into LHR too!
Commavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 12064 posts, RR: 61
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3784 times:
Quoting Ramerinianair (Reply 5): I think that the only one who can merge with AA would be UA since they have the common ORD hub and large ops in JFK and LGA. This would consolidate some routes and instead of competing, they could dominate. Of course, there would be the anti-trust thing.
Yeah -- a big anti-trust thing. You could say that again.
AA and UA's route network overlap (not so much in New York, but definitely Chicago, L.A., transcon) would pretty much guarantee that the merger would never get regulatory approval. These two companies -- which arguably have the most overlapping networks of any two major legacy carriers in the U.S. -- would never get off the ground for precisely the reason you state -- they would consolidate routes and dominate. AA and UA together would have about one third of the entire U.S. market. DOJ would never allow that.
Jdaniel001 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3774 times:
There will be one big domestic full-service carrier after AA gobbles up NW, DL, and CO. Then a few national LCC's, the new US, WN, B6, Ted and then maybe a few regionals. UA will be the biggest US flag carrier overseas. However, it will dump most of it's domestic presence and concentrate on the major business centers and TED and Express.
COERJ145 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3680 times:
Quoting STLGph (Reply 9): yes. have school year around so kids spend less time staying up late on their parents computers and posting redundant threads.
Hey, I own my comp anyway, if u don't like the thread, don't relpy to it, or suggust to have it deleted. I am also not a kid, i'm a teenager with an intrest in the world of aviaton hoping to become a pilot.
hey, honestly, i think it's great you know what you want to do. and i hope you stick to it. and i hope you're successful at it. and you get one hell of a dental plan. but never, ever, wish against yourself.
if assumptions could fly, airliners.net would be the world's busiest airport
Actually, this wouldn't be such a bad combination...just think, you'd have hubs in Atlanta, Cincinnati, Houston, Newark, and Salt Lake City, (presumably Cleveland would be cut) and assuming the DC-9 variants got gutted, which isn't all that unlikely, you'd have an all-Boeing operator. The only issue might be that huge smattering of focus cities that Delta has, namely Boston, Fort Lauderdale, New York (both Kennedy and LaGuardia) Orlando, Tampa, and Washington, of which some (the New York operations for starters) would be gone.
Alaska Airlines is, put simply, nothing short of a mess right now. With their labor strife among their current employees, to say nothing of their 472 ramp service and stores agents at Seattle who are currently looking for another job, I'm not sure who would want to touch them. Operationally, however, this would be a relatively good fit, with hubs in Cleveland, Houston, Newark, and Seattle, and in Alaska's case, a nearly all-Boeing fleet, although the 737-200 and 737-400 would be new 737-variants in Continental's fleet, so those might go. In all likelyhood, the MD-80's Alaska has would be gone.
Would be unlikely to get past the Department of Justice. For one, the combined carrier would be the largest slotholder at LaGuardia, in addition to likely being the largest carrier at Kennedy as well, although in neither case do they share a significant number of destinations (obviously, there is some overlap). Looking beyond the Big Apple, however, this could be a good fit. DL's MD-90's are an oddball, and likely would be gone, and the MD-88's could see the same fate. Likewise, Delta's 737-200's and 737-300's would likely be jettisoned, along with American's Airbuses. The other issue would be the regional fleets, with little synergy other than the CRJ-700, as American Eagle otherwise operates all-Embraer aircraft, whereas with the exception of Atlantic Southeast's ATR's (which would likely be spun into Executive Airlines d/b/a American Eagle), Atlantic Southeast and Comair operate all Bombardier aircraft. At this point, you have a pretty good fleet mix, plus hubs in Atlanta, Chicago (O'Hare), Cincinnati, Dallas-Fort Worth, Miami, St. Louis, Salt Lake City, and San Juan. St. Louis would likely be gone, however other than that, there aren't any other hubs that are obvious choices to pull down. The carrier would also be the dominant carrier in Boston, it should be worth noting.
This merger makes a bit of sense, and might actually be a GREAT idea, as it would give jetBlue an opportunity to right-size, and in some cases (Burbank comes to mind) right-perform some routes, and perhaps start to string together jetBlue's currently disjointed network, using Denver and New York as the hubs.
This happens to be one I don't like, simply because Midwest simply is saddled with too many problems and too many poor business decisions to survive. The 328Jet is an absolute disaster economically, and additionally, Midwest's business plan simply involves chasing after a segment of the market that is increasingly getting smaller. Furthermore, Midwest outsourcing their Milwaukee ramp to Skyway (OK, Skyway is wholly-owned by Midwest, but with much lower pay) will likely turn into a decision that will saddle them in this market for any passenger who isn't originating or terminating in Milwaukee. airTran pursuing this would be nothing short of a disaster.
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
FlyGuyClt From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 537 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3481 times:
Take it from someone who has been there and done that. MERGERS, while they may look good on a route map are awful. Different company cultures, employees, seniority, and anything else that is negative.
Oh, the days of Florida Express and the BAC 1-11. Merger with Braniff II. However, that merger was great for us. The Braniff folks were awesome. But in the end. Bankruptcy, of course the owner at the time went to jail and then NBC but him on The Restaurant and we all got to see Rocco get nailed by this slim on national TV.