TerminalD wrote:

I said that UA's statement to try to influence the F9 IPO was fairly inappropriate and now F9 has seemingly delayed the IPO. I wonder how that is all tied together. It's not a coincidence.

Frontier Airlines pushed back its initial public offering, people familiar with the matter said, as competitive tensions flared between the no-frills carrier and United Airlines.

The share sale could slip until September or later, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the matter is private. Frontier Group Holdings Inc., which is backed by private equity firm Indigo Partners, had been planning to hold the IPO as soon as the second quarter, people familiar with the matter said in March.

The delay comes as Frontier prepares to more than double routes — an expansion that drew a warning from United President Scott Kirby. He vowed to stave off any attempt by Frontier to grab a bigger share of the Denver market. The discount carrier is based in the city, which is the most profitable hub for United, the third-biggest airline in the U.S.

https://skift.com/2017/07/20/frontier-m ... in-denver/

lightsaber wrote:

To do an IPO, a company has to release audited financial results. What we're F9's results?

Bald1983 wrote:

TerminalD wrote:

I said that UA's statement to try to influence the F9 IPO was fairly inappropriate and now F9 has seemingly delayed the IPO. I wonder how that is all tied together. It's not a coincidence.

Frontier Airlines pushed back its initial public offering, people familiar with the matter said, as competitive tensions flared between the no-frills carrier and United Airlines.

The share sale could slip until September or later, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the matter is private. Frontier Group Holdings Inc., which is backed by private equity firm Indigo Partners, had been planning to hold the IPO as soon as the second quarter, people familiar with the matter said in March.

The delay comes as Frontier prepares to more than double routes — an expansion that drew a warning from United President Scott Kirby. He vowed to stave off any attempt by Frontier to grab a bigger share of the Denver market. The discount carrier is based in the city, which is the most profitable hub for United, the third-biggest airline in the U.S.

https://skift.com/2017/07/20/frontier-m ... in-denver/

If all it takes is to have a competitor talk trash about you to delay your IPO, you probably are not a company where one should invest their money.

TerminalD wrote:

I said that UA's statement to try to influence the F9 IPO was fairly inappropriate and now F9 has seemingly delayed the IPO. I wonder how that is all tied together. It's not a coincidence.

LotsaRunway wrote:

Why is UA picking on the little guy on the block when its WN that's eating into their market share? They already know how to offer less and shrink down the seat pitch to compete with F9. But would they really be willing to offer more leg room and free bags to fight off the much larger competitor that recently entered Denver in force? Besides, F9 has two major competitors to deal with which is naturally going to limit growth. Perhaps F9 should offer new flights at IAD.

SFOtoORD wrote:

"Picking on"? This is business, not a kindergarten playground. They're competitors and F9 shouldn't care what UA says. This thread has nothing to do with WN and UA is doing fine against them more recently in DEN.

cschleic wrote:

Anyone planning an IPO these days, or a large merger/acquisition, is having second thoughts until there's more clarity on tax law changes, healthcare, or anything else getting done in Washington for that matter. The financial markets hate uncertainty, and there's nothing but uncertainty right now, never mind what Scott Kirby says.

SFOtoORD wrote:

LotsaRunway wrote:

Why is UA picking on the little guy on the block when its WN that's eating into their market share? They already know how to offer less and shrink down the seat pitch to compete with F9. But would they really be willing to offer more leg room and free bags to fight off the much larger competitor that recently entered Denver in force? Besides, F9 has two major competitors to deal with which is naturally going to limit growth. Perhaps F9 should offer new flights at IAD.

"Picking on"? This is business, not a kindergarten playground. They're competitors and F9 shouldn't care what UA says. This thread has nothing to do with WN and UA is doing fine against them more recently in DEN.

TerminalD wrote:

The share sale could slip until September or later, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the matter is private. Frontier Group Holdings Inc., which is backed by private equity firm Indigo Partners, had been planning to hold the IPO as soon as the second quarter, people familiar with the matter said in March.

OA940 wrote:

What's an IPO?

mariner wrote:

So far, I haven't seen any authoritative evidence that Frontier does care what UA says.

Going by Google, United should care a great deal more about what the press is saying about it - LOL.

https://skift.com/2017/07/20/united-air ... e-outlook/

"United Airlines Is Disappointing Investors With Its Mediocre Outlook"

https://www.thestreet.com/story/1423684 ... oubts.html

"United Airlines Exec Reveals 6 Reasons for Weak Guidance - But a Top Analyst Has Doubts"

http://airlinegeeks.com/2017/07/20/unit ... r-results/

"United Airlines Stock Drops, Despite Strong Second Quarter Results"

mariner

OA940 wrote:

What's an IPO?

TerminalD wrote:

cschleic wrote:

Anyone planning an IPO these days, or a large merger/acquisition, is having second thoughts until there's more clarity on tax law changes, healthcare, or anything else getting done in Washington for that matter. The financial markets hate uncertainty, and there's nothing but uncertainty right now, never mind what Scott Kirby says.

Is that why the DOW is at an all-time record? LOL

SFOtoORD wrote:

LotsaRunway wrote:

Why is UA picking on the little guy on the block when its WN that's eating into their market share? They already know how to offer less and shrink down the seat pitch to compete with F9. But would they really be willing to offer more leg room and free bags to fight off the much larger competitor that recently entered Denver in force? Besides, F9 has two major competitors to deal with which is naturally going to limit growth. Perhaps F9 should offer new flights at IAD.

"Picking on"? This is business, not a kindergarten playground. They're competitors and F9 shouldn't care what UA says. This thread has nothing to do with WN and UA is doing fine against them more recently in DEN.

As I said in the prior thread, it's pretty rare to trash another company's investment outlook as they are in the middle of a public financing. I assume there are no legal reasons preventing it, but from the company issuing it is known as a "quiet period" meaning they must abstain from comments that might manipulate the offering. That's why it is so low for a competitor to attempt the same.

TerminalD wrote:

cschleic wrote:

Anyone planning an IPO these days, or a large merger/acquisition, is having second thoughts until there's more clarity on tax law changes, healthcare, or anything else getting done in Washington for that matter. The financial markets hate uncertainty, and there's nothing but uncertainty right now, never mind what Scott Kirby says.

flyguy84 wrote:

What are the chances United is actually making a play for Frontier? It's a quick way to gain access to more narrow bodies, specifically 321 and knocks out a ulcc competitor. Just seems like an odd fight to pick.

TerminalD wrote:

The delay comes as Frontier prepares to more than double routes — an expansion that drew a warning from United President Scott Kirby. He vowed to stave off any attempt by Frontier to grab a bigger share of the Denver market. The discount carrier is based in the city, which is the most profitable hub for United, the third-biggest airline in the U.S.

SFOtoORD wrote:

Mariner - nothing you posted has anything to do with UAs comments about F9, but I'm guessing that was your way of defending F9 during their quiet period.

FSDan wrote:

TerminalD wrote:

The delay comes as Frontier prepares to more than double routes — an expansion that drew a warning from United President Scott Kirby. He vowed to stave off any attempt by Frontier to grab a bigger share of the Denver market. The discount carrier is based in the city, which is the most profitable hub for United, the third-biggest airline in the U.S.

Anyone else think it's odd that DEN is claimed to be the most profitable hub for UA? Two LCC competitors in DEN, while on the other hand UA has IAH and EWR as fortress hubs in huge business markets...

B737900ER wrote:

So one airline executive has that much clout that by his words alone he can prevent an entire company from offering an IPO.

Are you serious?

TerminalD wrote:

I said that UA's statement to try to influence the F9 IPO was fairly inappropriate and now F9 has seemingly delayed the IPO. I wonder how that is all tied together. It's not a coincidence.

AMALH747430 wrote:

F9 can't seem to get ahead. They've gone from serving small cities in the western US, to a sort of jetBlue west (until WN moved in on their turf), to a ULCC. It seems like every time they can't their business model it's too late because someone else out there has been doing it longer and better. I with they could succeed. I really enjoyed flying them in the early-mid 2000s. A friend of mine flew them AUS-DEN last week and was very pleased, but that doesn't always pay the bills.

globalcabotage wrote:

Kirby is trying to turn UA into a T-Mobile type environment, but he's loosing customers, not gaining them.

globalcabotage wrote:

Kirby is trying to turn UA into a T-Mobile type environment, but he's loosing customers, not gaining them.