Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Did US Airways Have A Say In AA Rebranding?  
User currently offlinersmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2
Posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 12260 times:

I worked at UA from 2003-2005. In that time UA under bankruptcy did two things.

1.. Started TED

2.. Began to repaint aircraft in that other awful paint scheme.

At the time of the UA/CO merger there were still a fair amount of UA aircraft flying around with the with the preivious scheme. Now all UA aircraft have been repainted to the new merger scheme

My thought is that US Airways had some say in the new AA scheme. This thought come from the economics of not having to do to much adjustment to AA if the merger goes through and if it does US Airways will repaint their aircraft to match thus saving $$ unlike what UA/CO did.


Am I on to something???

[Edited 2013-01-17 20:13:58]


Did You Ever Think Freedom Could Be this Bad
36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlinerj777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1811 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 12238 times:

Well.......... they did say that they would keep the American name.................

User currently offlineb757capt From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 12209 times:

Please see this.

The answer is no.

http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...13/01/a-tail-of-two-airlines.html/



The views written by this user are in no manner the views of my employer and should not be thought as such.
User currently offlinechepos From Puerto Rico, joined Dec 2000, 6215 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 12107 times:

Considering Tom Horton said they did not share details about the c/s until today leads me to believe that US had no input (then again who knows). Mr. Horton himself said this had been in the workings for the past 2 years.

Today he should have made an announcement as to what's going to be the future direction of AA (standalone, merged, space travel, Greyhound merger, Cubana Alliance - whatever). Yet nothing! Such an underwhelming livery, coupled with a blah announcement = same old AA.

[Edited 2013-01-17 20:27:04]


Fly the Flag!!!!
User currently offlinebeechtobus From United States of America, joined Nov 2011, 308 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 11973 times:

Quoting rsmith6621a (Thread starter):

"2.. Began to repaint aircraft in that other awful paint scheme."

Which The blue paint or the Ted paint?! I rather liked the blue paint that UA had, it was at least was a breath if fresh air from the schitzophrenic battleship paint job. Teds colors were pretty awful though.


User currently offlinersmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 11909 times:

Quoting beechtobus (Reply 4):

The blue scheme...terrible.



Did You Ever Think Freedom Could Be this Bad
User currently offlinebobloblaw From United States of America, joined Jan 2012, 1713 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 11894 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rsmith6621a (Thread starter):

I'm not sure how the new AA scheme saves money should US planes need to be painted in AA colors


User currently offlineflyguy89 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 1916 posts, RR: 21
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 11854 times:

Quoting bobloblaw (Reply 6):
Quoting rsmith6621a (Thread starter):

I'm not sure how the new AA scheme saves money should US planes need to be painted in AA colors

US has the smaller fleet....fewer planes they would need to repaint depending on how far along AA gets to repainting their own aircraft.


User currently onlineelbandgeek From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 753 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 11812 times:

I'm gonna guess AA told US immediately when the talks started that if anything happens with the merger one condition would be use of the new brand since so much work had already put into it. I'd also guess Parker didn't really have a problem with it since they knew AA would be the surviving brand regardless and it actually makes less work for him.

User currently offlineAA94 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 584 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 11780 times:

Quoting elbandgeek (Reply 8):
I'm gonna guess AA told US immediately when the talks started that if anything happens with the merger one condition would be use of the new brand since so much work had already put into it. I'd also guess Parker didn't really have a problem with it since they knew AA would be the surviving brand regardless and it actually makes less work for him.

  

AA is behind the wheel in terms of the branding, not US.



Choose a challenge over competence / Eleanor Roosevelt
User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5509 posts, RR: 28
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 11670 times:

Any combination will be by way of an acquisition by AA, anyway.


...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlineBeardown91737 From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 532 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 11451 times:

Quoting rsmith6621a (Thread starter):
My thought is that US Airways had some say in the new AA scheme.

Only if it was to subvert AA. If it was something US wanted, they would have already done it to their own planes.

Quoting rsmith6621a (Thread starter):
This thought come from the economics of not having to do to much adjustment to AA if the merger goes through and if it does US Airways will repaint their aircraft to match thus saving $$ unlike what UA/CO did.


Am I on to something???

If all AA aircraft were to be painted for the first time anyway, then it would be way more cost effective to paint them in the current awesome looking US livery, and then leave the US fleet as-is. It would be even more cost effective to keep the name US Airways, since AA was going to replace everything in their rebranding. Dping that would also say "the people who were going to paint that bizarre livery on all the AA planes don't work here anymore".



AA wants to come out of BK independently. This is just part of their plans to do so, plus it is also part of a rush to make the first move to show how serious they are about going it alone. Instead the new livery has generated a reaction of hoping Parker takes over and quickly puts a halt to the repainting.



135 hrs PIC (mostly PA-28) - not current. Landings at MDW, PIA, JAN.
User currently offlineflyabr From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 648 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 11104 times:

Any chance that a AA could become American Airways if a merger occurs??

User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5509 posts, RR: 28
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 10574 times:

Quoting flyabr (Reply 12):
Any chance that a AA could become American Airways if a merger occurs??

Nope.

If AA buys US Airways, they will not do so with the intent of changing their name and confusing the flying public. They would do so with the intent of expanding the market penetration of American Airlines.



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlinelhcvg From United States of America, joined May 2009, 1556 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 10357 times:

Quoting sccutler (Reply 13):

Yup. Depite the fact that AA has made a few missteps and lost some mojo over the years, the "AA Brand" is still much better known and respected throughout the country (i.e., not just in the US strongholds) and the world relative to US. Regardless of who buys who and all that, it will be American Airlines in name and branding even if Parker still runs the show in a few years -- US is toast in any merger scenario with AA.


User currently offlineYYZBound From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 63 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 10331 times:

Doug Parker has said publicly that the American brand would be the surviving brand in a merger, because it is more globally recognized

User currently offlineAA94 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 584 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9819 times:

Quoting Beardown91737 (Reply 11):
AA wants to come out of BK independently. This is just part of their plans to do so, plus it is also part of a rush to make the first move to show how serious they are about going it alone. Instead the new livery has generated a reaction of hoping Parker takes over and quickly puts a halt to the repainting.

The reality of it is that this rebranding is going forward, regardless of what DP or US has to say about it. What is the obsession with making Doug Parker a superhero? He isn't going to just swoop in and save the free world from AA's paint scheme. The AA brand (read: the surviving brand in the event of a merger), is here to stay. AA began rebranding efforts way before the US deal was even a blip on the radar, and they aren't just going to throw that all away because DP/US (or some members of the flying public) don't like it.

It is nearly certain that the US brand will not survive a merger.

Quoting lhcvg (Reply 14):
Doug Parker has said publicly that the American brand would be the surviving brand in a merger, because it is more globally recognized

  

Quoting lhcvg (Reply 14):
Yup. Depite the fact that AA has made a few missteps and lost some mojo over the years, the "AA Brand" is still much better known and respected throughout the country (i.e., not just in the US strongholds) and the world relative to US. Regardless of who buys who and all that, it will be American Airlines in name and branding even if Parker still runs the show in a few years -- US is toast in any merger scenario with AA.

  



Choose a challenge over competence / Eleanor Roosevelt
User currently offlineyellowtail From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 6122 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 9747 times:

Quoting chepos (Reply 3):
Greyhound merger, Cubana Alliance - whatever).

Best joke of the day on a.net



When in doubt, hold on to your altitude. No-one has ever collided with the sky.
User currently offlinePSAMD80 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 6 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8389 times:

The last thing on airline managements' mind is how easy it will be to paint their airplanes after a merger! The airplanes are simply stripped and painted in the surviving livery, or a new one, what ever the case may be.

[Edited 2013-01-18 11:51:12]

User currently offlineusair330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 824 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 8184 times:

Quoting yellowtail (Reply 17):
Quoting chepos (Reply 3):
Greyhound merger, Cubana Alliance - whatever).

Best joke of the day on a.net

  


User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8317 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 7996 times:

Quoting lhcvg (Reply 14):
Yup. Depite the fact that AA has made a few missteps and lost some mojo over the years, the "AA Brand" is still much better known and respected throughout the country

How can you say that when they just changed their branding? That tells me that their brand (prior to yesterday), wasn't good enough. I'm not saying US Airways is better but I'm no longer convinced that AA has the upper hand on the branding issue. Personally I think both have their strong and weak areas. For example in Europe US is more popular outside of LHR while in in S.America AA is the more recognized brand. In the pacific both are equally unknown and domestically it's a wash.


User currently offlinesccutler From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 5509 posts, RR: 28
Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 7638 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 20):
How can you say that when they just changed their branding? That tells me that their brand (prior to yesterday), wasn't good enough. I'm not saying US Airways is better but I'm no longer convinced that AA has the upper hand on the branding issue. Personally I think both have their strong and weak areas. For example in Europe US is more popular outside of LHR while in in S.America AA is the more recognized brand. In the pacific both are equally unknown and domestically it's a wash.

Think of it this way: AA will be driving the bus in any combination. If they see elements of an acquisition which they believe will benefit the combined operations, they'll rock 'n' roll with it; if not, call it worm food.

While it's true that AA is in the midst of recovering from its own 11, US has had two, HP one, and on its best day the assets controlled by US will not dent AA's long-term plans and strategy. US had their fun suggesting they might try to acquire Delta while DL was in the 11 mill, and that was mild entertainment, no more; this blather and babble with AA falls neatly into the same category, and I'd expect it to succeed equally well.

Which is to say, not at all.



...three miles from BRONS, clear for the ILS one five approach...
User currently offlinenatethegreat From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 7328 times:

I love the new AA look. I think it is fresh and yet pays respect to the history of AA.

User currently offlineNWAROOSTER From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1082 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 7042 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

One thing that seems to be overlooked about the NEW paint livery is as follows. A great number of the new aircraft that American may acquire along with a good percentage of it's current aircraft use a lot of fiberglass and composite materials. These materials can't be polished like aluminum and must be painted. This had to be a major consideration for American Airlines about how their aircraft will be painted in the future. Any "merger" if there is one really probably had no affect on the finial livery used on their aircraft.   

User currently offlineWingtips56 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6494 times:

Quoting NWAROOSTER (Reply 23):
One thing that seems to be overlooked about the NEW paint livery is as follows. A great number of the new aircraft that American may acquire along with a good percentage of it's current aircraft use a lot of fiberglass and composite materials. These materials can't be polished like aluminum and must be painted. This had to be a major consideration for American Airlines about how their aircraft will be painted in the future. Any "merger" if there is one really probably had no affect on the finial livery used on their aircraft.

And has it is, the tails have been painted grey for everything that came after the 727 and DC-10, i.e., 737, 757, 767, 777, MD80, MD11, F100, A300, BAe-146 (the whole plane was grey, as was the A300 initially) ... even the 747's, so the pure metal look has been compromised for a long time anyway. More and more composites have crept in...nose, gear doors, hatch covers, cowlings, etc. that have made the more recent planes look bandaged.

Since the whole rebranding started before the Ch. 11 filing and US interfering, I'm sure they would have been invited to butt-out of this process.



Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines
User currently offlineAA94 From United States of America, joined Aug 2011, 584 posts, RR: 2
Reply 25, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6609 times:

Quoting sccutler (Reply 21):
While it's true that AA is in the midst of recovering from its own 11, US has had two, HP one, and on its best day the assets controlled by US will not dent AA's long-term plans and strategy. US had their fun suggesting they might try to acquire Delta while DL was in the 11 mill, and that was mild entertainment, no more; this blather and babble with AA falls neatly into the same category, and I'd expect it to succeed equally well.

Which is to say, not at all.

  

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 24):
Since the whole rebranding started before the Ch. 11 filing and US interfering, I'm sure they would have been invited to butt-out of this process.

  



Choose a challenge over competence / Eleanor Roosevelt
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12499 posts, RR: 46
Reply 26, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6544 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rsmith6621a (Reply 5):
The blue scheme...terrible.

Seriously? Terrible?

IMHO, these are way better than any recent UA scheme, including the current mashup

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Brimley
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Brimley


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Brimley
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Brimley



Anyway, back on topic. I really like the new AA colours and I don't see any US influence.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinejlbmedia From United States of America, joined Jun 2002, 622 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6422 times:

Quoting AA94 ():
Quoting lhcvg (Reply 14):Doug Parker has said publicly that the American brand would be the surviving brand in a merger, because it is more globally recognized

When Parker made that statement he was talking about AA's current branding. This new branding might change his mind. The new branding is not recognized anywhere, including globally.



JLB54061
User currently offlineinfiniti329 From United States of America, joined Jul 2012, 652 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6328 times:

Quoting natethegreat (Reply 22):
pays respect to the history of AA.

All i see is a new AA nothing from its past


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19575 posts, RR: 58
Reply 29, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6165 times:

Quoting jlbmedia (Reply 27):
When Parker made that statement he was talking about AA's current branding. This new branding might change his mind. The new branding is not recognized anywhere, including globally.

I promise you that after all the resources (human, time, and financial) that have been poured into this new brand, they are not going to simply chuck it three months later.

If a merger occurs the new carrier will be called American Airlines and it will use 100% of the new AA branding. While I do hope that they make some minor tweaks to the tail based on customer feedback (eliminating the excessive gradient use), this is the brand that will define American Airlines for at least the next several years.

The American Airlines brand has been iconic for the last 45 years. This new brand is also iconic, whether you love it or hate it.


User currently offlineBarryH From United States of America, joined Sep 2012, 71 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 6010 times:

Quoting jlbmedia (Reply 27):
When Parker made that statement he was talking about AA's current branding. This new branding might change his mind. The new branding is not recognized anywhere, including globally.

This is a strange thread. Why would anyone think that a re-branding program that's been under development for two-years would have anything to do with US? What we started to see yesterday had to have been finalized months ago for things like AA.com to be updated and for the (very complex) graphics applied to the aircraft to be manufactured and/or applied.

And should a merger occur there's no assurance that the newly reconstituted Board would want Parker or Horton to be the combined carrier's CEO. And chances are whoever provides financing will have seats on the Board and a great deal of sway in major decision making. None of this is about Parker or Horton or their "feelings;” it’s about what's deemed in the best interest of the shareholders and investors in the new company and those decisions will be made by the new Board. And the new company's Board and CEO will most likely be announced at the same time while the composition of the Board and who the new CEO is may have already been determined behind the scenes as is typical. At this stage, in spite of past comments from both AA and US, nothing is confirmed as to what a merged company will look like and what its management will be. The theory of a merger and what it turns out looking like can be very different.


User currently offlineDiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1536 posts, RR: 3
Reply 31, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5950 times:

Quoting natethegreat (Reply 22):
I love the new AA look. I think it is fresh and yet pays respect to the history of AA.

In a lot of ways, they would be better off forgetting that history. Their actions for the last 2 decades are incredibly stupid. They've had poor service for at least 10 years and generally are my airline of last resort.


-DiamondFlyer


User currently offlineWingtips56 From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5933 times:

American has been a national brand since the 1930's. New paint jobs along the way, but an established brand none the less.

By comparison, US has gone by multiple names and identities (All American, Allegheny, USAir and US Airways), and until 1986 or so was just East Coast.



Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19575 posts, RR: 58
Reply 33, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5908 times:

Quoting Wingtips56 (Reply 32):
By comparison, US has gone by multiple names and identities (All American, Allegheny, USAir and US Airways), and until 1986 or so was just East Coast.

The current US Airways is a completely different company than the one that went by those names. This US Airways was America West Airlines until the merger. They still retain their "Cactus" callsign and they still retain their Tempe, AZ HQ. Because the new combined carrier was targeted to becoming an intercontinental flag carrier, the "America West" LCC brand target mainly at leisure travel to the Southwest United States was not appropriate and so they took the US Airways name and then made some changes to the brand.

If US Airways were to take over AA, I would consider it to be the strangest of ironies that the little, podunk LCC America West Airlines out of Tempe, AZ will have become one of the world's largest (the largest?) international full-service airlines.

BTW, for those of you trashing US's service, I have had the opportunity to fly with them a few times both before the merger (when they were HP) and after. In all of my flights, I was very pleased with the way that they did business. Yes, their onboard hard product is bare-bones, but then again, so was NW's. I will note, however, that all of my flights have been US West flights.


User currently offlineCOEWR787 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 337 posts, RR: 3
Reply 34, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3485 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 33):
If US Airways were to take over AA, I would consider it to be the strangest of ironies that the little, podunk LCC America West Airlines out of Tempe, AZ will have become one of the world's largest (the largest?) international full-service airlines.

Wasn't Delta a little crop duster outfit once upon a time?  


User currently offlinecrj900lr From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 333 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3003 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 33):
BTW, for those of you trashing US's service, I have had the opportunity to fly with them a few times both before the merger (when they were HP) and after. In all of my flights, I was very pleased with the way that they did business. Yes, their onboard hard product is bare-bones, but then again, so was NW's. I will note, however, that all of my flights have been US West flights.

The mainline product is good but our Express operations are by far the worst. There is going to be some serious reorginazation of the Express operations in the near future weather a merger happens or not.


User currently offlineintermodal64 From United States of America, joined May 2006, 124 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (1 year 7 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2431 times:

It looks like no one outside of American had any input to the new logo. It looks to me like it was not even test marketed. What is their new slogan now? I think it goes like this: "But WAIT! There's MORE!" They will roll it out with their new info-mercials on late-nite cable television. "If you call NOW, we'll give you not just one, but TWO circuitous connections!"

Seriously, though, the average consumer is looking for "cheap and modern." The new look conveys that well. The rest of us will still enjoy flying the airline we have liked so much for so many years.

[Edited 2013-01-21 02:51:44]

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...
Why Did Early 747s Have This In Front Of Cockpit? posted Wed Jul 11 2007 16:05:11 by RootsAir
Did US Rampers Ever Destroy A Managers Car In PHL? posted Tue Aug 21 2007 04:24:29 by Malaysia
Did Hawaiian Air Have Spit Ops @ LAX In The 80's? posted Thu Jan 4 2007 23:30:38 by 747400sp
How Many Airlines Have Liquidated In The US? posted Fri Aug 4 2006 21:40:13 by Falstaff
Did Flights Have More F/A In The 70s? posted Tue Feb 28 2006 04:11:40 by Malaysia
Why Did VS Have A 346 In IAD Today? posted Wed Jan 14 2004 21:37:12 by UniTED
How Many Routes In Aisa Do Us Majors Have? posted Sat Oct 19 2002 15:13:44 by Bmi330
US Dividend Miles In AA Advantage posted Fri Aug 17 2001 19:26:41 by Contrails
AA A-300's Have PTVs In Coach posted Fri Nov 24 2000 23:27:13 by AA@DFW
What Equipment Did SR Use At THR In 1980? posted Sun Oct 21 2012 06:37:26 by WA707atMSP