Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Barrons article on DL/LCC merger

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

michael707767

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2002
Posts
1,640
Part One

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2006
b.gif
b.gif
BARRON'S EDITORIAL COMMENTARY

Shrinking the Skies
There are too many domestic airlines, but a merger is not the answer


By THOMAS G. DONLAN


EVERY AMERICAN DID NOT TRAVEL by air last week -- it just seemed that way. Flights were full, ground services, including the Transportation Security Administration, were overwhelmed. Passengers may be forgiven for wondering how the U.S. aviation industry can make so little money providing a service that everyone wants.

Two of the biggest air carriers, Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines, are in bankruptcy. Some of the others, including United Airlines and US Airways, have recently emerged, or like American Airlines, barely avoided that fate with a reorganization that mirrored what would have been done in bankruptcy court.

Every major airline except American and Southwest has been there at least once in the past 20 years, not to mention all the once-famous and never-famous names that no longer exist.

Domestic airline investors have been hammered repeatedly, although speculators have had chances to do very well.

Anyone with a suspicion that American Airlines' parent corporation AMR would avoid bankruptcy at its moment of crisis in 2004 could have ridden a one-dollar stock all the way to a recent level around 30.

Don't call that easy money -- it would have taken real courage to make the bet, especially to leverage the bet. But fortunes have been made as well as lost on airline stocks, even though the industry has made no net profit since the Wright Brothers.



Cheap at Twice the Price?

As Andrew Bary outlined in Barron's Oct. 2 cover story, most airline stocks are still cheap. The exceptions are those in bankruptcy, where the bondholders will get new stock and the old stockholders are likely to get nothing.

The solvent carriers mostly sell for less than 10 times projected 2007 earnings. That would be a warranted multiple if jet-fuel prices hold steady and the economy tumbles. Any improvement in fuel prices would be a positive and mere avoidance of disaster should push airlines further into friendly skies.


But friendly skies for airlines are full of clouds for passengers. The past few years of financial woes have constrained growth, and that's been the real source of domestic aviation's recent return to modest prosperity.

Even in October, not a wildly popular month for air travel, the 11 carriers with independent national route systems filled more than 70% of their available seats. For the third quarter, indeed for the year through September, most of them filled more than 80% of their seats. Official results aren't in, but we suspect Thanksgiving-week travelers rarely saw an empty seat.

We may be at a turning point in the domestic aviation market. Unprofitable airlines keep flying the equipment they have, and even ground those that cost a lot to fly. Capacity shrinks, middle seats fill up. Competition among 11 carriers keeps prices in check. There's nothing left to give, except comfort.

U.S. airlines have only 140 airplanes scheduled for delivery next year, and most will replace aircraft in the domestic fleet, which numbers 5,000.

That will change in a couple of years. Profitable airlines purchase new aircraft, almost by reflex. If past results are indicative of future returns, U.S. airlines will order hundreds of planes while they are prospering, and receive them during the next economic downturn. Then the cycle will begin again.
 
Part Two

On the Wings of a Deal

"Those who cannot learn from the past are condemned to repeat it." US Airways provided a sign of that earlier this month, when it offered to buy Delta Air Lines out of bankruptcy for nearly $9 billion, half cash and half stock.

Set aside the question of where a recently bankrupt airline -- US Airways -- plans to get more than $4 billion in cash: Borrow it, of course, in an era when lenders believe there is no such thing as a risky loan, because all risk can be traded away with derivatives. Just ask why US Airways would want Delta, a currently bankrupt airline that failed the last time it tried to fly its way to prosperity.

One answer is that Delta flies about 25% international routes. Long hauls and international routes are more profitable than U.S. domestic routes. Another answer is that the U.S. doesn't need 11 carriers and reducing competition would be an act of statesmanship, possibly a profitable act.

A third answer is that every airline manager wants to run the world's biggest airline. A merger would put the new airline ahead of American and United. The fourth answer is the official US Airways claim that the combined airlines would have "synergy" worth $1.65 billion.

But history suggests that use of the word "synergy" is a tip-off to future disaster, and that airline mergers, in particular, rarely work well. Union contracts don't shuffle together easily; operations vary widely from airline to airline, even if passengers don't perceive much difference in the cabin.

US Airways recently merged with America West, so recently that only about half the America West planes have been repainted in US Airways colors. Other pending issues are more difficult: Pilots are picketing, though not striking yet, over contract adjustments and seniority rights in the to-be-unified workforce.

Flight attendants and mechanics have similar concerns. They also know that if merged airlines achieve the efficiencies they claim to expect, no worker's job will be safe. And that goes double in a merger with Delta, since Delta's workforce is non-union, except for the pilots.

A merger would add to operating problems that US Airways and Delta already have. Juan O'Callahan, an independent consultant with 45 years in the aviation industry, notes that the combined fleet would be dauntingly complex. (O'Callahan has served on the boards of five U.S. aviation companies, including America West. He was chairman of the executive committee during the first year of America West's bankruptcy.)

At the end of 2005, America West had a fleet of 145 aircraft of five types, using four engine models. The pre-merger US Airways had 268 aircraft of nine types and six engine models. Each aircraft type and each engine type has to be flown and maintained "by the book," and each book is different. Scheduling qualified crews is more difficult than it would be at an airline (Southwest is the only example) with just one aircraft type and one engine manufacturer.

Even when the planes are the same, they may be different. US Airways' Airbus 319 and 320s have different manufacturers' engines depending on whether they were delivered to the old US Airways or the old America West. The new US Airways flies 10 airplane types, only two of which are compatible with Delta's 13 types.


Pilot Error

It's not impossible to manage such a mish-mash, it's just difficult and costly. Call it a dis-synergy, or a dysergy. Or adopt the language of airline-safety investigators and call it "controlled flight into terrain."

O'Callahan's warning:

"A premature US Airways-Delta merger would result in a 900-airplane fleet with 20 different aircraft/engine types, creating a potential economic nightmare for pilot crew scheduling and training and a vast new department to deal with various maintenance bases, technical personnel, overhauls and outsourcing contracts.

The extra crew and related costs associated with a 20-type, mixed-bag fleet of 900 aircraft (and different training, scheduling and seniority regimens) could amount to over $500 million a year."

It would be an act of statesmanship to do something to reduce the number of U.S. domestic airlines to the point where the survivors can be reliably profitable if run well.

For example, a bankruptcy judge with imagination might order Delta liquidated by a trustee, rather than resurrected by management and banks.

But cramming incompatible airlines together isn't statesmanship; it's foolishness.
 
Oh, don't tell permanent JETFO and Bravodude that. They don't want to hear it. They just believe Parker and his people. How can he say again with a straight face that our routes don't overlap?

Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Last edited:
General--Better hang your hat on something other than route overlap. That is a problem easily delt with. TC
 
General--Better hang your hat on something other than route overlap. That is a problem easily delt with. TC

Well, Jim Oberstar, new Chairman of the Transportation sub committee, helped squash the UAL/US merger for that reason (he was just a committee member back then). Thanks for admitting what could happen. You will be the first witness. Oberstar is pro-consumer, not pro merger, and now he is Chairman.

Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Oh, don't tell permanent JETFO and Bravodude that. They don't want to hear it. They just believe Parker and his people. How can he say again with a straight face that our routes don't overlap?

Bye Bye--General Lee

Doesn't matter what they believe. What only matters is what the creditor's believe.
 
Doesn't matter what they believe. What only matters is what the creditor's believe.

That is true. And the creditor committee will be making the decision. Again, the 9 members consist of: Dalpa, Boeing, Pratt, Coke, PBGC, Fidelity (those are supposedly our friendlies), two banks, and a lessor. We shall see.....


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Doubt this one will go far. Won't be NWA/DAL either. Think it will be a NWA/CAL deal going private with Wilson/Bonderman friendship putting it together. THAT will cause the wild scenerio for the remaining consolidation and the designation of a designated mort to be sold off in pieces.
 
I know I should probably know this, but I can't figure out why everybody refers to US Airways/America West as LCC. Every time I see that I can only see Low Cost Carrier, but I know that is not what they are referring to in this case.

So I am throwing myself under the bus and asking the question: What does LCC stand for in this case?

Thanks,

FJ
 
I know I should probably know this, but I can't figure out why everybody refers to US Airways/America West as LCC. Every time I see that I can only see Low Cost Carrier, but I know that is not what they are referring to in this case.

So I am throwing myself under the bus and asking the question: What does LCC stand for in this case?

Thanks,

FJ

LCC is their stock code or identifier on Wall St.

Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Someone help me out on this logic....
Let's call Dal's cost to operate it's 13 a/c types....13X
and awa/us 10 types .....10X

The twisted logic of the argument is that it will cost more than 23X. That is..13X+10X . What a retarded point to make..Dysergy... sure it would cost a lot .. and this deal May or may not go through for reasons other than fleet complexity... But when People make this point , that is , that it would cost more than 23X to operate the fleets... I do not know how to value their intellect.
 
Parker picked LCC because he envisioned the new US Airways as the first International 'Low Cost Carrier.'
 
US Air confident will acquire Delta

Tue Dec 5, 2006 11:28 AM ET


By Kyle Peterson and Chris Reiter

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - US Airways Group Inc. (LCC.N: Quote, Profile, Research) is confident its proposed merger with bankrupt Delta Air Lines Inc. (DALRQ.PK: Quote, Profile, Research) will win approval from Delta's creditors and be completed despite opposition from Delta management, the president of US Air said on Tuesday.
"Because this transaction creates value that can only be created through a merger, and because the bankruptcy process is designed to elicit value, we're going to get this done," Scott Kirby said at the Reuters Aerospace & Defense Summit in Washington.
He said US Air could complete a merger about six months after starting due diligence. So far, Delta has not publicly said that it would open its books to US Air.
On November 15, US Air proposed a deal now worth $8.6 billion to acquire Delta, whose management immediately rejected the offer. Delta said it wanted to emerge from Chapter 11 as a stand-alone airline.
US Air, the product of a merger between the former US Airways Group and America West Airlines, has said the merger would generate $1.65 billion in annual savings.
"Talking to Delta has helped clarify some uncertain issues," Kirby said.
He said the $1.65 billion savings target is "quite conservative" and that a merger may, in fact, produce more savings. He said US Air beat the savings target it set when it embarked on the US Air/America West merger.
"We've been through this before. In that case, we started with a similar lack of information," Kirby said.
"We feel like we will beat (the $1.65 billion in merger savings) ... We feel very confident," he said.
Kirby declined to discuss the nature of US Air's talks with Delta or the creditors committee, saying only that he was optimistic about the prospects for a merger.
US Air's goal is to have its proposal fairly evaluated and to win Delta's approval to conduct due diligence, a condition of the offer, he said.
"We're talking to all parties -- anyone who wants to talk to us," Kirby said.
 
US Air sees competition key to Delta bid

Tue Dec 5, 2006 5:36 PM ET

By John Crawley


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - US Airways Group Inc. (LCC.N: Quote, Profile, Research) is betting antitrust regulators would look favorably on any merger proposal with Delta Air Lines Inc. (DALRQ.PK: Quote, Profile, Research) because low-cost competitors have sharply boosted industry competition, US Airways President Scott Kirby said on Tuesday.
That approach departs from the strategy that helped to create US Airways last year, when America West Airlines successfully pursued a "failing firm" argument to rescue the bigger but severely distressed US Airways from bankruptcy.
"We're not relying on the ailing firm theory at all," Kirby told the Reuters Aerospace & Defense Summit in Washington, D.C. "We're relying on the merits," Kirby said of the attempt to buy another bigger airline.
US Airways has proposed a deal now worth $8.6 billion to buy Delta, which is restructuring in Chapter 11 bankruptcy and still plans to emerge next year as a stand-alone airline.
Legal and other experts say any proposed Delta merger would receive close antitrust scrutiny from the U.S. Justice Department. Congress may hold hearings if lawmakers grow concerned about the potential impact on consumers.
Competition issues, amplified by congressional concern, derailed in 2001 a planned merger of the old US Airways and United Airlines, a unit of UAL Corp. (UAUA.O: Quote, Profile, Research).
That proposal foundered on traditional questions over overlapping routes but Kirby said US Airways does not have that problem this time on nonstop routes and can address any concerns about connecting service.
Kirby also said US Airways anticipates having to sell one of the New York shuttles, if the Delta merger takes shape. But he noted that competitors would welcome the move. JetBlue Airways Corp. (JBLU.O: Quote, Profile, Research), Southwest Airlines (LUV.N: Quote, Profile, Research), and AirTran Holdings (AAI.N: Quote, Profile, Research) have said they would be interested in buying shuttle assets, like gates in New York and Washington.
US Airways believes antitrust officials will acknowledge the competitive landscape has changed since the start of the decade and will not rely on old standards to judge a Delta deal.
"When you dig down into the details, we think the antitrust case on its merits is very compelling to allow the transaction to go forward," Kirby said
Between January and August 2006, Delta and the US Airways-America West operation accounted for about 17 percent of the domestic travel market, Transportation Department figures show.
Budget competition has proliferated in the East where Delta and US Airways each have a heavy presence. Low cost airlines account for about a quarter of the industry's domestic business as measured in passengers flown, compared to about 15 percent a decade ago, according to government data.
AirTran, JetBlue, and Frontier (FRNT.O: Quote, Profile, Research) also gained market share last year. And in August, Southwest became the first low-cost carrier to top all U.S. airlines in passengers flown in a single month -- 8.7 million.
William Warlick, a credit analyst with Fitch Ratings, told Reuters that low cost airlines "continue to be the source" of industry growth and "really are the ones" that dictate competition.
"Not only have they grown but they have changed the way the legacy carriers think about competition in this industry," Warlick said.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom