Speedtape
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2004
- Posts
- 1,973
This merger should in theory allow larger guage aircraft on many routes. If you had DL pulling pax from IND through ATL and NW pulling pax from IND through DTW you should be able combine those passengers on a larger aircraft to one of the hubs. A much larger enitity should be able to upguage many of the markets served due to the higher number of passengers served. I see the opportunity to convert formerly outsourced feed routes into mainline routes all across the country as quickly as DL can get get out of it's current contracts.
You bring up excellent points. If you followed it in the Congressional Hearings, you will remember that RA argued, and in the context of the statement it was true, that NWA and Delta did not compete head to head, except for a few exceptions, on very many city pairs. Therefore, the proposed merger should not be disapproved.
Of course what he did not mention, is that there was a LOT of competition for Point of Origin to Final Destination traffic, which, if considered, might have shed a different light on the argument. What is meant by this? Most of the traffic is connecting traffic, not non stop! To illustrate, an example would be MSY to LGA. NWA and Delta do not compete head to head on these city pairs--meaning non-stop in RA's argument. However, when one looks at it closer, NWA and Delta do compete on these city pairs--through different connecting hubs. So, a customer could have a choice, pre-merger, either MSY-MEM-LGA or MSY-ATL-LGA. At some point, Post-Merger, things could change. Now, one Company versus 2 is has some unique advantages in controlling that customer(s) travel in the illustration, while making the new Company more efficient.
Should the economy continue to decline, and advanced bookings decline, then the marketing and route folks, could reduce capacity further, but continue to maintain high load factors, by routing that MSY passenger through ATL, or MEM, as the case may be, while impacting the other hub. The end result would be retaining the MSY passenger, but should other factors continue decline, reduce service/capacity on one of the hub routings. This could also cause changing guage to accomodate the loads on the surviving routing. It becomes a Logistic issue. There are other factors. However, my guess is that this is an example of some of the things that were mentioned as the advantage in merger and also, how they mentioned that by streamlining the Post Merger Company, they could gain new efficiencies in a recession with plenty of room to move.
It will be interesting to see how they streamline the new company. In addition, how new opportunities from failed competitors will be captured. Some of these issues are what provide great optimism in the future of this merged company. Along the way, there could be some short term pain for employees through the streamling, but the long term benefits of a strong, competive, and surviving company will provide a much better career--and maybe better job security(knock on wood!)