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

Northwest and Delta a better fit, not United according to the Street

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

Heavy Set

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2002
Posts
2,277
Northwest May Be Best for Delta
c.gif

By Ted Reed
TheStreet.com Staff Reporter
11/15/2007 5:14 PM






CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- If Delta (DAL - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr) wants to merge with someone, Northwest (NWA - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr) may be the most viable candidate.

On Wednesday, a hedge fund called for a merger between Delta and UAL's (UAUA - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr - Rating) United Airlines, and the Associated Press reported that the two carriers have discussed a deal that would put the combined company's headquarters in Chicago. Delta denied holding any talks.
In any case, "Northwest makes more sense," analyst Michael Derchin of FTN Midwest Securities said Thursday in a report. Additionally, a source said, past internal Delta studies have concluded that Continental (CAL - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr - Rating) and Northwest are good merger candidates, while United is not.
Those studies indicated that a pact between United and Delta, the nation's second- and third-largest airlines, would be unlikely to gain approval from antitrust regulators. Meanwhile, Northwest has the ability to limit Continental's maneuverability because it owns a stake in its fellow carrier and could block an acquisition.
Derchin wrote in his report that Northwest's Pacific routes are the primary lure. "It will take Delta 15 years to build an Asia/Pacific operation that is comparable to their current Atlantic and Latin American operations," he said. "A merger would get them there in one year." While United also has a strong Pacific operation, Derchin listed several reasons why Northwest is the preferred partner. A key is that integration of the carriers' international alliances would be smoother, namely one with Air France KLM (AKH - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr - Rating). That company has formed a joint venture with Delta, and the KLM division has a business venture with Northwest.

A merger with NWA closes this loop," Derchin said. United is a founder of the competing Star Alliance.

Additionally, Delta, which is rapidly expanding internationally, could benefit from Northwest's position as the U.S. launch customer for the Boeing 787, with orders or options for 68 deliveries. Anderson, a former Northwest executive, "knows where the bodies are buried," Derchin said.
While Northwest would have an advantage in gaining regulatory approval because it is smaller, a merger with United could also be cleared, he believes. FTN Midwest Securities makes a market in UAL's shares.
For its part, Northwest is among the airlines that has been noncommittal on consolidation. At an industry conference last week, CFO Dave Davis said that "consolidation has been a feature of this business for decades, and we think it's going to continue," but did not comment on what Northwest's role might be.
Meanwhile, the thought of a merger with United and a move of Delta's Atlanta headquarters troubled U.S. Rep Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., who questioned Delta CEO Richard Anderson Thursday at a House Aviation Subcommittee hearing on airlines' preparations for the holiday travel season. Westmoreland proclaimed his loyalty to Delta, saying that he represents many Delta employees and that he, his wife and daughter are former employees. He said he was disappointed to read of the merger talks, had also read Delta's denial, and wanted to hear from directly Anderson that there were no discussions.

I haven't talked to [United CEO] Glenn Tilton or any other executive at United since the last time I was in the industry four years ago," Anderson responded. "There are no discussions, there have been no discussions. I was as surprised at that AP article as you were."

Then Westmoreland declared Delta is "a southern company," adding "We don't want the family moving north. We want to keep the family in Atlanta." To which Anderson responded: "We couldn't agree with you more. It's a great airline with a great legacy that goes back to Monroe, Louisiana."
Westmoreland's comments recalled a statement by Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., in January, when US Airways (LCC - Cramer's Take - Stockpickr - Rating) CEO Doug Parker appeared before the Senate Commerce Committee to defend his proposed acquisition of Delta.


"I must say you are an aggressive suitor," Lott told Parker. "But the lady from the South -- Atlanta -- doesn't seem to want to be forced into this shotgun wedding."
In fact, that hearing provided a strong indication that while a US Airways and Delta merger may have had backing from Wall Street and from hedge funds, it wasn't popular with lawmakers. A week later, it collapsed. Perhaps Westmoreland's comments should serve as a reminder that Congress will get involved if airlines move to consolidate. Not to say there won't be mergers, but clearly regional loyalists and various opponents will have a chance to be heard.
 
Last edited:
Read this part about Congress and backing for Delta

"I must say you are an aggressive suitor," Lott told Parker. "But the lady from the South -- Atlanta -- doesn't seem to want to be forced into this shotgun wedding."
In fact, that hearing provided a strong indication that while a US Airways and Delta merger may have had backing from Wall Street and from hedge funds, it wasn't popular with lawmakers. A week later, it collapsed. Perhaps Westmoreland's comments should serve as a reminder that Congress will get involved if airlines move to consolidate.





So, do Hedge funds and Wall Street always win? No. You need to get past the Government, and it appears Delta has a lot of friends in DC.
 
"I must say you are an aggressive suitor," Lott told Parker. "But the lady from the South -- Atlanta -- doesn't seem to want to be forced into this shotgun wedding."
In fact, that hearing provided a strong indication that while a US Airways and Delta merger may have had backing from Wall Street and from hedge funds, it wasn't popular with lawmakers. A week later, it collapsed. Perhaps Westmoreland's comments should serve as a reminder that Congress will get involved if airlines move to consolidate.





So, do Hedge funds and Wall Street always win? No. You need to get past the Government, and it appears Delta has a lot of friends in DC.


It's good to have connections.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
If in fact consolidation is going to happen I like a DAL/NWA combination. Short term it may not be a bed of roses and there are very few mergers, if any, that have had happy endings but this combinations along with AF/KLM on the other side of the ocean makes for an extremely dominent and powerful global network, blanketing all the main hubs. Combine that with Deltas current expansion into some other places not previously served and the reigning in of Open Skies....this could be a very successful operation. The seniority issues could get ugly. Hopefully some things are being learned watching the fallout of the US Airways implosion. If I am a Delta pilot in the bottom 2/3 seniority and can maintain base and relative position I would like the idea that half the current NWA pilot population will retire in the next ten (fifteen accounting for age 65) years providing for some quick advancement assumming the combination doesn't divest of alot of airplanes and furlough pilots. With little route overlap this might be accomplished.

Regarding a Delta/United deal, if I am a Delta pilot I would avoid like the plague. I could see alot of bad things in this combination. I think Delta typically hires a different kind of pilot than United (ie conservative republican) whereas I would say United pilots in a general sense are more liberal and strangely different. Not trying to be offensive to the United guys/girls but thats just my observation.

Further, I like the unity the NWA pilots could bring to the Delta pilot group....get them involved a little more and put pressure on the union leadership to take a little harder line to "take it back". Not sure how it would go down with NWA pilots having retirement, some Delta guys getting lump sums then new guys getting only the 11%. That would all have to be worked out.

Another point to be noted. NWA pilots will be less likely to stay until age 65 to retire since they still have their full retirement in place. I see alot going a year or two past age 60 then hanging it up. Delta guys will probably go more toward a full 65 term when its brought in.

Best case for a Delta/NWA new hire whos coming on board right now is for Delta and NWA to stay separate for about another year, both companies continue expanding and a healthy hiring stream (total another 1000 plus on board) then if consolidation must happen glue them at that point.

This combination may not produce the biggest US airline in the end (unless you eventually throw an Alaska or JB into the mix) but it might very well be the most profitable with the best overall network.
 
Last edited:
Dal-nwa

And what about the DC9's? UAL's fleet is actually more compatible with DAL's:

747-400
777
75/76
737 (300,500,700,800)
A320
MD88

Vs a DAL-NWA fleet:

747-400
777
A330
75/76
737 (700,800)
MD88
A320.

CVG would go, and maybe MEM. Some of those assets could be sent out to LA to build a true West Coast hub and gateway to Asia. But the airline would be the largest in the world (843 aircraft if all were kept -- which will not happen, vs AA's 699.)

Either way it's a giant ********************-sandwich for the junior guys like me.

In any event, to quote a legnd of the screen, "Mongo only pawn, in game of life."
 
And what about the DC9's? UAL's fleet is actually more compatible with DAL's:

747-400
777
75/76
737 (300,500,700,800)
A320
MD88

Vs a DAL-NWA fleet:

747-400
777
A330
75/76
737 (700,800)
MD88
A320.

CVG would go, and maybe MEM. Some of those assets could be sent out to LA to build a true West Coast hub and gateway to Asia. But the airline would be the largest in the world (843 aircraft if all were kept -- which will not happen, vs AA's 699.)

Either way it's a giant ********************-sandwich for the junior guys like me.

In any event, to quote a legnd of the screen, "Mongo only pawn, in game of life."

The problem with United would be the hubs close to ours. DEN/SLC, IAD/JFK, CVG/ORD, and we both have an LAX presence. That would be bad. NWA, on the otherhand, has a lot less overlap, and CVG and MEM would turn into focus cities, which is pretty much what our mainline does out of CVG anyway. If I were you, I would wish for NWA over anyone else--legacy wise. We could always go for a part of United (Asia stuff out of SFO), or go for Alaska. Combining with USAir or United would be bad, and I don't think it would happen anyway for antitrust reasons anyway. Relax.

Also, back in the late 90s we had 737-200s, 737-300 non-efis, 737-300s w/efis, MD88s, MD90s, 727s, 737-800s, 757s, 767-200s, 767-300DOM, 767-300ERs, L1011s, MD11s, and 777s. That is 14 different types of planes. So, if we add a few from NWA, do you really think it will matter much? No, it won't. We won't get close to the amount we had in the late 90s.


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
Last edited:
And what about the DC9's? UAL's fleet is actually more compatible with DAL's:

747-400
777
75/76
737 (300,500,700,800)
A320
MD88

Vs a DAL-NWA fleet:

747-400
777
A330
75/76
737 (700,800)
MD88
A320.

CVG would go, and maybe MEM. Some of those assets could be sent out to LA to build a true West Coast hub and gateway to Asia. But the airline would be the largest in the world (843 aircraft if all were kept -- which will not happen, vs AA's 699.)

Either way it's a giant ********************-sandwich for the junior guys like me.

In any event, to quote a legnd of the screen, "Mongo only pawn, in game of life."

Fleets can be re-alligned, planes can be swapped and traded (ie Boeing has taken airbuses off other airlines hands and sold/leased those planes on the world market in exchange for new Boeing orders). Routes are very difficult and sometimes impossible to obtain. As the article states it could take Delta 15 plus years to try to create what NWA already has in place right now and even then, when asking for landing slots to other countries the answer all too often can be "NO".

Delta dominates the Atlantic and is chomping at the bit to go heavy on the Asian Pacific theater as that market is quickly maturing and coming into its own. With the right management team and strategic moves the NWA freighter operation could grow nicely in Asia as well, already having a great foothold there. Delta was hoping to obtain more Asia slots with the bids going out but pretty much all the legacies were awarded one equally during the last round. Its hard to get a leg up on your competition if thats how slots will be allocated. Now Continental is posting big advertisements in NYC saying "If you want to go to Bejing, you cant go on Delta". I'm sure a Delta leadership intent on growing NYC and LAX dont want to deal with that kind of black eye marketing going forward.

Bottom line, a merger must be more about routes that are hard to get and not about airplanes. Having said that when looking to the long term, one must be able to survive the pain of the short term.
 
Last edited:
You won't see a merger of equals unless one is in dire financial straits (like USAirways pre AWA/US merger). The DOJ will nix it - especially if it means a reduction in consumer choice. For example, the fact that UAL and DAL both serve European destinations out of IAD and JFK/ATL respectively on the East Coast would mean an automatic reduction in consumer choice from non-hub markets to Europe. Consolidation might be perfect from a business standpoint (reduce costs), but it doesn't from a political standpoint. Yeah, I don't see it happening - too many Congressmen would risk jobs lost in their districts (redundancies caused by closing/reducing overlapping hubs).

I think a merger between DAL and Alaska (not equals in terms of revenue) makes more sense because their route structures are complementary and the fleet types fit.
 
Regarding a Delta/United deal, if I am a Delta pilot I would avoid like the plague. I could see alot of bad things in this combination. I think Delta typically hires a different kind of pilot than United (ie conservative republican) whereas I would say United pilots in a general sense are more liberal and strangely different. Not trying to be offensive to the United guys/girls but thats just my observation.

Care to elaborate? What a moron.
 
Regarding a Delta/United deal, if I am a Delta pilot I would avoid like the plague. I could see alot of bad things in this combination. I think Delta typically hires a different kind of pilot than United (ie conservative republican) whereas I would say United pilots in a general sense are more liberal and strangely different. Not trying to be offensive to the United guys/girls but thats just my observation.

Care to elaborate? What a moron.

I was wondering how long it would take for someone to pick up on that line. I am only commenting on what I have observed. The hiring practices of United have been very different from that of Delta for at least a couple dedades now. The type of pilots they have targeted and hired have been different as a whole. You are free to dissagree if you want. Having said that I have some friends at United that do not fall into the group I am talking about.
 
Last edited:
As it stands right now, 50% of the NWA pilots are over the age of 50...for a NWA new hire that is a very big reason to join on. If there was a Delta/NWA merger, that would be lost. Is the merger a good thing for the NWA new hire?
 
Fleets can be re-alligned, planes can be swapped and traded (ie Boeing has taken airbuses off other airlines hands and sold/leased those planes on the world market in exchange for new Boeing orders).

NWA is nearly an all Airbus fleet. They'll be operating 64 A330s by end of next year, I can't see them giving those up in a merger.

Food for thought.. Richard Anderson and Doug Steenland go way back to the old days on Lone Oak. They have to be pretty chummy, and something might be in the works behind closed doors. Also, the route structures have limited overlap. I could be a very advantageous merger.

Question though, which colors would win out?
 
NWA is nearly an all Airbus fleet. They'll be operating 64 A330s by end of next year, I can't see them giving those up in a merger.

Huh?

NWA has 32 A330's, with NONE on order. Good news: You're half right. Bad news: 50% is a "F".

NWA has 162 Arbii in service. NWA also has 203 non-Arbii in service. So unless your definition of "nearly all" is 44%...you're waaaaaay off the sheet.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom