Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 89): The Midwest hubs won't work for a second rate carrier. Midwest is picking up premium travelers. Travelers that will go away with AirTran because they aren't going to stand for being shoved into a plane like sardines.

And what airline doesnt shove their passengers in their aircraft like sardines? Midwest might do it. FL might do it. You don't see passengers going to other airlines because of it. Premium travelers want ease of travel as well as good service. This combined airline would do that. Also, you need a hub in the midwest to expand to new markets in the west, like SEA, PDX, etc. MCI is a good airport to do that in. Even MKE would work.

Quoting BH (Reply 98): So its ok to get crammed into a 328 or 1900 as opposed to a 717 or 737? YX's 2x2 is not on every aircraft they fly and I doubt that everyone on their flights that have 2x2 are business travelers. So I think they would do fine with FL's set up, FL has 2x2 seating up front and coach in the back, that makes it more affordable for everyone involved.

1. The 1900 serves markets that would otherwise be devoid of service.
2. The 328 is the most comfortable RJ out there.
3. The Midwest Saver service is for leisure markets, few in number and still has better seat pitch and a vastly superior level of service.
4. I don't care about affordability. There is plenty of "cheap" capacity in the system. You low cost clowns keep pushing for all this low cost service and flying is going to be a lot less like a time saver and a lot more like Amtrak. Broke, consolidated, service limited, and useless.

Quoting BH (Reply 98): And what happens if YX cant continue to make a profit with 2x2 in the future and they resort to a 2 class set up or all coach, I guess they will just loose all their passengers and go out of business the way you are talking.

They're running 717's at sub 70 Seat CRJ economics. They are beyond the post 9/11 hicups. Clearly another bystander that doesn't understand Midwest's business model.

Quoting BH (Reply 98): How are you considering them a 4th tier airline. Is this just because of their seating?

Service, route structure, seating... all of it and thats behind Midwest/Alaska, the networks, and Southwest... Not right up there with... They have nothign but route overlap with DL. They should have thought about that when they set up shop, not later when they're looking at their balance sheet and finding Delta is going to squash them like a bug when they emerge from BK.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 101): This merger probably makes the most sense of any other scenario involving any other two U.S. carriers.

Laughable.

Here's a couple to chew on that actually compliment, since your stuck on the supposed need for mergers:

HP(US)/F9
UA/B6
F9/NW
HP(US)/UA

Quoting KstateinALB (Reply 102): And what airline doesnt shove their passengers in their aircraft like sardines? Midwest might do it.

Clearly, not a Midwest pax.

[Edited 2006-12-13 18:21:20]

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 84): On the conference call this morning Fl stated that they would try to run 152 daily flights out of MKE. The O&D numbers aren't there for that, sounds like STL for AA. They will rely on connecting traffic to support the hub.

Was that published by AirTran? If that's official, FL plans on keeping exactly 8 of Skyway's destinations open.

Quoting N917ME (Reply 91): YX continues to post profits and grow,

This is a recent change, they almost closed the door for good just a few years ago.

Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 105): This is a recent change, they almost closed the door for good just a few years ago.

And even survived at MCI and turned around financially with Southwest growth at MCI. And Northwest at their MKE doorstep. I wonder why that might be? Hmmm... Must be that product thingy.

Quoting N353SK (Reply 104): Was that published by AirTran? If that's official, FL plans on keeping exactly 8 of Skyway's destinations open

It is on airtran.com I hope they didn't put in some of the cities due to the size of the map. Looking at it though you can see lines to places like CWA, MSN, GRR, MKG, and GRB. The Skyway cities will be safe, which is good because I have alot of friends flying for Skyway and don't want to see them worrying about their jobs.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 103): Delta is going to squash them like a bug when they emerge from BK.

I find this comment to be extremely funny. Delta has had years to squash Airtran in ATL. They have fought against them in routes to ATL, as well as to MCO. And in many cases Airtran has gotten the best of them.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 103): Here's a couple to chew on that actually compliment, since your stuck on the supposed need for mergers: HP(US)/F9 UA/B6 F9/NW HP(US)/UA

Can you explain on your thoughts of these? I'd really like to hear what you have to say. I can't see a UA and B6 merger, because they are two companies that don't have the same things. Yea, maybe the A320, but what else? There are 2 on there that would fit. UA and US... and F9 and NW. I believe that they could work.

Quoting N353SK (Reply 104): Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 84): On the conference call this morning Fl stated that they would try to run 152 daily flights out of MKE. The O&D numbers aren't there for that, sounds like STL for AA. They will rely on connecting traffic to support the hub. Was that published by AirTran? If that's official, FL plans on keeping exactly 8 of Skyway's destinations open.

Does Midwest serve Hartford? I don't see them on the combined map.

FL will also gain entry to STL if this deal happens.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 103): 4. I don't care about affordability. There is plenty of "cheap" capacity in the system. You low cost clowns keep pushing for all this low cost service and flying is going to be a lot less like a time saver and a lot more like Amtrak. Broke, consolidated, service limited, and useless

If you dont care thats fine, But there are a load of people that would welcome this. Clowns? Your uninformed responses and the ideas you have based on 1 trip with FL make you look like a clown.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 103): They're running 717's at sub 70 Seat CRJ economics. They are beyond the post 9/11 hicups. Clearly another bystander that doesn't understand Midwest's business model.

I never said that they would have to eliminate 2x2, I said ,what would happen if they had to axe it, and by the way you were talking if 2x2 wasnt available a airline wouldnt work out there. Dont forget nothing stays the way it is in the airline industry for along time, you should know that.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 103): Service, route structure, seating... all of it and thats behind Midwest/Alaska, the networks, and Southwest... Not right up there with... They have nothign but route overlap with DL. They should have thought about that when they set up shop, not later when they're looking at their balance sheet and finding Delta is going to squash them like a bug when they emerge from BK.

I am glad you can see so far in to the future and predict the fate of airlines, My predictions is that mergers proposals will be going on throughout the industry and some will happen and some will not. And alot of people are not going to be happy with some that do go through, especially the ones that become hostile.

Quoting Longhaulheavy (Reply 67): and if my choice becomes Airtran or NW, I'll take NW every time.

So you'd rather fly an airline that tried to KILL YX than fly an airline that at least preserves most of the jobs/flights? Interesting.

Quoting Longhaulheavy (Reply 67): By taking over YX, many people will fly "anything but Airtran" because they see it as a personal affront to the city.

If it were someone buying AS I'd probably feel the same way. In the end, the acquiring carriers would have less success than AS, but they would be fine. Everyone would get over it and realize it's just a friggin' airplane flight, not religion.

Quoting Mainland (Reply 77): -They note if Midwest delays in proceeding with merger negotiations and goes on with the Mad Dog/RJ fleet renewal synergies could be lost.

Then I'd expect a large order for new Airbus planes any day from YX!

Quoting Mainland (Reply 77): -"Aspects of Midwest Signature brand will be integrated into combined carrier" with a "Best practice approach to product and service"

Then they'll be renaming the carrier "Midwest" and offering 2x2 seating.  

Quoting Mainland (Reply 77): -Airtran notes in their industry analysis that YX's unit revenue premium has eroded from more than 35% in 98/99 to less than 3% in 05.

I think that shows the real challenge for YX - like AA with MRTC, people just aren't willing to pay [much] more for a [somewhat] better product. They can be modestly successful in their niche, but they remain [vulnerable, ripe, in peril of, subject to] a hostile takeover.

Quoting Cloudy (Reply 79): The fleet and labor differences would be much harder to work out than they were with Morris Air or Transtar - both those mergers were hard on Southwest's operations and culture. Also, A MKE hub is not as valuable as the MDW gates WN was so crazy to get with the ATA deal. Also, ATA wanted to deal, Midwest Express does not want to. It is easier and cheaper to make deals with willing partners.

I'm not sure, but I think you are referring to WN+YX. I was referring to WN+FL. The issues would remain the same in regards to fleet and culture, and I don't advocate the deal, but it addresses the potential LBO threat at WN and also get's them into Atlanta.

This will be interesting.

-Dave

I don't think the public really has much of a say. Sure, they can vote with their feet and fly NWA or UA or someone else out of MKE. It all boils down to money. If the AirTran offer can put enough money in the pockets of the Midwest executives, they'll do it in a hearbeat. Don't gobble up the koolaid and think that ANY airline executive team will be thinking of their employees and customers before they think about themselves.

I like the idea of joining both airlines and reinventing AirTrans "premium" product to incorporate Midwests signature service. That service could be systemwide and could produce increased revenue potential, if priced correctly.

As far as Skyway, they can be sold off for pennies if it meant a rational deal. Once again, don't let the execs make you think they CARE more about the future of Skyway and its employees than their pockets. I'm sure MAIR holdings would love to add another portfolio to their armada of strugling airlines


AZJ

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 109): Does Midwest serve Hartford?

Yes, by Skyway and Midwest Connect.

Quoting KstateinALB (Reply 113): Quoting Quickmover (Reply 109): Does Midwest serve Hartford? Yes, by Skyway and Midwest Connect.

They must be either dropping Hartford as a combined carrier or omited it by accident. It isn't on the map. Does FL serve any city near Hartford that could be a substitute?

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 114): They must be either dropping Hartford as a combined carrier or omited it by accident. It isn't on the map. Does FL serve any city near Hartford that could be a substitute

It could be a mistake. FL's information is only based on public information, I am sure that if it goes through that there will be many changes as YX gives up information that is not publicly available.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 103): They should have thought about that when they set up shop, not later when they're looking at their balance sheet and finding Delta is going to squash them like a bug when they emerge from BK.

Clearly, it's delusion with you. This statement if pure folly. DL is in bankruptcy, partly due to its inability to compete effectively with AirTran.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 103): Here's a couple to chew on that actually compliment, since your stuck on the supposed need for mergers: HP(US)/F9 UA/B6 F9/NW HP(US)/UA

None of these make more sense than FL/YX. HP/F9 - Why? UA/B6 is absurd. NW/F9 - Why? US/UA - too much Western overlap.

What are you smoking?

[Edited 2006-12-13 18:54:03]

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 103): 4. I don't care about affordability. There is plenty of "cheap" capacity in the system. You low cost clowns keep pushing for all this low cost service and flying is going to be a lot less like a time saver and a lot more like Amtrak. Broke, consolidated, service limited, and useless.

Ah yes, the "low cost clowns" moniker. Well, we apologize for not wanting to blindly hand money over to carriers who would otherwise be making billions upon billions for basically the same service they offer today.

You can badmouth people all you want (and you do) for not wanting to spend more than they have to, but spending $500 a pop for a family of four to go visit grandma is not always feasible. Sorry if this rains on your first class parade.

Quoting KstateinALB (Reply 108): I can't see a UA and B6 merger, because they are two companies that don't have the same things. Yea, maybe the A320, but what else?

If I were Boeing7E7, I'd reply "That's my point. Substitute "FL" for UA and "YX" for B6 and you see what I'm saying." Of course, he might take issue with me speaking for him, and the comparison is not ideal, but the point is the same.

In my opinion, though, it goes both ways. Almost any merger is a clash of cultures, styles, fleets, routes, hubs, stockholders, customers, etc. While YX might be a standout carrier, in the end, isn't AS? Or CO? Or B6? Or any other "My favorite airline" carrier?

-Dave

[Edited 2006-12-13 18:57:24]

Quoting BH (Reply 110): Clowns? Your uninformed responses and the ideas you have based on 1 trip with FL make you look like a clown.

Yes, clowns. You all have this assumption that mergers are for some reason required while system efficiency is at an all time high. I'm uninformed? Who's tooting the bandwagon jumping merger horn bud?

Quoting BH (Reply 110): I never said that they would have to eliminate 2x2, I said ,what would happen if they had to axe it, and by the way you were talking if 2x2 wasnt available a airline wouldnt work out there. Dont forget nothing stays the way it is in the airline industry for along time, you should know that.

They don't need to axe it. Just who is actually turning a profit right now? It's not AirTran.

Quoting BH (Reply 110): My predictions is that mergers proposals will be going on throughout the industry and some will happen and some will not.

If any do, the industry and the passengers will suffer for it. Same thing happened the last merger cycle. My how some forget history.

If AirTran believed in their product, they woudln't be bottom feeders picking up the left overs at the worlds largest hub. They'd recognize the strength of geographical positioning that provides strength to their limited range fleet. They be smart and open a hub in Austin at a new uncongested airport right smack dab in the middle of CO and AA. Alas, they don't believe they can so they sit on their thumbs for 3 years over DFW then come up with this brilliant plan.

Here's how out of touch AirTran is - from the 10-Q:

During the third quarter of 2006, we reported a net loss of $4.3 million compared to net income of $1.0 million reported for the third quarter of 2005. The loss was attributable in a large part to the fact that our unit revenues did not grow enough to cover our increase in jet fuel prices. During the third quarter, we experienced a slowdown in demand following the changes in airline security protocols resulting from the thwarted terrorist activity in London. While our passenger revenue per available seat mile (ASM) increased, and our non-fuel operating costs per ASM declined, they were not sufficient to offset the impact of the increase in fuel costs per ASM.

1. You're a domestic carrier and shielded from the London incident from a passenger perspective, they didn't care and it didn't impact travel in a meaningful way. This has zero to do with a $5 million inversion in profitability.
2. Gas prices went up for everyone else as well, yet most are in a better position this year than last, including the "corporate match" you see at Midwest.
3. Your RASM is crap. Period.

Who's trying to buy who here again?

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 118): They don't need to axe it. Just who is actually turning a profit right now? It's not AirTran.

YX barely made a profit and FL lost a few million. The differences are tiny.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 118): 1. You're a domestic carrier and shielded from the London incident from a passenger perspective, they didn't care and it didn't impact travel in a meaningful way. This has zero to do with a $5 million inversion in profitability. 2. Gas prices went up for everyone else as well, yet most are in a better position this year than last, including the "corporate match" you see at Midwest. 3. Your RASM is crap. Period. Who's trying to buy who here again?

You're a fool. Do you have any idea what the London security scare did? HELLO - DID YOU NOT FLY. There was a liquid ban, which required passengers to check their luggage. Carriers like Southwest and AirTran who have passengers that fly disproportionately shorter stage lengths suffered tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue because many passengers didn't want to deal with the extra security or drove instead.

Do you even follow the events of the industry. Southwest, for example, which only flies domesticly stated in its third quarter financials that it lost $40 million in revenue due to the added security after the London incident. Wise up dude!

Apparently Joe Leonard is meeting tomorrow with the mayor of MKE and the Journal-Sentinal editorial board.

Again, all of this is exactly why, IMO, Doug Parker fired off his Delta acquisition proposal. Whether or not it actually happens, it has already created a domino effect of instability and change in the industry.

Doug's got to be laughing in his office right now.

Quoting KstateinALB (Reply 108): Can you explain on your thoughts of these? I'd really like to hear what you have to say. I can't see a UA and B6 merger, because they are two companies that don't have the same things. Yea, maybe the A320, but what else? There are 2 on there that would fit. UA and US... and F9 and NW. I believe that they could work.

UA benefits from B6 by a northeast presence that is virtually non-existent in their route structure. Minimal IAD overlap. Allows them to compete with DL/AA in Northeast (NY/BOS).

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 116): DL is in bankruptcy, partly due to its inability to compete effectively with AirTran.

Delta's problems were not Atlanta.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 116): None of these make more sense than FL/YX. HP/F9 - Why? UA/B6 is absurd. NW/F9 - Why? US/UA - too much Western overlap.

HP/F9 -

PHX and LAS will be constrained airports in 10-15 years. They would be able to use DEN as a west hub and Ivanpah reducing LAS/PHX use.

NW/F9 - NW is idle, F9 would be the gain. Denver gives a western hub to an airline too focused in one area. International Service opportunities with such a hub structure are substantial. NW's route structure weakness is western presence (and a pissed off staff).

US/UA -

Constrained airports in 10-15 years:

LAX/SFO/LAS/PHX -

Hub reduction, again use of Ivanpah in lieu of one or more hubs. SFO more an Asia hub, Ivanpah more domestic/Europe if desired. Forced downsizing at LAX, LAS, SFO and PHX by virtue of net airport capacity with no major expansion opportunities make those hubs a problem as a going concern. Ivanpah is to Vegas as Dulles is to DC, hub vs close in airport - only built just in time not 20 years ahead of its time. Ivanpah is the only major airport project out west. No one else is budging on a net capacity increase.

It's not about route overlap so much it is hub airport capacity which is facing a crunch involving the two. The airport capacity problem is what makes the merger workable. Not the function of just merging two airlines with what you assume to be complimentary route structures.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 119): You're a fool. Do you have any idea what the London security scare did? HELLO - DID YOU NOT FLY. There was a liquid ban, which required passengers to check their luggage. Carriers like Southwest and AirTran who have passengers that fly disproportionately shorter stage lengths suffered tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue because many passengers didn't want to deal with the extra security or drove instead. Do you even follow the events of the industry. Southwest, for example, which only flies domesticly stated in its third quarter financials that it lost $40 million in revenue due to the added security after the London incident. Wise up dude!

Southwest is a predominant short haul carrier that sustained a far greater impact than AirTran, or any other airline for that matter. Sorry, "Dude"...But you don't know what you're talking about. Get your head out of the range of talking head wanna be analysists who don't know a damn thing about the industry. Dude.

[Edited 2006-12-13 19:29:12]

A FL/YX merger would be the death of the MKE hub and I think this is partly the reason for the refusal of the offer. As was mentioned MKE has low O/D numbers which make it relatively unattractive as a hub. Some low O/D hubs work because of their geographic location like CVG and MEM. But MKE doesn't have that. If you look at the destinations served by YX and FL you'll see that MKE is basically at the top of the map. The number of destinations west of MKE is fairly limited as well making it relatively unattractive for east/west connections. So the low O/D and location means MKE would likely get the plug pulled. It might stay a focus city but the hub days would be over.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 106): I wonder why that might be? Hmmm... Must be that product thingy.

Clearly, that product thingy hasn't done them that much good in comparison with Airtran:

2006 YTD Earnings Per Share:
FL: +.18
YX: -.01

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 118): Yes, clowns. You all have this assumption that mergers are for some reason required while system efficiency is at an all time high. I'm uninformed? Who's tooting the bandwagon jumping merger horn bud?

So with your insite a merger should happen when a system is not effecient. In the business world it's a lot smarter to aquire a company when its efficient, so now would be the right time.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 118): 1. You're a domestic carrier and shielded from the London incident from a passenger perspective, they didn't care and it didn't impact travel in a meaningful way. This has zero to do with a $5 million inversion in profitability

You show your ignorance here! This had a large impact on the domestic system, Why do you think their are all these new TSA directives for all flights in response to this. It resulting in very long lines at local airports and many people avoided airtravel due to the incident. And FL is still profitable for the year to date YX is not.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 118): If any do, the industry and the passengers will suffer for it. Same thing happened the last merger cycle. My how some forget history

There are also several mergers that have turned out very well. My, how people only seem to dwell on the negative aspects and ingore certain positives.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 118): If AirTran believed in their product, they woudln't be bottom feeders picking up the left overs at the worlds largest hub

Bottoms feeders? They have picked off the top, middle, and bottom in ATL, you show your ignorance here again. FL is one of the most respected airlines in the finacial industry.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 118): They be smart and open a hub in Austin at a new uncongested airport right smack dab in the middle of CO and AA.

Why pointlessly thow money into a new hub when you have the opportunity to take over something that is already in place.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 118): Alas, they don't believe they can so they sit on their thumbs for 3 years over DFW then come up with this brilliant plan.

Actually I see this as being a responsible company, They make good choices for their company and if they dont see DFW working as planned why continue to throw money in there when they could use it somewhere else for a better outcome.

Airlines cant just toss money around like they have over many years, FL is one of the most aggressive airlines yet they have great disipline in their disicion making.

[Edited 2006-12-13 19:26:05]

I would not call this a ringing endorsement for Midwest. Barrett and Tim are tight. I think Midwest is sold...we are just haggling price..






For Immediate Release: Contact: Eileen Force
December 13, 2006 (414) 286-8504


Mayor Tom Barrett today released the following statement regarding AirTran’s bid for Midwest Airlines:

“I have had good conversations with executives from both Midwest Airlines and Air Tran. I intend to support an outcome that is in the best interests of the residents and travelers in southeast Wisconsin and the employees of Midwest Airlines.

We love having a hometown airline and my support for it remains strong. Midwest is a solid company and, under the leadership of Mr. Tim Hoeksema, continues to be an exemplary corporate citizen. Its presence is very important to Milwaukee.

I pledged to work with Mr. Hoeksema and Midwest Airlines so that the outcome is one that is in the best interests of the company, its employees and Milwaukee.”

-30-

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 122): UA benefits from B6 by a northeast presence that is virtually non-existent in their route structure. Minimal IAD overlap. Allows them to compete with DL/AA in Northeast (NY/BOS).

Makes no sense. B6 is a Low Cost Carrier that has built a niche just like your YX reasoning. They have one class of service and provide no premium product. The over lap with IAD is considerable.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 122): Delta's problems were not Atlanta.

Delta has many problems and one of its biggest was its inability to compete with the low cost carriers on the east coast. Saying that AirTran in ATL wasn't a problem is ridiculous.


F9 is a low cost carrier, NW is not. F9 has good labor relations, NW doesn't. While a western hub would be helpful to NW, the synergies are not there because NW would probably have to raise the salaries of the F9 employees thus significantly reducing the benefits.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 122): HP/F9 - PHX and LAS will be constrained airports in 10-15 years. They would be able to use DEN as a west hub and Ivanpah reducing LAS/PHX use.

That makes no sense. You don't merge with another airline because you think your main hub airports are going to max out in 10-15 years. What kind of reasoning is that?

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 122): NW/F9 - NW is idle, F9 would be the gain. Denver gives a western hub to an airline too focused in one area. International Service opportunities with such a hub structure are substantial. NW's route structure weakness is western presence (and a pissed off staff).

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 122): It's not about route overlap so much it is hub airport capacity which is facing a crunch involving the two. The airport capacity problem is what makes the merger workable. Not the function of just merging two airlines with what you assume to be complimentary route structures.

Do you watch Scrubs? Great show. Here's my comment to your above statement:

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG ... WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG ... WWWWWWRRRRRRROOOOOOOONNNNNNNGGGGGGG!!!!!!

[Edited 2006-12-13 19:28:20]

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 21): If AirTran respects the customers (and employees) of Midwest enough, it could certainly work out for them. Perhaps rebrand Business Class as Signature Service in the front of the cabin, taking it up a notch, and roll out the cookies too.

IIRC, in order to roll out those 'freshly baked' cookies and the BOB meals that YX currently offers; a plane needs to have something called a galley. To my knowledge none of FL's planes are equipped w/a galley. As a trade-off, FL's 717s have 3 lavs to YX's 2 on their 717s; I believe FL has 3 lavs on their 73Gs as well. So in all, likelihood YX's Signature Service would be phased out in a full-blown merger. Worth noting: the Business Class seats on FL's 73Gs are identical to YX's Signature Seats in every way except the upholstery color.

While I do agree that FL needs another hub located in the middle of the country; I personally would rather see YX stay as a stand-alone carrier. I only had a chance to fly them (YX) once last year and was very impressed with them. The primary reason that I don't fly YX more often is that most of my trips (to/from PHL) involve going to cities where connecting out of MKE just doesn't make sense.

Quoting USPIT10L (Reply 78): If FL stands back and lets DL and US merger without doing anything to bolster their own performance/operation/stock price, then they're shooting themselves in the foot.

Not to digress here, but just what makes you think that merger (US/DL) has any chance of being approved?

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 103): Here's a couple to chew on that actually compliment, since your stuck on the supposed need for mergers: HP(US)/F9 UA/B6 F9/NW HP(US)/UA

Okay, one at a time:

HP(US)/F9:
HP/US needs to finish their merger prior to grabbing anyone else.

UA/B6:
Why would B6 want to merge w/anybody at this point. While UA may be merger-happy; having come out of Chapter 11 not too long ago; they need to get their own house in order first. Besides due to their overall size UA merging w/anybody would be subject to DOJ scrutiny.

F9/NW:
Interesting! Would we see animal tails on 747s and A330s?

HP(US)/UA:
The last time UA tried to merge w/US (pre-HP) a few years ago; the DOJ shot it down. This listed merger would be much larger.

On the subject of mergers, I have only one thing to say to airlines; STOP THE INSANITY! If you want to survive or grow, do it the old fashioned way... On Your Own!

Personally, I think a merger should only happen if a carrier's knocking on Chapter 7's door (like US was last year).

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 120): Apparently Joe Leonard is meeting tomorrow with the mayor of MKE and the Journal-Sentinal editorial board.

I see he understands what I was referring to previously about the "Old Boy" network here. When he shows up at the MMAC (the center of the Old Boys), then I will be worried.  

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 119): You're a fool. Do you have any idea what the London security scare did? HELLO - DID YOU NOT FLY. There was a liquid ban, which required passengers to check their luggage. Carriers like Southwest and AirTran who have passengers that fly disproportionately shorter stage lengths suffered tens of millions of dollars in lost revenue because many passengers didn't want to deal with the extra security or drove instead.

I would bet that FL has a longer average stage length than does YX. Neither carrier does a lot of real short haul flying.

What people don't appreciate about this with respect to MKE is that if the deal goes through, NW will be back in MKE with a vengance, and NW will win. NW is running 18 daily flights out of 6 gates right now (pretty poor utilization). YX goes bye bye, and NW can probably triple that very quickly. Remember that more capacity is coming (in the way of CR9s and 175s) in the very near future.

It's true that MKE residents are fiercely loyal to YX and that NW failed with the last attempt at a focus city. In the absence of YX, though, NW's brand loyalty in the market (they're easily the #2 carrier at MKE) and their superior product up front (where it matters for the high-yield customers that YX targets) will win out.

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 128): IIRC, in order to roll out those 'freshly baked' cookies and the BOB meals that YX currently offers; a plane needs to have something called a galley. To my knowledge none of FL's planes are equipped w/a galley. As a trade-off, FL's 717s have 3 lavs to YX's 2 on their 717s; I believe FL has 3 lavs on their 73Gs as well.

All of FL's a/c have a forward galley. Some still have the ovens installed from the TWA birds, but most have been removed. If FL really wanted to add cookies to the menu, they could install ovens. Will they, who knows.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 130): What people don't appreciate about this with respect to MKE is that if the deal goes through, NW will be back in MKE with a vengance, and NW will win. NW is running 18 daily flights out of 6 gates right now (pretty poor utilization). YX goes bye bye, and NW can probably triple that very quickly. Remember that more capacity is coming (in the way of CR9s and 175s) in the very near future.

I'm sorry, but I just don't buy this. While NW is one of the fiercest competitors, AirTran is a strong low cost carrier with a strong balance sheet. NW would be foolish to go after a combined YX and FL at MKE. And with that kind of reasoning, it's only a matter of time before someone puts YX out of business ... Will Southwest go into MKE at some point without a strong FL there?

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 132): And with that kind of reasoning, it's only a matter of time before someone puts YX out of business ...

No. YX can compete with NW. FL cannot. A combined carrier, which would have FL service standards (FL concedes as much) would be a much different story.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 133): No. YX can compete with NW. FL cannot. A combined carrier, which would have FL service standards (FL concedes as much) would be a much different story.

Look, a combined YX/FL would be committed to MKE because there just aren't many options out there for focus cities or hubs. Their aircraft would have to be somewhere and MKE would win. The history between NW and FL goes way back to the early 1990s when Fornaro was there, and they are familiar with each other's tactics. While NW may be tempted to make a play for MKE, the fact is, there would be no other place for FL to go, and they would stick it out. NW coming out of bankruptcy would be hard pressed, I believe, for a long fight. You fight the battles you think you can win or you must win. FL would need to win, and NW wouldn't. That's just my take.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 122): UA benefits from B6 by a northeast presence that is virtually non-existent in their route structure. Minimal IAD overlap. Allows them to compete with DL/AA in Northeast (NY/BOS).

And re-enter a market they retreated from, feed a NY/BOS area that they now have no international service from? Why? Why compete in a market that has seen yields eroded over the years?

Quoting BH (Reply 125): So with your insite a merger should happen when a system is not effecient. In the business world it's a lot smarter to aquire a company when its efficient, so now would be the right time.

Mergers yield a capacity reduction. The efficiency is a sign of existing capacity being near to insufficient - not an over capacity situation. Mergers result in a negative impact, not a positive impact.

Quoting BH (Reply 125): You show your ignorance here! This had a large impact on the domestic system

Wrong. Only idiot analysts and airlines looking for a scape goat trump this up. Enplanements over the period were up. The impact was minor, save for with Southwest as I mentioned.

Quoting BH (Reply 125): There are also several mergers that have turned out very well. My, how people only seem to dwell on the negative aspects and ingore certain positives.

More negative than positive. This one is a negative. AirTran will get pounded.

Quoting BH (Reply 125): Why pointlessly thow money into a new hub when you have the opportunity to take over something that is already in place.

What exactly where they contemplating in DFW?

Quoting BH (Reply 125): Actually I see this as being a responsible company, They make good choices for their company and if they dont see DFW working as planned why continue to throw money in there when they could use it somewhere else for a better outcome.

DFW was a non-starter. They wasted their time.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 127): Makes no sense. B6 is a Low Cost Carrier that has built a niche just like your YX reasoning. They have one class of service and provide no premium product. The over lap with IAD is considerable.

Its called access to a key airport. It doesn't matter if a network absorbes an LCC for the net airport capacity to the gaining carrier. AirTran gains nothing by going after Midwest. IAD overlap is not considerable.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 127): Delta has many problems and one of its biggest was its inability to compete with the low cost carriers on the east coast. Saying that AirTran in ATL wasn't a problem is ridiculous.

Delta has an RJ problem. They grew on the bean counter program and ignored their strategic system capability. The bean counters reduced service where they shouldn't have which adversely impacted the system dynamics and placed an over reliance on ATL and RJ's. CVG and SLC can be used much more effectively than they are, and the new DL management has recognized this.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 127): That makes no sense. You don't merge with another airline because you think your main hub airports are going to max out in 10-15 years. What kind of reasoning is that?

If you are at a hub with no capacity enhancement available (unlike ATL), just how is that hub going to work for you in the future? If some of your key hubs are about to become some of the most delayed airports in the US, then how will you maintain a schedule? If you can't expand at your hub, you're dead.

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 128): Why would B6 want to merge w/anybody at this point. While UA may be merger-happy; having come out of Chapter 11 not too long ago; they need to get their own house in order first. Besides due to their overall size UA merging w/anybody would be subject to DOJ scrutiny.

If this merger frenzie starts to pan out, UAL will not be competitive in the northeast. Period. B6 is the only carrier they could potentially grab.

Quoting PHLBOS (Reply 128): The last time UA tried to merge w/US (pre-HP) a few years ago; the DOJ shot it down. This listed merger would be much larger.

He indicated YX and FL made the most sense. I indicated mergers that make more sense.

Quoting Mlsrar (Reply 136): Why? Why compete in a market that has seen yields eroded over the years?

For the same reason DL identified with its blunder that the drop was cyclical, not permanent.

[Edited 2006-12-13 19:53:21]

Does anyone know what type of facility YX has in MKE (gates, etc..)? Is it a good connecting hub? I've never been there. They have several gates in MCI. I've seen as many as 6 or so aircraft parked there at one time.

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 62): As a stockholder of both YX and FL I fully support this merger. Not because of my loyalty to the Tran (I don't work there anymore) but because from a business sense the buyout makes sense. Put your emotions aside and look at it. It makes sense.

Yup, you'll make money in the short run, but your income will go to hell in the long run after AirTran screws up MKE.

As an example of screwing up something, why do you think FL asked boeing if they could push back their deliveries of 73Ng's?? Because they misread the market and now have too many planes. Now apply that statement to the acquisition of YX, hmmm, now more planes that FL doesn't know what to do with and they can't push back their delivery at all (b/c they now own them). Looks like a money maker to me  

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 92): Look at it from a business standpoint, not an emotional one. Tim doesn't give a shit about you our any other employee, the same goes for Joe. They care about the almighty dollar. This merger makes sense.

Your right, FL doesn't care about YX, they just want the planes and MKE, not the routes, not the people, and certainly not the product. Why the hell do you think Joe is pushing so hard for the deal???

I hope Wisconsin's laws screw FL up on this one. Example, the Agey (bendix) take over of Allied signal back in the late 80's. Perfect example of reverse take over, that would be perfect.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 135): You fight the battles you think you can win or you must win. FL would need to win, and NW wouldn't. That's just my take.

Well, MKE would be dismantled, period.

NW would probably not take the fight to MKE for a third time, after realizing that they can still maintain a population of higher-yielding elite pax, without the nonstops to leisure destinations.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 137): Wrong. Only idiot analysts and airlines looking for a scape goat trump this up. Enplanements over the period were up. The impact was minor, save for with Southwest as I mentioned.

Here are the revenue loss estimates by the primarily domestic carriers due to the added security in the wake of the London incident:

AirTran - $8 to $12 million
Frontier - $3 to $4 million
JetBlue - $9 to $10 million
Southwest - $40 million

The impact was not minor, and it was not a Wall Street scapegoat. You are uninformed.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 137): Its called access to a key airport.

JFK is not a key airport for UA.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 137): If you are at a hub with no capacity enhancement available (unlike ATL), just how is that hub going to work for you in the future? If some of your key hubs are about to become some of the most delayed airports in the US, then how will you maintain a schedule? If you can't expand at your hub, you're dead.

PHX and LAS are fully aware of their growth issues and the cities and counties are currently reviewing additional capacity. And speaking of growing, YX's growth plans are non-existent. According to you comment above, FL seems to be doing the right thing ... create synergies with a carrier who has minimal overlap allowing you to increase overall service.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 137): Delta has an RJ problem. They grew on the bean counter program and ignored their strategic system capability. The bean counters reduced service where they shouldn't have which adversely impacted the system dynamics and placed an over reliance on ATL and RJ's. CVG and SLC can be used much more effectively than they are, and the new DL management has recognized this.

That's one of many problems at DL. As far as their management goes, it's unclear whether they have any idea what they are doing. Let's see how the winter goes for them and their huge international expansion.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 137): If this merger frenzie starts to pan out, UAL will not be competitive in the northeast.

Why do you think they are talking to CO. Acquire B6 would not solve the problem.

[Edited 2006-12-13 20:14:10]

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 138): Does anyone know what type of facility YX has in MKE (gates, etc..)? Is it a good connecting hub? I've never been there. They have several gates in MCI. I've seen as many as 6 or so aircraft parked there at one time.

YX has 13 gates in MKE which they do a horrible job using. They have about 55 mainline flights a day which equates to 4.2 flights per gate per day. Or one flight per gate every 3.5 hours. Not the best usage now is it? FL in BWI has 5 gates and runs about 50 flights a day. Much better usage. The only time that YX has a full house is during the 0730 push, and sometimes in the evening. Way to much space going to waste.

Quoting BAW2198 (Reply 139): As an example of screwing up something, why do you think FL asked boeing if they could push back their deliveries of 73Ng's?? Because they misread the market and now have too many planes. Now apply that statement to the acquisition of YX, hmmm, now more planes that FL doesn't know what to do with and they can't push back their delivery at all (b/c they now own them). Looks like a money maker to me

That is not an example of screwing up. Airlines push back deliveries all the time. Screwing up is not ordering airplanes when you need them.

Quoting BAW2198 (Reply 139): Your right, FL doesn't care about YX, they just want the planes and MKE, not the routes, not the people, and certainly not the product. Why the hell do you think Joe is pushing so hard for the deal???

That's just complete BS. The only people AirTran won't need is the upper management, although i'm certain talented ones will be offered jobs. MKE is crucial to FL, why would they fire everyone! Your comments make no sense.

Quoting Mlsrar (Reply 140): Well, MKE would be dismantled, period.

You have no idea what you're talking about. MKE is crucial to AirTran.

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 142): YX has 13 gates in MKE which they do a horrible job using. They have about 55 mainline flights a day which equates to 4.2 flights per gate per day. Or one flight per gate every 3.5 hours. Not the best usage now is it? FL in BWI has 5 gates and runs about 50 flights a day. Much better usage. The only time that YX has a full house is during the 0730 push, and sometimes in the evening. Way to much space going to waste.

But you'll never miss a connecting flight on YX because they have gate space. I can't tell you how many times my friend has gotten screwed at ATL because he missed a connecting while the inbound flight was waiting for a gate to open up. Great effiecient use of gates  

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 137): Delta has an RJ problem. They grew on the bean counter program and ignored their strategic system capability. The bean counters reduced service where they shouldn't have which adversely impacted the system dynamics and placed an over reliance on ATL and RJ's. CVG and SLC can be used much more effectively than they are, and the new DL management has recognized this.

True, but we're all still waiting for DL's final answer to that question. They still are flying too many RJs, Comair's destruction/sale notwithstanding.

Quoting Quickmover (Reply 138): Does anyone know what type of facility YX has in MKE (gates, etc..)? Is it a good connecting hub? I've never been there.

I think it's a great facility. Very modern and certainly not congested, unlike ORD and soon to be MDW.

Quoting AirTran737 (Reply 142): YX has 13 gates in MKE which they do a horrible job using. They have about 55 mainline flights a day which equates to 4.2 flights per gate per day. Or one flight per gate every 3.5 hours. Not the best usage now is it? FL in BWI has 5 gates and runs about 50 flights a day. Much better usage. The only time that YX has a full house is during the 0730 push, and sometimes in the evening. Way to much space going to waste.

And FL will build up MKE to get better utilization out of it. Remember, they have plenty of 737NGs on order, while YX is merely contemplating the future (Airbus).

Quoting BH (Reply 115): It could be a mistake. FL's information is only based on public information, I am sure that if it goes through that there will be many changes as YX gives up information that is not publicly available.

BDL is a very expensive airport for pax and carriers. For instance, the airport has a .10 tax on every $1 of revenue not profit,revenue.

SW will be reducing flights in February. Delta has already reduced number of seats in the market.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 143): You have no idea what you're talking about. MKE is crucial to AirTran.

Bold statement there. Of course, with the huge presence FL has at MKE right now, and their fortress schedule, I can see where it is important.   

[Edited 2006-12-13 20:23:44]

Quoting BAW2198 (Reply 144): But you'll never miss a connecting flight on YX because they have gate space. I can't tell you how many times my friend has gotten screwed at ATL because he missed a connecting while the inbound flight was waiting for a gate to open up. Great effiecient use of gates

Not sure what your point is. Efficient use of gates means as many departures from a gate as you can schedule (within reason). Southwest averages up to ten departures per gate - they are the gold standard. Not using your gates effectively (always having ones idle) costs lots of money, not only to the airline but also to the airport and the community since carriers could be bringing passengers in and out, which stimulates the economy.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 44): If they want to grow, that's AirTran's problem. A merger for the sake of merging with what appears to be complete disregard for what Midwest is and what makes Midwest viable is just plane stupid.

Someone mark the date on the calendar because for once I'm agreeing with Boeing7E7 about something...

Part of what it boils down to is the answer to two questions: (1) Why isn't Southwest in MKE yet (and similarly, why did NW's recent minihub at MKE fail)? and (2) Why is YX doing reasonably well with a small hub in MCI, where Southwest is by far the largest carrier? And what it all seems to point to is:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 42): MKE is low level O&D with premium customers willing to pay which is why an 88 seat premium airline works so well.

(and similarly, Midwest's niche at MCI is among carriers who are willing to pay a premium for a product with more amenities).

But frankly, when you compare FL's product to WN, what is there aside from business class seating for 10% of the plane and XM Radio? AirTran crams one more row than WN into its 737-700's and takes additional room from the coach cabin with increased pitch in business class. If you're among the 90% of FL's passengers in the coach cabin, WN's product is better. In most markets where WN and FL compete with non-stop flying, WN has better yields and a higher market share.

I can understand the appeal of a potential FL-YX combination on paper. There's little duplication in the route networks and they could gain from combining operations in several major markets. Both operate the 717 as the largest constituent of their respective fleets as well. And it is certainly no secret that AirTran has desperately wanted a Midwest hub, what with their attempts to build up service at MDW and IND. What I think is missing is AirTran's appeal (productwise) to Midwest's core group of passengers -- and without the passenger base, Midwest doesn't hold much value.

If Midwest is taken over by AirTran, the product is almost certainly going to be virtually identical to the current AirTran product. What would AirTran be able to offer in a jetBlue or Southwest decided to go into MKE in a big way? No Signature Service, no position as the "hometown" airline, and ultimately, far less of a commitment to MKE as a home base. There is nothing compelling about AirTran's product which would give them any competitive advantage at MCI, either.

If all they want is a bunch of nearly new 717's, the merger makes sense. But the Midwest business as a whole won't be worth very much if the service levels end up being like AirTran.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 143): The only people AirTran won't need is the upper management, although i'm certain talented ones will be offered jobs. MKE is crucial to FL, why would they fire everyone!

I'm basing this comment on what happened with the TWA/AA merger. Your going to have a lot of disgruntled rampers that aren't going to like working for airtran (for various reasons, I don't know them all) and aren't going to try as hard to do their jobs like before. Far be it easier and cheaper to lay off a majority of the newly merged worked force and train noobs at lower prices.

Quoting SeeTheWorld (Reply 143): MKE is crucial to AirTran.

Then why hasn't airtran tried to aquire gate space at MKE on their own instead of merging.

Quoting Mlsrar (Reply 150): I read the article. Just because Leonard said it, doesn't mean it's true.

Exactly. What do people expect him to say prior to a merger? What would happen to merger plans if he said they were going to hack the MKE schedule? The deal would be dead. He can cover his ass by adding flights for 6 months and then saying because of market conditions they were forced to rethink their MKE strategy. It is all politics.

If this merger does happen in my opinion IND would be more effected then MKE. FL's focus would be on MKE more so than IND.