Kaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12292 posts, RR: 35 Posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1054 times:
Just having a quick look through the news section on another part of Planet airliners.net and came across a story about Delta and CO discussing a merger; this will come as a surprise to no one, BUT there's a twist . . .
CO and DL believe that if CO was to lead the merger and effectively acquire Delta, this might overcome the NW veto. Not surprisingly, NW has a different view and is confident it can overcome this.
From a fleet point of view, both CO and DL would fit like a glove. Both have RR powered 777s, GE powered 764s, there's a split with the 757 (but it shouldn't cause too much of a problem), then of course, more 737s than you can shake a stick at - and Delta's 737 fleet is more than likely to top 200. BUT, routewise, the airline's seem to have similarities; they both have very big networks out of NY (JFK and EWR) and not much business on the Pacific (relative to UA and NW). So, while on first glance CO and DL seem well paired, a strategic move might be for DL and NW to merge. I couldn't see this being a happy merger and fleet commonality - apart from the PW powered 757s, would be a nightmare, but then there's the Pacific.
Yeah, maybe CO and DL should just work together . . .
Picarus From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 299 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 968 times:
Here we go again...
Please guys, let's not turn this into a financial analysis again...okay?
It's pretty apparent DL and CO are evaluating this possible arrangement solely to circumvent NW veto's power. I'll never understand why DOJ allowed NW to retain "effective control" of CO with this thinly veiled veto arrangement.
In any event, I don't seem a full blown merger in the cards any time soon. My educated guess is that we'll see some sort of three way alliance between NW, DL, and CO if the UA/US merger is approved.
Blink182 From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 1999, 5474 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 954 times:
There is no way the government/congress would let a merger that big go through. AA is buying TWA because TWA is in financial trouble and already declared bankruptcy. UA buying US, well I am not really sure what is behind that. CO and DL coming together, I doubt that would go through. They are both really big airlines and the airline would have a stranglehold in the Texas market. DL at DFW and CO at IAH. I don't think any airline wants to be THAT big in Texas.
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
Wpr8e From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 937 times:
Stranglehold on Texas? Have you forgotten about Southwest and American?
I would be interesting to see some DL reaction on this forum. Maybe a bit of crow should be eaten. They were so adamant that CO would not buy DL, that now it may happen, whether or not to circumvent NW, CO has to come up with the cash.
SteveT From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 44 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 909 times:
Cash may not be necessary. CO could purchase DL in a stock swap deal. The DL shareholders would give up their DL shares in exchange for CO shares. The former DL shareholders would then own much more than half of the surviving airline, which would be CO. Comments?
PhilTLL From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 27 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 903 times:
Even with the two significant mergers going on, I think CO/DL working closely wouldn't really do too well. The current NW/CO arrangement suits both of them, and I believe the theory of DL buying AS is good.
As a side note, UA/US is much bigger IMO than AA/TW. At my last fleet count, US had nearly 400 airplanes and TW didn't break 200. Both had significant orders pending; I'd presume TW's are easier to break with the bankruptcy declaration.
Ladevale From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 889 times:
Wrp8e states that "I would be interesting to see some DL reaction on this forum. Maybe a bit of crow should be eaten. They were so adamant that CO would not buy DL."
Yeah, it seems like our friend Ceilidh wasn't at all wrong, but DeltaSFO, whom one might have expected to chime in by now, was wrong, very wrong...
Hey, CO's purchase of Delta may be a last-ditch recognition on Leo Mullin's part that he doesn't have the management resources (i.e., staff and analytical systems) to run an airline in the current environment. Delta management have just taken far too many incompetent and unwise actions over the last three years to inspire confidence among its various constituencies (i.e., its shareholders, its employees, and its passengers). We perhaps should have seen this coming when Delta announced a couple years back that it would add a surcharge to non-internet tickets/bookings. Do you remember the public firestorm that that caused and the embarassment to Delta management when they had to retract the decision. There have been many decisions like that over the last three years.
Continental management, however, has proven not only that they can create a competitive image for their carrier, but that they can get employees to buy into that image.
If this merger were to go through, however, Gordon Bethune is not by any means the clear cut winner. He may have had a better management staff than those at Delta, but he would now have to grapple with bigger labor problems than those caused by mergers at American/TWA and United/US Airways. For one, who wants to tell the pilots at Delta that their "new" contract, the one at Continental, calls for them to take a pay cut?
Cba From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 4530 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 830 times:
A CO/DL merger will not happen. If it did however, they'd probably keep Continental's name an livery. The Delta Airlines name was originally concieved because the airline served the Mississipi delta area from ATL. Continental sounds more like a world wide name.
TEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 811 times:
Regarding the 777 fleets, Delta's are powered by RR Trent 800 series and Continental's are powered by GE90s. Continental's 767s are all powered by GE CF6s but Delta's 767s are powered by both P&W 4000 & GE CF6 engines. Continental's 757s are powered by RR RB211 engines while Delta's are P&W 2000 powered.
ATL From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 68 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (13 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 784 times:
Just an idea here, but if this does go through I think you might see DFW disassembled and that fleet moved out to SLC. By doing this the combined airline could really beef up its west-coast operation. They could also use the extra widebodies to increase pacific ops. I guess what I'm saying is that while they might not be a good fit route wise the increase in the fleet would enable the airline to expand where it needed to.
This would be a lot cheaper then finding a good route fit but having to absorb labor troubles or a bad fit of a fleet.