http://www.nypost.com/p/news/busines...lue_let_fly_emw4jFdCFmHEt5j4GEEU3N
Very interesting read.
Mods, I hope this doesn't get deleted as a duplicate thread, it is very different than the AA seeking 5 merger thread.
This article gives insight as to why AAs initial plan to codeshare with B6 and remain independent is losing steam.
It explains why AA is now openly looking at merging.
As I have said several times, B6 simply isn't interested in codesharing with AA out of JFK
They want to be left alone to do their interlines and grow as they grow
Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
It comes down to what is best for the B6 shareholders. Can AA provide more value than the current B6 plans? And by value I mean how much $$$ will JBLU shareholders get in the deal. I assume AA wants to exit BK first, then they will have more valuable AMR stock in which to trade JBLU shareholders for the deal.
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
If AA determines a merger with B6 is its last, best hope to stave off US, it'll happen. The basic elements are already in place to make a credible case for combination and integration, and LH still holds that goodly share of stock in B6 that IAG can pick up to start building the shareholder majority needed to make a deal work.
Live life to the fullest.
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
Not
I hope they can achieve this plan. I would like to see them similar to AS but based on the east coast. Strong, independent, good product. The difference at the moment is that B6 don't appear to want to play the same codeshare strategy as AS.
If it came to a merger I can only (maybe naively) hope that AA would change to resemble B6 in terms of service and product. Though I don't give high hopes on that.
| Quoting jfklganyc (Thread starter): As I have said several times, B6 simply isn't interested in codesharing with AA out of JFK They want to be left alone to do their interlines and grow as they grow |
I hope they can achieve this plan. I would like to see them similar to AS but based on the east coast. Strong, independent, good product. The difference at the moment is that B6 don't appear to want to play the same codeshare strategy as AS.
If it came to a merger I can only (maybe naively) hope that AA would change to resemble B6 in terms of service and product. Though I don't give high hopes on that.
-
- LAXdude1023
- Posts: 6214
- Joined:
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
| Quoting jfklganyc (Thread starter): This article gives insight as to why AAs initial plan to codeshare with B6 and remain independent is losing steam. |
| Quoting jfklganyc (Thread starter): As I have said several times, B6 simply isn't interested in codesharing with AA out of JFK |
That article doesnt say anything of the sort. The journalist provides no direct quotes that B6 has no interest in partnering with AA. All it says is that B6 doesnt want to be AA's pawn and who could blame them?
Id believe that B6 doesnt want to merge with AA, but sever ties completely? No evidence of that at all.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD BRING BACK THE PAYWALL!!!!
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
"Id believe that B6 doesnt want to merge with AA, but sever ties completely? No evidence of that at all."
They don't have any ties. They have an interline agreement and accrue FF points just as B6 does with HA.
[Edited 2012-07-11 17:31:38 by srbmod]
They don't have any ties. They have an interline agreement and accrue FF points just as B6 does with HA.
[Edited 2012-07-11 17:31:38 by srbmod]
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
| Quoting jfklganyc (Reply 11): They have an interline agreement and accrue FF points just as B6 does with HA. |
Accrue FF only on a very limited set of routes ... and you can't redeem jetblue points for award travel on AA.
One is fun hip and modern. Another is old-school and serious. Can't imagine how the cultures (and passengers) mixing and merging.
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
That said back to point...what the B6 pilot contract says plus AAs latest actions in looking for a merger (which is a change in course) I would say this article is barking up the right tree.
[Edited 2012-07-11 17:31:53 by srbmod]
[Edited 2012-07-11 17:31:53 by srbmod]
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
As much as B6 and AA are a natural fit at JFK, and probably AA's last best chance of regaining a position in NYC that has seriously eroded, a merger is a bad idea for both airlines:
From AA's perspective: Most of B6's route network doesnt work at AA's unit cost levels. Jetblue can make money on low yielding Florida and transcon markets because is has lower costs. They are losers one you apply AA's costs.
From B6's perspective: Jetblue was founded upon and still manages a to sustain an employee culture that differentiates it from everyone else. They have as a result a materially better product than just about anyone else and it produces revenue premiums that are material. Once absorbed into AA's unionized workforce, B6 will look and feel just like AA and this product differentiation will evaporate. Though there are clearly revenue synergies, largely drive by connectivity at JFK, B6's footprint when merged into AA will have higher costs and probably lower revenue. This is not a winning recipe.
From AA's perspective: Most of B6's route network doesnt work at AA's unit cost levels. Jetblue can make money on low yielding Florida and transcon markets because is has lower costs. They are losers one you apply AA's costs.
From B6's perspective: Jetblue was founded upon and still manages a to sustain an employee culture that differentiates it from everyone else. They have as a result a materially better product than just about anyone else and it produces revenue premiums that are material. Once absorbed into AA's unionized workforce, B6 will look and feel just like AA and this product differentiation will evaporate. Though there are clearly revenue synergies, largely drive by connectivity at JFK, B6's footprint when merged into AA will have higher costs and probably lower revenue. This is not a winning recipe.
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
Is this thread talking about merging under the JetBlue name or the American name?
Bring JetBlue To Mexico City! (TLC and/or MEX would be great)
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
| Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 4): That article doesnt say anything of the sort. The journalist provides no direct quotes that B6 has no interest in partnering with AA. All it says is that B6 doesnt want to be AA's pawn and who could blame them? Id believe that B6 doesnt want to merge with AA, but sever ties completely? No evidence of that at all. |
.
| Quoting Reply 11): From B6's perspective: Jetblue was founded upon and still manages a to sustain an employee culture that differentiates it from everyone else. They have as a result a materially better product than just about anyone else and it produces revenue premiums that are material. Once absorbed into AA's unionized workforce, B6 will look and feel just like AA and this product differentiation will evaporate. Though there are clearly revenue synergies, largely drive by connectivity at JFK, B6's footprint when merged into AA will have higher costs and probably lower revenue. This is not a winning recipe. |
Agreed. It's definitely not a winning recipe at all. AA doesn't know how to do mergers, other than to destroy each and every network they have bought, taken over and merged. There's nothing left of any of them.
If a merger is going to come down the pipeline, it's time someone take AA over, like US Airways, fire all the greedy, out of touch executive management and rebuild AA into a strong, self-confidant world airline.
-
- TomFoolery
- Posts: 443
- Joined:
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
So AA wants to focus on "High Value" customers...does no airline understand that every "High Value" customer started out as a low value customer at one point?
There is a reason there are more Y seats than any other class combined on most US airlines. At some point, one of those passengers from the low value end of the aircraft will move their way forward to the higher value end. They will progress from the low value check-in/drop off line, to the high value line. The only hitch in this planning is the expectation that there will be immediate loyalty to the same brand.
I have flown with AA a few times in the past, and never found them to be a carrier worth my devoted loyalty, and I would venture to guess that AA could care less. I got what I paid for, and nothing more. I knew my value to AA...pretty not 'High'.
B6 does not really seem to project such a need to serve based on a customer's market value (high/low). They have a fine, consistent product. They built a strong customer base of what AA does not seem to value very highly. Now AA wants to cozy up to B6 and have another go (via code-share agreements) at customers whom they will shun away anyway based on their 'Low Value'. I am happy to see B6 did not buy into it.
I would be disappointed if I booked a B6 flight, and got AA service (and fees) instead. They are two different products that just happen to serve the same location.
There is a reason there are more Y seats than any other class combined on most US airlines. At some point, one of those passengers from the low value end of the aircraft will move their way forward to the higher value end. They will progress from the low value check-in/drop off line, to the high value line. The only hitch in this planning is the expectation that there will be immediate loyalty to the same brand.
I have flown with AA a few times in the past, and never found them to be a carrier worth my devoted loyalty, and I would venture to guess that AA could care less. I got what I paid for, and nothing more. I knew my value to AA...pretty not 'High'.
B6 does not really seem to project such a need to serve based on a customer's market value (high/low). They have a fine, consistent product. They built a strong customer base of what AA does not seem to value very highly. Now AA wants to cozy up to B6 and have another go (via code-share agreements) at customers whom they will shun away anyway based on their 'Low Value'. I am happy to see B6 did not buy into it.
I would be disappointed if I booked a B6 flight, and got AA service (and fees) instead. They are two different products that just happen to serve the same location.
Paper makes an airplane fly
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
| Quoting jfklganyc (Thread starter): http://www.nypost.com/p/news/busines...lue_let_fly_emw4jFdCFmHEt5j4GEEU3N Very interesting read. This article gives insight as to why AAs initial plan to codeshare with B6 and remain independent is losing steam. It explains why AA is now openly looking at merging. |
NY Post should definitely be trusted. After all, they are using schedule information from 2010. They definitely know about airlines.
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
For me the view is more simple:
AA doesn't' like to be taken by US, as they would not have the lead. US would lead the merger.
So they look for alternatives. The five candidates they presented as being interested is just a laugh in my opinion, just a move to de-rail the US ideas.
With Jetblue the management dreams to have a merger and keep dominating it then.
Such a scenario would ultimately destroy Jetblue and no wonder that Jetblue management isn't interested at all.
Jetblue has a cost base which is competitive and it has a product and fleet of modern airliners, while AA has probably the oldest fleet on the planet, demotivated employees and a none competitive network.
It is not at all surprising that Jetblue is not interested. Beware them to be.
Regards
Flyglobal
[Edited 2012-07-12 06:13:07]
AA doesn't' like to be taken by US, as they would not have the lead. US would lead the merger.
So they look for alternatives. The five candidates they presented as being interested is just a laugh in my opinion, just a move to de-rail the US ideas.
With Jetblue the management dreams to have a merger and keep dominating it then.
Such a scenario would ultimately destroy Jetblue and no wonder that Jetblue management isn't interested at all.
Jetblue has a cost base which is competitive and it has a product and fleet of modern airliners, while AA has probably the oldest fleet on the planet, demotivated employees and a none competitive network.
It is not at all surprising that Jetblue is not interested. Beware them to be.
Regards
Flyglobal
[Edited 2012-07-12 06:13:07]
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
If anything, a B6+AS only merger sounds more logical - one handling west coast and one handling east coast, and the resulting carrier would instantly gain national presence at the level of WN
the hypothetical B6+AS could attempt to make 2 mid-size cities into east-west hubs (AUS being one), but they don't need it if they couldn't find a suitable city
the hypothetical B6+AS could attempt to make 2 mid-size cities into east-west hubs (AUS being one), but they don't need it if they couldn't find a suitable city
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
AA throughout its history has been a very predatory, competitively violent airline.
I applaud JetBlue for their response, which is a slightly polite 'FU.'
I applaud JetBlue for their response, which is a slightly polite 'FU.'
-
- jetbluefan1
- Posts: 3310
- Joined:
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
| Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 17): If anything, a B6+AS only merger sounds more logical - one handling west coast and one handling east coast, and the resulting carrier would instantly gain national presence at the level of WN the hypothetical B6+AS could attempt to make 2 mid-size cities into east-west hubs (AUS being one), but they don't need it if they couldn't find a suitable city |
Given the choice between "Alaska" and "JetBlue", I have a feeling that JetBlue will win the naming contest.
I agree that this is the most logical option. B6 makes money on the east coast -- its west coast operations are a drag on the bottom line. LGB, though low-cost, serves only low-yielding regional destination where B6 has considerably lower RASM than competitors. Transcon connectivity to LGB is token service to JFK and BOS at a whopping 1-2x daily. It's time to shut that operation down and redeploy the aircraft.
B6 can continue to dominate the leisure market on the east coast as well as business travel from BOS and JFK. Continue the interlining agreement growth (which I believe is adding material top line growth) and make codeshare agreements with some. JFK is really a crown jewel in this regard.
AS can compete on the west coast at PDX, LAX, SAN, and of course SEA. Expand codeshare partnerships, especially now that there could be direct feed from the B6 network.
Revenue synergies from the automatic doubling of network size -- therefore allowing greater connectivity and flight choices. Cost synergies at duplicate stations.
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
| Quoting mogandoCI (Reply 17): |
| Quoting jetbluefan1 (Reply 19): |
I said basically the same thing in another thread, although I did suggest the possibility of adding F9 to the mix as well:
"AS and B6, being the independents covering the West and East coasts respectively, merging with each other would seem to make more sense than either one merging with AA. Maybe throw in F9 to pick up the Denver hub as well, since I'd think that both AS and B6 might have operating costs low enough and connecting opportunities great enough to be truly competitive there. Also, I've thought for some time that "Blue Frontier" would be a great name for an airline."
Able to kill active threads stone dead with a single post!
RE: NY POST: B6 To AA...Go Away
F9 is a mess and loses money. Plus they have gone the ULCC route...B6 and AS have not
And their pilots are now integrated with Republic pilots
The whole situation is too messy for a 3 way.
And their pilots are now integrated with Republic pilots
The whole situation is too messy for a 3 way.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: AF022, alggag, AMIKI, BoeingGuy, Eiszeit, FLJ, flyingclrs727, hongming, Ishrion, jabarei, LuxuryTravelled, masseybrown, mavml, MrBren, Numberj, PHLCVGAMTK, SEQU, ShanghaiNoon, SirMS, socalflyer00, Someone83, tu204, washingtonflyer, wjcandee, Zoob and 232 guests