Is there an ideal number of "majors"?

[dickburns]

Without getting into the fine details of what defines a major, regional, or legacy, is there an ideal number of "larger" ie. "major" carriers that our economy and market is structured towards?

There are the main 6 and a half, for discussions sake (Delta, United, Northwest, Continental, American, USAir, and I consider Southwest a half...no longhaul int'l). Are we better off with more? less?

I don't know this sh!t, pay attention to it much, or analyze it, so please chime in with your expert opinions and I'll just keep existing.

 

[Diesel-9]

ONE! Giving two airline CEO's a chance spells doom.

 

[YourPilotFriend]

One major and ONLY ONE seniority list...the holy grail for a pilot.

 

[CitationUltra]

Without getting into the fine details of what defines a major, regional, or legacy, is there an ideal number of "larger" ie. "major" carriers that our economy and market is structured towards?

There are the main 6 and a half, for discussions sake (Delta, United, Northwest, Continental, American, USAir, and I consider Southwest a half...no longhaul int'l). Are we better off with more? less?

I don't know this sh!t, pay attention to it much, or analyze it, so please chime in with your expert opinions and I'll just keep existing.

Probably a maximum of three "network" carriers. We're headed for re-regulation, and probably the fewer the better at this point. One or two wouldn't be bad necessarily.

 

[T-Bags]

Probably a maximum of three "network" carriers. We're headed for re-regulation, and probably the fewer the better at this point. One or two wouldn't be bad necessarily.

3 is the economic answer

 

[maxblast72]

Does anyone believe Andersen when he says no domestic hubs will be closed? Is there not too many domestic hubs east of the Mississippi river already?

If I were a politician in Memphis or Cincinatti, I think I would be getting ready to fight for the jobs in my district by opposing the merger.

 

[CitationUltra]

3 is the economic answer

Yes, you're right. Three is the optimum for now.

 

[CitationUltra]

Does anyone believe Andersen when he says no domestic hubs will be closed? Is there not too many domestic hubs east of the Mississippi river already?

If I were a politician in Memphis or Cincinatti, I think I would be getting ready to fight for the jobs in my district by opposing the merger.

The problem with that is there are more jobs/votes to be lost if the merger doesn't go forward. Plus I think there is a resistance to denying stockholders what benefit may accrue from a merger, vs. the loss of shareholder value resulting from the merger not happening.

 

[AutoBus]

Without getting into the fine details of what defines a major, regional, or legacy, is there an ideal number of "larger" ie. "major" carriers that our economy and market is structured towards?

There are the main 6 and a half, for discussions sake (Delta, United, Northwest, Continental, American, USAir, and I consider Southwest a half...no longhaul int'l). Are we better off with more? less?

I don't know this sh!t, pay attention to it much, or analyze it, so please chime in with your expert opinions and I'll just keep existing.

How could one even answer that, too many variables. Like it or not the free market model has to prevail.

The correct answer could be 1 or 100? it depends on the answer you are looking for.

Re-regulation is not a option, you can't put the egg back into the shell, and for those of us who actually remember those times, know that thing were not all that great.

Sure paychecks were larger, but the industry was heading to the same demise as the steel, textile and manufacturing industries faced in this country, in the end the situation might well have been worse than the one we currently face.

 

[whatitdoing?]

I think in the next 5 or so years you'll only see 3 majors. DL/NWA UAL/CAL and American. Or should I say DL, CAL, and American.

 

[General Lee]

Does anyone believe Andersen when he says no domestic hubs will be closed? Is there not too many domestic hubs east of the Mississippi river already?

If I were a politician in Memphis or Cincinatti, I think I would be getting ready to fight for the jobs in my district by opposing the merger.

Remember he said he wouldn't CLOSE any hubs, but never said anything about not downsizing them. I would think CVG would be on the short list to be chopped, but apparently we have the highest yields there out of any of our hubs. I think we have some very large contracts with Procter and Gamble and a few other large corporations, and I guess we are really sticking it to them with fares? I would think there could be a small pilot base there eventually, with mainly transcons and maybe a CDG connection in Europe, and a few RJs to certain select cities. I don't know much about NWA's MEM hub, other than Elvis used to live there, and there are a lot of Fedex planes there. I bet a lot of RJ flights from CVG and MEM will get chopped if they are duplicated in DTW and ATL.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[AC560]

There are the main 6 and a half, for discussions sake (Delta, United, Northwest, Continental, American, USAir, and I consider Southwest a half...no longhaul int'l). Are we better off with more? less?

As you are making international long haul a heavily weighted factor (leading WN to count for only half) then there are a lot more then 6 major players when you count foreign airlines.

Also what are you looking for in terms of an ideal number? An ideal number for a consumer, shareholder, pilot, etc?

My personal opinion is that consolidation will lead to short term increases in profitability and less competition in terms of fares. This will result eventually in foreign carriers being allowed to operate domestically in the US to spur competition and lower prices. As always the US airline industry is its own worst enemy.

 

[Trash8Mofo]

Name one other country that has as many airlines as we do! While I admit that fewer airlines and fewer jobs is not a pleasant thought, but it is a necessary evil.
IMHO, the reason why our wages are going lower and lower is because everyone of us is trying to hang on to whatever ********************ty jobs we are having. Because the alternative being 1st year FO is just unthinkable. Thats goes for management too. Maintaining market shares or whatever you want to call it, illogically flooding the market with cheap seats is management's way of hanging on. That was all fine when credit was easy to come by. When the co loss enough money, they went ahead and borrowed more. Well, that train has stopped, and that lead to some abrupt shutdowns in the last weeks.

At the end of the day, re-regulation would be great, but thats just a pipe dream. The more painful way to correct our oversupplied, illogical pricing (unable to transfer fuel cost being one), is what we are about to experience: merger. This will be good in the long run, but painful in the next 3 years. I'm already on the street, so let me tell you, its not pleasant at all.

 

[AC560]

Name one other country that has as many airlines as we do!

China and India would be two of the top of my head. European countries tend to be rather small which predicates the need for less carriers obviously.

 

[pianoman]

One of the major concerns I have with industry consolidation is that you get to a point where any one airline is so big that a strike would have devastating consequences on the economy, so the government will continue to thwart any steps by workers to take a self-help action.