Jrlander From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1104 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4869 times:
Rumors are flying around regarding a NW/DL merger. I have no knowledge of such a merger. But I do think it is an interesting thought. So what would a combined carrier look like?
IF- which is a big one- the merger were to happen, I think we would see:
long haul fleet:
A330's with the new lie-flat Delta business seat installed
767-300ER's and 767-400ER's with a new business class seat
747-400's with redone interiors including AVOD at all seats
777-200ER's and 777-200LR's
(the 787's would slowly replace 767's)
757-200 ETOPS (NW fleet redone to be like DL's upcoming fleet)
757-300 (with AVOD at all seats
757-200 (NW planes redone to match DL planes)
A320 (NW planes redone like DL 737-800's)
Two club system like Delta-
Business Elite clubs (or whatever name is used) placed at MSP, DTW, LAX, SEA.
WC at SFO becomes Business Elite lounge.
At SEA- international operations from South Concourse (WC becoming BE lounge), others from DL's A gates.
At LAX? My guess is they might use T-5.
The fleet would obviously be huge. It would allow some reallocation of planes to better markets. For instance, A330's could go to ATL and support larger demand European and South American Routes. Some of the 767's could go to DTW to support smaller markets. More planes may be available to support expansion at LAX (including, I would think, routes to South America)
The combined carrier, with reduced capacity at MEM and CVG, would probably quickly retire older DC-9's with high fuel costs. It might also decide not to take the 737-700's, and instead renegotiate to purchase more 777's or 787's.
This is all speculation, of course. But it is an interesting thing to contemplate.
Haggis79 From Germany, joined Jun 2006, 1096 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4802 times:
Well, I don't know how likely such a merger is - albeit I think it is far more likely than the much-talked-about-on-anet DL/UA combination given the overseas alliance connections of the respective carriers and given the fact that DL just has strengthend their relationship to AF and is in the process to strengthen their relationship to KL and NW (ATI planned from Summer 08, transatlantic joint-venture with AF/KL/NW from Summer 2010)....
but anyways, if you want me to speculate, I could very much imagine that DL/NW are going to pull a "soft merger" a la AF/KL, with both brands surviving at least for the forseeable future. I could see the Asia and Amsterdam flights being operated using the NW brand with the European flights being transferred to DL. This would save them much hassle about brand recognition and traffic rights in the first place, and AF/KL (as well as LH/LX) have been proven that such a merger can very well be successful.
ConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4680 times:
Quoting Haggis79 (Reply 1): if you want me to speculate, I could very much imagine that DL/NW are going to pull a "soft merger" a la AF/KL, with both brands surviving at least for the forseeable future.
DL/NW have extremely little fleet compatibility, and attempting to merge labor on that scale would be a nightmare beyond imagination. Then, there's still several Asian rights that could, in theory, be jeopardized by a traditional merger.
Jetlanta From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 3249 posts, RR: 35
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4591 times:
Quoting EXAAUADL (Reply 3): I giant cluster F&$K, how about that....rember the only people who want mergers are:
media: gives them something to write about other than Anna Nicole
Wall Street: $$$$$
Top Mgmt: $$$$$$
Megers are all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for a select few, employees, communities and pax all get the shaft
All good points, but they don't change the fact that every major U.S. airline is the product of multiple mergers over the course of time. They have always happened and will continue to happen. Fleets, labor, etc...are issues that get worked out over time. Even if it is messy in the beginning, people forget soon enough.
i want it to happen it would make it much more easy to go to Asia
Quoting DL777LAX (Reply 6): Unions at NW
well your wrong there ask WA what happened to there unions when DL merged with them(they where all gone but the pilots)
hubs (largest to smallest): ATL,DTW,MSP,JFK,LAX,SLC,NRT (i dont know what would happen to AMS and KL)
FC: BOS,SEA,MCO,MEM,CVG,LGA and DCA
fleet: A330s A32Xs 787 77L 77B 764 763ER 763 753 752 744 738 73G MD-88s and MD-90s and the DC-9s will go
77Ws will be ordered and will start replacing the 744s
then when the 737RS comes out DL places a huge order to replace 737,757, A32X and MD a/c
1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6432 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4408 times:
I think the 767-400ER is the big question mark, as NW's A330 fleet is larger than Delta's 767-400ER fleet. This is one of the reasons why I oppose a DL/NW merger. Perhaps the 767-400ERs could be used strictly on European routes while the A330s can be used on some Asian routes. If the merger was a soft merger, then the 767-400ERs may continue to be operated.
The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
DeltaL1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9289 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4383 times:
Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 8): I think the 767-400ER is the big question mark, as NW's A330 fleet is larger than Delta's 767-400ER fleet. This is one of the reasons why I oppose a DL/NW merger. Perhaps the 767-400ERs could be used strictly on European routes while the A330s can be used on some Asian routes. If the merger was a soft merger, then the 767-400ERs may continue to be operated.
i wouldn't worry about the 764s and i think NWs A330s are leased right? DL owns there 764s. When they merge everything will pretty much stay just like they are now most airbus will stay at MSP,DTW and boeing at ATL,SLC,JFK and LAX(the later being more ERJs but some Boeings)
SLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4028 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4364 times:
Do we have to start this merger $hit again! We just discussed this last August according to a search. While some might like this, until there is more concrete evidence; strong words from both Mr Anderson and Mr Steenland, then I suggest we quit piddling with this!!!!
DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
Bobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6441 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4347 times:
Quoting DeltaL1011man (Reply 9): i wouldn't worry about the 764s and i think NWs A330s are leased right? DL owns there 764s
Some of NWA's 330's are leased some are owned just like DAL and the 767-400. None of the 767-400's or A330's are owned outright by either carrier. They have very large loan payments due every month. This is also true of most carriers, however Northwest totally owns all of its DC-9's, before someone asks.
Azjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3888 posts, RR: 28
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4157 times:
IF there is a merger, I predict it will be modeled after the AF/KLM group. If a true mergers happen in the future, I don't think 2 larger carriers will combine. I think it would be a large and a small/medium combining or two small ones. No mega mergers.
BAW716 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2027 posts, RR: 27
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3968 times:
My two cents...
I've seen this topic discussed more than once...and the answers still remain the same:
Assuming for the moment that DL/NW even want to merge (and there is no information I have that states that they are even talking about it), merging the two carriers would be a nightmare of epic proportions.
One aspect that is a cost disaster is fleet: DL is all Boeing (mainline) and NW has a mixed Boeing/Airbus fleet with it now being the largest A330 operator (I read this just the other day). The fact that these would have to be integrated is too mind boggling to even contemplate...and this is just ONE factor.
I agree with those on this forum who advocate a AF/KL kind of structure, with two operations with only those aspects of the company that can be combined to achieve cost reduction and or increased efficiencies being merged. That said, there would be huge DOT hurdles as well as foreign government concerns (Japan?). Right now, they are in the SkyTeam alliance. The only potential benefit would be to introduce carrier wide code sharing, but frankly, I see the other members of the alliance (those in the Pacific) having issues with that.
Let NW and DL fix their own houses and operate as two separate carriers within the scope of SkyTeam. Right now, this seems to work fine and there is no reason to make a change.
David L. Lamb, fmr Area Mgr Alitalia SFO 1998-2002, fmr Regional Analyst SFO-UAL 1992-1998
Gsosbee From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 825 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3912 times:
The fleet issue (not just a potential DL/NW merger) is interesting. I am not all that sure that the fleet differences are as important as normal M&A issues and the union issues.
Each existing airline has a fleet and a group of flyers and maintainers for that fleet. Sure you would like everything complementary, but over a given strategic planning period the fleet issues somehow work themselves out. (In fact one line of thought is that it gives the company to pick from the best route/aircraft applicability. Worse case it give the company a big hammer with both A &B.) In each of the airline deals that we have reviewed, the fleet issue was way down the chain as areas of concern for us.
The union issues on the other hand are the killers.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3873 times:
Quoting Gsosbee (Reply 17): The fleet issue (not just a potential DL/NW merger) is interesting. I am not all that sure that the fleet differences are as important as normal M&A issues and the union issues.
I don't think the fleet issues are of any concerns at all, actually...
Watewate From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 2284 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3850 times:
^ what he said.
Fleet commonality isn't a deal breaker on a merger as as big as this. Costs of operating different types are spread over so many aircrafts that it probably is cheaper to maintain A+B fleet rather than to get rid of types from one manufacturer quickly.
If they can manage to do what AA did with its MD80/737 @ DFW/MIA - i.e. fly certain types from particular bases, fleet complications would certainly be workable. I reckon that they'll hold on to the short-haul fleet until the 737/32x successor comes along.
If I were a shareholder for DL, I wouldn't mind this deal provided that the new entity can work through the labor integration mess - not an easy task by any means. If I held NW shares, however, I'd be hesitant to jump on this proposal. What does NW get out of this deal? It's got a great pacific network and a relationship with KL that's the envy of the industry. DL seems poised to make some noise with its recent announcements into Europe, but will they pay off? Also, DL will need to spend heavily to update JFK and LAX facilities to support their recent expansion announcements - so where is the near/medium-term upside for the investors aside from obvious synergistic savings? Those savings, while substantial, probably won't create enough value to make the merger worthwhile since the costs have been slashed during the carriers' restructurings. If such merger happens, chalk one up for the bankers, lawyers and fund managers. The employees and investors come out on the losing end.
If they really want to create value, they need to get away from this fantasy mergers and monetize what they already have by spinning off the non-core activities.
Tl8490 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 161 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3789 times:
Does anyone else think the Delta boys got a look at the AF/KLM playbook while they were in Paris and are now ready to talk about that kind of merger more so than before. It just seems that a DL/NW hook up similar to AF/KL would be great...
Think about it....you leave everything the same...then slowly..go to one reservation system..then slowly order planes as one group the integrate ground personnel...then the flight attendants..then finally the pilots ..over a period of years...I still think this is already going on...the NW flight attendants use DL training materials for some things now...
777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3548 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3768 times:
Quoting Gigneil (Reply 19): I don't think the fleet issues are of any concerns at all, actually...
Indeed. I think the importance of fleet commonality is grossly overstated here on airliners. Mostly by people who don't know what they're talking about. Fleet commonality is secondary to a number of things, it's really a minor detail.
Evan767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2957 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3728 times:
ATL (mega-hub for domestic, Latin America, Europe, and a little Africa and Middle East) (One flight to the Orient and that's NRT)
JFK (similar to right now - mostly international traffic to Europe, Africa, and Middle East with connections to many east-coast cities and major west coast cities) (One flight to the Orient and that's NRT)
MSP (gateway to NRT and Asia)
MEM (domestic hub similar to Delta's CVG)
SLC (Hub for connections in the west, with minimal international flights except to Mexico and Canada) (One flight to the Orient and that's NRT)
NRT (Onward connections to Southeast Asia)
LAX (O&D mostly)
MCO (Similar to Delta's current operations)
There's a real problem with the DTW, MSP, MEM, and CVG integration. My guess is two would go, two would stay. CVG has high operating costs so my guess is that would be on to be downsized. It's a toss-up between MSP and DTW but I picked MSP just because it is further north and west allowing for better connections to Asia. MEM would serve as a domestic hub.
757-200 (fleet reduced domestically, more planes internationally)
767-300 for the timebeing until a plethora of 787's arrive
787 order to help phase out 767's and 757's
DC-9's, MD-88's and MD-90's finally phased out in favor of A319's
747-400's phased out in favor of newer A330's, 767-400's, and 787's
Delta name, brand, and product stays.
Wow, I am a true loser.
The proper term is "on final" not "on finals" bud...
: Yest you are! You left out the 777s of DL. IF (& it's a very big IF) this were to happen, I would venture to say you'll see a large fleet of 773ERs i
: Either MSP or SLC will go. I would really bet on it being MSP. NS
: Here it is: Parent Company we call it Dornel Group (combination of the first 3 letters from Delta and Northwest) It has 5 subsidiaries. NW, DL, NW Car
: If NW and DL merged I think it would look like this: Hubs: ATL (largest hub) MSP (gateway to Asia) NRT AMS DTW (gateway to Europe) SLC Focus cities: S
: Congratulations Centrair, you have seen the future.
: If both airlines have just gone through bankruptcy, operationally they must in theory be at their most cost efficient. Both have large fleets so commo