On this day in 1991 possibly the world's greatest airline shut down for good.

Sad news from 29 years ago today. On this day in 1991 the world's most well know airline shut down for good. I was lucky enough to have ridden on Pan Am a few times between Detroit and JFK and JFK to Frankfurt. I flew aboard their L-1011-500, Boeing 747 and Boeing 727-200.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-KarUJQ6v0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ_dYxGQwGA

Did PanAm have BOB in its last years?

davidjohnson6 wrote:

It's just a company that went bankrupt, no different to a small store on your local shopping street.... hundreds of other companies go bankrupt across the world every day, people dust themselves down and find a new job and the world carries on

It most certainly is not the same. I think we can all agree that mismanagement at Pan Am led to their ultimate demise. However, the world lost an iconic brand. That's not the same when mom & pop's donut shop goes under. Not saying one is more "important" than the other, but that they're simply not the same as far as cultural impact goes.

davidjohnson6 wrote:

It's just a company that went bankrupt, no different to a small store on your local shopping street.... hundreds of other companies go bankrupt across the world every day and the world carries on

Yes Pan Am...Bob's Shoe Emporium same thing

davidjohnson6 wrote:

It's just a company that went bankrupt, no different to a small store on your local shopping street.... hundreds of other companies go bankrupt across the world every day and the world carries on

This is such an example social conditioning in our new throw away society where nothing is sacred anymore . 50 years ago companies just didn't go bankrupt. Pan Am was and iconic brand and name. So to play it's demise down like that is pretty insensitive to it's employees and those who relied on Pan Am for their travel and well being.

davidjohnson6 wrote:

Pan Am was a company of the period from the 1930s to the 1960s... by the 1980s it had completely lost its way while competitors out performed and by 1991 deserved to die

Even if we agreed with your premise, there would still be cause for saddness about the demise of a once great airline even if it had gone on too long as you say.

klm617 wrote:

davidjohnson6 wrote:

It's just a company that went bankrupt, no different to a small store on your local shopping street.... hundreds of other companies go bankrupt across the world every day and the world carries on

This is such an example social conditioning in our new throw away society where nothing is sacred anymore . 50 years ago companies just didn't go bankrupt. Pan Am was and iconic brand and name. So to play it's demise down like that is pretty insensitive to it's employees and those who relied on Pan Am for their travel and well being.

Apparently no one gets nostalgia anymore either

Let's say if AA, UA, or DL went away. Would anyone be sad?

davidjohnson6 wrote:

Pan Am was a company of the period from the 1930s to the 1960s... by the 1980s it had completely lost its way while competitors out performed and by 1991 deserved to die

Deserved to die?? Wow, piece of work. Thousands of people worked there. How about deserved competent management?

Ziyulu wrote:

Let's say if AA, UA, or DL went away. Would anyone be sad?

Actually AA has gone away as far how its run its really America West in disguise. I'm sure the employees are doing their best to create a great airline but they have to work within what the company gives them.

davidjohnson6 wrote:

It's just a company that went bankrupt, no different to a small store on your local shopping street.... hundreds of other companies go bankrupt across the world every day and the world carries on

What a sad, throwaway comment. Pan Am was an institution. It pioneered modern air travel and had many firsts, and was the unofficial, official US flag carrier for a long time. Unfortunately, it was grossly mismanaged, slow to adapt to the changed competitive landscape that emerged after Deregulation, and limped along for a decade before it finally went into liquidation after a massive asset sale of its crown jewels (TPAC network, LHR slots, Northeast Shuttle, TATL routes). What was left for a few months was a joke of a business plan with a focus on Miami and Latin America. Still, it was an icon of American business, entrepreneurship, aviation, and post-war success. Yes, the world carried on without Pan Am, but almost 30 years later, it still holds a special place in aviation and that's why it is a celebrated brand.

Ziyulu wrote:

Let's say if AA, UA, or DL went away. Would anyone be sad?

Of the three, I would say that AA (in reality HP/US) and UA have already gone away and are shadows of their former selves. DL is only slightly better.,

floridaflyboy wrote:

davidjohnson6 wrote:

Pan Am was a company of the period from the 1930s to the 1960s... by the 1980s it had completely lost its way while competitors out performed and by 1991 deserved to die

Deserved to die?? Wow, piece of work. Thousands of people worked there. How about deserved competent management?

The entity deserved to die as it was a mismanaged mess that was out of touch with reality. It would have been nice if Pan Am had not gone down the rabbit hole of failure, but since it did, it met its end.

No one here has said that they are happy that people lost their jobs. Step down from the manufactured outrage about points that were not made.

Jerseyguy wrote:

Apparently no one gets nostalgia anymore either

Nostalgia is important, but only for things that are good. Remembering the glory days of Pan Am is nostalgia.

The last 20 years was an embarrassment to the brand and it finally being put out of its misery was a good thing. I don't understand being nostalgic about something that sucks.

Jerseyguy wrote:

davidjohnson6 wrote:

It's just a company that went bankrupt, no different to a small store on your local shopping street.... hundreds of other companies go bankrupt across the world every day and the world carries on

Yes Pan Am...Bob's Shoe Emporium same thing

Wait! What? Bob's Shoe Emporium shut down?? Nooooo , I got all my moccasins from them since 1962. Oh hold on, that was Jim's Shoe Emporium. Bob's brother LOL.

Isn't Pan AM XII about to start up in Equatorial Guinea offering nonstop A380s to Harare, Zimbabwe?

Think about big stores that collapsed in the U.S. Circuit City, Montgomery Ward, Mervyn's, Service Merchandise, etc. Do we miss them?

Ziyulu wrote:

Let's say if AA, UA, or DL went away. Would anyone be sad?

No because the airlines of today can't even compare to what the airlines of yesterday set forth as far as customer service like their older ancestors did. Whether you fly DL, COM US, NK or any other it's basically all the same. The US3 have been allowed to grow to big and powerful in the market today. There is a culture now of fly by our rules or sit home. To really understand this you would have had to have flown in to 60s and 70s when airlines cared about the product they put out rather than the culture today of how cheap can we make it.

Ziyulu wrote:

Think about big stores that collapsed in the U.S. Circuit City, Montgomery Ward, Mervyn's, Service Merchandise, etc. Do we miss them?

Very much so.

klm617 wrote:

On this day in 1991 possibly the world's greatest airline shut down for good.

Sad news from 29 years ago today. On this day in 1991 the world's most well know airline shut down for good. I was lucky enough to have ridden on Pan Am a few times between Detroit and JFK and JFK to Frankfurt. I flew aboard their L-1011-500, Boeing 747 and Boeing 727-200.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-KarUJQ6v0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ_dYxGQwGA

Well

PanAm was a great airline but the ‘worlds greatest’ I don’t think so


Not sure If any one airline can claim that title
PAA was a pioneer in many ways with its epic route system, gestated in the flying boat days, the launch customer of the 747, the iconic Pan Am building in Manhattan, all
powerful images and reminders of what used to be


But that’s the point, they’re gone and they spent decades getting ‘ready to leave’


PAA made a business out of going out of business, they sold off asset after asset, refinanced, worked out deals, raised cash anyway they could. It was an agonizingly long, slow death.


And in the meantime employee morale nosedived, service standards were abysmal, aircraft were filthy and ancient


That death spiral went on for a very long time, so long it became the real image and reputation of the airline and damaged its culture permanently



Very sad they went out of business but it was worse to see the terrible deterioration of the brand over such an extended period


They were great once but that was a long time ago and a long time before they finally went under



Most of their valuable route system and some of their fleet ended up with healthy, strong carriers like United and Delta and this was the best possible outcome, unfortunately not for many of their employees but at least a decent sized part of PAA survived under a different name



I don’t think it’s possible to name one airline that’s the greatest in the world, past or present, there’s a handful of exceptional carriers that are the best though, they’re so good that picking one is impossible and that’s a good thing

It's not like the loss of, say, the Oldsmobile brand. But still pretty sad. Let's all have a good cry.

Curious to know about Pan Am's fleet count at the end in 1991? Were their aircraft interiors in bad shape? Wasn't DL supposed to buy their Latin America operation?

Ziyulu wrote:

Did PanAm have BOB in its last years?

Buy on board is a post 9/11 thing

Pan am was once one of the world's most recognisable brands . Unfortunately once Juan Trippe retired it definitely lost its way . I think de regulation really was unfair to them . When domestic carriers were allowed to start flying overseas routes but Pan am weren't given domestic rights, it put then at a massive disadvantage. The merger with National was a huge mistake as well and probably was the final straw that would break the camel's back .
I do find it amazing that both iconic brands and rivals of pan am and TWA failed to make it. The airline business is most definitely a tough one !

klm617 wrote:

Ziyulu wrote:

Let's say if AA, UA, or DL went away. Would anyone be sad?

No because the airlines of today can't even compare to what the airlines of yesterday set forth as far as customer service like their older ancestors did. Whether you fly DL, COM US, NK or any other it's basically all the same. The US3 have been allowed to grow to big and powerful in the market today. There is a culture now of fly by our rules or sit home. To really understand this you would have had to have flown in to 60s and 70s when airlines cared about the product they put out rather than the culture today of how cheap can we make it.

In the days of deregulation, service level was the only way to differentiate from competitors. Fares were government controlled, and you paid through the nose for the privilege of flying

By the time it shut down, Pan AM was a shadow of it's former self. I think much of their demise was due to the purchase of National and the failure to properly integrate National's route network to maximize the feeders into the international network side.

Cointrin330 wrote:

Pan Am was an institution. It pioneered modern air travel and had many firsts, and was the unofficial, official US flag carrier for a long time. Unfortunately, it was grossly mismanaged, slow to adapt to the changed competitive landscape that emerged after Deregulation, and limped along for a decade before it finally went into liquidation after a massive asset sale of its crown jewels (TPAC network, LHR slots, Northeast Shuttle, TATL routes). What was left for a few months was a joke of a business plan with a focus on Miami and Latin America.

It was a creature of the narrow bilaterals times that didn't adequately adapt to a modern era, in effect, 'You'll fly us and like it because there's no one else.' It didn't have to compete on price or routes. The services it provided, and the wage rates the structure supported, were functions of monopoly power that depressed demand. Do people mourn 1980s Aeroflot, once the largest passenger carrier in the world? Imagine if the U.S. Internal Revenue Service had a monopoly on tax prep software and tax consulting services.

I was lucky enough to get to fly Pan Am, around Christmas 1983 I flew EWR-TPA on a Pan Am DC-10. Strangely the return TPA-EWR flight was a Pan Am L1011. Several members of the New York Yankees were on the return flight including Yogi Berra who was the manager at them time.

f4f3a wrote:

Pan am was once one of the world's most recognizable brands . Unfortunately once Juan Trippe retired it definitely lost its way . I think de regulation really was unfair to them . When domestic carriers were allowed to start flying overseas routes but Pan am weren't given domestic rights, it put then at a massive disadvantage. The merger with National was a huge mistake as well and probably was the final straw that would break the camel's back .
I do find it amazing that both iconic brands and rivals of pan am and TWA failed to make it. The airline business is most definitely a tough one !

Indeed. I have thought that a merger of TWA & Pan Am could have worked. Yes, the airline biz is pretty tough.

PANAM was an icon of aviation. I never had the chance to fly them as I'm too young to have had the chance to but, I've read a lot about them and respect them.
To sit and type about their demise instead of just recognizing what made them an icon in aviation history truly speaks of the lack of love for aviation some of you have on this site.

klm617 wrote:

Ziyulu wrote:

Let's say if AA, UA, or DL went away. Would anyone be sad?

No because the airlines of today can't even compare to what the airlines of yesterday set forth as far as customer service like their older ancestors did. Whether you fly DL, COM US, NK or any other it's basically all the same. The US3 have been allowed to grow to big and powerful in the market today. There is a culture now of fly by our rules or sit home. To really understand this you would have had to have flown in to 60s and 70s when airlines cared about the product they put out rather than the culture today of how cheap can we make it.

That's a mighty elitist attitude. The reason they cared about the product was because that was the only way to differentiate themselves. Fares were controlled, were high and the number of people who could fly were very limited.

This "how cheap" attitude is akin to complaining about Courtyard Marriotts and yearning for the day when there was nothing but a handful of Ritz-Carlton's around.

Antarius wrote:

klm617 wrote:

Ziyulu wrote:

Let's say if AA, UA, or DL went away. Would anyone be sad?

No because the airlines of today can't even compare to what the airlines of yesterday set forth as far as customer service like their older ancestors did. Whether you fly DL, COM US, NK or any other it's basically all the same. The US3 have been allowed to grow to big and powerful in the market today. There is a culture now of fly by our rules or sit home. To really understand this you would have had to have flown in to 60s and 70s when airlines cared about the product they put out rather than the culture today of how cheap can we make it.

That's a mighty elitist attitude. The reason they cared about the product was because that was the only way to differentiate themselves. Fares were controlled, were high and the number of people who could fly were very limited.

This "how cheap" attitude is akin to complaining about Courtyard Marriotts and yearning for the day when there was nothing but a handful of Ritz-Carlton's around.

Yes. If things today were still the way they were in "the good old days" , the vast majority of people on this site (including myself) would rarely, if ever, be able to afford to set foot on an aircraft.

What was the last flight that operated before they shut down?

klm617 wrote:

On this day in 1991 possibly the world's greatest airline shut down for good.

They were never that good...it was only the perception of them that was good.

b4thefall wrote:

Antarius wrote:

klm617 wrote:

No because the airlines of today can't even compare to what the airlines of yesterday set forth as far as customer service like their older ancestors did. Whether you fly DL, COM US, NK or any other it's basically all the same. The US3 have been allowed to grow to big and powerful in the market today. There is a culture now of fly by our rules or sit home. To really understand this you would have had to have flown in to 60s and 70s when airlines cared about the product they put out rather than the culture today of how cheap can we make it.

That's a mighty elitist attitude. The reason they cared about the product was because that was the only way to differentiate themselves. Fares were controlled, were high and the number of people who could fly were very limited.

This "how cheap" attitude is akin to complaining about Courtyard Marriotts and yearning for the day when there was nothing but a handful of Ritz-Carlton's around.

Yes. If things today were still the way they were in "the good old days" , the vast majority of people on this site (including myself) would rarely, if ever, be able to afford to set foot on an aircraft.

If they just increased ticket prices by $10 by including a meal, that would be out of reach for you?

Ziyulu wrote:

b4thefall wrote:

Antarius wrote:

That's a mighty elitist attitude. The reason they cared about the product was because that was the only way to differentiate themselves. Fares were controlled, were high and the number of people who could fly were very limited.

This "how cheap" attitude is akin to complaining about Courtyard Marriotts and yearning for the day when there was nothing but a handful of Ritz-Carlton's around.

Yes. If things today were still the way they were in "the good old days" , the vast majority of people on this site (including myself) would rarely, if ever, be able to afford to set foot on an aircraft.

If they just increased ticket prices by $10 by including a meal, that would be out of reach for you?

That's not what made Pan Am special. It was the end to end experience, from front to back. Long haul on the US3 gives you a meal right now - does that make it better? No.

Ziyulu wrote:

b4thefall wrote:

Antarius wrote:

That's a mighty elitist attitude. The reason they cared about the product was because that was the only way to differentiate themselves. Fares were controlled, were high and the number of people who could fly were very limited.

This "how cheap" attitude is akin to complaining about Courtyard Marriotts and yearning for the day when there was nothing but a handful of Ritz-Carlton's around.

Yes. If things today were still the way they were in "the good old days" , the vast majority of people on this site (including myself) would rarely, if ever, be able to afford to set foot on an aircraft.

If they just increased ticket prices by $10 by including a meal, that would be out of reach for you?

The ticket prices in those days were a heck of a lot higher than the equivalent of $10 compared to prices now.

Cointrin330 wrote:

Pan Am was an institution. Unfortunately, it was grossly mismanaged, slow to adapt to the changed competitive landscape that emerged after Deregulation, and limped along for a decade before it finally went into liquidation after a massive asset sale of its crown jewels (TPAC network, LHR slots, Northeast Shuttle, TATL routes). What was left for a few months was a joke of a business plan with a focus on Miami and Latin America. Still, it was an icon of American business, entrepreneurship, aviation, and post-war success.

Look at the contradictions in this post. "It was an institution!" "It was grossly mismanaged!"

"It limped along before liquidation!" "It was an icon of American business!"

Antarius wrote:

Ziyulu wrote:

b4thefall wrote:

Yes. If things today were still the way they were in "the good old days" , the vast majority of people on this site (including myself) would rarely, if ever, be able to afford to set foot on an aircraft.

If they just increased ticket prices by $10 by including a meal, that would be out of reach for you?

That's not what made Pan Am special. It was the end to end experience, from front to back. Long haul on the US3 gives you a meal right now - does that make it better? No.

Think internationally on US airlines. Isn't their product on par with the "better" airlines? What is lacking?

Ziyulu wrote:

Let's say if AA, UA, or DL went away. Would anyone be sad?

Yes. In many ways, all three are far more iconic and pioneering than Pan Am. Just because Pan Am was first, doesn't mean it was the best.

And anyway, they all get points for surviving.

Blerg wrote:

What was the last flight that operated before they shut down?

The final flight was Barbados to Miami on Clipper Goodwill, a Boeing 727-221 Advanced, N368PA.

Is it true that their decline started with having ordered all those early 747 just before the oil price hike?

They would have been absolutely incredible to fly with in the 30s to the 60s. The Flying Boats provided a degree of luxury not found in any heavier-than-air transport since, not even Singapore Suites (and one way SFO HKG was $20k in 2020 money, that’s how exclusive it was). And a 707 down through the South Pacific to Sydney with 30 passengers, or the hop-on-hop-off round the world service that operated daily in both directions JFK LHR FRA IST BEY THR KHI DEL BKK HKG HND HNL SFO (from memory) — miraculous. But the 747 killed it. Pan Am was never geared to transport 300 people on one aeroplane.

Rookie87 wrote:

PANAM was an icon of aviation. I never had the chance to fly them as I'm too young to have had the chance to but, I've read a lot about them and respect them.
To sit and type about their demise instead of just recognizing what made them an icon in aviation history truly speaks of the lack of love for aviation some of you have on this site.

Agreed. Everyone should read Skygods. PanAm was something this disposable society cannot understand.

PanAm was one if the brands globally. Them failing wouldn't have been say Apple, but it would be the equivalent if Starbucks ir Netflix failing. It was a big deal.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

Rookie87 wrote:

PANAM was an icon of aviation. I never had the chance to fly them as I'm too young to have had the chance to but, I've read a lot about them and respect them.
To sit and type about their demise instead of just recognizing what made them an icon in aviation history truly speaks of the lack of love for aviation some of you have on this site.

Agreed. Everyone should read Skygods. PanAm was something this disposable society cannot understand.

PanAm was one if the brands globally. Them failing wouldn't have been say Apple, but it would be the equivalent if Starbucks ir Netflix failing. It was a big deal.

Lightsaber

I think it would be compared to if Coca Cola went bankrupt. I think in their heyday Pan Am was just as huge as Coca Cola as far as iconic brands go.

Noshow wrote:

Is it true that their decline started with having ordered all those early 747 just before the oil price hike?

And they ordered way too many. But the time it came to replace them they were two broke to buy more fuel efficient aircraft. What if they had kept the National DC-10s in favor of the 747's. I am sure at the time used 747's brought a pretty good return. Then they could have built their long haul fleet around the A310 and the DC10. Perhaps they dumped them due to the anti DC10 stigma of that time. Also another what if could they have done better if they South America and kept their Trans Atlantic routes.

lightsaber wrote:

Agreed. Everyone should read Skygods. PanAm was something this disposable society cannot understand.

I disagree. We understand it, but we also recognize that PanAm was disposed of. If Pan Am was really as iconic and everlasting, it would still be around, innovating, reinventing etc. But it isn't. And it was run into the ground long long before the supposed "disposable society" came about.

klm617 wrote:

I think it would be compared to if Coca Cola went bankrupt. I think in their heyday Pan Am was just as huge as Coca Cola as far as iconic brands go.

Its closer to Sears. A once glorious icon that was a terminally ill patient until it was finally put out of its misery.

Coca Cola has evolved and continues to thrive.

How appropriate because Fedex is delivering this guy to me today!

klm617 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Rookie87 wrote:

PANAM was an icon of aviation. I never had the chance to fly them as I'm too young to have had the chance to but, I've read a lot about them and respect them.
To sit and type about their demise instead of just recognizing what made them an icon in aviation history truly speaks of the lack of love for aviation some of you have on this site.

Agreed. Everyone should read Skygods. PanAm was something this disposable society cannot understand.

PanAm was one if the brands globally. Them failing wouldn't have been say Apple, but it would be the equivalent if Starbucks ir Netflix failing. It was a big deal.

Lightsaber

I think it would be compared to if Coca Cola went bankrupt. I think in their heyday Pan Am was just as huge as Coca Cola as far as iconic brands go.

I remember reading that at one time Pan Am had the world's second greatest brand recognition with their 'blue meatball,' with only the Coca Cola logo ahead and the Mercedes Benz tri-legged logo in third.
I, for one, still miss them greatly and in my book a 707 in their colors is as elegant as an airliner ever got.