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

How Would Shutdown of United Help Rivals

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

canyonblue

Everyone loves Southwest
Joined
Nov 26, 2001
Posts
2,314
Potential United Shutdown Might Help Rival Airlines
By Sonoko Setaishi

Dow Jones Newswires
NEW YORK -- Air fares might be on fire sale and the drumbeat of war might be getting louder, but there's hope for the airline industry in the eyes of at least some pundits: If UAL Corp.'s (UAL) United Airlines shuts down, most other airlines stand to benefit.

A potential Chapter 7 liquidation of the world's second-largest carrier, operating under protection from creditors since December, may be "the industry's best-case scenario," Jamie Baker, analyst at J.P. Morgan Securities Inc. in New York, wrote in a research note Thursday.

The shutdown of the Chicago carrier would help the surviving network carriers by boosting their revenue, Mr. Baker said. That, the analyst bets, would outweigh the potential negatives of the shutdown, such as the continuation of high industry labor costs and the likely emergence of a host of domestic startups that would pose a threat to the big airlines.

United says it's making progress toward its goal of emerging from Chapter 11 by June 2004 by slashing labor and other costs and pursuing strategies to make it more competitive, including the proposed creation of a low-fare division.

United's fate likely will become clearer in the next two months, during which the carrier must meet the strict financial targets set by the providers of its interim financing while discussing concessions with labor unions. A war with Iraq, particularly a lengthy one, could diminish its chance of survival. The direction of the economy and demand for air travel also will play a big role.

A liquidation is "not going to happen," said United spokesman Joe Hopkins. " Everything that we're working on is to transform United into a much more competitive entity that can be successful over a long period of time."

Even so, some industry executives and analysts have been speculating over which airline would be interested in which United assets and who the ultimate winner would be in the event of the carrier's shutdown.

"An ex-UAL industry is sufficiently compelling, in our view, and an inherent possibility given the industry's poor track record at Chapter 11 resuscitation," said Mr. Baker, who wouldn't speculate on the odds of United's emergence from Chapter 11. Mr. Baker doesn't rate UAL stock and doesn't own its shares. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) is involved in the $1.5 billion debtor-in-possession financing extended to UAL.

"I think that the industry would benefit overall from the fact that capacity would be pulled out" should United close its doors, said Michael Linenberg, airline analyst at Merrill Lynch & Co. in New York. In particular, Mr. Linenberg said, "there would be lots of opportunity for the financially stronger, profitable, low-fare, low-cost operators" such as Southwest Airlines Co.(NYSE:LUV) (LUV), JetBlue Airways Corp.(NASDAQ-NMS:JBLU) (JBLU) and AirTran Holdings Inc.'s (AAI) AirTran Airways.

Mr. Linenberg wouldn't handicap the likelihood of United's liquidation, saying it depends on many factors. The analyst doesn't rate UAL stock and doesn't own the shares.

UAL shares were down three cents, or 2.7%, at $1.07 in afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange. The stock reached a 52-week low of 64 cents on Dec. 9. Shares of a company in Chapter 11 typically become worthless during the proceedings.

Had United not flown last year, the other major network carriers would have posted much smaller losses, or even profits, estimates J.P. Morgan's Mr. Baker.

AMR Corp.'s (AMR) American Airlines, the world's largest carrier, would have lost about $2 a share, rather than the whopping loss of $12.97 a share posted in 2002. Continental Airlines Inc.(NYSE:CAL) (CAL), the nation's fifth-largest carrier, would have earned about $2 a share, rather than losing $4.52 a share. Northwest Airlines Corp.(NASDAQ-NMS:NWAC) (NWAC), the No. 4 U.S. carrier, would have roughly broken even, rather than having a red ink of $5.74 a share.

The greatest potential beneficiary, according to Mr. Baker, is America West Airlines parent America West Holdings Corp.(NYSE:AWA) (AWA). The owner of the No. 8 U.S. carrier would have earned about $4 a share last year, rather than losing $3.82 a share. Mr. Baker's estimates assume that the industry would capture 70% of United's revenue.

Burning through millions of dollars each day, United's big rivals likely can't afford to snap up any significant chunk of the carrier's assets should they go to the auction block, Mr. Baker and Merrill Lynch's Mr. Linenberg say.

However, the big airlines would likely race to move into United's domestic markets and vie for its prized international airport access.

American, for one, would move aggressively to seize United's Pacific routes, the two analysts say. The Fort Worth, Texas, carrier would also nearly dominate Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, unless low-fare carriers such as JetBlue expand into the city.

Continental and Delta Air Lines Inc.(NYSE:DAL) (DAL), the third-largest U.S. carrier, would be eager to obtain United's slots at London Heathrow Airport, the two pundits say. Mr. Baker says Delta would be more likely to gain access to the airport.

Delta would also go after United's San Francisco hub, while Continental would push for its Denver hub and Southwest, the No. 6 carrier, would seek its Washington Dulles hub and could win it over JetBlue. Also up for grabs would be United's Los Angeles hub.

"Every major carrier remaining would be interested in enhancing their presence in those cities," Mr. Linenberg said.

United's liquidation wouldn't solve all of the industry's problems. If United shuts down and ends its efforts to slash labor costs with the help of the bankruptcy court, "current labor progress at AMR and elsewhere would similarly grind to a halt," Mr. Baker said. American has asked its employees for annual labor-cost savings of $1.8 billion, and Delta and Northwest have also said they must wring more cost savings from union contracts.

US Airways Group Inc. (UAWGQ), owner of the No. 7 U.S. carrier, which sought protection from creditors last summer, has cut its labor costs by more than $1 billion a year.

Another potential drawback for the big hub-and-spoke carriers: Southwest, the low-fare king, would take away an even greater share of the domestic market, Baker predicted.
 
Seems to be a popular subject to write about these days. I just read an article entitled "Deathwatch" in Forbes magazine yesterday, and the potential fate of UAL is on the news wires almost every day.

They've definitely got some big problems to overcome, and I'm not sure that duct tape's the answer this time around.
 
First off, nobody wishes for the end of United. Well, maybe the management and employees at all the other airlines, but it doesn't necessarily mean good times for all the other airlines should United liquidate.

In 1990/91 many of us thought it would help USAir if/when Eastern and Midway went out of business. It may have in some small way but over 300 guys remained on furlough for seven years and the company performed poorly up until 1996. Similarly TWA and Northwest had people on furlough and they were not called back in any hurry either. A few years later American furloughed about 600 guys for three years.

Typhoonpilot
 
capacity

While the short term removal of capacity may help for the moment, ultimately that capacity will be replaced as the market needs it. In the end, the low cost producer benefits the most.

Internationally would have a different effect and perhaps some of the so called majors could take advantage of that. Outside carriers would as well.

In the end, it is what the public will pay for what service that determines success. So far, they have not shown a willingness to be a part of this future growth except at a low fare rate.
 
Publishers , I have to respond.

In the end, it is what the public will pay for what service that determines success. So far, they have not shown a willingness to be a part of this future growth except at a low fare rate.

It is NOT growth that we are talking about; it is reducing capacity to match the demand. In a race to produce the cheapest product that there is too much of, consumers focus solely on price. There is nothing else to distinguish the vendors, and no one is willing to sacrifice market share by ceding one cent to the competition. If one (very large) competitor leaves the market, the business model may begin to resemble a more normal pricing curve. The situation now is NOT sustainable: too many seats chasing too few passengers. It doesn't matter if it's SWA or DAL: with too many airplanes in the sky, times are tough. The definition of "tough" may vary with the carrier, but if SWA with a single fleet type, lower labor costs and no international network infrastructure is looking at breaking even, then something is wrong. That something is excess capacity. Not growth.

Internationally would have a different effect and perhaps some of the so called majors could take advantage of that.

You are essentially correct but I take issue with your "so called majors" comment. If UAL, DAL and AAL are not majors then who is? I am not going to get into a SWA versus the world debate here. All I am saying is that your argument does not benefit by an underhanded jab at major carriers with an international network. A capacity reduction to Europe and the Far East (UAL has already surrendered South America) would benefit many carriers - but not SWA, JBLU or AirTran, the current darlings of this board.

Just because your favorite airline is not included in some beneficial scenario is no reason to demean the ones who will benefit.

P. S. I start a 3-day trip tomorrow, so my lack of replies until then are no comment on your responses; I'll just be gone!
 

Latest resources

Back
Top