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

Delta CEO Says Consolidation Possible

  • Thread starter Thread starter STL717
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 28

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
Regarding DAL/NWA, it makes the most sense. And if you look closely, both companies have been making subtle moves lately to distance themselves. The biggest hurdle would be that NWA is an Airbus airline, and DAL is Boeing airline.

Has anyone considered this: a merger of the parent companies, but not the actual airlines?

It would be funny, and actually very plausible if the consolidation (which is sure to come for the legacy carriers), mirrored the consolidation of the regionals where there are only a few huge holding companies who run many airlines as a "wholly owned subsidiaries". This would offer the same benefit to shareholders, without the messy effects of the actual merger. And it could also introduce whipsaw to the legacy pilots, something you've never faced.

Imagine that. "Delta Air Lines, a wholly owned subsidiary of Excelon Transportation".

How does it make sense to reduce customer choice? Guess what - it don't... That merger will never happen. NEVER EVER NEVER EVER NEVER EVER. Get it?

The only plausible way for a merger of equals to happen would be for one to be in severe financial distress with liquidation (and thousands of potential jobs lost) imminent. USAirways was months (if not weeks) away from liquidation and it needed a merger partner to survive. That's the point. As an example, NWA and Delta compete for European and Asian passengers (through different hubs) and, as another example, a passenger wanting to fly from San Diego to Richmond could choose between the two airlines (again, connecting through different hubs). In those cases, DAL and NWA are direct competitors. Why would you want to reduce consumer choices by merging two viable airlines that don't need the merger to survive? The Department of Justice will not allow it.

Instead, a merger between DAL and Alaska makes much more sense because:

1. the route structures are complementary (Alaska fills out the West Coast for Delta)

2. no hubs would need to be closed (Alaska could keep its West Coast hubs to provide competition against SWA and US) - no redundancies (big political issue for Congressmen in those states)

3. Current Alaska passengers could leverage Delta's international network (proposed Asia expansion out of LAX)

I doubt AA could afford much of a bidding war with DAL. DAL's balance sheet is much stronger after the bankruptcy (renegotiated a lot of debt) and AA does not have much of an international network out of the West Coast excluding London out of LAX. DAL would win that bidding war.

Again, NWA and DAL will not merge unless one is in severe financial distress. I don't see it happening.
 
another opinion

Delta's Alliance Almost Like Merger
Wednesday October 17, 6:59 pm ET
By Joshua Freed, AP Business Writer
Alliances Like Delta's Can Be Almost As Good As a Merger


MINNEAPOLIS (AP) -- Domestic airline mergers are hard enough. And foreign ownership rules block overseas airlines from buying U.S. carriers.
But alliances like the one announced Wednesday by Delta and Air France-KLM are a sort of end-run around those obstacles.

ADVERTISEMENT


The joint venture forming between Air France-KLM Group and Delta Air Lines Inc. will allow them to share profits and estimated annual revenues of up to $8 billion on trans-Atlantic flights. The only other U.S. carrier involved in such a tight alliance with a foreign airline is Northwest Airlines Corp., whose joint venture with KLM began in 1991.

"That's as close to a merger as you can get without actually merging," said airline analyst Michael Derchin of FTN Midwest Securities Corp, referring to the deals of both carriers. "Because these guys can basically sit down and collude legally on pricing, scheduling, marketing -- act as one firm. It's definitely a powerful tool."

Collins Stewart analysts said the Delta-Air France deal is likely to inspire wider combinations, including BA and American and Germany's Deutsche Lufthansa AG, United Airlines of the U.S. and Britain-based BMI.

Meanwhile, codesharing is another options, falling at the low end of the airline cooperation scale. This practice allows one airline to sell seats on another's flights. There are also alliances that involve closer cooperation, such as one between United Airlines and Lufthansa. Finally, deep alliances like Northwest-KLM and Delta-Air France, include profit sharing.

With an antitrust exemption, airlines can coordinate schedules, fares and marketing, too. That's what Northwest and KLM do, and analysts said the Delta-Air France alliance is similar.

British Airways PLC has twice unsuccessfully attempted to combine with American Airlines on trans-Atlantic routes, but it hasn't received antitrust immunity.

American executives told analysts on Wednesday that the Delta-Air France alliance gives them a "renewed focus" on getting an antitrust exemption for its relationship with British Airways.

"They're trying very hard to do the same thing but they can't get antitrust exemption right now," said Calyon Securities analyst Ray Neidl. "They can't even get codesharing across the North Atlantic to London because the two airlines have such a predominant position there. It's something that everybody wants to do."

A new "open skies" agreement that takes effect March 30, 2008, will allow airlines to fly from anywhere in the European Union to any point in the U.S.

Carriers have been rushing to take advantage. Six airlines in the so-called SkyTeam Alliance have already applied to the Department of Justice for antitrust immunity for trans-Atlantic flights. They are Air France and KLM, Delta and Northwest, as well as Alitalia and CSA Czech Airlines. Currently, Northwest only has antitrust immunity with KLM while Delta has it only with Air France, Alitalia and CSA.

Northwest has stressed that it is not seeking antitrust immunity with Delta on domestic routes.

On Wednesday, Northwest issued a statement saying the Delta-Air France joint venture should not impact the SkyTeam antitrust application because it would not achieve the same benefits.

In addition, the Transportation Department last year sought to lift rules that cap foreign control of U.S. airlines at 25 percent of voting shares, but it backed down because of fears about jobs and security.

And while the 25 percent ownership rule blocks mergers of U.S. and foreign carriers, even domestic mergers are notoriously difficult.

Managers of combined airlines have to meld disparate fleets and routes, decide which hubs to keep, and persuade frequent flyers to stick around. Even more dicey is the integration of two -- usually unionized --staffs. Two years after it was bought by America West Airlines, pilots at US Airways Group Inc. still haven't settled on a new contract because of seniority disputes.
 
I am all for an AirTran/Frontier merger!
 
Doesn't AMR own Hawaiian?

No. They're an independent company. They would probably be a great match for someone, although I'm not sure how profitable the inter-island flying is. Also, how could anyone ever get rid of a great name like that?
 
Last edited:
I am all for an AirTran/Frontier merger!

Eh. I'm not thrilled about the idea. I like it better than an AAI/SWA merger, but my favorite would be AAI/Alaska. Unfortunately, Alaska doesn't seem to be interested in merging with anyone.
 
General, UAL has much more CASH than DAL.

I have said Delta for more than 5 years. I am even more convinced today. Think about it. CAL has a pension. That is a humongous deal killer. CAL has told Tilton: "You can't even run water, let alone an airline". Delta's BK was a mirror image of UAL's. Delta is non-union except for ALPA. UAL has the maintenance operation for sale. And after selling the mileage plus, UAL has enough cash to substantially reduce debt at both carriers. Even after the sucking sound of cash leaving with manager types.

And Delta removed old-time airline guys from the CEO slot when the previous CEO retired. No coincidence. It was an order from two boards.

UAL has kept staffing lean. So has Delta. Coincidence? Cost control? BS! This is merger prep. And it is going to happen the next three months. A merger takes time, and in three months these a..holes are out of time before this corrupt administration is gone from the White House.

Thinking past the merger announcement, I figure 5 or 6 months of idle talk at the arbitration table. Then 30 days cooling.

See you on the strike line next summer or about a year from now.

Crockett,

When that happens.....I get first bunk break, you get the fat chick in Sao Paulo.....Deal???
 
The prospect of a few years of 100 bucks a barrel ought to motivate some get-together's and get rid of some of this friggin EXCESS CAPACITY!!
 
Guess what fellas - this is not about what is good for anyone other than the hedge funds who are now in aggregate major investors in recent BK carriers. They want a return on their investment for their shareholders, and now.

Much of this is deliberate speculation to run up the stock prices so the hedges can pump and dump. It might even result in an announced merger or two, whether they come to fruition or not.

Better hope they don't. This group of investors knows nothing about airlines, and doesn't care if they leave smoking ruins, tens of thousands out of work, and the industry in chaos, so long as they make a killing.

Anyone who thinks this is about what is good for the consumer or industry is delusional.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom