Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is DL Bidding For AA's Miami Op?  
User currently offlineaacun From Mexico, joined Jan 2004, 557 posts, RR: 1
Posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 19807 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Just heard from a pilot Delta is getting ready to put a billion dollar bid for AA's Miami operation. Has anyone else heard anything of this matter?

108 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineusairways787 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 290 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 19833 times:

No disrespect to pilots, I usually just dismiss it when pilots talk, they just like us are usually last to know. I haven't heard anything of the sort. It isn't ours to bid for.

US787



"Pre departure walk around complete, all doors closed, ready for pushback"
User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4224 posts, RR: 37
Reply 2, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 19678 times:

Just rumors and speculation with little to no substance other than reading between the lines on RA's statements on how he wouldn't mind having that operation.

If it happens, it happens.



Chicks dig winglets.
User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 19636 times:

Quoting aacun (Thread starter):
Just heard from a pilot Delta is getting ready to put a billion dollar bid for AA's Miami operation. Has anyone else heard anything of this matter?

Three days ago we read on Anet That DL was going to aanounce new SEA-China service. The we read that DL and HA were going to merge
Today it is DL buying AA's MIA operation for 1 billion
Not one of those have happened or are likely to happen.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 19557 times:

You can't buy assets with stock, you need cash.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently onlineFWAERJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 3812 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 19321 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 4):
You can't buy assets with stock, you need cash.

DL has a big cash warchest. There have been rumors since the new pilot contract was approved that DL is hoarding cash for mergers and acquisitions.

That said, Richard Anderson has stated that the only parts of AA that he is interested in are MIA and DFW, so this might have some validity.



"Did he really need the triple bypass? Or was it the miles?"
User currently offlinePIEAvantiP180 From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 557 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 19299 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting STT757 (Reply 4):
You can't buy assets with stock, you need cash.

And i believe that any airline interested in MIA ops would need a lot more then 1B $ in cash to buy it. Plus MIA is priceless to AA and i don't believe it for one second they would sell it to anyone especially one of their biggest competitors in DL. Plus DL would need another 150-200 RJ, narrow body, and wide body(25-40) planes to run the MIA ops. Again i just don't see MIA ops and all the necessary aircraft being bought for just 1B$. In my opinion MIA is worth 3-5B$ at lest.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8457 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 19218 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

AA would surrender O'hare before they sold Miami. DL has a nice franchise to Latin America from Atlanta and JFK, given all that is Miami really that attractive ?

User currently offlineavek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4412 posts, RR: 19
Reply 8, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 19011 times:

Quoting aacun (Thread starter):
Just heard from a pilot Delta is getting ready to put a billion dollar bid for AA's Miami operation. Has anyone else heard anything of this matter?

No, and it's highly unlikely, for any number of reasons:

1. With some modest carrier shuffling, MIA has enough spare gate capacity to enable an ambitious US legacy carrier to set up a very respectable focus city operation to Latin America, so there's no need to buy from a competitor what can be gotten with a couple calls to the local airport authority.

2. As others have alluded, a piecemeal purchase is actually more complicated than a wholesale acquisition in bankruptcy. Among other things, as a practical matter, creditors want cold, hard cash when buying a chunk of an operation (as opposed to accepting stock and debt assumptions when the entire franchise is being scooped up). Additionally, the antitrust issues are likely worse in a purchase of a fraction of the company because the transaction would probably be unable to rely upon the "failing firm" exception to antitrust scrutiny that can apply when an acquisition of substantially all of a bankrupt company takes place.

And labor would be a hot mess for the next 20 years.

3. Some of the restricted access market rights are simply non-saleable, and would revert back to DOT for potential allocation to other operators.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 18893 times:

I think the only way AA would do this is if they ceded off everything they own besides DFW. They would have to be truly desperate to do this. They'd probably make more money running only the DFW and MIA hubs than them selling off MIA for a billion dollars.

Then again, we did see Pan Am sell off a lot of their money making assets back in the day. I wasn't there so it might seriously be apples to oranges.

I don't doubt DL would make a move like this, I just doubt AA would agree. The only curve ball I see is if many of the creditors are pissed off at the losses they made with AA and wanted to cut their losses and bail out... but basic economics say it makes more sense to wait it out and let the MIA hub make money



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinehiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2177 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 18075 times:

that has been a rumor that has been around for a long time. A nagging theory has been voiced that delta and usair plan to divide amr so that neither has to take the enployees.....that all this has been to stall and delay amr reorg to force a collapse and a subsequent asset purchase. Dunno...but it keeps resurfacing from time to time.

User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3208 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 18047 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 3):
Three days ago we read on Anet That DL was going to aanounce new SEA-China service. The we read that DL and HA were going to merge
Today it is DL buying AA's MIA operation for 1 billion
Not one of those have happened or are likely to happen.

Yeah, don't forget when it was reported in the media that US was about to buy out AS. Ooops, just saw Chester flying overhead independently.

Of all of these rumors, the only one I sort of believe is SEA-PVG.


User currently offlinedeltaflyertoo From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 1662 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 17948 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 9):
Then again, we did see Pan Am sell off a lot of their money making assets back in the day. I wasn't there so it might seriously be apples to oranges.

The difference was AMR has like over 4 billion in cash, Pan Am had nothing. Each time they went through one of those huge asset deals it was literally to subsidize another few months to a year of operation (in which I guess someone at the top at Pan Am either had huge ego, prayed or whatever but I guess would think it would then turn around in that time)....So seeing AA isn't cash strapped I doubt this too. But as above posters pointed out, they would make a lot more by having just DFW and MIA as it seems the sum of ORD, LAX and JFK are what drags them down.


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3607 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 17830 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 3):
Three days ago we read on Anet That DL was going to aanounce new SEA-China service. The we read that DL and HA were going to merge
Today it is DL buying AA's MIA operation for 1 billion
Not one of those have happened or are likely to happen.

If you read this board enough delta has been about to takeover every domestic airline at some point and opening multiple new hubs MIA, SEA, LAX. I would not put too much time on the rumor until we hear something. It would not be the craziest thing ever but it would also have major problems IE the overlap of its own ATL hub. Delta operates to all those same places with ATL and has better feed than MIA.

Quoting avek00 (Reply 8):
3. Some of the restricted access market rights are simply non-saleable, and would revert back to DOT for potential allocation to other operators.

I dont know about that specifically but that could be a major price reduction to a MIA sale and something people on here dont realize.


User currently offlineSkyTeamTriStar From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 398 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 17650 times:

Until it comes from a News Release from Delta Air Lines, Inc., then its untrue....

User currently offlineOB1504 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 3433 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 17432 times:

Quoting avek00 (Reply 8):
1. With some modest carrier shuffling, MIA has enough spare gate capacity to enable an ambitious US legacy carrier to set up a very respectable focus city operation to Latin America, so there's no need to buy from a competitor what can be gotten with a couple calls to the local airport authority.

Adding to this, DL already tried to build a focus city at MIA just recently, and it didn't last.


User currently onlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6312 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 17057 times:

I actually think this rumor might ha e some truth....DL might just make a run for some AA assets, if only to cost AA and US some money......and to add an air of instability in some of AA's very robust FFers in LatAm. I already see it happening a bit in GUA etc....AA had a lot of pissed off frequent flyers in the 4 destinations I went travelled to week.... POS, BZE, GUA, SAP ...with the delays and cancellations cause by the "industrial action"


When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 16968 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 13):
It would not be the craziest thing ever but it would also have major problems IE the overlap of its own ATL hub. Delta operates to all those same places with ATL and has better feed than MIA.

Actually I think it would be great... MIA has plenty of O/D and it would help relieve some pressure in ATL.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 16):

I actually think this rumor might ha e some truth....DL might just make a run for some AA assets, if only to cost AA and US some money.

I foresee it too. I think this rumor is very believable from DL's end, I just don't think AA in their right mind would agree to it.

In AA's weak, present state, still the only way I see this happening is if the creditors get sick of dealing with AA and just want to cut their losses, but even then I think it's unlikely



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3607 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 16817 times:

I would think a sale of ORD to US would make more sense for many reasons. US needs a central hub probably more than delta really needs MIA and the sale is better for AA.

They may potentially merge anyway and ORD is a hub with major competion not a fortress hub. MIA. DFW, JFK and LAX would still be able to connect alot of people and serve alot of america.....clearly the network would face some major problems and would loose quite a few elite flyers but they could find a partner to help them maybe even US and get them into one world? I just think selling MIA or DFW is the last thing AA wants to do right now. I bet US would still pay some major cash for ORD it would really enhance their network but i think it would force them to leave star alliance for one world. Who knows? I just dont see them wanting to sell MIA when other things have value. Heck i could see them selling the LGA slots first than MIA


User currently offlineAA94 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 605 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 16573 times:

Oh, please.

Why would AA sell off Miami? The point of going through bankruptcy is so that you learn to manage your assets better, so that you get benefits out of them in the future. I'm not sure why so many users on this thread are under the impression that AA is just going to sell its entire operation to the highest bidder.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 9):
I don't doubt DL would make a move like this, I just doubt AA would agree. The only curve ball I see is if many of the creditors are pissed off at the losses they made with AA and wanted to cut their losses and bail out... but basic economics say it makes more sense to wait it out and let the MIA hub make money

  

Quoting FWAERJ (Reply 5):
DL has a big cash warchest. There have been rumors since the new pilot contract was approved that DL is hoarding cash for mergers and acquisitions.

Perhaps, and good for them. But just because DL is willing to pay the money doesn't mean AA is going to take it. I'm not sure why AA would want to fold one of the key parts of their international operation. Anyone who says that AA would make a mover like this isn't thinking logically.



Choose a challenge over competence / Eleanor Roosevelt
User currently offlineSCL767 From Chile, joined Feb 2006, 8862 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 16217 times:

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 15):

Quoting avek00 (Reply 8):
1. With some modest carrier shuffling, MIA has enough spare gate capacity to enable an ambitious US legacy carrier to set up a very respectable focus city operation to Latin America, so there's no need to buy from a competitor what can be gotten with a couple calls to the local airport authority.

Adding to this, DL already tried to build a focus city at MIA just recently, and it didn't last.

DL also knows that it would face stiff competition from Latin American airline groups such as AviancaTaca and LATAM. AA's oneworld partner LAN continues to increase frequencies into MIA and plans to launch new routes between South America and MIA next year, i.e. LAN plans to operate non-stop flights between MIA and GIG in January.


User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1904 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 16089 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 16):
I actually think this rumor might ha e some truth....DL might just make a run for some AA assets, if only to cost AA and US some money......and to add an air of instability in some of AA's very robust FFers in LatAm. I already see it happening a bit in GUA etc....AA had a lot of pissed off frequent flyers in the 4 destinations I went travelled to week.... POS, BZE, GUA, SAP ...with the delays and cancellations cause by the "industrial action"


And I think the rumor has absolutely no truth. No BK court would allow the sale of AA's most important/highest yielding hub and then expect them to compete successfully against the other remaining legacy airlines. AA's chances of long term success against the other legacies would decrease dramatically if the hub were sold. The objective of BK is to reorganize and make the company stronger, not weaker.

[Edited 2012-09-21 20:07:11]

User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 16050 times:

Quoting aacun (Thread starter):
Just heard from a pilot Delta is getting ready to put a billion dollar bid for AA's Miami operation. Has anyone else heard anything of this matter?

Sorry, the creditors would never go for that. That would leave AA unviable as an airline going forward thus leaving the creditors well short.


User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2460 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 15845 times:

AA would effectively be committing the airline equivalent of hari-kari by selling MIA to DL. The have spent the last 10 years strengthening the hub to the point that it is arguably the centerpiece of their operation, and likely the most profitable aspect.

AA is not in desperate need of cash at the moment. This rumor seems like a remnant of the last time DL tried to build up MIA (LHR flights with connectors from several spokes). We heard a lot of chatter regarding the possibility of DL negotiating a purchase of the AA/MIA operation, but it didn't happen then and in my view, it is less likely to happen now.


User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9672 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 15373 times:

Quoting aacun (Thread starter):

AA isn't in Chap 7....thus they aren't, and wont be, selling assets. I bet the same pilot thinks Delta is going to open Dallas again too  
Quoting STT757 (Reply 4):

......uhh ok.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 7):
AA would surrender O'hare before they sold Miami. DL has a nice franchise to Latin America from Atlanta and JFK, given all that is Miami really that attractive ?
Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 13):
It would not be the craziest thing ever but it would also have major problems IE the overlap of its own ATL hub. Delta operates to all those same places with ATL and has better feed than MIA.

You guys are kidding right? Your not even remotely comparing Atlanta with Miami to Latin/South America?

I can't think of a market that MIA isn't its largest O/D destination by far. (and I can't think of really any that Atlanta is in the top 5)

Oh and AA has a much larger year round network to Latin/South America from MIA than DL does from Atlanta. A good chunk of Delta's network is summer seasonal (or it goes from daily to 1x a week)



yep.
User currently offlineqqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2296 posts, RR: 13
Reply 25, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 15347 times:

What hub did DL (or CO, US, NW, UA) sell to another carrier during their bankruptcy to survive? Oh, that's right, they didn't. The economics of the airlines are vastly different in deregulation, and the asset sales we saw in the 70s and 80s just won't happen again, unless an airline is truly faltering and about to go under (TWA). AA is reorganizing in bankruptcy, just like United, US Airways, Continental, Delta and Northwest. None of those carriers performed major asset sales during their Ch. 11. Yes, we may see some hubs/focus cities shrink, but that's not an asset sale. AA has the exclusive right to organize without outside input through the end of the year. They will undoubtedly have their plan in place by then, or seek another extension if not (which is guaranteed to be granted).

AA has outperformed the entire industry for the past four months in RASM. That shows in spades how much the company has improved their operating costs -- and that was *before* the new labor agreements were in place. The new work rules allowing improved efficiency and productivity and lower costs won't begin taking effect until October, and it will take at least a year to implement all the changes. It means AA's costs will only continue to shrink.

On another note about AA, their entire bankruptcy is entirely self funded. Meaning they didn't have to secure DIP (debtor-in-possession) financing, and they won't have to secure exit financing either. That's because of their strong cash position, meaning they wouldn't need to perform any asset sales. DL can entertain the idea all they want, and even present it to the court, but AA is under no obligation to even contemplate the offer. And I'm pretty sure DL knows exactly how that'd go down, and highly doubt they're willing to endure that failure in the public eye -- meaning they won't attempt it. They may dream about it, but like many things, it's a pipe dream.



The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 26, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 13230 times:

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 25):
What hub did DL (or CO, US, NW, UA) sell to another carrier during their bankruptcy to survive?



CO sold their LGA assets, which they bought in Eastern's CH-7 liquidation, to US Air. That included their slots and a lease to US Air for the new Terminal CO was building at LGA. Also CO sold their MIA-London rights, which they acquired from Eastern when Texas Air took over Eastern, to AA when AA bought Eastern's MIA/Latin America operation. CO also sold AA their SEA-NRT flight.

And while not an asset sale CO did shut down their DEN hub and move those assets to beefing up EWR and IAH, they did the same with their HNL hub. They moved all those DC-10s and 747s operating Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Japan etc.. from HNL to EWR to begin expanding their Trans-Atlantic network from EWR.

So there are instances where a carrier has shrunk, and in the long run it worked out for them. With AA MIA would not be the place to shrink, that would be ORD (IMO).



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinecrAAzy From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 802 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 13026 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yeah .... I heard the rumor was that DL was going to trade its NYC hub for AA's MIA hub... LOL.

Does that make any sense? No! This is completely ridiculous from both a strategic position for AA and the "rumored" cost. AA giving up its second most important by i like saying DL is going to give up NYC ... It's only going to happen if the airline is completely liquidated and even then $1 billion dollars is like saying your only going to pay $5000 for a brand new BMW 5 series


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8457 posts, RR: 7
Reply 28, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 12906 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 24):
You guys are kidding right? Your not even remotely comparing Atlanta with Miami to Latin/South America?

I can't think of a market that MIA isn't its largest O/D destination by far. (and I can't think of really any that Atlanta is in the top 5)

Oh and AA has a much larger year round network to Latin/South America from MIA than DL does from Atlanta. A good chunk of Delta's network is summer seasonal (or it goes from daily to 1x a week)

No one is saying "Atlanta is bigger then Miami", we all know MIA is the Latin America king. But Delta does have a decent sized Latin opertation in Atlanta. Hey they have the only flight by a US airline to Johannesberg from where ? Atlanta, that huge hub you sell tickets to any city in the world.


User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9672 posts, RR: 14
Reply 29, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 12784 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 28):
Hey they have the only flight by a US airline to Johannesberg from where ? Atlanta, that huge hub you sell tickets to any city in the world.

Really? Jeesh man, your teaching me about aircraft MX and the city of Atlanta. Hey maybe you should teach me about The University of Georgia and an A&P license.....that would pretty much cover my life  
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 28):

No one is saying "Atlanta is bigger then Miami", we all know MIA is the Latin America king. But Delta does have a decent sized Latin opertation in Atlanta.

Yes but its not even comparable to what Delta could/would have at MIA if they were to have AA hub. As i said, Delta's network is very seasonal and has a hard time(impossible) serving smaller markets because MIA is the top market by far.



yep.
User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2255 posts, RR: 8
Reply 30, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10963 times:

Quoting aacun (Thread starter):
Just heard from a pilot Delta is getting ready to put a billion dollar bid for AA's Miami operation. Has anyone else heard anything of this matter?

Another pilot has heard a rumor that when he is on a trip, Selena Gomez will give him the key to her hotel room, and will say "come up to my room if you want to have some fun tonight!"

Some rumors have a viable chance of coming true. Others are pure fantasy. All of us need to recognize the difference.

There is no doubt that DL management has fantasized of adding AA's MIA operations to DL's collection of hubs - the result would be an unbeatable airline. I'm sure DL has also thought about buying AA's terminal at JFK, which would be a quick solution to DL's facilities problems there, and possibly even AA's facilities at LAX, which would give DL enough gates to become the dominant airline in Los Angeles.

I'm also sure that United, Southwest, JetBlue, and every other airline in the US has done studies of what assets owned by American they would like to purchase, if there is an opportunity.

However, Miami is the crown jewel of AA's network, and without MIA, the rest of the airline would be unable to survive. DL can daydream all they want about taking over AA's facilities at MIA, but the only way AA, or their creditors, would sell them is if the airline was liquidated.

Quoting STT757 (Reply 26):
CO sold their LGA assets, which they bought in Eastern's CH-7 liquidation, to US Air. That included their slots and a lease to US Air for the new Terminal CO was building at LGA. Also CO sold their MIA-London rights, which they acquired from Eastern when Texas Air took over Eastern, to AA when AA bought Eastern's MIA/Latin America operation. CO also sold AA their SEA-NRT flight.

True, but these were not the most vital parts of CO's network. AA selling their MIA hub would be the equivalent of CO selling either their IAH or EWR hubs, which did not happen.



Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 31, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10836 times:

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 30):
True, but these were not the most vital parts of CO's network. AA selling their MIA hub would be the equivalent of CO selling either their IAH or EWR hubs, which did not happen.

I agree, that's why I mentioned ORD which is of lesser importance to AA than DFW and MIA.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2255 posts, RR: 8
Reply 32, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10624 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 31):
Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 30):
True, but these were not the most vital parts of CO's network. AA selling their MIA hub would be the equivalent of CO selling either their IAH or EWR hubs, which did not happen.

I agree, that's why I mentioned ORD which is of lesser importance to AA than DFW and MIA.

My apologies - you are correct. I did not read the last line of your message before I made my post. It's been a long week 



Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3607 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 10426 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 29):
Quoting jfk777 (Reply 28):

No one is saying "Atlanta is bigger then Miami", we all know MIA is the Latin America king. But Delta does have a decent sized Latin opertation in Atlanta.

Yes but its not even comparable to what Delta could/would have at MIA if they were to have AA hub. As i said, Delta's network is very seasonal and has a hard time(impossible) serving smaller markets because MIA is the top market by far.

BUT no one said it wasnt larger no one mentioned size of flights to south america or o&d but you.

The point is how would Delta deal with duel hubs feeding the same areas? What major market does AA serve from MIA that Delta doesnt?

Delta wants to be as profitable as posible not move as many people as possible. ATL has more feed than MIA for connecting passengers and business people. AA wishes it had the feed at MIA that Delta has at ATL. Two hubs to feed the same area would be inefficient and unrealistic in 2012. There would be too much redundancy from ATL/MIA to the carribean, south america, and central america it would not be the most cost effective. I cant see Delta making ATL cuts just so they can buy MIA? MIA is so profitable because AA conntects so many people o&d alone isnt worth it? Delta could set up an operation in MIA there is gate space and no slot problems, and the route authorities AA has apparently wont transfer and go back to the DOT anyway.

By the way have you seen a route map? Deltas operation to the carribean and central america is pretty extensive from ATL. Its not like DL does not have lots of flights to those same major markets. Two hubs would be inefficient and have you forgotten that people on here report that DL would loose access to its most profitable MIA markets in Brazil if this went thru and it would roll back to the DOT? Delta would not be instantally taking over AAs MIA operation when some of its gems in South America would go back to the DOT


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 34, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 10074 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):
The point is how would Delta deal with duel hubs feeding the same areas?

It would be like ATL and JFK to Europe. MIA *is* the hub to Latin America. DL would be just fine feeding passengers to MIA. They wouldn't eliminate all ATL-Latin America flying... they'd keep the few routes where it's more convenient to fly out of / through ATL.

AA isn't #1 to Latin America for some unknown reason... it's MIA



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinequestions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 843 posts, RR: 1
Reply 35, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9486 times:

Quoting EricR (Reply 21):
No BK court would allow the sale of AA's most important/highest yielding hub

This is not to challenge the poster, EricR, but a question for the group. Is there any publicly available data to back this up? To what degree, eg, percentage of revenue and net income, does MIA contribute to AA's financial performance?

When considering current market share and growth opportunity, is LATAM or Asia a better play for DL?


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3607 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 9366 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 34):
It would be like ATL and JFK to Europe. MIA *is* the hub to Latin America. DL would be just fine feeding passengers to MIA. They wouldn't eliminate all ATL-Latin America flying... they'd keep the few routes where it's more convenient to fly out of / through ATL.

AA isn't #1 to Latin America for some unknown reason... it's MIA

But Delta would be forced to return AAs super profitable authorities back to the DOT(as reported here). MIA has tons of gates and space Delta is free to start flying right now if MIA is so hot and its mostly for o&d. They have ATL and its free i dont see them really wanting to pay enough money to get this from AA anyway plus ATL has all those cities covered plus there would be no increased efficiency.


User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1904 posts, RR: 1
Reply 37, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 9027 times:

Quoting questions (Reply 35):
This is not to challenge the poster, EricR, but a question for the group. Is there any publicly available data to back this up? To what degree, eg, percentage of revenue and net income, does MIA contribute to AA's financial performance?


Perhaps I should clarify. While it is theoretically possible, it does not seem reasonable nor likely that they would permit it.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 38, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 7969 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 36):
MIA has tons of gates and space Delta is free to start flying right now if MIA is so hot and its mostly for o&d.

It's not that easy. Hubs just don't pop out of nowhere. AA @ MIA has the loyalty, FFs, recognition, coveted routes, a long history, the feed, Latin American partners, etc. What would DL have? They tried it recently and it hasn't done so well. They had little feed, lacked many of the good route authorities, little FFs there, etc. Plus you can bet that anything DL tries to pull AA is going to respond



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineTWACaptain From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 29 posts, RR: 3
Reply 39, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 7542 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Real simple...it ain't gonna happen. With the three unions on the Creditor's Committee, along with the likelihood that Airbus and Boeing would side with the unions it this case, a breakup of the AA operation under Chapter 13 isn't an option. The unions would not want a break up because no jobs would in any likelihood go with any portion, especially for the majority of employees. Airbus and Boeing would not want to lose 465 new aircraft orders as Delta's management have publicly stated they have no interest in purchasing new aircraft anytime soon (as seen with the recent 717 and MD-90 acquisitions).

If Delta want's AA's MIA and DFW operations they're going to have to take all of AA to get them. Considering the size of the combined company, the anti-trust regulations wouldn't allow it.



TWA-Gone, but not forgotten...
User currently offlineAA94 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 605 posts, RR: 2
Reply 40, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 7402 times:

Quoting questions (Reply 35):
This is not to challenge the poster, EricR, but a question for the group. Is there any publicly available data to back this up? To what degree, eg, percentage of revenue and net income, does MIA contribute to AA's financial performance?

A large percent. I can't quote exact numbers, but MIA is a cornerstone of AA's operations. Giving it up is basically a death sentence.



Choose a challenge over competence / Eleanor Roosevelt
User currently onlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6312 posts, RR: 2
Reply 41, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 7277 times:

Only one person probably knows for sure what DL might /might not do....Richard......lets call him and ask him. 


When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineMAV88 From United States of America, joined May 2011, 183 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 7217 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 34):
Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):
The point is how would Delta deal with duel hubs feeding the same areas?

It would be like ATL and JFK to Europe. MIA *is* the hub to Latin America. DL would be just fine feeding passengers to MIA. They wouldn't eliminate all ATL-Latin America flying... they'd keep the few routes where it's more convenient to fly out of / through ATL.

AA isn't #1 to Latin America for some unknown reason... it's MIA

DL is not going to come into MIA and setup a large operation. If they really wanted to, they would have already done it. It's hasn't been a secret that MIA is the largest market to Latin America. Besides, I doubt MIA could handle another carrier coming in an setting up shop with say over 50 flights a day down to Latin America. AA and their partners have the entire market on lock.


User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1616 posts, RR: 2
Reply 43, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 7077 times:

1. While unlikely to pull it off, Delta senior management desperately wants to get their hands on MIA!
You can believe just about any rumor that they are attempting, because they are discussing all kinds of scenarios that would allow them to get AA's MIA operation. Whether they can actually succeed is another matter.

2. The creditors committe is much more interested in recouping their capital than AA's long term survival, so a large sum of cash now would be more attractive to them than assets that could generate a return years down the road. Remember AA management is not in control during bankruptcy, the creditors ultimately are steering this process.


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3607 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 7017 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 38):
It's not that easy. Hubs just don't pop out of nowhere. AA @ MIA has the loyalty, FFs, recognition, coveted routes, a long history, the feed, Latin American partners, etc. What would DL have? They tried it recently and it hasn't done so well. They had little feed, lacked many of the good route authorities, little FFs there, etc. Plus you can bet that anything DL tries to pull AA is going to respond

Well i personally think if they sell any hub it will be ORD to USairways and i said that much earlier in this thread. I dont think Delta will buy or be able to buy MIA, i was just making a point MIA has room for Delta is O&D was so rich and available and they have the planes they could start flying many flights instantally.


User currently offlineCV880 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1134 posts, RR: 2
Reply 45, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 7031 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 43):
Delta senior management desperately wants to get their hands on MIA!

DL & EA were kings in South Florida before AA ever had a presence there. EA folded and DL gave it up except for Florida-NYC. IIRC, DL had the opportunity to get the international routes from MIA that PA had, but let them go. DL would be insane to "purchase" what they gave up long ago. Same can be said for the ORD market where DL never attempted CHI-LAX/SFO after regulation ended in the late 70's, and also gave up CHI-Florida to both AA & UA.


User currently onlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6312 posts, RR: 2
Reply 46, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 6927 times:

Quoting MAV88 (Reply 42):
DL is not going to come into MIA and setup a large operation. If they really wanted to, they would have already done it. It's hasn't been a secret that MIA is the largest market to Latin America. Besides, I doubt MIA could handle another carrier coming in an setting up shop with say over 50 flights a day down to Latin America. AA and their partners have the entire market on lock.

Things change and will always continue to change. IMHO many in this forum will eat their words on this thread by the end of 2014. MIA will look very different in 24 months.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 43):
1. While unlikely to pull it off, Delta senior management desperately wants to get their hands on MIA!
You can believe just about any rumor that they are attempting, because they are discussing all kinds of scenarios that would allow them to get AA's MIA operation. Whether they can actually succeed is another matter.

  

Don't forget their are some AA and CO (LatAm) people at DL now....people who know Latin American markets...like Cortelayu



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offline2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 2684 posts, RR: 1
Reply 47, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6769 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 46):
Things change and will always continue to change. IMHO many in this forum will eat their words on this thread by the end of 2014. MIA will look very different in 24 months.

It'd not come as a surprise if DL is to open selected Latin American and Caribbean routes out of MIA in the near future.
Several markets might sustain AA plus another U.S. airline on the MIA route and DL flights from both ATL (or JFK) and MIA.



I'm not on CM's payroll.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 48, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6749 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 43):
1. While unlikely to pull it off, Delta senior management desperately wants to get their hands on MIA!
You can believe just about any rumor that they are attempting, because they are discussing all kinds of scenarios that would allow them to get AA's MIA operation. Whether they can actually succeed is another matter.

Um what has Delta's management desperately attempted? What actual actions (not rumors like this one) has Delta attempted?? The only thing I can think of involving DL and MIA are the random MIA-LAX flights (which I think is mainly for their LAX operation) and the MIA-LHR + the small inter-FL feed to MIA (none of which focused on Latin America.)

Your response makes it sound like DL has tried 30 plans to get MIA and failed. This is just a RUMOR! There might not be a shred of truth. I think they'd buy MIA if they could but it's not their #1 goal in life.

It's like the posters that say "DL is trying to buy everyone and everything" because of a RUMOR that DL was gonna buy AS, a RUMOR DL was gonna buy AA, a RUMOR DL is gonna buy HA, a RUMOR DL is going to buy MIA, a RUMOR DL is gonna buy B6, etc. See a common theme?

If DL's management is "desperate" to get MIA, then it's a well hidden desperation because they haven't publicly shown it



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1616 posts, RR: 2
Reply 49, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6668 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 48):

I'm just telling what I know.
I haven't seen anything public (with the exception of them hiring consultants to go over the various scenarios), but I can tell u for a fact that there are a lot of discussions going on and true desire to get ahold of AA's MIA operation. It is not rumor, I know from a senior exec. And it's not a secret within the industry. Like I said a realist would put there chances of success at less than promising, but they are interested and not just a passing interest.
I believe some play will made for MIA before AA exits bankruptcy, they looked for the most opportune time and strategy.
Now what that is I don't know, and I doubt they know at this point.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 50, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6655 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 49):

I wouldn't call that desperate but rather good business to explore every option. Every carrier would be smart to try and take advantage of AA while they are down. I'm sure DL realizes their chances are pretty low, but not impossible. They've made some pretty large business deals in the past few years that have, IMO, favored DL more than the other side (the US-DL slot swap and the DL-WN 717 deal come to mind.) Difference here though is I don't think DL and AA would be able to come to an agreement



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1616 posts, RR: 2
Reply 51, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6317 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 50):

The key is the last sentence in your statement.
I don't think DL will try to come to an agreement with AA but rather with the creditors.
Investors like cash now!
We shall see. May very well be nothing comes of this. But tge longer AA stays on bankruptcy the greater the window of opportunity that DL or someone else has at plucking AA assets.


User currently offlinehiflyer From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2177 posts, RR: 3
Reply 52, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 6247 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 51):
I don't think DL will try to come to an agreement with AA but rather with the creditors.

  

Doing it the way you wrote could have the advantage of taking aircraft/routes/facilities without the encumbrance of employees...DL did similar with UA over PanAm's Latin....chapt 7 instead of chapt 11.... just over 20 years ago.

Any potential deal also would possibly complicate the current chapt 11 proceedings possibly extending them...already slowed by USAir getting involved. Sometimes corp memory is long...AMR growth at DFW and ORD reduced DL to just a spoke operation at those stations.

There are valid reasons for and against. However...one thing is quite fixed...Latin and Carib business look to Miami....they have large offices there...the city caters to them...and a long history. Being large in flying to those areas from Miami gives a carrier a vast base to draw from....and pretty much one of the better areas in the world right now for economic growth to fly to. How much AA's MIA operation is 'in play'....gonna be fun to watch.


User currently offlineDeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9672 posts, RR: 14
Reply 53, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 6169 times:

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):
BUT no one said it wasnt larger no one mentioned size of flights to south america or o&d but you.

which is the point. You say Delta doesn't need it and i'm pretty much telling you your talking out of you butt.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):
The point is how would Delta deal with duel hubs feeding the same areas?

uh the same way a ton of airlines do it? How does Delta make LGA/JFK work? how about ATL/JFK to Europe?

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):
Delta wants to be as profitable as posible not move as many people as possible.

......even more of a reason to buy the gold mine that in MIA.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):
ATL has more feed than MIA for connecting passengers and business people.

.....ugh. almost all of the markets down south have a very large (like 50%+) O/D to MIA. so in other words....feed don't mean crap.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):
Delta could set up an operation in MIA there is gate space and no slot problems, and the route authorities AA has apparently wont transfer and go back to the DOT anyway.

Stop making stuff up. If you were right then how did American get the MIA hub in the first place.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):
By the way have you seen a route map? Deltas operation to the carribean and central america is pretty extensive from ATL.

Have you? I know your not talking to me about routes. ATL's network is very seasonal. It also bleed money when flying to most secondary market places. (because 50-75% of the O/D is going to MIA)

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):
and have you forgotten that people on here report that DL would loose access to its most profitable MIA markets in Brazil if this went thru and it would roll back to the DOT?

They lied. I can't think of a single case where an airline got assets from carrier in BK and it went back to the DOT. AA got all fo TWA's LHR stuff and Euro routes. AA got all of EA's MIA hub, which has grow into the now AA MIA hub. DL and PA's euro network. Ua and PA's Asia and LHR network.

Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 36):
But Delta would be forced to return AAs super profitable authorities back to the DOT(as reported here).

Stop saying this. Its wrong. Prove one case where it has happened.



yep.
User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 54, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6108 times:

The creditors would not agree to such an agreement. Delta would have to vastly overpay for MIA to make the creditors think that literally pulling the heart of AA's international network, while leaving the rest of the airline to die would somehow be a good deal for them. Anything the creditors got they would subsequently lose when AA emerges weak and uncompetitive. You think the employees creditor group would go for it? How about Boeing and Airbus? Caterers? Which creditor group would be made better off, by AA losing MIA?

User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 55, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 6107 times:

My point from above is AA's current creditors would end up being creditors of the new weak minus MIA AA. Anything they got from Delta would be lost.

User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8457 posts, RR: 7
Reply 56, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 6049 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting hiflyer (Reply 52):
Doing it the way you wrote could have the advantage of taking aircraft/routes/facilities without the encumbrance of employees...DL did similar with UA over PanAm's Latin....chapt 7 instead of chapt 11.... just over 20 years ago.

DL has always had this Miami obsession, first with Pan AM in 1991. IF they wanted it so badly they should have swallowed their pride 20 years ago and gotten their Miami hub. But the Finance people probably didn't want anything to do with that pesky phrase introduced to American Businss about 20 years ago " Legacy Costs".


User currently offlineEricR From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 1904 posts, RR: 1
Reply 57, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5781 times:

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 55):
My point from above is AA's current creditors would end up being creditors of the new weak minus MIA AA. Anything they got from Delta would be lost.

  
Any amount of short term benefit gained by selling the MIA hub would not outweigh the long term drawbacks. The BK court as well as creditors know that for AA to be able to effectively repay its debts, key assets need to be retained and the MIA hub is one of those key assets.

Wild rumors tend to come out on slow news days. It gives people something to talk about no matter how ridiculous they are.


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 58, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5763 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 51):
The key is the last sentence in your statement.
I don't think DL will try to come to an agreement with AA but rather with the creditors.
Investors like cash now!

Yes, I think this is the only way it'll happen (creditors what I meant when I said "AA.") I'm not too business savvy, but is there a way to pay the creditors and give them a new stake in DL? So they aren't screwed with a MIA-less AA? I guess that could only be accomplished by dealing with ALL of AA's creditors, wouldn't it? IDK

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 54):
The creditors would not agree to such an agreement. Delta would have to vastly overpay for MIA to make the creditors think that literally pulling the heart of AA's international network, while leaving the rest of the airline to die would somehow be a good deal for them.

I think it would be easier and more beneficial to just buy AA than to fight and overpay for MIA... I see both options as extremely unlikely

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 56):
DL has always had this Miami obsession, first with Pan AM in 1991. IF they wanted it so badly they should have swallowed their pride 20 years ago and gotten their Miami hub.

What is this MIA obsession I keep hearing about?



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 59, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5791 times:

Quoting CV880 (Reply 45):
DL & EA were kings in South Florida before AA ever had a presence there. EA folded and DL gave it up except for Florida-NYC. IIRC, DL had the opportunity to get the international routes from MIA that PA had, but let them go. DL would be insane to "purchase" what they gave up long ago. Same can be said for the ORD market where DL never attempted CHI-LAX/SFO after regulation ended in the late 70's, and also gave up CHI-Florida to both AA & UA.

The executives at DL when" DL gave up the PA routes from MIA" , are long gone from the company, so that would have little if any influence on the execs at DL today


User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6844 posts, RR: 9
Reply 60, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 5776 times:

I don't think DL wants MIA that much. They couldn't make the feeder ops work out nor the LHR flight. MIA-LAX will definitely stick around as it's an alternative to AA and got retimed for the sake of the business traveler. Also keep in mind that DL still doesn't fly MIA-SLC, a giant hole in the overall network. And historically DL has always been bigger up the road at FLL.

Most of what AA flies out of MIA is already served by DL out of ATL. Yields might not be as grand, but it's still very competitive.



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlinequestions From Australia, joined Sep 2011, 843 posts, RR: 1
Reply 61, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 5676 times:

Quoting hiflyer (Reply 52):
There are valid reasons for and against. However...one thing is quite fixed...Latin and Carib business look to Miami....they have large offices there...the city caters to them...and a long history. Being large in flying to those areas from Miami gives a carrier a vast base to draw from....and pretty much one of the better areas in the world right now for economic growth to fly to. How much AA's MIA operation is 'in play'....gonna be fun to watch.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 60):
And historically DL has always been bigger up the road at FLL.

If DL wants MIA so badly and has been unable or unwillingly to grow there -- "plenty of gates and slots" as others have noted; pulling out of MIA-LHR so quickly -- why would they just not grow ex-USA routes from FLL? Not the same business demand? Not the same loads? Inadequate facilities?


User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2255 posts, RR: 8
Reply 62, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5415 times:

Quoting Deltal1011man (Reply 53):
Quoting slcdeltarumd11 (Reply 33):and have you forgotten that people on here report that DL would loose access to its most profitable MIA markets in Brazil if this went thru and it would roll back to the DOT? They lied. I can't think of a single case where an airline got assets from carrier in BK and it went back to the DOT. AA got all fo TWA's LHR stuff and Euro routes. AA got all of EA's MIA hub, which has grow into the now AA MIA hub.

Actually, this isn't true.

AA originally purchased all of TWA's London routes, but the DoT refused to let AA keep TWA's PHL-LHR, STL-LGW, and BWI-LGW routes. The DoT ordered TWA to keep STL-LGW, and told TWA to sell the PHL and BWI routes to another airline. The routes were ultimately sold to USAirways.

Likewise, the DoT refused to let AA purchase Eastern's Miami-Canada authority at the time of the Latin America route sale. I believe EA kept the routes, and DL ultimately purchased them after Eastern shut down.

When United purchased Pan Am's Pacific routes, the transfer was conditioned on United relinquishing their SEA / PDX - NRT authority, which had been awarded two years earlier. After a heated route case, SEA-NRT was awarded to CO, who subsequently sold the route to AA. PDX-NRT went to DL.

The DoT could easily insist that DL relinquish at least some of AA's routes and / or slots into GRU and GIG as a condition of an asset transfer.



Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6844 posts, RR: 9
Reply 63, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5387 times:

Quoting questions (Reply 61):

Well historically DL ran aspects of the DL Express and Song operation out of FLL. They had quite a large operation at one time, always was secondary to MCO though. The draw down occurred during BK in the mid 2000s. MIA never had any DL Express or Song operations. It was always mainline or connection. These days FLL is still a large station for DL, and IIRC larger than MIA. The only major change was how FLL-LAX essentially got moved over to MIA.

AA had the edge on business travel in Miami. Their hub is borderline fortress so it's difficult for another carrier to step in and challenge AA. UA tried to compete with AA for many years at MIA, but even they gave up during BK.



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently onlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6312 posts, RR: 2
Reply 64, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5290 times:

Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 62):
The DoT could easily insist that DL relinquish at least some of AA's routes and / or slots into GRU and GIG as a condition of an asset transfer.

If the option to DL was "Yes, you can buy AA's Miami Hub operations if you gave up some Brazil frequencies" I am sure DL would do that in a heartbeat. Remember AA's profitability at MIA is a lot more than Brazil....it is EZE, LIM, PAP, POS, CCS, SDQ etc etc.....



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineOB1504 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 3433 posts, RR: 6
Reply 65, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5081 times:

Quoting questions (Reply 61):
If DL wants MIA so badly and has been unable or unwillingly to grow there -- "plenty of gates and slots" as others have noted; pulling out of MIA-LHR so quickly -- why would they just not grow ex-USA routes from FLL? Not the same business demand? Not the same loads? Inadequate facilities?

Regardless of how well the route was or was not doing, I don't think DL ever planned on keeping MIA-LHR. I think it was after a year or so of flying the route, they could change the LHR slots to one of their actual hub airports.

FLL is pretty maxed out in terms of facilities for handling international arrivals. The airport only has 6 international gates, currently split up between AA, AV, BW/JM, B6, and NK.


User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 66, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4842 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 51):
I don't think DL will try to come to an agreement with AA but rather with the creditors.
Investors like cash now!
Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 62):
AA originally purchased all of TWA's London routes, but the DoT refused to let AA keep TWA's PHL-LHR, STL-LGW, and BWI-LGW routes. The DoT ordered TWA to keep STL-LGW, and told TWA to sell the PHL and BWI routes to another airline. The routes were ultimately sold to USAirways.

Likewise, the DoT refused to let AA purchase Eastern's Miami-Canada authority at the time of the Latin America route sale. I believe EA kept the routes, and DL ultimately purchased them after Eastern shut down.

When United purchased Pan Am's Pacific routes, the transfer was conditioned on United relinquishing their SEA / PDX - NRT authority, which had been awarded two years earlier. After a heated route case, SEA-NRT was awarded to CO, who subsequently sold the route to AA. PDX-NRT went to DL.

Excellent summary sir.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7552 posts, RR: 14
Reply 67, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days ago) and read 4760 times:

Quoting usairways787 (Reply 1):
No disrespect to pilots, I usually just dismiss it when pilots talk,

I don't really realize why this is even news. We know that DL hired a consultant to study acquiring AA. We also know that they would never be able to buy all of AA with DOJ, Finally, we know that MIA is the piece of AA they most want. This, if true, is no shock at all. The question is only whether it would succeed and I think it would not absent US agreeing to sell MIA to DL. Think about that one...

Quoting avek00 (Reply 8):
1. With some modest carrier shuffling, MIA has enough spare gate capacity to enable an ambitious US legacy carrier to set up a very respectable focus city operation to Latin America, so there's no need to buy from a competitor what can be gotten with a couple calls to the local airport authority.

It's not about gates. It's about eliminating the competition instead of fighting for market share. DL can't win in a straight fight as evidenced by MIA-LHR/MCO/JAX/etc. AA couldn't take ATL either.

Quoting avek00 (Reply 8):
2. As others have alluded, a piecemeal purchase is actually more complicated than a wholesale acquisition

That is probably true.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 9):
I think the only way AA would do this
Quoting AA94 (Reply 19):
Why would AA sell off Miami?

AA wouldn't do it. The question is whether the creditors and US Airways would. While MIA is a great hub for anybody, it does overlap CLT in that, unlike ATL, CLT is much more dependent on Florida and Caribbean connecting traffic from the North, mostly because the CLT local market is much much smaller than ATL. MIA will almost certainly decimate CLT's Latin flying and I've suspected it would also mean a reduction in Florida capacity simply because AA costs will surely be higher than existing US costs, and Florida is very price/cost dependent.

So, it is conceivable that US would be willing to part with MIA as part of acquiring AA. It would also help US finance the purchase. US seems to be buying AA mainly as a domestic network play. US thinks they do not have enough network coverage in the USA. AA gives them that. They may not see as much value in MIA if they have CLT. US has also made it clear that they will work with everybody and anybody to get this acquisition done.

My personal opinion on all of that is that it's all horrible and I hope it doesn'y happen. More concentration in the industry is all bad. The mergers need to stop.

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 56):
DL has always had this Miami obsession

DL has an obsession with the major coastal gateways: JFK/LAX/MIA/SEA.


User currently onlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6312 posts, RR: 2
Reply 68, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days ago) and read 4713 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 67):
So, it is conceivable that US would be willing to part with MIA as part of acquiring AA. It would also help US finance the purchase.

And therein lies the answer to how this deal can be done.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7552 posts, RR: 14
Reply 69, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4533 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 68):
Quoting enilria (Reply 67):
So, it is conceivable that US would be willing to part with MIA as part of acquiring AA. It would also help US finance the purchase.

And therein lies the answer to how this deal can be done.

I wouldn't doubt it. I'm certain DL has talked to US about it. It's not something US would want known as it might disrupt interest by AA's unions in supporting US. While I'm sure these discussions have all taken place, I'm not sure US would sell MIA. I'd say US is probably willing to do it, but they have to consider whether it increases or decreases the chances of a transaction being completed. I've got to think the creditors committee would support it. I don't think it's crazy to think that US would also sell PHX, but I don't know who the buyer would be. F9/B6?

Another thing to consider would be how such a change would affect B6/NK at FLL, if at all.

There is one major problem with such a scenario IMHO. If PHX closes or is sold and DL took MIA, you have to ask whether US is really much better off. They'd be trading PHX for DFW that will face a non-perimeter DAL in 15 months and picking up a weak ORD hub. They'd also get 3rd place operations in LAX/JFK. Not sure that's such a world class airline. I think AA needs MIA. It's pretty key to their value, but who knows. DP is a deal guy...

[Edited 2012-09-24 09:08:26]

User currently onlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6312 posts, RR: 2
Reply 70, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4392 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 69):
If PHX closes or is sold and DL took MIA, you have to ask whether US is really much better off.

Well the whole industry woudl be better off as a competitor is gone. that helps yields.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineOzarkD9S From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 5198 posts, RR: 21
Reply 71, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4376 times:

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 25):


What hub did DL (or CO, US, NW, UA) sell to another carrier during their bankruptcy to survive?
Quoting WA707atMSP (Reply 62):


The DoT ordered TWA to keep STL-LGW, and told TWA to sell the PHL and BWI routes to another airline. The routes were ultimately sold to USAirways.

Slightly off. STL/BWI/PHL-London were carved out of the AA deal. The DoT never told TWA they had to sell BWI/PHL. But Icahn found a ready buyer in US. TWA could have kept them if they wanted to.



Next up, STL-ATL-MSY-ATL-STL
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 72, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4368 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 68):
Quoting enilria (Reply 67):
So, it is conceivable that US would be willing to part with MIA as part of acquiring AA. It would also help US finance the purchase.

And therein lies the answer to how this deal can be done.

IDK, I still think MIA is just as valuable to US as it is to DL (or AA.) But I suppose if it's the only way to be able to fund the US+AA merger they'd do it, but that seems like a pretty unlikely scenario IMO



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1101 posts, RR: 5
Reply 73, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4301 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 49):
I believe some play will made for MIA before AA exits bankruptcy, they looked for the most opportune time and strategy.

Wild speculation... A.net at its best or worst, whichever way you want to see it.


User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6844 posts, RR: 9
Reply 74, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4305 times:

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 71):

Slightly off. STL/BWI/PHL-London were carved out of the AA deal. The DoT never told TWA they had to sell BWI/PHL. But Icahn found a ready buyer in US. TWA could have kept them if they wanted to.

Did AA ever fly PHL/BWI-LHR?



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8457 posts, RR: 7
Reply 75, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4297 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 71):
Slightly off. STL/BWI/PHL-London were carved out of the AA deal. The DoT never told TWA they had to sell BWI/PHL. But Icahn found a ready buyer in US. TWA could have kept them if they wanted to.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 74):
Did AA ever fly PHL/BWI-LHR

USair purchased the Baltimore and Philadelphia routes from TWA and ran them to Gatwick. AA did for one summer season or one year fly a PHL to LHR nonstop, it was discontinued and has never returned.


User currently offlineWA707atMSP From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 2255 posts, RR: 8
Reply 76, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4197 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 75):
Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 71):
Slightly off. STL/BWI/PHL-London were carved out of the AA deal. The DoT never told TWA they had to sell BWI/PHL. But Icahn found a ready buyer in US. TWA could have kept them if they wanted to.
Quoting tommy767 (Reply 74):
Did AA ever fly PHL/BWI-LHR

USair purchased the Baltimore and Philadelphia routes from TWA and ran them to Gatwick. AA did for one summer season or one year fly a PHL to LHR nonstop, it was discontinued and has never returned.

When USAir signed their partnership with BA, the US DoT required USAir to relinquish all of their US-London authority if the partnership was to be approved. Several airlines applied for the authority USAir was relinquishing. Ultimately, AA was awarded PHL-LHR, and was allowed to move BWI / CLT - LGW to BNA and RDU.

PHL-LHR and BNA-LGW were suspended relatively quickly, although I think AA was allowed to keep the slot BA gave to AA to operate PHL-LHR and use it to add an extra frequency on another route. RDU-London, however, continues to this day.



Seaholm Maples are #1!
User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1616 posts, RR: 2
Reply 77, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4019 times:

Quoting LDVAviation (Reply 73):
Wild speculation... A.net at its best or worst, whichever way you want to see it.

Not wild speculation at all!

For the umpeenth time in this thread, I have direct knowledge that high-level discussions are going on at Delta (or at least were earlier in the summer) regarding how they could obtain MIA. Now, I have no idea what course those discussions took or if they are dead now or close to yielding something. But it certaintly isn't wild speculation for me to believe that a play for AA's MIA op will be made at some point before AA exits bankruptcy, since I know for a fact that there is serious interest and a lot of time devouted to accomplishing the goal. I don't think its a likely successful proposition, but that doesn't mean a play won't be made. In fact, I would be willing to bet that multiple plays have already been privately made. I won't speculate on the form or type of offers floated, and i have no idea if any have but I would bet private discussions have already occured.

(I believe you also thought it was wild speculation roughly 2 years ago when I said if AA didn't do something drastic they would be filing for bankruptcy within 18months)

I really don't understand how anybody thinks that DL making a play for AA assets is so off the wall idea. Even without any personal knowledge of what it is going at DL headquarters, it is publicly known that DL hired consultants to evaluate a bid for AA. They wouldn't be paying those consultanting fees if they didn't plan on pursuing something or everything AA has. And considering what AA has and where DL could benefit it certainly isnt a stretch by any imagination that MIA is the most likely target for DL. I really think people are confusing how likely DL is to pry MIA away from AA versus how likely DL is to make a play for MIA. Two entirely different propositions and one is almost certain to happen, that is if it hasnt already happened (privately).


User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7552 posts, RR: 14
Reply 78, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3994 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 72):
Quoting yellowtail (Reply 68):
Quoting enilria (Reply 67):
So, it is conceivable that US would be willing to part with MIA as part of acquiring AA. It would also help US finance the purchase.

And therein lies the answer to how this deal can be done.

IDK, I still think MIA is just as valuable to US as it is to DL (or AA.) But I suppose if it's the only way to be able to fund the US+AA merger they'd do it, but that seems like a pretty unlikely scenario IMO

They'd also do it if they think the presence of DL bidding directly with the court could harm the chances for US to buy the remainder.


User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 79, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3944 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 77):
For the umpeenth time in this thread, I have direct knowledge that high-level discussions are going on at Delta (or at least were earlier in the summer) regarding how they could obtain MIA

They wont be getting it.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 77):
I really don't understand how anybody thinks that DL making a play for AA assets is so off the wall idea.

Here's why: The creditors would have to be better off with Delta taking a bit of AA and making AA an unviable airline than if AA were to come out of BK on their own. Most of the creditors at AA will still be creditors when DL take the MIA hub away from AA. They would lose more than they would gain in such a scenario.

Delta taking AA's MIA hib would leave only 2 US carriers to many business destination in Latin American and that is unacceptable.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 77):
it is publicly known that DL hired consultants to evaluate a bid for AA. They wouldn't be paying those consultanting fees if they didn't plan on pursuing something or everything AA has.

Airliens pay consultants all the time and nothing comes from it.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 77):
And considering what AA has and where DL could benefit it certainly isnt a stretch by any imagination that MIA is the most likely target for DL.

It isnt about Delta benefiting, it is about the creditors benefiting and they wont if AA is stripped of its best assets and left to die.

Quoting enilria (Reply 67):
So, it is conceivable that US would be willing to part with MIA as part of acquiring AA

No, it isnt conceivable. Again people here must think Doug Parker is an idiot. There are essentially two major assets AA has that are worth anything. MIA and DFW. Taking MIA away from US and giving it to Delta leaves US with only one decent asset and that is DFW and a bunch of weak ones NYC/ORD and LAX. US will not be willing to part with MIA because there is no reason for them to. How is US BETTER off selling off MIA and being locked out of Latin America??? Dont say CLT is a substitute, it isnt.

Quoting enilria (Reply 67):
US seems to be buying AA mainly as a domestic network play

Nobody does a legacy merger for domestic coverage only.

Bottom line nobody benefits from such a forced sale and it would be forced except Delta management and shareholders. Not AA creditors, not the employees and not customers.


User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 80, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3937 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 78):
They'd also do it if they think the presence of DL bidding directly with the court could harm the chances for US to buy the remainder.

For the umpteenth time, why would US want AA minus MIA? What is in it for them that is better than the entire AA?


User currently offlineQANTASvJet From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2012, 79 posts, RR: 0
Reply 81, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3882 times:

If they have any sense they will bid for it. If AA have any sense they will say no.

User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1616 posts, RR: 2
Reply 82, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3882 times:

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
They wont be getting it.

You might be right. You are likely right, but YOU HAVE NO BASIS to say outright they won't be getting it.

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
Here's why: The creditors would have to be better off with Delta taking a bit of AA and making AA an unviable airline than if AA were to come out of BK on their own. Most of the creditors at AA will still be creditors when DL take the MIA hub away from AA. They would lose more than they would gain in such a scenario.

Delta taking AA's MIA hib would leave only 2 US carriers to many business destination in Latin American and that is unacceptable.

Here's why you have no idea what you are talking about...

You don't know what the bid for the MIA assets are at this point. Therefore you have no way of knowing whether or not the investors will be better off or not.

(and you are ignoring the fact the investors dont really care about the long-term viability of AA, they ultimately only care about their return on investment - most investors are much more interested in a dollar today than the prospect of two dollars tomorrow. just saying, if cash is involved, investors will always be more invlined to take the cash offer if competiting bids are even remotely close)

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
Delta taking AA's MIA hib would leave only 2 US carriers to many business destination in Latin American and that is unacceptable.

How do you figure?
If DL were successful gaining the MIA hub from AA, it certainly would create vaccum where service would either be reestablished from MIA or more likely from other hubs. It wouldnt be much different from today where markets that support service to destinations other than MIA have competiting service from other gateways.

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
Airliens pay consultants all the time and nothing comes from it.

And nothing may come from this, but it certainly isnt unrealistic to expect that a play will be made. Airlines dont typically pay consultants when they don't expect to pursue something. The evaluation may end in it not being worth pursuing, but they intent to pursue is certainly there.

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
It isnt about Delta benefiting, it is about the creditors benefiting and they wont if AA is stripped of its best assets and left to die.

Once again until you know what the potential offer is you just sound ignorant!
Obviously it is about the creditors benefiting. That is why you hire consultants to help craft an offer that works for you as well as the creditors you hope to reach a deal with. Not saying a deal will get done, but you have zero credibility saying how creditors will benefit at this point. Hell, AA is still in bankruptcy and while unlikely you dont even know if AA will make it out - if DL predicts AA will end up in chapter 7 then the creditors wouldnt care less what AA is stripped of or its long term prospects (point being until you see or hear what the offer might be and what condition AA is in at that point there is no way you can evaluate what is in the creditors' best interest)

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
US will not be willing to part with MIA because there is no reason for them to.

Once again, until you know the circumstances under which a deal is made you have no idea what US is willing to accept or leave on the table.
A decade ago, I doubt anybody thought US would basically give their LGA operation to DL. But they did and happily so.

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
Nobody does a legacy merger for domestic coverage only.

That's debatable.

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 80):
For the umpteenth time, why would US want AA minus MIA? What is in it for them that is better than the entire AA?

That is why executives get behind closed doors and craft deals. It is all about finding out what is in it for eachother to reach a deal that works for both sides. If they reach a deal on this, then your will find out what is in it for them. (just speculating but one big advantage for US is if DL and US reach a mutual understanding on splitting AA assets versus the two of them making competing bids - could be billions cheaper for US and part of the understanding could be that certain flights out of MIA (slot restricted) remain with US) - any number of ways things could come together that US benefits by letting MIA go


User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4103 posts, RR: 8
Reply 83, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3859 times:

Quoting enilria (Reply 69):
If PHX closes or is sold and DL took MIA, you have to ask whether US is really much better off. They'd be trading PHX for DFW that will face a non-perimeter DAL in 15 months and picking up a weak ORD hub. They'd also get 3rd place operations in LAX/JFK. Not sure that's such a world class airline. I think AA needs MIA. It's pretty key to their value, but who knows. DP is a deal guy...
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 72):
, I still think MIA is just as valuable to US as it is to DL (or AA.) But I suppose if it's the only way to be able to fund the US+AA merger they'd do it, but that seems like a pretty unlikely scenario IMO
Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
There are essentially two major assets AA has that are worth anything. MIA and DFW.

AA's JFK operation is probably worth quite a bit also mostly in terms of LHR slots and other peak-time slots. And what about LGA? I'm not comparing these to DFW or MIA, but would DL be interested enough in either JFK or LGA to have that as the centerpiece of a deal instead of MIA?


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8457 posts, RR: 7
Reply 84, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3857 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The only scenario where Miami would NOT be part of AA is if AA sold its divisions. Miami has been the one hub which AA has dominated like no other. Miami with no AA after the long building process of the A-D North Terminal would be ironic. Delta is a evolutionary airline, not a revolutionary airline as AA has been traditionaly under Crandall.

User currently onlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6312 posts, RR: 2
Reply 85, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3831 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 82):
You don't know what the bid for the MIA assets are at this point. Therefore you have no way of knowing whether or not the investors will be better off or not.

you are very right...if DL makes a juicy bid...will be hard for the creditors to ignore. Remember they don't care about aircraft like we do...all they want is their money



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 86, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3813 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 83):
AA's JFK operation is probably worth quite a bit also mostly in terms of LHR slots and other peak-time slots. And what about LGA? I'm not comparing these to DFW or MIA, but would DL be interested enough in either JFK or LGA to have that as the centerpiece of a deal instead of MIA?

MIA is the crown jewel by far. DL already has a large JFK and LGA operation and probably wouldn't be allowed to take much of it (maybe a terminal but not much in the way of slots.) LAX I'm sure DL would take if they were able to, but that doesn't seem like DL's #1 priority. ORD is worthless to them (not that advantageous of an operation plus they have DTW and MSP.) And lastly, I'm sure DL would take DFW if they could, but that would be like pulling AA's heart out instead of all 4 limbs (MIA)

That's just my take. MIA is the biggest thing worth going for.

DL pulled off the LGA / DCA slot swap heavily in their favor
DL pulled off the WN 717 deal heavily in their favor
Those example pale in comparison to taking MIA, but I'd give them a generous 10% chance of them pulling it off. Not bad odds if you're DL



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineqqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2296 posts, RR: 13
Reply 87, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3789 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 77):
I really don't understand how anybody thinks that DL making a play for AA assets is so off the wall idea.

Because the only way it'll happen is if AA enters Ch. 7. DL is (smartly) exploring all options and scenarios, and will make their moves (if any) when the time is right. This play of taking over MIA would only happen in a Ch. 7 scenario. As for US, they'd be smart to dump CLT long before MIA. There is no financial incentive for the creditors to back any such scenario in a Ch. 11 proceeding. Considering AA is financing their own bankruptcy and exit, they have far more control than most airlines going through Ch. 11.



The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1616 posts, RR: 2
Reply 88, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3747 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 83):
but would DL be interested enough in either JFK or LGA to have that as the centerpiece of a deal instead of MIA?

I can't see them being interested in that. They have just about everything they want in NYC. I can only see some very small parts of AA's ops there that would be of any interest and not worth taking on the rest. Plus there would be DoJ/DoT issues. Of all of AA's assets, I think DL would be least interested in JFK/LGA. Well, maybe less interest in ORD but both would be right at the bottom of their list I would assume.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 86):
Those example pale in comparison to taking MIA, but I'd give them a generous 10% chance of them pulling it off. Not bad odds if you're DL

I agree 100%


User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 89, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3720 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 88):
I can't see them being interested in that. They have just about everything they want in NYC. I can only see some very small parts of AA's ops there that would be of any interest and not worth taking on the rest. Plus there would be DoJ/DoT issues. Of all of AA's assets, I think DL would be least interested in JFK/LGA. Well, maybe less interest in ORD but both would be right at the bottom of their list I would assume.

I think if DL could get away with it from a regulatory standpoint, they'd take everything they could at JFK/LGA. You know how powerful they'd be? They'd even surpass UA @ EWR. It's not worth pursuing though, because as you note, most of the assets would probably have to be given away. Not worth it



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineLAXtoATL From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1616 posts, RR: 2
Reply 90, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3599 times:

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 87):
Because the only way it'll happen is if AA enters Ch. 7.

False.

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 87):
DL is (smartly) exploring all options and scenarios, and will make their moves (if any) when the time is right.

True.

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 87):
This play of taking over MIA would only happen in a Ch. 7 scenario

False.

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 87):
As for US, they'd be smart to dump CLT long before MIA.

Really false. MIA is a great hub for Carrib and S. America flying! It is absolutely horrendous for domestic connections!! CLT is the backbone of the entire US network and since US is currently running a profitable network with CLT as its primary hub, lets just assume they would never under any realistic circumstance dump that hub and certainly not for MIA!

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 87):
There is no financial incentive for the creditors to back any such scenario in a Ch. 11 proceeding.

Really no financial incentive??? Cash is always a financial incentive last time I checked. Certainly for investors looking for a return on their investment. Geez, do you guys even think before you type??? Do you realize why creditors are given a seat at the table during a bankruptcy reorg instead of letting management run the show? Its because the creditors' and management interests are not necessarily the same...

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 87):
Considering AA is financing their own bankruptcy and exit, they have far more control than most airlines going through Ch. 11.

AA is not financing its own bankruptcy exit. They havent presented an exit plan yet. Furthermore, the cash on hand was stockpiled as a result of debt issues over the last several years - so if they ultimately decided to exit with DIP financing it wont be because they financed it themselves but that they just used another method (but they have been and will continue to pay a pretty penny for those funds - especially since the last several billion were financed at extremely high rates)

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 89):
I think if DL could get away with it from a regulatory standpoint, they'd take everything they could at JFK/LGA. You know how powerful they'd be? They'd even surpass UA @ EWR. It's not worth pursuing though, because as you note, most of the assets would probably have to be given away. Not worth it

As you say from a regulatory standpoint it is likely a non-starter, but what more could they really add to their NYC operation? Im just not sure there is much more a single airline could offer. If we saw DL's ultimate wish list for NYC I cant imagine much else on the list other than a handful of slots, better facilities, and of course the thing they could never get - a single airport operation. I was under the impression that DL's combined NYC operation was already larger than UA @ EWR. Is that incorrect?


User currently onlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6312 posts, RR: 2
Reply 91, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3535 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 90):
I was under the impression that DL's combined NYC operation was already larger than UA @ EWR. Is that incorrect?

The two airlines squabble is ads over exact language..one claims "bigger", then one claims "most departures", then the other says "most seats" and it goes on an on.



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlineocracoke From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 690 posts, RR: 1
Reply 92, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3492 times:

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
Most of the creditors at AA will still be creditors when DL take the MIA hub away from AA. They would lose more than they would gain in such a scenario.

This is assuming that there is still an AA left. Every day this bickering between the unions and management continues, is one day closer to AA ending up like Eastern. Don't think it can't happen. That slippery slope gets awfully steep the closer you get to the edge.....

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
Delta taking AA's MIA hib would leave only 2 US carriers to many business destination in Latin American and that is unacceptable.

Unacceptable, kinda like there are only 2 US carriers to many business destinations in Asia? Or do you mean unacceptable as in only 2 US carriers to the South Pacific? Or do you mean unacceptable as it's also unacceptable that there are only 2 US carriers to all of Africa?
What makes Latin America so special?

And by 2 US carriers, do you mean DL, UA, NK, B6, US, or AA (AA would still have flights from DFW & JFK). Which 2?

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
US will not be willing to part with MIA because there is no reason for them to

MONEY!! Money talks; the rest walks......

US isn't sitting on the biggest pot of gold. A billion or so from DL on top of what US has could be all that is necessary to convince the creditors committee that getting that money NOW would be better than getting nothing should the union/management fight bring the whole airline to a stop, by which time all the creditors committee could hope to get is a few pennies from a fire sale.

It all depends on these next few weeks/months, and how much patience the creditors committee have for putting up with the union/management games. It will come to the point, where they just might throw in the towel, and take the money at hand, rather than hope to "maybe" get something down the road out of an airline that would be damaged and beyond repair. I'm sure the members of the creditors committee have all studied the Eastern case at business school.


User currently offlineslcdeltarumd11 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 3607 posts, RR: 0
Reply 93, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3427 times:

Heck i think Spirit played AA right. People all screamed AA DFW is fortress and unpenetrable but spirit rolled in and has a pretty decent operation now to a good amount of cities with little resistance of AA. They are taking advantage of AAs weak position to defend itself. If Delta really wanted a few o&d routes to Latin America they could do it now but the MIA experiment didn't do so hot

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 65):
Regardless of how well the route was or was not doing, I don't think DL ever planned on keeping MIA-LHR. I think it was after a year or so of flying the route, they could change the LHR slots to one of their actual hub airports.

Delta was clearly trying to get it to stick. They knew those were purely only for MIA use and not transferable like the BOS authorities they also used.


User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 94, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3343 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 82):

I worked in network planning for over 15 years I have more than an idea what I am talking about. I am going to say this one more time so it gets through your head. Delta, in order to make the creditors choose to gut AA, would have to grossly over pay for the MIA asset. Additionally many of the creditors would still have a relationship with the gutted AA. It isnt as though they will simply walk away. Employees, lessors, airports, caterers etc are all creditors. It isn't as though they will take thieir Delta dollars and walk away. Most will have ongoing financial dealings with AA. Thus a gutted AA isn't in their interest( you think the employees, and every airport served by AA would want such a deal that only ensures future AA losses) As for US agreeing to sell MIA and keep the crap, anyone who thinks D Parker is that stupid is delusional. A court isn't going to force AA to give up its best assets if AA can even remotely show a viable business plan moving forward. Bankruptcy isn't a democracy. The judge has the final say, even the creditors don't. Creditors are a party, they don't call the shots. There is no example in ch 11 of an airline being forced against its will to give up its assets.

Essentially what you're saying us this: a judge will rule that AA is so unviable in its current state that the company needs to go to chapter 7, because that is what would result.


User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6517 posts, RR: 9
Reply 95, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3279 times:

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
Taking MIA away from US and giving it to Delta leaves US with only one decent asset and that is DFW and a bunch of weak ones NYC/ORD and LAX.

CLT and PHL are not decent assets?


User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4103 posts, RR: 8
Reply 96, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3225 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 95):
CLT and PHL are not decent assets?

I think he was referring to the assets US would gain from AA. That said, I think ORD is being greatly overlooked in all this, even ignored. ORD is weak right now because AA doesn't have the right aircraft for the hub. With proper gauge adjustment, ORD could be very healthy. We are talking the third largest market in the country in an excellent location.


User currently offlineAAexecplat From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 636 posts, RR: 4
Reply 97, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3198 times:

Honestly...this site is becoming less and less desirable to read and post on...this isn't fantasy football league...why would AA with billions in cash and positive cash flow divest one of its highest yielding operations to one of its principal competitors? Seriously.

User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 98, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3190 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 90):
I was under the impression that DL's combined NYC operation was already larger than UA @ EWR. Is that incorrect?

Nope;

UA serves a little over six and a half million more passengers per year:

UA
27,712,885

DL
21,029,698

http://www.panynj.gov/airports/pdf-traffic/JUL2012_REG.PDF

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 91):
The two airlines squabble is ads over exact language..one claims "bigger", then one claims "most departures", then the other says "most seats" and it goes on an on.

DL is being slick by using the term "in New York" as in not including New Jersey, in their advertising. Neglecting the fact that EWR serves the same market as JFK and LGA. If you go to DL.com EWR appears in the sames schedules as JFK and LGA.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinemilesrich From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2009 posts, RR: 6
Reply 99, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3182 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 9):
Then again, we did see Pan Am sell off a lot of their money making assets back in the day. I wasn't there so it might seriously be apples to oranges.
Quoting bobnwa (Reply 59):
The executives at DL when" DL gave up the PA routes from MIA" , are long gone from the company, so that would have little if any influence on the execs at DL today

A company that sells off its valuable assets rarely prospers. Delta didn't sell off their good routes to keep the DFW hub, nor did AA sell off RDU, or BNA, they closed the losers or cut them way back. What Pan Am did was sold off their routes and other assets like Hilton International that had value in order to try to keep the rest of the airline afloat, when most of the rest of the airlines a loser, or at least marginally profitable. While Delta still has the JFK hub, they operate most of the remaining Pan Am routes, 20 years, with smaller aircraft, and have abandoned so many of the Pan Am destinations while developing a code share with Air France through Paris, and now KLM through Amsterdam with the NW acquisition. Remember, a big part of Pan Am's Trans Atlantic route structure was the Frankfurt hub, it's gone. Hamburg, a big Pan Am destination, gone. Dusseldorf, gone. And then there are the cities that have been discontinued, restarted etc., like Istanbul. Tel Aviv was never a big Pan Am destination, PA only entering that market very late in its downward spiral. That was TWA territory, while Pan Am flew to the Arab capitals of Amman, Beruit and Damascus, with connecting to service to then Jordan controlled Jerusalem prior to 1967.

Delta, even before deregulation, apparently discovered that dominating the BOS-BDL-NYC-PHL-WAS markets to all of South Florida, especially MIA, was not an easy thing to do. In the 6 years before deregulation that DL had protected route authority acquired from Northeast to South Florida from the Northeastern US, they concentrated on FLL and PBI, and had limited service to MIA. Then deregulation came and the routes to MIA became the target of many new low price entrants, Peoples Express, Northeastern, Arrow Air, etc.

If Delta is interested in American's MIA, they must believe that the O&D traffic from South Florida will support the routes, and that they won't have to take away traffic from the Atlanta fortress to Latin America that is a cash cow for the airline.

As far as Delta's flights to Canada from NY, while Delta serves YUL from JFK, LGA, and ATL, the flights are operated by regional jets, and DL's "original" route to YUL from BOS, acquired in the NE purchase, has been abandoned.


User currently offlineenilria From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 7552 posts, RR: 14
Reply 100, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days ago) and read 3134 times:

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 80):
For the umpteenth time, why would US want AA minus MIA?
Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 79):
No, it isnt conceivable. Again people here must think Doug Parker is an idiot. There are essentially two major assets AA has that are worth anything. MIA and DFW. Taking MIA away from US and giving it to Delta leaves US with only one decent asset and that is DFW and a bunch of weak ones NYC/ORD and LAX.

US would still be better off than now and DP has made it clear he is basically willing to do *any* deal. I only think he would sell MIA if he is forced to. Here are possible reasons:
1) He needs the cash from Delta to finance the merger/acquisition
2) DL offers so much for MIA that his bid for all of AA looks too cheap.
3) He'd rather craft the deal with Delta himself instead of having the creditors/judge do it in court (because the deal was too good to refuse).

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 80):
What is in it for them that is better than the entire AA?

Huge $$$ from Delta...besides, as I said, this isn't something DP would do by choice. He would only do it if he felt there was no other way to buy AA. He is pretty desperate to buy AA. Have you noticed?

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 82):
and you are ignoring the fact the investors dont really care about the long-term viability of AA, they ultimately only care about their return on investment

Exactly. The judge could stop the creditors if he thinks the deal absent MIA would create a viable remaining company, but the creditors only care about *now*.

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 85):
Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 82):
You don't know what the bid for the MIA assets are at this point. Therefore you have no way of knowing whether or not the investors will be better off or not.

you are very right...if DL makes a juicy bid...will be hard for the creditors to ignore. Remember they don't care about aircraft like we do...all they want is their money

Exactly

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 90):
Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 87):
As for US, they'd be smart to dump CLT long before MIA.

Really false. MIA is a great hub for Carrib and S. America flying! It is absolutely horrendous for domestic connections!! CLT is the backbone of the entire US network and since US is currently running a profitable network with CLT as its primary hub, lets just assume they would never under any realistic circumstance dump that hub and certainly not for MIA!

I think if you had to choose CLT or MIA, you clearly choose MIA. I don't see that as even a debate. The reason: proftability. MIA is far more profitable and high yielding than CLT. CLT is a low-yield Florida hub with the lowest local % of any U.S. hub.

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 90):
Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 87):
Considering AA is financing their own bankruptcy and exit, they have far more control than most airlines going through Ch. 11.

AA is not financing its own bankruptcy exit.

Yeah, financing your own exit means financing the exit with the creditors money. I'd say it is unlikely they will be allowed to exit using their cash hoard. They avoided DIP with all that cash which was important for them controlling their destiny, but I think they will be required to have outside investors in order to exit and give some of their cash hoard back to the creditors.


User currently offlinetommy767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6844 posts, RR: 9
Reply 101, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days ago) and read 3137 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 98):

DL is being slick by using the term "in New York" as in not including New Jersey, in their advertising. Neglecting the fact that EWR serves the same market as JFK and LGA. If you go to DL.com EWR appears in the sames schedules as JFK and LGA.

DL has a good presence at EWR including the flight to AMS and the new check in and security areas (B-1 is all Delta so they basically have their own concourse.) I would like to see DL take more risks out of EWR by adding back LAX and launching CDG since AF left the market.



"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 102, posted (2 years 2 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3088 times:

Quoting tommy767 (Reply 101):
I would like to see DL take more risks out of EWR by adding back LAX and launching CDG since AF left the market.

I remember the early '90s when DL had more flights from EWR to LAX than JFK, they had 3 daily 762s from EWR and a single daily A310 from JFK to LAX. They also had their short lived EWR-FRA flight.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineBobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1725 posts, RR: 1
Reply 103, posted (2 years 2 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3030 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 95):
CLT and PHL are not decent assets?

No I mean AA's weak assets in ORD/NYC and LAX. For US to pitch the jewels MIA (and even DFW as some "Experts" here have suggested) makes no sense what so ever.

This is a nonsense argument. Delta can make any bid they want, but it wont take much for AA to convince the judge it a bad offer for everyone. What people here are suggesting is completely unprecedented in Ch 11 airline history. That a potential restructured viable company would have its assets stripped involuntarily and made unviable. Suggestions that DL would pay US so much for MIA that US would sell MIA rest on the strange assumption that Delta would generate significantly more incremental cash flow from a MIA base than US/AA could. At some point Delta shareholders will say, "Youre paying too much"" Doug Parker wants to be a player in Latin America, US isnt selling MIA if it gets AA. This whole argument is as moronic as saying AC will sell YVR to West Jet to raise cash (an argument or rumor I expect to see here one day).

This entire thread is nothing more than mental __________.


User currently offlineNYCAdvantage From United States of America, joined Sep 2009, 356 posts, RR: 0
Reply 104, posted (2 years 2 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2812 times:

I have a question, didn't AA used some or most of those South American landing rights as collateral for one of those loans they got?

User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 105, posted (2 years 2 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2775 times:

Quoting LAXtoATL (Reply 90):
As you say from a regulatory standpoint it is likely a non-starter, but what more could they really add to their NYC operation? Im just not sure there is much more a single airline could offer. If we saw DL's ultimate wish list for NYC I cant imagine much else on the list other than a handful of slots, better facilities, and of course the thing they could never get - a single airport operation. I was under the impression that DL's combined NYC operation was already larger than UA @ EWR. Is that incorrect?

Well having AA gone as a competitor would be a HUGE plus. They'd obviously cut back on some duplicating routes, but it's not as if all the AA passengers would go away... there'd still be a need for some of the flights to stay. Plus a strengthened DL could further expand NYC

Quoting Bobloblaw (Reply 103):
This is a nonsense argument. Delta can make any bid they want, but it wont take much for AA to convince the judge it a bad offer for everyone. What people here are suggesting is completely unprecedented in Ch 11 airline history. That a potential restructured viable company would have its assets stripped involuntarily and made unviable.

I agree it's extremely unlikely, but I wouldn't say it's completely implausible. If it's between DP getting all of AA minus MIA or nothing at all, I'm sure he'd go with the first choice. The planets would have to align just right, but it's not 0%

Plus, another angle is if AA continues their labor plummet, AA might look like a lost cause and getting any kind of a return (selling MIA to DL) would be better than absolutely nothing. Again, I agree, very very unlikely. But there is a possibility, and it would be dumb for DL to pass up this opportunity, considering AA is so weak



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinerwy04lga From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 3176 posts, RR: 8
Reply 106, posted (2 years 2 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2690 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 98):
DL is being slick by using the term "in New York" as in not including New Jersey

Is he not correct? Isn't it an established fact?...New York does not include New Jersey.

There's nothing stopping UA from claiming to be biggest in New Jersey. That's a mighty proud boast. vomit 

Quoting enilria (Reply 100):
CLT is a low-yield Florida hub

that's actually in North Carolina.


Another thread has started about a rumour wending its way around JFK that AA and DL will swap terminals.

[Edited 2012-09-25 15:00:52]


Just accept that some days, you're the pigeon, and other days the statue
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16892 posts, RR: 51
Reply 107, posted (2 years 2 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2657 times:

Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 106):
Is he not correct? Isn't it an established fact?...New York does not include New Jersey.

No, it's disingenuous.

Jetblue doesn't sponsor the Jets so they can develop brand loyalty in East Rutherford NJ (pop 15,000). Their sponsoring their "Hometown".



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7972 posts, RR: 51
Reply 108, posted (2 years 2 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2578 times:

Quoting STT757 (Reply 107):
Quoting rwy04lga (Reply 106):
Is he not correct? Isn't it an established fact?...New York does not include New Jersey.

No, it's disingenuous.

Oh boy not this again!

Yes, EWR is in NJ but to ignore its impact on JFK/LGA is pretty unrealistic. Of course it does allow DL to say #1 to NYC or whatever



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
75L To SSA/REC Is Becoming A Liability For AA posted Tue Nov 3 2009 03:32:19 by C010T3
How Good Or Bad Is DL/ NW For KLM? posted Wed Feb 20 2008 07:37:38 by Paneuropean
Is DL Filing For ATL-GLA? posted Wed Oct 13 2004 18:05:27 by GLAGAZ
Is There A Buyer For AA's F100 Fleet? posted Mon Dec 15 2003 15:48:48 by John
Is Lufthansa Bidding For Ansett Australia? posted Mon Nov 5 2001 08:05:44 by United Airline
How Is LGA Doing For DL posted Fri Sep 7 2012 05:26:20 by avi8
Bankruptcy: Is Ch 11 Imminent For AA? posted Sat Sep 17 2011 16:38:52 by admluvs2fly
More 747's For DL....but 747's For AA? posted Sun Oct 3 2010 20:27:28 by VC10er
Is LHR Not A 777-only Station For AA Anymore? posted Fri Aug 7 2009 12:20:12 by Ssides
Status Of SJU For AA - Is It Still A Hub? posted Mon Mar 16 2009 17:47:49 by AlitaliaDC10