airportlover wrote:

[list=][/list]

wedgetail737 wrote:

Not going to happen anytime soon. None of the three airlines can afford each other at this time.

I am not asking if it's feasible, but whether it would work well and make sense? If money were no issue, would these three airlines complement each other nicely? I think they very well would.

CallmeJB wrote:

I think most of you are seriously underrating the international resources and experience that HA brings to the table. They have landing rights and assets/personnel in several large east Asia/oceania markets, and wide body aircraft.

Imagine the route possibilities.

How much more efficient would those Asia routes be if they flew the widebodies out of SEA instead of HNL? There's lots more feed into SEA. Then relegate HNL to the niche market that it should be (except for the flights to SYD/MEL/AKL).

And is there a market for a wide body flight HKG-ANC, considering the connecting possibilities that AS provides from ANC? Maybe NRT/PVG/PEK? It could be like the Icelandair of the Pacific Ocean; not a dominant global airline, but an efficient network that could generate yields with low fares.

airportlover wrote:

SFOtoORD wrote:

It would be pretty odd to have an airline that large with only coastal concentrations. You’d get some of the usual economies of scale, but not much network synergy.

Yes, it would be odd. I do think it could work, though. Many business travelers spend most of their time between the coasts, SEA, LAX, SFO, BOS, NYC, PHL, DCA, IAD, BWI, etc. For the occasional ORD, DFW, IAH, or ATL flight, they would just fly another airline. Or they would be based at a merger hub, and they would likely have nonstops to those cities but not PIT, CLE, ROC, BDL, RIC, CVG, MKE, DSM, etc.

rbavfan wrote:

airportlover wrote:

Would a merger between Hawaiian, Alaska, and JetBlue work well?

None of them are low-cost carriers, but none of them are legacy airlines. They are all considered boutique airlines with certain regional strengths and many network weaknesses. Joining the three airlines together would create a decent US (including Hawaii and Alaska, obviously) and Caribbean/South American network.

JetBlue has very strong brand loyalty in New York and Boston. People love JetBlue and will fly them whenever it is possible! Terminal 5 at JFK is excellent, even though it has to deal with NYC ATC delays. Its Florida and Caribbean network is excellent from both BOS and JFK, not to mention LGA and EWR. SJU is unique among US carriers, but it may not be as important in the near future due to the hurricane. FLL is another large operation, and B6 could build it up to rival MIA in terms of destinations. Or they could do the same with SJU, but I see FLL as more likely. Feed from Alaska's PNW network would really help this. The operation at Long Beach is also strong, albeit smaller. I see Long Beach being reduced to a small focus city or spoke in a merger scenario.

Hawaiian offers a great network within Hawaii, and it consistently rates well on customer service rankings, along with AS and B6. Hawaiian serves most major US cities, but they do have limited East Coast frequencies. However, Hawaii only seems to be becoming more popular among travelers, and there are well-heeled leisure travelers willing to pay for business class. Hawaiian has a large Asian and Australian/New Zealand network. This offers enticing connection opportunities from the ENTIRE US due to HNL's geographic location.

Alaska is very strong on the West Coast, with large operations in SFO, LAX, SAN, PDX, and SEA. This is unmatched among US carriers. No other airline offers the breadth of service from every major West Coast city. I only see this as an advantage in the current AS. With a merger, a few cities would have to be reduced and connections pushed through SEA and maybe SAN or SFO. PDX is probably too small, and LAX has no room. The Virgin America routes have brought in new customers to the brand, and it has helped AS with transcontinental service. Alaska is also a huge strength for the brand, and nobody can compete with them there. AS and B6 do have one gaping hole, though: the Midwest. I do not envision this changing, even with a merger. It is going to be tough for these airlines to crack those markets, and their customers may not really demand it. As long as the major markets are covered, a merged airline does not really need to worry about small cities between the coasts too much. They need to focus their energy on NYC, BOS, SEA, FLL, SJU, HNL, and one California city (whichever they choose to).

So, what do you guys think?

Hawaiian/Alaska merger would require dropping to many duplicated routes to et past the government watchdogs. Hawaiian/jetBlue on the other hand could easily fly. No overlap.

RalXWB wrote:

Hawaiian and JetBlue yes but not with Alaska...that would be horrible. Alaska has way too many Boeing people on its Board

dampfnudel wrote:

I think before a B6/AS merger even becomes a possibility, DL will make an attempt to buy one of them with a fair chance of succeeding.

CobaltScar wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

ADrum23 wrote:

An AS and B6 merger would be nice eventually, but AS needs to finish with the VX merger first and both need to build up their presence in the central part of the country.

AS doesn't need a merger in the future, B6 probably does. These two aren't going to get married. The only likely merger I see in the next few years might be NK + F9. B6 should have started to talking to VX long before AS did.. They may be the odd man out in this current airline environment.

Why would B6 need a merger but AS not? They basically mirror each other in size and scope on their respective coasts, except B6's coast has far more population plus is in range of the islands of the Caribbean and western Europe with narrow bodies, while Alaska is stuck with Hawaii and I suppose overlap with B6 in Mexico and central America.

Seems to me its AS with less options and less customer base.

wedgetail737 wrote:

enilria wrote:

rj777 wrote:

1)AS hasn't finished merging with Virgin America yet
2)Hawaiian is too much of an icon to disappear
3)JetBlue.......same as Hawaiian

AS/B6 is an inevitable merger that I hope never happens.

I don't think it's envitable, but I agree. And I hope that merger never happens. However, I see B6 merging with NK more than AS. But that's just my opinion.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

CobaltScar wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

AS doesn't need a merger in the future, B6 probably does. These two aren't going to get married. The only likely merger I see in the next few years might be NK + F9. B6 should have started to talking to VX long before AS did.. They may be the odd man out in this current airline environment.

Why would B6 need a merger but AS not? They basically mirror each other in size and scope on their respective coasts, except B6's coast has far more population plus is in range of the islands of the Caribbean and western Europe with narrow bodies, while Alaska is stuck with Hawaii and I suppose overlap with B6 in Mexico and central America.

Seems to me its AS with less options and less customer base.

Not every airline has to fly everywhere. However, the post enrila made below yours, an AS/B6 merger is probably inevitable. A nation of 330 million people deserves more choices than we are going to inevitably wind up with.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

enilria wrote:

AS/B6 is an inevitable merger that I hope never happens.

I don't think it's envitable, but I agree. And I hope that merger never happens. However, I see B6 merging with NK more than AS. But that's just my opinion.

NK and B6 really are totally different classes of carriers. NK and F9 are the more likely merger candidates, and yes sooner or later, AS and B6 will get married.

santi319 wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

I don't think it's envitable, but I agree. And I hope that merger never happens. However, I see B6 merging with NK more than AS. But that's just my opinion.

NK and B6 really are totally different classes of carriers. NK and F9 are the more likely merger candidates, and yes sooner or later, AS and B6 will get married.

Why? Because one is Low cost and one isnt? They can change their business model you know.

I always thought an NKB6 merger is almost inevitable. They fit into each other perfectly, they could be like Norwegian a LCC with perks.

tphuang wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

CobaltScar wrote:

Why would B6 need a merger but AS not? They basically mirror each other in size and scope on their respective coasts, except B6's coast has far more population plus is in range of the islands of the Caribbean and western Europe with narrow bodies, while Alaska is stuck with Hawaii and I suppose overlap with B6 in Mexico and central America.

Seems to me its AS with less options and less customer base.

Not every airline has to fly everywhere. However, the post enrila made below yours, an AS/B6 merger is probably inevitable. A nation of 330 million people deserves more choices than we are going to inevitably wind up with.

tphuang wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

CobaltScar wrote:

Why would B6 need a merger but AS not? They basically mirror each other in size and scope on their respective coasts, except B6's coast has far more population plus is in range of the islands of the Caribbean and western Europe with narrow bodies, while Alaska is stuck with Hawaii and I suppose overlap with B6 in Mexico and central America.

Seems to me its AS with less options and less customer base.

Not every airline has to fly everywhere. However, the post enrila made below yours, an AS/B6 merger is probably inevitable. A nation of 330 million people deserves more choices than we are going to inevitably wind up with.

Again just because routes are complementary now, that makes merger inevitable? Vx was a far better fit for b6 than as, but obviously it didn't happen. Why would a less fit be inevitable? In fact, they compete on some of the most important business routes against each other.

I think people make the assumption that because b6 hubs are in some of the most competitive msa, they will somehow automatically be swallowed up. but reality is they are the highest yielding in all its primary hubs.

Same with as, why would a very profitable airline with competent leadership need to merge?

CobaltScar wrote:

tphuang wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

Not every airline has to fly everywhere. However, the post enrila made below yours, an AS/B6 merger is probably inevitable. A nation of 330 million people deserves more choices than we are going to inevitably wind up with.

Again just because routes are complementary now, that makes merger inevitable? Vx was a far better fit for b6 than as, but obviously it didn't happen. Why would a less fit be inevitable? In fact, they compete on some of the most important business routes against each other.

I think people make the assumption that because b6 hubs are in some of the most competitive msa, they will somehow automatically be swallowed up. but reality is they are the highest yielding in all its primary hubs.

Same with as, why would a very profitable airline with competent leadership need to merge?

Because a merge will make the shareholders more money.

Less airlines = less competition = more money for the share holders and the airlines and the airlines employees.

wedgetail737 wrote:

michman wrote:

wedgetail737 wrote:

Not going to happen anytime soon. None of the three airlines can afford each other at this time.

Apparently you've never heard of a cashless merger. This is exactly how NW/DL, UA/CO, and AA/US all got together. If the entities all want to make it happen, they certainly can and will.

Then it's a matter if these airlines truly want to merge. There is always the hostile takeovers. Are the mergers you mentioned really cashless. I hope you don't intend to mean that they didn't have any significant cost to the host party. In addition to approvals by stockholders and executive management, the takeover would involve purchasing the majority share of stock, right?

AAvgeek744 wrote:

NK and F9 are the more likely merger candidates, and yes sooner or later, AS and B6 will get married.

AAvgeek744 wrote:

santi319 wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

NK and B6 really are totally different classes of carriers. NK and F9 are the more likely merger candidates, and yes sooner or later, AS and B6 will get married.

Why? Because one is Low cost and one isnt? They can change their business model you know.

I always thought an NKB6 merger is almost inevitable. They fit into each other perfectly, they could be like Norwegian a LCC with perks.

NK would have to make the big changes. jetBlue has a great reputation,Spirit does not. IMO, they are a bad fit. I have flown on both, there's no comparison, and trying to become like Norwegian isn't a very high bar.

flybynight wrote:

As an AS Gold, there is one big issue I am seeing with their growth - they are a regional carrier for the most part, but the Big Three don't want to partner with AS because they are all competing now. Not having AA or DL to connect with through out the mid-west or Eastern region is a serious issue. Say I want to fly from Seattle to Syracuse or Providence, it becomes an issue if I want my miles towards AS.
AS needs a stronger network back East and B6 could be just the ticket.

santi319 wrote:

AAvgeek744 wrote:

santi319 wrote:

Why? Because one is Low cost and one isnt? They can change their business model you know.

I always thought an NKB6 merger is almost inevitable. They fit into each other perfectly, they could be like Norwegian a LCC with perks.

NK would have to make the big changes. jetBlue has a great reputation,Spirit does not. IMO, they are a bad fit. I have flown on both, there's no comparison, and trying to become like Norwegian isn't a very high bar.

Why? Last time I checked NK complains dropped 60+% and they were first place ontime arrivals for US based airlines in October and November...

Jetblue is slowly losing it IMO

OA940 wrote:

Since when is HA an LCC? I mean a leisure carrier sure, but it still offers pretty much the same as the legacies.

EA CO AS wrote:

AS and B6 entering into a comprehensive, network-wide, reciprocal codeshare agreement would certainly get both carriers the majority of the benefits of M&A activity at a fraction of the price.

Let's keep an eye on AS and what it does with the Airbus fleet inherited from VX. It will be very difficult to see a merger between B6 and AS if AS disposes of the Airbus fleet completely. If AS keeps them and decides to order some to replace some older 737s, the possibility of a merger may grow substantially.

The only way I see a B6/HA tie up is if B6 decides to go through with international operations to Europe. HA already flies to different areas in the Pacific; they lack reach to Europe. it doesn't need to reach Mexico or the Caribbean (HI is already a tropical and tourist destination altogether). Why tie up with a carrier that does not even cover the entire US? Might as well continue to depend on codeshares.

OA940 wrote:

Since when is HA an LCC? I mean a leisure carrier sure, but it still offers pretty much the same as the legacies.

rj777 wrote:

1)AS hasn't finished merging with Virgin America yet
2)Hawaiian is too much of an icon to disappear
3)JetBlue.......same as Hawaiian