Jzucker From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 100 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 739 times:
I don't deny that I am an "UNINFORMED KID", despite the fact that I did not particularly care for your tone. I do hold a private pilots license at the age of 17 and have over 150 hours logged. Truth be told, I am "informed" in many aviation related topics to a greater extent than you....Okay, so I may be speculating! IN FACT, my youngness has prevented me from seeing much of the takeovers you mentioned. I am naive in believing that the Aviation World now is what it always was..
I ask any patient people out there to respond, even predict the future of the industry I will have a career in, and the industry I love.
I for one, will be sad to see especially USairways join UAL, which is the biggest airline now anyway. I LIKE DIVERSITY.
So Matt, please don't judge me because of my age. Even young, "misinformed kids" can love aviation. And to everyone else, thanks in advance for the kind feedback!
Ikarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 730 times:
MattD, which of these airlines were as big/famous as TWA, or US Air?
What is happening right now in America is on a bigger scale than the once-rumoured KLM/BA merger and the only way I could imagine anything nearly as big in Europe would be for LH and AF to merge or something similar.
To be honest, I do prefer them merging to them going bust like PanAm....
Matt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 50 Reply 4, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 725 times:
From an enthusiasts standpoint, it makes little difference whether an airline goes bust or gets swallowed. In the end, the name vanishes.
Although I agree, a merger would be the better road, and for two reasons:
1. From an enthusiasts POV, the transition and hybrid liveries provide a great excuse to take trips and take a lot more pictures
2. From a business standpoint, I can't imagine what anyones argument could be.
A merger means that most of the employees will have continued employment whereas a shutdown leaves everyone out in the cold. Not only does their week to week livlihood go out the windows, but their beneifits, pensions, etc also evaporate.
I certainly don't mean to sound belligerent, and kudos to you for your flying accomplishments.
But you suggesting that we "raise the price of airfares so no one can fly" is nothing short of ludicrous.
First of all, last minute, First Class, and Business Class fares are already beyond the reach of the average persons pocket book. I'd be willing to bet that most (>75% of those you see flying those services) either are redeeming FF miles and/or their employer is paying for the flight. Second, what would be the point of hobbling the airline industry through "higher fares"?
Just so your beloved Air XXX livery will be around for you to look at it longer?
What you are suggesting speaks one of two things:
Price fixing/collusion (which is difficult to prove, but nonetheless very illegal)
Re-regulation (isn't the government too big already?)
Iainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 720 times:
Jzucker - Although you do have your PPL and 150TT, that does not substitute the knowledge of business you need to be able to discuss these mergers in depth.
Mergers can be very good for us, as aviation enthusiast, passengers, and be very bad. What the US goverment has to decide is if US Airways and United do merge will that have the consequences you have mentioned above. If it passes they feel that the maket will be closer to perfect competition therefore it will not effect the market price. If they rule that the merge between US Airways and United would Monopolies the market, and not provid fair competition then they will rule against it!
Jzucker From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 100 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 709 times:
Thank you for your reasonable response. I will admit to almost regretting having posted that last message. I will further say that even my first one may have been a bit pre-mature. Let me attempt to clarify my thinking, despite the fact that it may be naive in its logic:
First and foremost. It is a fact that the number of people flying has drastically increased. If my sources are correct, there will be a 20% increase in the flying public in the years to come.
FACT: The ATC system is struggling with its outdated technology..upgrades are far and few between
FACT: Airport expansion seems to slow to accolmadate the growth in traffic
Yes, you have made it clear that already many mergers have taken place. But if we could freeze time, how would you rate our current situation? The flying public does not need a global giant that will control prices and airtravel. Having competition is favorable in the eyes of the consumers. C'mon...all of the alliances have already made unified global travel and earning frequent flier miles a breeze. OKAY...so raising ticket prices is not a good idea, However I stand by my opinion that continued merging leading to one or two giants is not in the best interest of the industry.
I can certainly be swayed with more educated information, I will admit. Thanks... Josh
Iainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 704 times:
Josh your facts really having nothing to do with your point. Your point is you want the airline industry to become a 'perfect market'! The airline industry is a very strange one, think of how Pan Am was teh largest thing flying in the US for years, and they went bust, and British Airways ruled the skies over Britian, and now a having problems with 2 carriers, Easyjet and Virgin. I think what is happening with mergers is just these major carriers taking large hops instead of a steady walk!
Jzucker From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 100 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 699 times:
I think your right. I will be entering an aviation college next year, and to be honest with you, i am more worried than anything that after another 5 or 6 years of education and flight instructing, the industry will not be what it is now. Logically I know it wont and cannot be. But I love to fly. Whether there are 5 world airlines, or 50, I will be satisfied having a seat in the flight deck no matter what turns the industry takes.
BTW.....My double Major is in Business Management, maybe then ill attempt this subject again. Just give me another 4 years.
Iainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 694 times:
Josh we seem to have a lot in common, I too am a 17 year old Private Pilot, currently study Business at University, luckily for me I graduate next year! The industry might not be the same, as far as the way the competitive market is set up, however I sure prices will not skyrocket, and there will be more demand for pilots then there currently is!
Cody From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1924 posts, RR: 9 Reply 10, posted (12 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 680 times:
It's not only sad its dangerous. Now the TWA deal I can let slide a little because their very existence depends on it, but the USAirways and United deal is a problem I think. It's main purpose is to line the pockets of just a few people. I keep hearing these goofy remarks about how it is necessary but the truth is it is not. USAirways has spent the better part of the year sitting idle and not making any plans except this merger. In the meantime they are getting behind the curve. I am saying this with the background of an economics degree and a commercial pilot's license so please do not call me an uninformed kid. For those of you wanting a job in aviation in the future, beware of these deals. It's sinister, it's bad. Trust no one. Just because someone tells you a deal is necessary does not make it so. Look at things from a new prospective.