Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
KLM Chief Say NW And DL Merger A Real Possibility!  
User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12923 times:

Well, its now being discussed within the Skyteam group as oppsed to just on here!!

http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articl...08_AAT006425&type=comktNews&rpc=44

122 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMalpensaSFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12923 times:

Question now is... What hub stays and what hub goes?

User currently offlinePanamair From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 4927 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12882 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting UAL777UK (Thread starter):
Well, its now being discussed within the Skyteam group as oppsed to just on here!!

Of course AF-KL would want such a merger - it would prevent them from having to choose between DL and NW as their key U.S. partner...it's easy for all these people (AF, KL, Minetta) to want such a merger because they don't have to deal with the horrible integration issues (not just of a DL-NW tieup but with any US airline merger in general), especially with disparate employee cultures, fleet issues, etc.


User currently offlineLitz From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1767 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12882 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

If this were to happen, it would happen over a lot of people's kicking, screaming bodies ....

Other than a nice route overlap, there's just not much synergy there.

Different fleet types, way way different labor structures (nonunion labor and union labor mixed together is a bad, bad situation that's just too volatile to think about), different business models, just waaaaaaaay different pretty much alltogether.

Not to mention that DL has made it very clear that they intend to go it alone. and I'd be shocked if NW felt any different.

And yes, this has been discussed to death here ... general summary is : we'd believe it when we'd see it.

- litz


User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3171 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12849 times:

It's one of the most obvious mergers in the US for a long time. Both are struggling and already have a very close cooperation, they codeshare on many routes, are both in SkyTeam, have transatlantic partners that already one entity.

Fleet commonality is hardly there, but with the number of aircraft both carriers are flying, this will not be an issue at all. And for replacement orders that will be shortly for both carriers (NW and the DC9s, DL with its 732s) they can have commonality advantages as they will be able to place a larger order.

For hubs, I would think that MEM and CVG will be downgraded to 'focus' cities. If the new DL-NW entity gets full ATI with KL-AF (that will be an important reason to merge), expect the MEM-AMS to be chopped in favour of more AMS-ATL flying and similarily, CDG-CVG will be reduced in order to boost CDG-DTW. It's a lot of rationalizing.

In my opinion, if both carriers can come to a good agreement, a merger can be a very good move; and this is the time: the economy is on it's way up, revenues will likely increase and this is very helpful to cover the enourmous costs of a merger; in order to be a more healthy and stable company once we have the economy slowing down again.


User currently offlineDrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5192 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 12829 times:

First of all--this KLM guy is no authority to run and say that the merger is 'a real possibility'. Such a merger would not make it past the US gov't without some serious shedding of mass on one or both DL/NW sides. He is merely postulating like we do on a.net.


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3171 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12800 times:

Quoting Litz (Reply 3):
Different fleet types

Not really an issue. A rule of thumb says that advantages of fleet commonality work up to 50 planes per type, after the 50th plane, incremental costs per extra plane remain similar. Both carriers have such a strong fleets that it is not really an issue, and as I said in my earlier post, they have enough replacement needs to increase buying power for replacements. (787 to replace DLs 767s in the longer term?) AF and KL also have different fleets especially on short-haul, and this also works out good.

Quoting Litz (Reply 3):
way way different labor structures (nonunion labor and union labor mixed together is a bad, bad situation that's just too volatile to think about),

Agreed, this is a real challenge. But didn't US and HP also differ very much on this aspect?

Quoting Litz (Reply 3):
different business models

In what sense? Both seem to be typical examples of network carriers, operating high-frequency flights with varying equipment from hubs. Both carriers are strong transatlantic players and offer connections from US to Europe. Both are old legacy carriers, now cutting costs everywhere they can. Again, to take the example of US-HP, their business models seemed to differ way more than NW and DL.

Quoting Litz (Reply 3):
Not to mention that DL has made it very clear that they intend to go it alone. and I'd be shocked if NW felt any different.

They aren't in Chapter 11 for nothing...


User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3171 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12800 times:

Quoting Drerx7 (Reply 5):
First of all--this KLM guy is no authority to run and say that the merger is 'a real possibility'.

I might think that he has more information about what's discussed on management boards then we have?


User currently offlineNwab787techops From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12765 times:

I don't think we are going to see any mergers. DL and NW don't have the money to pay the bill, never mind the 100s of millons it would take for a merger. The only time you would see something like that, is if other airlines where in merger talks say CO and UA. Maybe you would see talks of a NW/DL merger, but even then I think AA would be first in line before DL in a merger to keep up with UA.

User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12753 times:

Quoting Joost (Reply 7):
I might think that he has more information about what's discussed on management boards then we have?

Exactly....one of the main reasons i started the thread!


User currently offlineORD From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 1384 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12699 times:

Quoting Nwab787techops (Reply 8):
DL and NW don't have the money to pay the bill, never mind the 100s of millons it would take for a merger.

DL and NW don't need the money for a merger. Investors foot the bill. That's exactly what happened with US Airways and America West.

Quoting Nwab787techops (Reply 8):
The only time you would see something like that, is if other airlines where in merger talks say CO and UA. Maybe you would see talks of a NW/DL merger, but even then I think AA would be first in line before DL in a merger to keep up with UA.

CO and UA have already had merger talks. Nobody knows how serious they are, but they have happened. Even industry guru Mike Boyd has said UA is positioning themselves to possibly merge with CO.

As for AA, I don't see them getting approval to merge with DL, NW or CO. When you look at the stats they are already so much larger than #2 UA. If they merged with another big airline I think they would simply be too large for the goverment to accept.


User currently offlineIsitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12684 times:

Fleets......The MD-80's are gone in favor of the newer scarebuses.
The DC-9 will be phased out slowly in favor of newer EM-175's or 190's.
Im not sure what will happen to the 737-800. Perhaps nothing.

Something big must go. We have 777.767,A330 and 747-400. All of these are
not needed.

Thats my uneducated guess.
Whats yours?
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7078 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12662 times:

If true would that mean that this new airline would drop the A319/A320 and A330 ?


It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineN801NW From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 744 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12626 times:

FWIW, Mr. van Wijk does have a seat on NWA's board of directors. If they come out with new post-reorganization NWA stock then a board reshuffle is possible.

User currently offlineAlitalia744 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 4753 posts, RR: 45
Reply 14, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12611 times:

Quoting Isitsafenow (Reply 11):
Fleets......The MD-80's are gone in favor of the newer scarebuses.
The DC-9 will be phased out slowly in favor of newer EM-175's or 190's.
Im not sure what will happen to the 737-800. Perhaps nothing.

Something big must go. We have 777.767,A330 and 747-400. All of these are
not needed.

Thats my uneducated guess.
Whats yours?
safe

if it happened (and i pray to god it doesn't) fleet would probably become:

MD88s (or A319s but not A320s, DL loves their 738s)
737-800
757-200
757-300
767-300/300ER
767-400ER
777-200ER
747-400



Some see lines, others see between the lines.
User currently offlineNwab787techops From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12580 times:

If there is any truth in this, look who is going to be part of the new Delta family.

Big version: Width: 120 Height: 83 File size: 3kb


User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3171 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12580 times:

Quoting Columba (Reply 12):
If true would that mean that this new airline would drop the A319/A320 and A330 ?

Highly unlikely. Those planes are new and they have lots of 'm. An airline won't go for fleet commonality just because it looks cool in the in-flight magazine. They fleet of 100+ Airbusses is that large that it already has all advantages of fleet commonality.

When you compare a fleet of 1 aircraft to a fleet of 20 aircraft, keeping 20 doesn't cost 20 times as much as keeping one, it will cost 15 or 16 or 17 times as much. So you have an advantage.

Keeping up a fleet of 200 identical aircraft costs twice as much as keeping 100 aircraft. There is no further advantage.

Example (numbers purely fictious)

Imagine you have 1 one aircraft, you will keep one spare landing gear in your inventory. You hardly ever need it, but in case you need it, you need to have it, as ordering a new one or reparing takes several days and you can't miss your plane for a week or so.

When you fly 20 aircraft, you can still do with one spare landing gear. It's is very unlikely that 2 aircraft have a broken gear exactly in the same week, so if one breaks down, you repair it or order a new one. Here you see a cost advantage.

When you fly 100 aircraft, it happens more often that the landing gears break, so you keep 5 gears in your inventory. There is no cost advantage over flying 100 aircraft and having 5 spare gears, or 20 aircraft or 1 spare gear.

Of course, numbers differ and the spare part / aircraft ratio differs from part to part. But in general, from 50 aircraft there are not so much further advantages in maintenance; there are when buying, though.

So for new airplanes as the 320s flying for NW or the 738s of Delta, replacement for the sake of commonality is a waste of money. When replacing the DC9s, MD80s, 737 first generations, etc by new A320/737NG/A320RS/737RS, commonality is available and you have more buying power when ordering 200 than when ordering 100.

Quoting Drerx7 (Reply 5):
First of all--this KLM guy is no authority to run and say that the merger is 'a real possibility'.

By the way, he also was the one that said KLM would 'reconsider' it's cooperation with NW after 2010 and hinted at going with Delta, along with AF. He and Spinetta wil also be the ones that will eventually make that decision. I would think that for NW it is a highly unfavourable situation to lose all the KLM feed...


User currently offlineMptpa From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 546 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12516 times:

Well.

Besides the uncommanility of the fleet types, it does offer some incentives:

Fleet:
- DC9/B737-200 - Gone. Replace with EMB195
- A320/319, B738 - Replace with just B737/8 or A320/19
- B757, B767, A330 - rationalize with B787
- B744, B777 - Rationalize/modernize with B748i and B773
- B72F - Replace with some rebuilt B744(F) and B77F

Hubs:
ATL, DTW, MSP - Keep
MEM, CVG, SLC - reduce to focus cities
JFK - Reduce to a super focus city, move most to DTW where the facility is MUCH better
NRT - make this more a super hub

NWA would operate and expand the Asia Pacific routes plus fortify the Cargo ops
DAL would be used to operate and expand the Europe, Middle east, Africa routes using CDG and AMS and hubs


User currently offlineAlitalia744 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 4753 posts, RR: 45
Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12487 times:

Quoting Mptpa (Reply 17):
JFK - Reduce to a super focus city, move most to DTW where the facility is MUCH better

I'll disagree and say JFK would be kept over MSP.



Some see lines, others see between the lines.
User currently offlineIncitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 4030 posts, RR: 13
Reply 19, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12471 times:

Quoting Joost (Reply 6):
Not really an issue. A rule of thumb says that advantages of fleet commonality work up to 50 planes per type, after the 50th plane, incremental costs per extra plane remain similar.

That rule of thumb is not accurate.

Just consider two airlines. One Southwest style with 400 737-700s. The other has 50 737-700s, 50 737-200s, 50 A320s, 50 757s, 50 E-195s, 50 F100s, 50 DC9s and 50 Tu-204s.

Do I need to elaborate further?



Stop pop up ads
User currently offlinePositiverate From United States of America, joined May 2005, 1590 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 12421 times:

Quoting UAL777UK (Thread starter):
Well, its now being discussed within the Skyteam group as oppsed to just on here!!

Oh boy...another NW/DL merger thread.

His comments hardly qualify as "being discussed within the SkyTeam Group". It's just speculation by one executive within the group. In meetings on Capitol Hill Gerry Grinstein told policymakers and their staff that he would work to avoid a merger because it is so tough on the company integration wise.

[Edited 2006-06-14 16:34:00]

User currently offlineDL787932ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 597 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 12394 times:

Of course, seeing one of these has a unique appeal:



But I agree it seems unlikely, mainly because of the labor force integration problems. The completely disparate fleets (except for the 752) would work themselves out over time (in ten years, something like E190/737NNG/752/753/788/789/(something bigger?)). But integrating NW's unions with DL's mostly nonunion employees, especially with NW's current labor issues (it's pretty bad when one has to call a "truce" with one's own employer), is a scary prospect.



F L Y D E L T A J E T S
User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3171 posts, RR: 4
Reply 22, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 12378 times:

Quoting Incitatus (Reply 19):
Do I need to elaborate further?

Yes please. Your example is not close to the situation drawn here. Of course, a 737-200 or a DC-9 will have higher operating cost than a 737-700.

Consider two airliens:
one flying 50 737-700s and 50 A319s
one other flying 100 737-700s.

Between them, the costs won't differ by hugh numbers.


User currently onlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4342 posts, RR: 35
Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 12355 times:

I believe they secretly work together much more then they would make believe to the anti trust patrol. Apart from the obvious codeshares, they announced Chapter 11 on the same moment last year. My guts feelings say there is a merger being prepared behind the scenes


nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineIncitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 4030 posts, RR: 13
Reply 24, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 12331 times:

Quoting Joost (Reply 22):
Yes please. Your example is not close to the situation drawn here. Of course, a 737-200 or a DC-9 will have higher operating cost than a 737-700.

Consider two airliens:
one flying 50 737-700s and 50 A319s
one other flying 100 737-700s.

Between them, the costs won't differ by hugh numbers.

You are just looking at the parts inventory management aspect of the problem. And even with the 100/50-50 Boeing/Airbus case inventory management and maintenance won't look pretty. A large share of aircraft parts are what is called slow moving parts - they sit in inventory for a long time and demand is very random. Two fleets = duplicaton. Also... in this case Boeing does not use the metric system and Airbus does - more training for maintenance crews.

Besides parts management and maintenance, the mixed fleet will introduce additional complications in scheduling, crew training, revenue management and pricing, and recovery from weather disruptions. In short, don't do it.



Stop pop up ads
25 1337Delta764 : I hope this NEVER happens, no matter what Joost says. The cold hard fact is that mixing the fleets would be a disaster.
26 Post contains images FlyGuyClt : What makes you think the "Delta" name will survive? What makes you think "Steenland" would still be there? Safe Flying
27 Milesrich : While the 737/800 and A-320/319 are competing types, the airlines own enough of both to keep them rather than dump them. The savings would be in elimi
28 Slider : Exactly right- it's not a terribly responsible thing to say, to incite all sorts of hysteria, tension or investor unease as a third party, albeit one
29 Post contains images Joost : I don't totally disagree on you My main point is that when mixing a fleet of 100+ 737s and 100+ 320s, replacing one of them with something new way be
30 Post contains links and images Jacobin777 : I would hope not..those NW A330's are beauties...and like AF/KL, both have a lot of Boeing and Airbus in their fleets, with KL basically having an "a
31 Post contains images FlyGuyClt : One thing that no one is realizing is. Is the Bankrupcty process being used to make the companies more compatible? To get ride of the "non" compatible
32 Panamair : No way..just because the facility is nicer at one doesn't mean that the airline should give up the world's largest airline passenger traffic market (
33 STT757 : Out: Cincinnati, Memphis, Salt Lake City In: Detroit, Atlanta, Minneapolis, JFK, Narita
34 Post contains images FlyGuyClt : Ah, someone who understands O and D traffic and the cash that goes with it. Safe Flying
35 STT757 : The minute a merger involving DL, NWA or AA is announced CO and UAL will announce their merger.
36 Drerx7 : My sentiments exactly.
37 DAL767400ER : Definitely agree with that. Would agree with that, except for SLC. While there would no noubt be overlap between SLC and MSP, SLC still is better pos
38 Panamair : As long as the non-union DL employees (which are the majority of the DL employees) don't get dumped to the bottom of the seniority list just because
39 SLCUT2777 : As for hubs: I disagree slightly IN: ATL: This has been DL turf for a LONG time and they are big. DTW: This will be the largest interior O&D market. J
40 SLCUT2777 : Very well said! The overlap between SLC and MSP would only be slight at best with a small handful of network connections that DC/Skywest in SLC would
41 Bobnwa : That is a good re-cap of the hub situation and very likely right in the event of a hook-up. You could also add AMS and CDG.
42 Airzim : I think DOA means Dead on Arrival! Plus everyone's forgot about the AMS hub. Does it make more sense for DL to move their India flights to AMS or NW
43 Slider : DOA might be an appropriate acronym for such a union.
44 Post contains images FlyGuyClt : Just when I thought no one on Anet had any humor in them indeed. Safe Flying
46 Lamedianaranja : No he isn't, you're right. But I think the Dutch people who copied his words got the meaning of the word 'optie' wrong. What Leo van Wijk, CEO of KLM
47 TOLtommy : Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Can you say DL/PA? Wasn't fun back then at all.
48 Post contains links Airline7322 : This seems to be a lively discussion. I'm one of the producers of an aviation based podcast (see site-related forum for more info), and I'm interested
49 7E72004 : why would you want to downgrade SLC? If you did that there would be no hub west of MSP.
50 Post contains images Glareskin : They very well know about these issues as they recently merged themselves! I fully agree. I recognized the photo immediately as one of yours, althoug
51 SLCUT2777 : Keep "Cobra Airlines" from reforming in a merged DL/NW. The USA doesn't need another unpredictable carrier that you never when they'll strike! Especi
52 Post contains images Jacobin777 : I've taken a few from the same angle, that's why the look a bit "the same"...
53 MalpensaSFO : MSP is nothing more in the Northwest system than it was 10 years ago. The term "stagnant" comes to mind. JFK has and always will be a Delta operation
54 Burnsie28 : Yeah right, JFK be kept over MSP, I don't think so, JFK, MSP, DTW, SLC, ATL will be kept as US hubs, and NRT AMS for overseas. Then MEM and CVG would
55 Post contains images Lightsaber : I have got to be prepared for a.net thread titles... my keyboard has some of my soda on it now... thanks! I disagree. NW pacific... DL Atlantic... or
56 Spartanmjf : Different domestic fleet types [MD80/738 v DC9/EJet/A32X], different international fleet types [757/767/777 v A330/744/DC10], very different work and
57 DC10Widebody : You know as much as I am all for the legacies surviving and DL in particular because I have had many very nice trips on them, but I fail to see how to
58 Alitalia744 : Please, lord, do not let DL and NW merge.
59 ContinentalEWR : A merged Delta/Northwest needs a better name....Both Delta and Northwest are too regional/localized, given the global presence of each airline. They n
60 KDCA : The combined fleet would probably look something more like this: E-190 A319 A320 737-800 757-200 757-300 767-300ER A330-200 A330-300 747-400 The A330s
61 Fewsolarge : I don't understand why so many people are so quick to axe SLC. In merger scenarios between DL and any of AA, CO or NW. SLC would still be an important
62 Alias1024 : I wonder if PDX might see a revival as a Pacific gateway if DL and NW get hitched. DL tried it years ago, and still has a pretty decent presence in PD
63 Usdcaguy : I think these scenarios are nonsense. Has anyone performed a cost/benefit analysis to determine what would be gained vs. what would be spent in this s
64 Post contains images N353SK : Yeah, that Millimeters, Centimeters, and Meters training is really intensive ..... The real question is, what would this merged behemoth of an airlin
65 DL Widget Head : How about buying the rights to the name and logo of TWA, or Pan Am, or maybe even naming it something new like Trans Global.
66 We're Nuts : Unfortunately there is more to running an airline than just spare parts (and who does their own maintainence anymore anyway?) For each aircraft type
67 SKYYBLUE : Independence Air meets TWA globes with a hint of NW/DL.
68 VV701 : Surely this depends on your operations. EZ have a mixed fleet of 70+ 319s and 50- 737s. But if you go to any of the airports where they base aircraft
69 Post contains images SLCUT2777 : People look at SLC as being a "smallville" and wonder how the NBA Jazz even survive here. I think it is a combination of the following: 1. They equat
70 Bucky707 : not saying it won't happen, in fact it is such an idea I am sure some management types will think it's great. But, I agree. I don't see how two airli
71 SLCUT2777 : Especially those from NW. They will likely lose their union representation in such a scenario.
72 Panamair : DL management is not going to engage in any merger activity while still in Ch.11. They have repeatedly said that their number one focus is getting DL
73 Isitsafenow : We can have Joe Patroni be in charge of maintenance... safe
74 AvConsultant : Depending on who's the surviving carrier and where the roles in question are moved to. They are are Worlds apart to say the least. Definite. There wi
75 SLCUT2777 : I do not see that lasting beyond a year from now. AirTran has proved they can go at it with DL in their fortress hub at ATL, and CVG is one of the la
76 Burnsie28 : MSP would remain a major hub, it has to many vital links to heartland cities that none of the other hubs have.
77 DAL767400ER : All of which could as well be served from either DTW or SLC as well, or heck, even ATL as is the case with SUX.
78 MKEdude : A merged DL/NW would need a hub west of MSP, It makes no sense to ax SLC. MEM and CVG on the other hand would be the first things to go. Also has ther
79 Burnsie28 : Colin, I dont think so, reason being, cities, like TVF, GFK, DVL, YWG, Watertown, and many others could not support the size of aircraft that would b
80 Post contains images DAL767400ER : All of said routes could be reached by using CRJs or ERJs, not much larger than the SF3s used to Watertown, and certainly smaller than the Diesel Nin
81 KDCA : Forgot about the 764s but they wouldn't last beyond the 787s anyway, there would be far too many redundat but different widebodies initially with the
82 Fewsolarge : I think I just threw up a little in my mouth.
83 AvConsultant : LOL!!
84 TL8490 : Maybe KLM/AF is going to put up the merger money... Also....Boeing and Airbus would be very interested in helping to protect their markets.... just my
85 Burnsie28 : Tell the government that too, a lot of them are EAS cities. Stagnant, what, SLC is a good western hub, but MSP has a lot of traffic. A lot of cities,
86 AvConsultant : The merger should be CO and DL
87 Kiwiandrew : it seems odd that on the one hand they are talking about a DL/NW merger while on the other hand they have talked about KL having to review it's agreem
88 Delta767300ER : DNWA (Delta Northwest Airlines), Delta North Airlines, Delta Northwestern Airways...... -Delta767300ER
89 MastaHanky : Their cargo division could simply be called "Northwest And Delta Shipping" (or NADS for short). The parent company could boast about their big NADS w
90 Fewsolarge : I always liked the idea that Delta and Continental could merge to become DelTaco.
91 DAL767400ER : Fleet-wise, yes. Route network, possibly, yes. Considering current relations between the two, hell no.
92 767-332ER : Everyone keeps talking about ATL and how a number of flights would be absorbed (MEM hub flying) into ATL...ATL does not have the gate facility to abso
93 Indy : With 5 hubs east of the Mississippi (ATL, CVG, JFK, DTW and MEM it is highly unlikely that such a merger would get approval from US regulators. It wou
94 Positiverate : I think the ideal, though, would be to absorb the airline and take that capacity out of the system. We can all agree, I think, that there is entirely
95 Indy : I disagree with that. Nationally the loads for the airlines are great. Can't really ask for much better. What their is however is competition. It isn
96 AvConsultant : Bravo!! Added to humor to this board Elaborate, please. What's up with between the 2 of them? It's slowly becomig CAL given the new peope coming on b
97 DAL767400ER : Well, let's see: -CO complaining that DL is just copying them -CO complaining that DL is abusing CH11 to hide from their duties -DL responing "And th
98 Post contains images LO231 : Where's EWR in this? Regards, LO231
99 DL Widget Head : EWR is neither a NW or DL hub nor even a focus city for either airline.
100 LO231 : I know. I'm a dumbass. Got mixed up with CO. Regards, LO231
101 Post contains images DAL767400ER : In the network of the new CO/UA merger giant .
102 Post contains images Isitsafenow : I have read your post with much interest. I have used the CVG hub many many times and do not understand why DL gave that place and enema and cut so m
103 Junction : There are a lot of posts about mixing fleet types, company culture, unions, pensions and employees - but when has any of this prevented a merger in th
104 AvConsultant : I knew about the NYC ad wars. Thanks for the info. this is interesting. I did not realize about the squable. There might be something to your last pa
105 SLCUT2777 : CVG in a DL/NW merger scenario becomes a highly redundant hub and DTW with it's market size becomes far and away more important. As far as the lack o
106 Terryb99 : Not the best example, but I understand your point. Landing gear assets are normally managed by gear shops. Most airlines do not overhaul their own ge
107 We're Nuts : Perhaps the Alaska Air Group is ripe to be swallowed? NW could make good use of the routes and the built-in regional support. So could CO, for that ma
108 WorldTraveler : Keep in mind that this statement was issued by the President of an airline that is owned by DL’s partner… and one whose own future is very much up
109 LO231 : I'm clueless on this one. Are there differences in pay checks within the company? I don't get this. I don't think its the case even with a small airl
110 WorldTraveler : LO, DL bought Western which was a heavily unionized company. All but the pilots were absorbed into DL w/o a union. DL bought Pan Am's transatlantic as
111 Positiverate : Right, but that was at the OLD DL. Where everything was happy go lucky and it was the greatest place in the world to work. Things are different at DL
112 WorldTraveler : I agree the world is different but DL employees so far are still better off than their counterparts at US, UA, and NW as of this point in the restruct
113 TL8490 : worldtraveler....Welcome to my RU List...great post
114 Positiverate : DL is also fighting to save the pilot pension plan. This "termination" isn't like what UA or US did (dump the plan on the pBGC). It merely is an agre
115 Jamake1 : Mmm hmmm... Just talk to Delta's F/A's who have had terms imposed on them without any negotiating leverage, lack of duty rigs and other work rules, e
116 Bobnwa : Do you work as a flight attendant as well as work as an executive assistant to the CEO of your airline? You are a very busy person!
117 WorldTraveler : Jam, and show me how much better your particular carrier's FA rates and rules are when compared with DL's. $39 might be a bargain if you get something
118 Fewsolarge : Actually, they have the same leverage that they always had ... the ability to organize. That forces Delta to remain competitive in what it offers.
119 Positiverate : And yet DL's F/A's vote down union representation time and time again... Must not be that bad there I guess.
120 Jamake1 : I worked as an executive assistant during my voluntary furlough for 2 years. And you're correct. I am a very busy person. I work as a flight attendan
121 Jamake1 : The last time a union election came up at Delta was about 5 years ago, well before that carrier entered Chapter 11. Delta may pay a slightly better b
122 Jamake1 : WT: Since you are not a Delta flight attendant, I won't continue to debate you. But I do take exception when you post comments such as "antagonistic u
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...
My Idea: NW/CO/DL Merger posted Tue Jul 18 2006 22:53:15 by BillReid
NW And DL Gone (maybe) -- What Happens? posted Sat Feb 18 2006 18:08:31 by N908AW
NW And DL How Does This Effect MHT,PVD&BDL? posted Sun Sep 18 2005 23:53:31 by Georgiabill
NW And DL Could File For Ch. 11 Protection posted Tue Sep 13 2005 22:11:22 by KC135TopBoom
NW And DL Could File BK As Early As Wed posted Tue Sep 13 2005 20:41:07 by Flydl2atl
Question About NW And DL At DFW posted Fri Jan 30 2004 00:52:20 by COEWRNJ
AA/NW And DL/CO posted Sun Jun 4 2000 20:51:56 by Kaitak
CLT And ATL After Proposed US/DL Merger posted Fri Nov 17 2006 18:32:27 by RyeFly
A DL/NW/CO Super Merger? posted Thu Jan 19 2006 23:28:43 by 1337Delta764
1986 NW & Republic Merger And Aircraft posted Mon Dec 12 2005 04:26:04 by Centrair