MKE22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 1155 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4806 times:
Quoting ATWZW170 (Thread starter): keep hearing about DL/NW - why not US/NW? MEM is going away no matter how you look at it....So why couldn't US have hubs in CLT/PHL/MSP/LAS/PHX/DTW. Just seems like it would be a better hook up.
The dance with America West didn't exactly happen too long ago. It does sound good hub wise, US may be looking as well though because they did try to merge with DL not all too long ago as well. Idk, we will see how US pans out in all of this.
COERJ145 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4770 times:
I agree that NW/US would be an excellent combination, but with hubs, i'd say PHL would be downsized slightly in favor of DTW(better facilities). The fleets would combine well. A321s could be used to free up domestic 757s for TATL routes. However, the labor combination could be a problem. Also, I think NW would favor the name Northwest Airlines, over US Airways, it would have better recognition(especially across Europe and Asia).
Flighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8946 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 4669 times:
Quoting NWAESC (Reply 3): Forgetting labor for a second, the multiple IT fiascos at US are reason for NWA enough to pass on any kind of link up
US's IT "fiascos" had to do with purchasing new equipment and switching it on. Now, it is new and switched on. NW has equipment that is old and switched on. They are both in good shape in the IT department.
The problem with a US-NW linkup is they both lack true front-line hub cities. MSP, DTW, PHL and PHX and CLT are all mid-size cities. PHL has a large population, but many of them are poor unemployed people. So it's not as good a hub city as DFW for example, with an equal population but a much greater economy.
DL has its JFK hub and inroads at LAX and BOS. Plus, ATL is a monster. NW needs these large cities to feed its network. I do not think US has the clout to do that.
ATWZW170 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 904 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4641 times:
If something like this were to happen I don't see how US would be the controlling factor. I see NW calling the shots. I could see Doug Parkers upper VP team in the mix - Scott Kirby and Robert Isom are pretty good guys. I think Parker and Steeland would be good to step down and show all labor groups that its a new day.
Labor could be a problem but if you consider that both of these airlines have had terrible moral for so long combining and making a total change to the work place might rally the troops, bring people together. Of course selling the idea to a very naysayer work groups might be hard....if the right person was charismatic enough they just might be able to bring a hault to all the bickering, the feelings of ill will, and turn both companies around. I think everyone was thrilled when Parker hit the ground, he seemed to talk change....but then things went down hill fast when his promises never came through.
I just don't see why DL/NW would work -- totally different fleets - what a nightmare. And really, the US Airways and NW uniforms are pretty close. I personally would love to see it.
Success is getting what you want...happiness is liking what you get
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 26111 posts, RR: 85
Reply 12, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4624 times:
I think it is a pretty good idea.
It could have worked last year, if Mr. Parker had gone for Northwest instead of Delta. I think he made a miscalculation there, underestimating Mr. Grinstein's determination to bring Delta out of Chapter 11 as a standalone.
I don't think Mr. Steenland will initiate anything - I think he will respond to offers - and so far Mr. Parker has been very quiet in all this.
However, we have some way to go. If Delta chooses Northwest over United, I think Mr. Tilton will go nuclear and no airline will be safe from the fallout.
If Delta chooses United over Northwest, I'd guess the others will be running around like headless chooks looking for dance partners.
And I don't think Mr. Parker will be left out. Just because Delta may make an offer for Northwest doesn't mean that someone else can't make a better offer.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31800 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4556 times:
STAR needs a strong American domestic partner, and US really isn't it. But if NW and US merged and stayed in SkyTeam, you not only continue to have three SkyTeam members, but they become even more powerful with NW and US tying the knot. UA and DL merging and staying in SkyTeam would, I think, be a non-starter with the United States Department of Justice on anti-trust grounds. Yet if they stay in STAR, I would expect DL would need to give up it's branding and adopt UA's (whether or not UA's management is in control or shown the door in favor of DL's) because UA was a founding member of STAR and they have the name recognition in the alliance.
So DL and NW should merge and then UA should be allowed to finally take over US. UA can scrap TED and use US as their LCC.
You'd have one really strong and one solid SkyTeam member, one very strong STAR alliance member, and one very strong OneWorld one. AA could even buy AS to shore up their West Coast ops (assuming they don't follow past form and dismantle it) if they feel they need a larger presence to successfully compete against DL+CO and UA.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 27127 posts, RR: 74
Reply 18, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4487 times:
Quoting Gigneil (Reply 5):
Further, NW would likely be the controlling partner there.
Not necessarily. It is likely that the very smart M&A folks who made the HP acquisition of US happen would do the same with NW. Remember too that US is in a much stronger position financially than NW and doesn't particularly need a merger partner.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 4473 times:
US/NW won't work for one simple reason - it would merge the 5th and 6th largest US network airlines and would set off consolidation that would dwarf the merged US/NW. No board in their right mind is going to accept a deal that will be eclipsed by other combinations, esp. when the majority of the value of the deal will be done in stock which will very much reflect market strength.
With a merger of this magnitude, IND may well go away too.
Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 4): I also think that anyone with the right mind would want to avoid US like the plague due to labor issues as well as the whole IT fiasco last year...
I don't think that was a very big issue overall.
Quoting Gigneil (Reply 5): Further, NW would likely be the controlling partner there.
Doubtful. US is still in a better financial position.
Quoting ATWZW170 (Reply 8): And really, the US Airways and NW uniforms are pretty close. I personally would love to see it.
All US uniforms are changing over the next year anyway.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 17): STAR needs a strong American domestic partner, and US really isn't it.
UA+US is just fine for an American domestic Star network.
Quoting N1120A (Reply 19): Remember too that US is in a much stronger position financially than NW and doesn't particularly need a merger partner.
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 20): US/NW won't work for one simple reason - it would merge the 5th and 6th largest US network airlines and would set off consolidation that would dwarf the merged US/NW. No board in their right mind is going to accept a deal that will be eclipsed by other combinations, esp. when the majority of the value of the deal will be done in stock which will very much reflect market strength.
If DL and NW have any chance to be approved, then US and NW would be even more likely given US is far smaller than DL.
USFlyer MSP From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2257 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4166 times:
Quoting MCOflyer (Reply 22): I agree but for US/NW it would be something like this:
Focus cities: LAS, MSP, SEA, IND
Hubs: DTW, PHL, CLT
Im sorry but that list makes no sense. A global airline on the scale of NW/US is going to have all of its hubs east of Indiana? I dont think so. Thats was the problem with the original US. So It would be more like:
SEA (depending on what they do with the AS relationship)
I dont know why everyone wants to reduce MSP to a focus city in the NW merger scenarios. MSP is NW's #1 O/D city and produces more O/D than PHL, DTW, and CLT despite its lack of competition and high average fares and would produce similar numbers if its average fares were as low as PHX and LAS. In addition, I believe that MEM has a chance to keep its hub because it has very low costs, excellent weather and on-time performance, and virtually no competition. It could be successfully repositioned as more of a competitor to DFW and IAH for south-central US traffic rather than southeast US traffic like ATL and CLT.
I do agree with your fleet rationalization though, except for the 787 and the A350 both being in the fleet plan and the cargo 742s needing to go.
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4330 times:
Quoting HPRamper (Reply 21): If DL and NW have any chance to be approved, then US and NW would be even more likely given US is far smaller than DL.
you miss the point. It is not a question of whether NW/US is too large but whether it is too small. A NW/US merger would cause the other 4 players to merge as well. How it shakes out is not important. Any combination would be larger than NW/US. it makes no sense to look for a partner that will make you the smallest company in the industry - or at least the network carrier segment of it.
: ??? Who has LAX to begin with? Thats UA and DL turf.
: i agree but i also think for all boeing airlines 787/777 and all airbus airlines A330/A350 i don't know if its Delta turf maybe ExpressJet turf just
: Sales of the 777 going forward are going to be seriously curtailed by the A350. They are different generations of aircraft. NS
: As a quick aside IAH was #4 with "total population" being used as the metric from the 2000 census. Here are what the top 10 "total population" center
: As screwed up as that would be, that's what I think will happen. We talked about these types of scenarios (generically) in my strategy class. The ind