Why did SWA buy AT? After all, couldn't they also have done all those things you brought up? 2 very different cultures.
So because SWA and AT merged, any airline merger would be a good thing economically? I think you missed my point. The business models of SWA and AT were very similar. Merging them made sense, especially since AT was about 20% of SWA's size, so the economies of scale meant the merger would be better for SWA than merging with a smaller airline with a different business model. I've never said that the culture of the pilots & other employees was a major factor in whether a merger should happen. It would be stupid to do so. Yes, it is a consideration, but it's greatly outweighed by the economics of size, route structure, and business model.
HA is 5% the size of DL, with a very different business model. For all the
economic reasons I've stated before, I don't think it would be a very good merger for either side.
As with so many of these internet discussions, ones viewpoints get in the way of the truth. Others may look at me, or Dan Roman, or 808 Pilot, or Hansoma, and simply say that we don't want the merger for personal reasons. Although that is partly true, for me, I've always tried to look at the big picture, and be pragmatic. If the merger makes economic sense for an airline, I'll say it is a good thing to do, like I did with the SWA/AT merger. If it involves too much risk, with a large likelihood of costing too much $$, then I'd say 'don't do it'. Such is the case with HA/DL, or AK/DL. The costs and benefits to DL would be too much, and outweigh any perceived benefit.
No, I'm not an airline economics expert. This is just my viewpoint, coming from many years in the industry - one that I'm trying hard to keep separate from my wish for HA to remain independent.
HAL