AirTran Alaska merger

[gt1900]

Can't imagine alaska being the buyer. They don't even want their own 700's. Kind of hard to imagine them wanting a company that is all 700 and 717's. Plus don't see the synergies. And if airtran made a move to buy alaska can't imagine delta not stepping in. Only people I ever hear this rumor from is airtran pilots. And how they would want relative seniority.

Besides the fact that ALA could write a check for AAI tomorrow, and AAI would have to finance the world to purchase ALA... Naw, won't happen anytime soon, and if it does, ALA will be the purchaser!

 

[General Lee]

Lots of good "synergies". We only have one route that overlaps (ATL-SEA). They are on the west coast, we are on the east coast. Similar fleet types, roughly the same number of pilots. Very different business models and management styles. Any thoughts from all the players and haters on FI?

Nah, that would mean AK would have to dump a very lucrative code share with DL through the SEA hub and onward towards Asia. AK has 737-400s/700s/800s/900s, and besides the -900s and -400s, a lot of airlines have common aircraft with them. American, CAL, SWA, DL, and Airtran all have those types of planes (DL has -700/800s, CAL has -700/800/900s, AA has -800s, SWA and Airtran have -700s). When it comes to overlap, Airtran, DL, AA, and CAL all don't have a lot. SWA does overlap more out of SEA and PDX compared to the others. So, when it comes down to it, which of the airlines does AK work with now, and how is that working out with them? (hint the big D) If someone else makes a play at AK, then maybe DL and AK will make a move to make it even "closer." You never know, but I hope to fly into Sitka someday in the left seat of one of those planes. That would be FANTASTIC. You just never know....



Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[Lear70]

Wait. This may have come across wrong. Are you saying AAI has more internation flying then ALA? Because they don't! Just checking, because you made it seem like they did. Do you remember the amount of Russia flying that ALA used to do?

USED to do? How about now? Have you checked AAI's route map lately? Just wondering... Because AAI and ALA are probably pretty comparable in terms of the *amount* of international routes, if not the distances and ETOPS (which, again, can be easily trained for). AirTran isn't just a Southeast airline anymore...

BTW.. Have you even flown in the mountains, or in Alaska? Im guessing you have absolutely zero real mountain flying experience with your last comment!

Well, as usual, you're pretty clueless about me. I've been flying in the mountains since I was 20, my first real flying job, and I do a LOT of Alaska flying, not to mention Mexico airports that are 9,000 feet field elevation IN the mountains these days in the Lears and Falcons (and have both before and since AirTran), in and out of fields you probably wouldn't even consider because,,, well, that's our job. So make sure you don't assume...

The approaches are the easy part!!! With the exception of Key West, AAI has very, very little flying that even comes close to the complexity of the flying they do at ALA.

Key West isn't complex. It's pretty straightforward, actually.

There is a large group of our pilots that are afraid to fly in the snow, let alone a good storm coming off the coast with winds gusting to 40 or 50 knots. The flying at AAI and the flying in Alaska can't even be compared. Our flying is a joke compared to their South East flying and the flying they do. Heck, our guys were complaining about landing a 737 at Key west, yet ALA used to fly 73's into 3900ft long Dutch Harbor! In case you think our flying is even close to theirs, heres a little video for you! Now imagine a V1 cut!

*yawn* It's an airplane. We fly them. It's not all that difficult until something goes wrong and, even when it does, there are exit routes. That's what we get paid to do. We don't draw the incomes we draw to fly day in, day out throughout the year, we get paid what we do because we are gone from our families for extended periods of time and are expected to make life-saving decisions when it goes down hill.

The day to day flying itself isn't that extreme, at *any* carrier. Unless you're being shot at, and you don't get that at either AAI or ALA.

The majority of pilots that have reached this level can be trained to execute those approaches, it has absolutely *NOTHING* to do with integrating two carriers.

That said, again, I see no reason Alaska would consider an AirTran hookup. Bob may be shopping for a dance partner, but Alaska, for the most part, doesn't seem to be interested in joining the merger mania party...

 

[Ty Webb]

yAWn!

Joe Leonard told my recurrent class 5 or 6 years ago that AirTran had approached both Midwest Express and Alaska about merging, and " . . . neither of the two had any interest in it whatsoever".

So, there you have it; I doubt that Alaska's position has changed in regard to marryin' a Tranny.

 

[gt1900]

USED to do? How about now? Have you checked AAI's route map lately? Just wondering... Because AAI and ALA are probably pretty comparable in terms of the *amount* of international routes, if not the distances and ETOPS (which, again, can be easily trained for). AirTran isn't just a Southeast airline anymore...

Well, as usual, you're pretty clueless about me. I've been flying in the mountains since I was 20, my first real flying job, and I do a LOT of Alaska flying, not to mention Mexico airports that are 9,000 feet field elevation IN the mountains these days in the Lears and Falcons (and have both before and since AirTran), in and out of fields you probably wouldn't even consider because,,, well, that's our job. So make sure you don't assume...

Key West isn't complex. It's pretty straightforward, actually.

*yawn* It's an airplane. We fly them. It's not all that difficult until something goes wrong and, even when it does, there are exit routes. That's what we get paid to do. We don't draw the incomes we draw to fly day in, day out throughout the year, we get paid what we do because we are gone from our families for extended periods of time and are expected to make life-saving decisions when it goes down hill.

The day to day flying itself isn't that extreme, at *any* carrier. Unless you're being shot at, and you don't get that at either AAI or ALA.

The majority of pilots that have reached this level can be trained to execute those approaches, it has absolutely *NOTHING* to do with integrating two carriers.

That said, again, I see no reason Alaska would consider an AirTran hookup. Bob may be shopping for a dance partner, but Alaska, for the most part, doesn't seem to be interested in joining the merger mania party...

Exactly. Key west is a joke. Yet AAI guys were up in arms about flying into it when we announced it. I find it interesting that you have so much Mt experience yet you think that the approach is the hard part. If you don't think there is a different mentality with AAI pilots and ALA pilots then you are sorely mistaken! Fly the RNP approach, or departure into Juneau through the Gastina Channel, then get back to me. The flying that AAI does is simple everyday flying with not a single tough airport to fly into, and ZERO mountains. ALA flys into some of the toughest jet airports in the world. Youve flown in Alaska, youve seen what can happen in the winter when a storm brews. We have nothing that comes even close to that in the lower 48. I had a Cpt get very, very nervous in ROC when they were reporting 200-1/2 with snow and winds gusting to 30 with fair breaking action. Thats a pretty regular occurance for the guys at Alaska!

AAI flys scheduled trips to exactly 4 international destinations. Cancun, Aruba, Montego Bay, and Nasau. WOW!!!!! Alaska Airgroups flys to 15, of which Alaska flys to 10 I believe. Not a lot, but far more then AAI. Throw in 4 Hawaii destinations from 6 different cities and we arent exactly talking the same type of flying. Heck, we don't even have rafts on our planes. Imagine half of our F/A's if they had to get their hair wet in water training!

 

[Kharma Police]

Exactly. Key west is a joke. Yet AAI guys were up in arms about flying into it when we announced it. I find it interesting that you have so much Mt experience yet you think that the approach is the hard part. If you don't think there is a different mentality with AAI pilots and ALA pilots then you are sorely mistaken! Fly the RNP into Juneau through the Gastina Channel, then get back to me. The flying that AAI does is simple everyday flying with not a single tough airport to fly into, and ZERO mountains. ALA flys into some of the toughest airports in the world. Youve flown in Alaska, youve seen what can happen in the winter when a storm brews. We have nothing that comes even close to that in the lower 48. I had a Cpt get very, very nervous in ROC when they were reporting 200-1/2 with snow and winds gusting to 30 with fair breaking action. Thats a pretty regular occurance for the guys at Alaska!

AAI flys scheduled trips to exactly 4 international destinations. Cancun, Aruba, Montego Bay, and Nasau. WOW!!!!! Alaska Airgroups flys to 15, of which Alaska flys to 10 I believe. Not a lot, but far more then AAI. Throw in 4 Hawaii destinations from 6 different cities and we arent exactly talking the same type of flying. Heck, we don't even have rafts on our planes. Imagine half of our F/A's if they had to get their hair wet in water training!

Take it easy Nanook. Yes, everyone will agree that Alaska has some challenging flying, jimmy crack corn and I don't care. Two thirds of the US population lives where we fly, not in the great white north. I was thinking of the revenue possibilities of flying people from Sarah Palin land to Disney World and other points east of the Mississippi where the Eskimo doesn't fly. It's all about money, not who can fly a RNP approach in a valley with tall mountains and blowing snow.

 

[gt1900]

Your exactly right. Who cares where everybody lives. Its about making money! Can you say EAS? ALA does a fine job of transfering their flying from Alaska in the summer to Hawaii and Mexico in the winter. ALA makes a butt load more money then AAI, even flying mostly where only 1/3 of the U.S. population lives. And there cost structure is much higher.... HMMM..... Imagine that!

Im not saying ALA is better then AAI, but with the exception of airplanes, size, and similar route maps, they are two totally different companies. ALA's business plan wouldn't work in the AAI markets!

 

[Kharma Police]

Your exactly right. Who cares where everybody lives. Its about making money! Can you say EAS? ALA does a fine job of transfering their flying from Alaska in the summer to Hawaii and Mexico in the winter. ALA makes a butt load more money then AAI, even flying mostly where only 1/3 of the U.S. population lives. And there cost structure is much higher.... HMMM..... Imagine that!

Im not saying ALA is better then AAI, but with the exception of airplanes, size, and similar route maps, they are two totally different companies. ALA's business plan wouldn't work in the AAI markets!

Yes, they make money yet still furlough pilots, go figure. They have a monopoly on some routes in Alaska and Seattle, tell me how they are doing in LAX. If Delta or Southwest wanted to make their lives miserable they could in a heartbeat. Delta could drop the code share and spool up the NWA operations in SEA and ANC. They have already started to ramp up their operations on the west coast. Look what happened with Midwest when they didn't adapt to the changes in the playing field. Heck, Mesa could set up shop in ANC like they did in Hawaii, it didn't take them long to run Aloha out of business. Alaska Air can keep plodding along the same course and keep making hay while the sun is shinning but the winters up north in the future will keep getting longer and darker. In my opinion they will have to merge with someone.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

I heeerd that Alaska is buying every airline because Alaska flies harder than everyone else. Including NASA - which we're buying. Landing at Canaveral? Pfffft. We have some guys who used to fly into Dutch Harbor. In the MUDHEN! (a-a-a-a-men!).

And my daddy can beat up your daddy.

[/ENDthisuselessthread]

 

[gt1900]

Two totally different scenerios. Alaska is very, very strong on the west coast and has a very good following. Nobody can touch them in ANC because of all the connecting cities they serve throughout Alaska. SWA tried to make their lives he11 in SEA and it didn't work. Alaska has held their own and SWA hasn't expanded on the west coast like they have been able to in other markets. LAX isn't a huge hub for them and they have still done very well there. THe difference between ALA and MidEX is that ALA has constantly changed to the environment, and it could be argued that it has made them much, much stronger. Technologically, nobody can touch them. They had HUD and were shooting RNP approaches before anybody else, that has allowed them to operate in crappy weather when DAL, NWA, and SWA were shut down. Midex never considered themselves pioneers with technology. ALA does. ALA's product is 10X's better then SWA's and their ticket prices are within 10-15 bucks on most flights. People on the west coast are willing to pay $10-$15 more to get service that is much, much better then SWA's, or DAL's, and NWA's for that matter on short flights. I know lots of people in the Northwest. Most choose ALA over SWA every time. The combination of ALA and Horizon offer so many more opportunities then NWA, SWA, and DAL do on the west coast that they really cant compete very well at this time. Heck, AAI pulls out of SEA every winter because they can't make money on ATL-SEA. Yet ALA comes in and every single flight is full. I tried to buy a ticket on them last winter, the only thing availibale was $1000+ roundtrip because the flights were already full. Don't bother trying to non rev on them from ATL-SEA. Yet you still can get on AAI flights. AAI flights are cheaper, yet ALA flights are more full. Imagine that!

However, you put ALA's cost structure and business plan on the east coast and they would fold pretty quick.