1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 5763 posts, RR: 2 Posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3489 times:
What are your thoughts on a DL/AA or DL/CO merger?
The strong point of these potential combinations is fleet commonality:
A DL/AA merger would probably only dump Delta's MD-90s and AA's A300s.
A DL/CO merger would likely dump Delta's MD-88s and MD-90s, and Continental's 737-300s.
Not to mention there is less hub overlap with those mergers compared to a DL/US merger. If a DL/AA merger were to occur, expect MIA to be replaced by ATL and CVG to be replaced by ORD. For DL/CO, expect JFK to be replaced by EWR and CLE to be replaced by CVG.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
Fewsolarge From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 409 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3462 times:
AA/DL would be a good match, but don't bet on MIA going away. First of all, it is the hub for Latin American traffic. If anything, ATL's role there might be slightly diminished. They could easily fund a Pacific attack with 777s harvested from Atlantic redundancy.
CO/DL is great in the South, but it's troublesome in the North.
MAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31118 posts, RR: 74 Reply 2, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3458 times:
Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter): If a DL/AA merger were to occur, expect MIA to be replaced by ATL and CVG to be replaced by ORD.
If an AA/DL merger were to occur, do you really think AA would let go of their most profitable operation? I don't think so. Both MIA and ATL would remain just fine. In fact, Atlanta would likely lose some Latin America/Caribbean routes if such a merger were to happen, because with MIA, AA would have no need for the redundancy.
BigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2755 posts, RR: 7 Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3436 times:
Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter): If a DL/AA merger were to occur, expect MIA to be replaced by ATL
Absolutely not. If this were to ever come to be, expect both ATL and MIA be kept. MIA's yields are tremendous and the lock on the South Florida-Latin America marketplace that AA currently has is substantial and quite profitable. If anything, I could see some ATL-South America flights be discontinued to improve yields at MIA.
Personally I think AA/DL has more merit, but I still do not see it happening. For the sake of arguement, assuming it could, an AA/DL arrangement has some logisitcal benefits:
1. AA's new JFK facility could easily handle the large TATL operation currently operated by DL
2. AA and DL terminals at LAX are adjacent; could make a focus city/hub development for feasible
3. Hubs/focus cities don't overlap: DFW, ATL, MIA, JFK, ORD, SLC, LAX, SJU. I would expect STL and CVG to become spoke cities.
4. Would propel the new carrier to #1 across the Atlantic, #1 to Latin America, #1 to Mexico, #1 to Canada, #1 to Hawaii, #1 in transcontinenal nonstop flying...
5. Fleets share more commonality except AA's buses and DL's 90's.
6. A combined AA/DL, no doubt, could easily be positioned as the USA's unofficial flag carrier
Of course, integrating debt, labor, IT platforms, operations, etc. would be enormous. Also the DOJ/DOT would have serious issues on the size and scope of this. The items that they new carrier must compromise on (perhaps Heathrow access?) might not be worth it...but hey, crazier things have happened!
Evan767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2957 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 3392 times:
Absolutely any other merger besides DL/US is good at this point IMO. I would love a merger with AA or CO, especially CO. We would dominate Europe with CO and pick up quite a bit of Asia with the Micronesia ops...
The proper term is "on final" not "on finals" bud...
Dalb777 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 2192 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3270 times:
If DL and US were to merge, they would take the Delta name. So what name do you think a DL/AA merger would keep, and what name would a DL/CO merger keep?
Geaux Tigers! Geaux Hornets! Geaux Saints! WHO DAT!!!
ZKNBX From New Zealand, joined Jul 2006, 464 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3248 times:
I am not sure that US would take the Delta name... you may be right but I wouldn't assume.
As for AA/DL on the face of it, has more merit but won't happen IMO because AA have their hands full and are in financial strife themselves... following the integration of TWA.
Cán't see all of SLC, DFW, BNA, ATL, MIA, JFK, ORD and STL surviving intact. Agreed with the above that likely ATL and MIA would stay as is. More a question about BNA, and STL. Combined carrier would have significant capacity on the west coast... LAX especially.
Fleetwise... AA's 757s are RR while DLs are PW. AA's 763s are GE while DLs are both GE and PW. Both operate T7s with RR, and NG737s... and M80s... all in all not a major drama.
Futurecaptain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3229 times:
DL cannot merge with CO. To get everyone in this merger game going on now here's how I see it.
AA/DL. Keeping the AA name. And for reasons stated above they can make a good pairing. Would be an enormous airline to contend with in the end I bet.
UA/CO. Has been talked about for months how great a pair they make. Taking UA name.
Which leaves NW/US. Taking NW name I would think due to their large Asian ops. Gives US a very large access to Asia and Europe allowing them to compete effectively with the two frankensteins I created above.
Alaska/Air Tran. Merge the west and east and get a national carrier. People respect both names. Great pair IMO
Frontier/Jet Blue. Airbus commonality. Both have PTV's which means fleet integration will be smoother. Hubs in JFK and DEN, far enough apart to not hurt each other. Would have extensive ops south of the border and could become a competitive LCC.
Southwest stands alone, they need noone, they want none. Everyone else still tries to be like them. They survive as is.
And there you have my plan for reducing the number of US airlines to a more reasonable number and giving everyone a fair shot as far as routes go. 3 major airlines each getting strong international routes. 3 major LCC's each having nationwide coverage. Competition still abounds in the form of new start ups to keep prices down, but enough has vanoshed that airlines can make a profit.
I couldn't have said it better myself. that is how things should go you should send a letter to the airlines and make your case. I would love to see an AA/DL merger but that would be one massive airline.
One mile of highway gets you one mile, one mile of runway gets you anywhere.
DL4EVR From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 641 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3059 times:
Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter): A DL/AA merger would probably only dump Delta's MD-90s and AA's A300s.
A DL/CO merger would likely dump Delta's MD-88s and MD-90s, and Continental's 737-300s.
Not to mention there is less hub overlap with those mergers compared to a DL/US merger. If a DL/AA merger were to occur, expect MIA to be replaced by ATL and CVG to be replaced by ORD. For DL/CO, expect JFK to be replaced by EWR and CLE to be replaced by CVG.
The most important question with this merger of course, is which a/c in the combined fleet would get the new AVOD PTVs???
STT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16260 posts, RR: 52 Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3049 times:
AA/DL merger would be great for JFK travelers, AA could have reason to complete their Terminal project to it's original goal of 55 gates (instead of the current 37). DL is not in a position to be seeking financing for a new JFK Terminal even after exiting bankruptcy, especially in light of AA's scaling backof their JFK Terminal project and DL's half empty terminal at Boston.
An AA/DL merger would require the disposition of gates and slots at Laguardia airport.
CO/DL would move DL's JFK operations to EWR further increasing CO's position as NY's largest carrier, it would also provide a huge fleet of 767s to replace 757 on Trans-Atlantic flights.
BA787 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 2596 posts, RR: 8 Reply 11, posted (6 years 6 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3036 times:
I think DL and CO is more likely somehow, I think AA are pretty strong across America, if AA merged with either DL or CO it would become a world beating airline. As for MIA being dropped by AA
AA is incredibly strong in Latin America and it would be therefore incredibly stupid of them to leave MIA.
As for the mergers, I would be surprised if we see any for the moment, maybe in a few years but things aren't bad enough for them yet!!
Futurecaptain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (6 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2889 times:
Quoting MPDPilot (Reply 8): that is how things should go you should send a letter to the airlines and make your case. I would love to see an AA/DL merger but that would be one massive airline.
Ok, here's a little more thought out. Still working on my proposals...
AA/DL
Hubs: Dallas, Chicago, Miami, Atlanta, Cincinati, New York, Salt Lake City, Los Angeles
Fleet: MD-80, 737-800, 757, 767-2/3/4, 777-200
Leaving Fleet: A300, 732, MD-90
Orders to be placed after merger: More Embrader RJ's to replace lost 732's, 787 to replace aging 767's and A300's, 737's to replace aging MD-80's/90's.
End result is 1000+ a/c. flying worldwide, dominate carrier to South America, large trans-atlantic ops, a small(er), but increasing Asian presence.
UA/CO
Hubs: Chicago, Denver, San Francisco, Washington Dulles, Los Angeles, Houston, New York, Cleveland, Guam
Fleet: A319, A320, 737-3/5/8, 747, 757, 767, 777
Leaving Fleet:737-7/9
Orders to be placed after merger: 777LR to replace 747 flying. Increase 787 order to replace aging 767's. Airbus narrowbodies to replace aging 737's.
End result is 900+ a/c. Combined well covered Asian networks as well as European. Would become the major carrier to Mexico.
NW/US
Hubs: Detroit, Minniapolis, Memphis, Tokyo, Amsterdam, Charlotte, Philadelphia, Las Vegas,
Phoenix
Fleet: A319, A320, A321, 747, 757, A330, 767
Leaving Fleet: DC-9, D-10, 737
Orders to be placed after merger: Airbus narrowbodies to replace lost capacity of Dc-9's and 737's. 787 to replace 767/DC-10 flying internationally.
End result is 900+ a/c. Extensive Asian ops, stronger pacific ops than any other merger due to NW's operations there. Competitive across the atlantic, though not particularly strong. Weakest going south of the border.
I think such a pairing would put all 3 resulting major international carriers on pretty equal ground.
Stand by for an initial analysis of the resulting LCC's.
Fewsolarge From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 409 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (6 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2613 times:
What use are CVG and CLE as hubs in these scenarios?
BigGSFO From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2755 posts, RR: 7 Reply 16, posted (6 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2598 times:
Quoting Fewsolarge (Reply 15): What use are CVG and CLE as hubs in these scenarios?
If it's AA/DL, CVG will definitely be reduced in favor of ORD. Chicago's O&D, yield etc. is superior to Cincinnati.
If it's CO/DL, CVG will be kept as it is more of a developed hub.
Makes one wonder if the so-called consolidation happens, hub cities will be reduced across the country and there will be a lot of empty terminals. PIT and STL are simply the first. Yet other airports, such as ORD, JFK and LAX, are in much need for extra space. Welcome to the Airline Econmics of the 21st century.
RobertS975 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 890 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (6 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2551 times:
It is not an absolute certainty, IMO, that smaller hubs would disappear in a merger simply because places like ORD are maxed out in terms of capacity. So if there were a AA/DL merger, I would suspect that keeping a place like CVG open will be the only way to increase connecting capacity.
JetBlueGuy2006 From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1613 posts, RR: 2 Reply 18, posted (6 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2536 times:
Quoting Evan767 (Reply 4): Absolutely any other merger besides DL/US is good at this point IMO
Quoting MPDPilot (Reply 8): couldn't have said it better myself
Very well said to all thus far on the thread!!!!
Home Airport: Capital Region International Airport (KLAN)
AA787823 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (6 years 6 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2516 times:
Dont hold your breath for any AA merger. AA has THE poorest track records for mergers, the only truley sucessful one being Trans Carribean. Air Cal GONE, Reno Air GONE, TWA 88.6% GONE. My guess is long term, US/DL will fall apart. UA/CO will get married, then down the road NW/DL. We will be left with United, Delta, American, US Air. Size in that order.
What? Why don't you explain this sentence rather than just put it out there? Now I'm simply confused. Is this due to some contract thing with NW? AF? Some other reason? Just your opinion?
Fewsolarge From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 409 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (6 years 6 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2465 times:
Quoting RobertS975 (Reply 17): So if there were a AA/DL merger, I would suspect that keeping a place like CVG open will be the only way to increase connecting capacity.
We have an example from the same region, same company: STL. CVG would make a great focus city, but in an AA/DL scenario, it would get the axe as a major hub pronto.
Floridaflyboy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1985 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (6 years 6 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2454 times:
Quoting ZKNBX (Reply 6): I am not sure that US would take the Delta name... you may be right but I wouldn't assume.
Yes, if it happens, which I hope it does not, they will take the Delta name. That has already been announced. If you read the pages on US Airways' web site, and all the newspaper articles, it says that.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 5763 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 31118 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jul 2006, 464 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 2596 posts, 
From Canada, joined May 2006, 311 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
