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

airtran future?

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
Register   Log in
EMBATP

EMBATP

looking for Patroni....
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Posts
232
ok all you tranny guys out there...what do you see coming up in the not so distant future for the tranny....with the "dreaded merger " no longer a possibility, a possible regime change in the union, the 15 more 737s we ordered, what will happen to midwest etc....

lets here it.....
 
ok

ok probably but the terminal will not be built for a while yet..

you guys think the doj will require northwest/midwest to give up some mke gates due to their arragement...controlling 70% of the market share doesnt seem too fair....
 
180ToTheMarker said:
8 gates at the new terminal in IND. There's your midwest hub.
Click to expand...
8 gates does not equate to a midwest hub. AirTran has that many gates in Baltimore. Northwest has a considerable presence in Indy. I don't think AirTran has the stomach to go up against Northwest again. Could be wrong, but considering the thumping AirTran just took from Northwest outbidding AirTran for Midwest they may just look further west for opportunities. Not sure what the outcome will be. However, I imagine AirTran will have to inform Boeing on their intent for those 737 orders for 2008 real soon.
 
I strongly suspect there was always an alternative to Midwest. NWA just spent a lot of dough to keep us from growing much in MKE. I think we will probably continue to take deliveries - it will be interesting to see the alternative unfold. I think we will probably be maxxing out our usage of the gates we have in MKE.
As far as going head to head with NWA in Indy or anywhere else - I think we are doing just fine. We are making money on these routes while NWA is probably losing money where they are trying to compete with us.
 
EMBATP said:
you guys think the doj will require northwest/midwest to give up some mke gates due to their arragement...controlling 70% of the market share doesnt seem too fair....
Click to expand...

how much of the market share does AMR control at DFW? it was 70% in 2000 with a delta hub there, now no delta hub so imagine its perhaps 80+%.

the politics of the nwa deal favor approval (sen. kohl and oberstar spearheading).

there are those still hoping for airtran coming in for a final final final bid, but i see now the midwest stuff has been removed from airtran.com.
 
Last edited:
I say hello to the humphrey terminal in MSP. Who knows maybe suncountry w/ those 737-800's may come into play.
 
I think the fact that Northwest payed so much for Midwest validates the strength of the future Airtran business plan. The knew they had do whatever it takes to keep us out of there (even if it meant overpaying). Same reason why Southwest outbid us for the Midway gates (to keep us out). I think it is better to be part of an growing airline that everyone fears than an airline that the others airlines could give a crap less about.
 
I don't think AirTran has the stomach to go up against Northwest again. Could be wrong, but considering the thumping AirTran just took from Northwest outbidding AirTran for Midwest they may just look further west for opportunities.
Click to expand...
Just because NWA outbid AAI for MEH, doesn't mean that they can "thump" us on an opreratinal basis. AAI 717s versus NWA DC-9s on the same routes from IND will probably do very well. Oh, and the 737s, even better.
 
75M said:
AAI 717s versus NWA DC-9s on the same routes from IND will probably do very well. Oh, and the 737s, even better.
Click to expand...


Maybee ifn wee bee makin a base up in Indiee, den likez maybee wee can chill wit Dario Francheesy an dat sawweeet wildcat babe he chillz wit!

You catz eeven think dat ole Indy gonna be da base?

Yoo make summ groovie poinztz an stuff, ole M75 duuuude. I gotzta git me a crash pad at dat big ole racin track, hey Ty Guy, iz ya gunna put dat trailer up in there?

AWWWW YEAAAHHHHH!!
 
EMBATP said:
not the same thing...delta left...there was no merger or code share involved
Click to expand...

so its ok for amr to have an 85+% market share in their home airport but NO other airline is allowed this luxury? that's fair. :rolleyes:
 
well there was this little thing called deregulation a while back....you may have heard of it....prior to that an airline just could not leave or stop serving a city....now they can....like delta leaving dallas...
 
EMBATP said:
well there was this little thing called deregulation a while back....you may have heard of it....prior to that an airline just could not leave or stop serving a city....now they can....like delta leaving dallas...
Click to expand...

and with that midwest will still maintain its market share as it is SEPARATE from northwest airlines. airtran would have combined it's market share with midwest and be the largest in MKE but you thought that was fair! don't you think it is a little hypocritical?


the point that a new combined NWA would be at 70% market share in MKE would not be the sole basis, imho, for not allowing a future merger. like i said DFW has one dominant carrier while serving a lot more people than MKE.
 
one...i never said anything was fair or not, i was just correcting the statement you made about american in dallas....they have that market share by default....another carrier left...no kind of legal problem there...

two...in the past, the doj has usually made the merged carrier give up something in its major hubs/cities to not allow a monpoly...with northwest/midwest having 70% of the flying out of mke, i just wondered if that would happen...

three...even tho they are seperate airlines, any one can see they have an agreement in place, or soon will have an agreement in place to code share, etc....
possible legal concerns for the doj...

four...as far as amr having control of dallas...there is a whole terminal waiting to be occupied, so anyone who chose to could go in there...
 
What about Spirit or Sun Country? Would NWA spend another XXX Million to keep you out of MSP? Sounds like a good way to bleed em dry....
 
EMBATP said:
one...i never said anything was fair or not, i was just correcting the statement you made about american in dallas....they have that market share by default....another carrier left...no kind of legal problem there...
Click to expand...

you originally stated:

EMBATP said:
controlling 70% of the market share doesnt seem too fair....
Click to expand...

EMBATP said:
two...in the past, the doj has usually made the merged carrier give up something in its major hubs/cities to not allow a monpoly...with northwest/midwest having 70% of the flying out of mke, i just wondered if that would happen...
Click to expand...

well there is NO merged carrier here. what did DoJ do to SWA when they bought out ATA gates and market share (they have a lot more than 70%) at MDW? MDW is also much larger than MKE.

EMBATP said:
three...even tho they are seperate airlines, any one can see they have an agreement in place, or soon will have an agreement in place to code share, etc....
possible legal concerns for the doj...
Click to expand...

you are assuming here.

EMBATP said:
four...as far as amr having control of dallas...there is a whole terminal waiting to be occupied, so anyone who chose to could go in there...
Click to expand...

what terminal? the new one is pretty much all AMR. the E concourse is filled with the extra airlines now except united which is still in B concourse.
 
one...you got me...but i was thinking what the doj might think..

two...airtran got a few extra gates at mdw after the whole thing happenned that were former ata gates, which i am sure had something to do with the whole swa/ata thing..

three...i think that that will probably happen...look at the past nwa/continental deal...

four...still plenty of gates available in e...

by the way i really dont care what happens...i am glad we did not merge with midwest...but i dont think nwa will be a saving grace either...

mainly...as stated in the original post...what do airtran guys think will happen based on past happenings at the tranny?
 
EMBATP said:
mainly...as stated in the original post...what do airtran guys think will happen based on past happenings at the tranny?
Click to expand...

one...vote yes yes no
two...enjoy a new wave of unity and get a great contract
three...the world will be trannies oyster.
 
Any chance Airtran could look at STL or San Antonio as a possible base? Hmmmm..... I believe they were after a heftier midwest presence and a more viable westward launching place. Lear what do you think?
 
I think we (AirTran) have a huge target on our backs right now. We are a small, well run, very successfull and PROFITABLE company.

I think that if we don't get bigger fast we are going to make an excellent target to be bought out by AA, Delta, SWA, CAL, UAL, etc.... We'd be a drop in the bucket for any of these companies...

Just my opinion, but I have to say that the (somethin's gonna happen soon) hair on the back of my neck has been standing on end for a while....
 
MINIME said:
Any chance Airtran could look at STL or San Antonio as a possible base? Hmmmm..... I believe they were after a heftier midwest presence and a more viable westward launching place. Lear what do you think?
Click to expand...
Why me? I don't have a crystal ball... ;)

STL has been a loser of a base for at least 3 airlines I can think of. Someone with a better background in TWA, AA, and SWA can probably explain why better than I could.

SAT? I love that city, but I can imagine what kind of problems we'd run into - mainly gate space. The airport's not that big.

TV9 has some of the same thoughts I do about it:

I think we (AirTran) have a huge target on our backs right now. We are a small, well run, very successfull and PROFITABLE company.
Click to expand...
Very true and, more to the point, the Legacies have tried to run us out of business before with a direct war... didn't turn out so well for them; I doubt they'd try it that way again.

I think that if we don't get bigger fast we are going to make an excellent target to be bought out by AA, Delta, SWA, CAL, UAL, etc.... We'd be a drop in the bucket for any of these companies...
Click to expand...
Not sure about a "drop in the bucket", but most of those companies could likely afford to buy us out in a hostile takeover attempt, just like we tried with Midwest.

The only thing we have working for us is our balance sheet. We have airplanes, but those are leased, as is most of the rest of the operation. We're not worth more in pieces than as a whole, which works in our favor.

Just my opinion, but I have to say that the (somethin's gonna happen soon) hair on the back of my neck has been standing on end for a while....
Click to expand...
Ayuh... I'm getting that distinct feeling as well. The main thing that concerns me is that we keep deferring airplanes and going after mergers; that tells me that management's stand-alone plan may not allow for the kind of growth we've been planning on for awhile.

Either we have to merge with/buy someone and get too big for any one airline to swallow, or we'll likely get swallowed in the next year or so ourselves...
 
maxblast72 said:
I think it is better to be part of an growing airline that everyone fears than an airline that the others airlines could give a crap less about.
Click to expand...

So when your airline stops growing, will you quit?
 
As far as STL goes, the biggest complaint I heard when I was at TWA was that there was not enough O&D traffic in STL. Now, throw on top of that AA and SWA's presence there, it makes for a tough place to grow a hub. Both AA and SWA have the history of squatting on their territory and driving others out. If we had both of them gang up on us, that could be a tough situation.

I live in STL so of course i'd love a hub there, but i'm just being realistic.

Also, to pick up on something Lear said... we don't really own anything, - that can be good or bad. In a bad way, it would be alot easier to transfer or drop leases than to sell owned airplanes - meaning that another airline could gobble us up and have an easier time trading in our leased 717s for a new contract for Airbus or 737s...

again, just my opinion...
 
Last edited:
2 717's out of 87? Wow.....heard the leased 717's are on 18 year leases?!? Are the 73's similar I wonder?
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom