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

Will it be US/AA or AA/B6/AK?

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

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
DEALTALK-Time may be ripe for US Air-AMR merger


By Soyoung Kim and Nick Brown

NEW YORK, June 7 | Thu Jun 7, 2012 6:57pm EDT


NEW YORK, June 7 (Reuters) - Having sat out the mega-mergers last decade that created the world's top two airlines, bankrupt AMR Corp appears to be on a path toward an arranged marriage with smaller counterpart US Airways Group.

With US Airways proposing a merger for the American Airlines parent, and labor groups putting the screws on AMR to pursue the deal, AMR recently agreed - albeit begrudgingly - to explore consolidation options while it is still in Chapter 11 bankruptcy. That was a reversal of the airline's earlier commitment to exiting bankruptcy as an independent company.

The third-largest U.S. carrier has made it clear that willingness to explore a merger does not "in any way suggest" a deal will be pursued. But most Wall Street analysts, industry executives and bankers agree AMR will find it tough to prove to creditors that going it alone would outstrip merger benefits.

AMR's consolidation review is expected to include potential deals with smaller carriers such as JetBlue Airways and Alaska Air Group and will not be limited to US Airways, according to people familiar with the matter.

But a deal with US Airways, the No.5 U.S. carrier, is seen as having the best shot at getting the blessing of a complex web of various stakeholders at AMR -- including labor unions, global alliance partners and financial creditors -- as well as anti-trust regulators in the United States and Europe.

Such a deal, which will make the combined carrier the world's largest, would also be large enough to allow the carriers to reverse years of network marginalization and take on larger rivals United Continental and Delta Air Lines , especially in the U.S. East Coast networks.

"I don't know anybody who's looked at it from 30,000 feet that would tell you that they think the standalone scenario is superior," Robert Mann, an airline industry consultant, said on Wednesday.

"It has not competed well when it was going from No. 1 to No. 2 now to the third position, and I don't see how a standalone would solve that, especially with this 'shrink and then re-grow' strategy they are doing."
James Sprayregen, the attorney who steered United through bankruptcy in 2006, cautioned that it is "inherently difficult" to convince a merger-resistant company to explore an M&A deal.

He said, however, that "if you get a sufficient number of stakeholders who support M&A over a standalone, even with the difficulty, that can create a lot of momentum."

AMR filed for bankruptcy in November, citing an untenable labor cost structure. The company also grappled with losses of well-heeled corporate travelers while Delta and United expanded networks and market share through mergers. AMR was the largest airline until the 2008 merger of Delta and Northwest.

It has proposed a standalone restructuring deal that would reduce its annual labor costs by about $1.25 billion a year through job cuts, changes to benefits and updated work rules.But AMR's unions argue that no amount of labor concessions could solve the airline's growing revenue and network disparity with United and Delta. They've thrown their weight behind US Airways, saying synergies from a merger would save 6,200 jobs that would be doomed if AMR exits bankruptcy independently.

"What's best for our company, our people and our financial stakeholders will be determined by the facts in a disciplined manner and process. And this includes whether American will choose to pursue any combination down the road," AMR said in a statement.


CORNERSTONE STRATEGY


AMR executives believe building on its strong presence in selective international networks, such as its industry-leading Latin American routes and the networks connecting New York's JFK airport and London's Heathrow, are more important than the overall size of the airline.
The carrier has said its standalone plan would generate $3 billion in new revenue and savings by 2017. Around $1 billion in new revenues would come from adjusting its fleet to market demand and establishing extensive code-sharing agreements with other domestic carriers, such as JetBlue and Alaska, people close to the company say.

Some industry analysts said broad code-sharing agreements with other airlines could present other viable alternatives.
"The one scenario that I believe is more interesting than a transaction -- and it's only possible if they win relief from the pilots -- is to have certain, extensive code relationships with JetBlue and with Alaska," said Bill Swelbar, a research engineer at MIT's international center for air transportation.

But a full-on merger with either of the carriers is seen as a long shot. Both airlines have carved out strong identities as low cost carriers and have publicly stated their lack of interest in industry consolidation.
"Our plan is really about organic growth. It's our own planes, it's our own people," JetBlue said in a statement to Reuters on Thursday. Alaska did not have immediate comment.


BEFORE OR AFTER


The timing of a deal remains unclear, as US Airways would prefer a deal while AMR is in bankruptcy, while AMR would like to exit bankruptcy before consolidating. In addition to AMR's labor unions, a US Airways proposal would likely garner support from AMR's partners in the global oneworld alliance, including British Airways. Oneworld, the smallest of the world's three juggernaut airline pacts, would gain US Airways, which has proposed to jump ship from the Star Alliance under a merger.
Alliances allow airline members to cooperate on routes and connections, essentially expanding their networks.

Adding US Airways' Philadelphia hub and Charlotte, North Carolina, service to oneworld would net 33 new Eastern U.S. cities for British Airways, a unit of International Airlines Group, that AMR does not presently serve, JPMorgan analyst Jamie Baker said in a research note.
"Such a merger would not be detrimental to oneworld. In terms of the joint business agreement any consolidation that increases the choices for our customers would be welcomed," International Airlines Group said in an emailed statement to Reuters, when asked about a potential tie-up of AMR and US Airways.

A combination of US Airways and AMR is also likely to be the last remaining merger of legacy U.S. carriers that could clinch regulator approval, analysts say.

For instance, Delta and AMR overlap in 68 domestic markets -- as opposed to 13 markets between US Airways and AMR, meaning no deal is possible without massive carve-outs and union job cuts. Delta declined to comment on Thursday.

Ray Neidl, an airline analyst with Maxim Group, said he rates the probability of a US Airways-AMR merger at 90 percent, but says it may well happen after bankruptcy."(AMR) will have a new base of stockholders at that point, and maybe a new board of directors," Neidl said. "They can negotiate a merger from a position of strength."

AMR until September has the exclusive right to propose bankruptcy restructuring plans without outside intervention. To effect a merger during AMR's bankruptcy, US Air would have to wait for exclusivity to end, or lobby AMR's unsecured creditors' committee to ask the bankruptcy court to lift exclusivity.

JPMorgan analyst Baker in a research note said AMR's standalone restructuring scenario "does not necessarily assure the wheels of industry consolidation grind to a halt, though it could slow the process."
The Allied Pilots Association, which represents AMR's pilots unions, has told its members that clinching a merger with US Airways in bankruptcy is critical to ensure they have a role.

"A merger with US Airways that followed our exit from bankruptcy would be entirely on AMR management's terms and would not require APA's consent. We would barely constitute a speed bump in that post-bankruptcy scenario," the union said in a communication to members that was reviewed by Reuters.

"We have more control over our destiny if a merger is conducted while the airline is in restructuring."



Bye Bye---General Lee
 
After DALPA sells out -900's, AA will get the judge to outsource JB's 190's
 
After DALPA sells out -900's, AA will get the judge to outsource JB's 190's

Do you mean the 76 seat JB E190s? Go hug an Airtran pilot, they deserve it.


Bye Bye---General Lee
 
In a perfect world Horton/AMR would probably want to join up with Alaska and B6. In reality, Parker is very eager to jump in bed with AA and will do anything he can to make that happen.

It'll be VA and JBLU! :D

I think the next round of mergers is going to be Delta/Alaska and then that will open the gates for AA/JB/VA 3 way. Go ahead and laugh, but it would be a good fit!
 
Do you mean the 76 seat JB E190s? Go hug an Airtran pilot, they deserve it.


Bye Bye---General Lee

No, I mean they have less leverage than you- so they'll get a worse result.

Do you disagree that DALPA is the most influential pilot union in the world?
 
I doubt it, but could you please elaborate on your conclusion?

Pure speculation on my part. I saw a text to one of our FO's from his wall street buddy right after the USAir anouncement saying to expect a play by SWA. A lot of strange things happening recently.

Jim
 
AA's management team really wants AS and are selling it as part of their great plan moving forward to the major creditors. I don't think there is anyway they can pull it off but they sure must feel they can. Either way the whole thing is horrific to think about from the AS side.

SWA had it's big chance to buy AS and thought the valuation at 2.1B was to much they are not going to come back 2 years later and pay 2.8B minimum. Plus their hands are full with AirTran.
 
Parker will win this one. Expect US-AMR.

Southwest and others will pick up some spin off, gates, cities, etc.
 
I'd like to then see SWA make a play for B6 to gain that much needed NYC presence. I doubt they would sit idle and get shut out of the biggest market in the world.
 
I'd like to then see SWA make a play for B6 to gain that much needed NYC presence. I doubt they would sit idle and get shut out of the biggest market in the world.

Looks like DL has already made a big play for the NYC market, with the USAir slot swap, a new terminal there in LGA, and a new $1.2 billion terminal at JFK. But, SWA does own Islip! You gotta love Ronkonkama.


Bye Bye---General Lee
 
General,

I know you fly ATL to points beyond, but if your ever flying over Long Island take a look.

Long Island Population = 2.8 Million people

That's 3/4 of the population of the Atlanta region! We fly alot of Long Islanders across the country from a little airport known as ISP.

I do think Delta will stand to gain more with the resolution of the AA bankruptcy. Whatever it ultimately is.
 
I think US Airways is more likely. Alaska and jetBlue just wouldn't give American the critical mass to re-gain the status of the largest airline. US Airways will add more aircraft and larger guage airframes at that...

The term sheet provided to the APA will allow unrestricted code-share with Alaska with the exception of Hawaii flying. That will allow American to capture a lot of the benefits from Alaska without actually merging. And while jetBlue has a strong presence in the Northeast with its JFK operations, US Airways stronger Northeast and East coast presence seems to work better for American. Plus the addition of a Southeast hub in CLT will add flexability to the American network.

US Airways also brings a lot of orders for Widebody aircraft in the A-330 and A-350's. That is a nice compliment to the orders for the 777 and 787 orders that American has.
 
That would be a big move. Meshing a 737 operation with a Airbus operation would be interesting.

Yes it would. I could see it being beneficial. As for 190s I'm sure they would get dumped. Planes types never seem to get in the way of wall st mergers. The assets are more valuable ( JFK , caribbean etc)
 
Realizing that there is a scenario floating out there for just about every airline in existence to either buy or be bought by Alaska...

AA scenario goes something like this...

AA has about 230 MD80's remaining...Alaska has about 130 actual and about another 40 or so 737-NG's in the pipe or on option. Combined with the deliveries of 737-800's AA has coming, and the fact that you are replacing a 140 pax jets with 156-170 pax jets, they are probably pretty close in ASM's.

Horizon would be merged into Eagle and airplanes packed up and shipped South and East...probably to Miami to re-enforce AMR's bread and butter Miami Hub.

Seattle would be turned into a "focus city" in AMR speak and except for a few flights down to the bay area, LA basin, and ANC everybody would be rerouted over DFW and ORD.

All of Alaskas airplanes would be integrated into AA's route network. All of the point to point Hawaii that Alaska has built up would be shuttered. AA would park all of the AA MD80's immediately.

APA will try to staple-us, because somehow they will have figured out how to convince themselves that it was Alaska that actually needed saving...and a job at American is better than a no job on the street.

At the end of this, AA will have the most fuel efficient narrow-body fleet of the large legacies and with the new wide-body deliveries in pretty good fleet shape overall.

There will be years of fighting and arbitration and litigation...and in the end none of it would have mattered to me because I am going to end up on the bottom of any combined seniority list no matter how it is combined. I can only hope the wide body fences aren't too high.

The only saving grace of this whole scenario is being able to watch some of the Arctic Eagles doing turns out of LGA. <---- now that would be funny.
 
Last edited:
Horizon would be merged into Eagle and airplanes packed up and shipped South and East...probably to Miami to re-enforce AMR's bread and butter Miami Hub.

Seattle would be turned into a "focus city" in AMR speak and except for a few flights down to the bay area, LA basin, and ANC everybody would be rerouted over DFW and ORD.

All of Alaskas airplanes would be integrated into AA's route network. All of the point to point Hawaii that Alaska has built up would be shuttered. AA would park all of the AA MD80's immediately.

Sadly, that is AA's M.O. Buying competition and shutting down their operations. If AA buys AS then you might as well pack up and move to DFW.
 
igneousy2 - you are a very sick man...
If your prediction were to actually come true, I think I would quit this airline hobby and become a dentist.
We work for the only Legacy airline that has not gone BK. Lets hope it stays that way.
Where is LGA by the way? I've never heard of it.
 
Without shareholder and employee backing there will be no deal. The employees and shareholders hate Horton and will not be behind any deal he puts together, so ak,b6 is unlikely.
They are behind the lcc deal, especially since it eliminates Horton and the rest of the whos, and this makes it the most logical course. Whether Parker can pull it off is another thing. If he's pulling another airline mgmt bait and switch it won't last. If he's serious about pulling the employees together to have a successful airline then there's a chance.
 
LEVERAGE EXPOSED

Up to now we have been arguing the merits of a YES or NO vote to the TA.

The arguments for the TA were mostly centering around a "Bird-in-the-Hand" premise, being that one shouldn't exchange an unknown for a known. This premise was supported by beliefs that those closest to the deal knew the most, a trust issue. Also there have been focus on the mathematical model of the time value of money. These and possibly the larger narrow body footprint are the basic reasons for voting YES.

These are logical arguments, but I propose they are in the micro view. Not to diminish the importance of any kind of "raise", or a diminishing 50 seat footprint, but I will illustrate, now with the data I have received from a company insider, how these are "micro view conditions" that are overshadowed, and overpowered by more important and more forceful arguments.

Pilots move to safety. Industrial psychologists know this. I am going to show you where the real safety is. Because I believe real safety is in the most truthful information, and the most honest assessments, I implore you, each of you, for your family, for your profession, your company, to listen carefully and make your decision based upon sound, sober judgement, without emotion or pretense.

The details are:

1. The company has Capacity Purchase Agreements (CPA) with "contract carriers".
These agreements extend well past 2020.

2. Delta has to honor these agreements as they are contractual.

3. Delta has to absorb the costs of these contracts, and if the aircraft operating or maintenance costs increase, Delta has to absorb these costs in addition.

4. The 50 seat aircraft are operating at a loss.

5. The 50 seat aircraft are coming up for mandatory engine maintenance/replacement costs very soon.

6. The costs to re-engine these 50 seat aircraft is between 2-2 1/2 BILLION dollars over the next 3 to 4 years. Unavoidable costs. (there are statements of 1billion on this web, those are wrong. The company has stated to me, through a person who knows, that the actual cost is 2-2 1/2 BILLION)

7. The company can replace these aircraft and avoid the 2-2 1/2 BILLION by letting the "contract carriers" fly 76 seat aircraft. These "contract carriers" would then allow the CPA agreements to be unhinged. The total deal is a deal between the Canadair and the "contract carriers", and Delta.

8. The 50 seat -76 seat agreement gives the company a one time savings of the hundreds of millions of dollars.

9. Canadair only has 11 76 seat aircraft to build and it closes down the line. There is a time crunch on Delta to get this deal done before that line is closed. This was a Canadair corporate decision.

10. The profit sharing cost savings to the company (going from 15% to 10%) was equal to a 2 1/2% pay "raise".

11. Efficiencies included in the contract were equal to a 3 1/2% pay "raise".

(are you seeing how Vice President of Labor Relations and Human Resources Mike Campbell might have been being very conservative when he said the pilot TA was cost neutral?)


12. AFTER re-engining the 50 seat aircraft, they still would operate at a revenue loss.

I can state emphatically that if the TA passes, we lose ALL LEVERAGE.

Points to be made:

For those of you who think we are hurting the company by voting NO.

The company used absolutely every ounce of leverage it has in Bankruptcy court to cut our contracts to the bone. This was after promising to "Do it once and do it right." Trust was given and then abused. This was a purely business decision by our management team. Moak did the best he could do, I presume, but was up against a management team that was willing to use every facet of coercion to diminish our careers under a paper Bankruptcy. It wasn't personal. It was a balance sheet decision leaving emotion and ramifications out of it.

If we doubled our contract to 8-17-6-6, we are still saving the company money by agreeing to this 8-17-6-6 agreement. Be assured you are still helping the company in this example. Remember the 400 million Tim O'Malley has cited is cost neutral to the company, there's 2-2 1/2 BILLION and we really don't know what the final costing of the "hundreds of millions" for the one time savings is.

Do not worry. A 8-17-6-6 is getting the company out of a bind they put their own selves in, we has nothing to do with that awful decision. We are neither responsible, nor required to help management for their erroneous decisions. These are the problems of a management with a lack of foresight. We can see this in how they deal with us also. But the point is that we only help them because we are going to be with this company for decades, they may be gone next year, and it is in our interest to help the company dispose of their bad business decisions. But in doing so, we will make the same business-only decisions in regard to what we get out of this agreement. It will cost them, not dearly, but fairly. This is the attitude of a professional, and a sober observer of the facts. I implore you who faithfully serve the company to reject this TA so as to make this a win/win for management and for the professional pilot.

For those of you who think a "Bird-in-the-Hand" should be the only factor.

A "Bird-in-the-Hand" premise is based upon grabbing and holding known values, contrasting with holding values that are unknown and estimated.

We know we have 4-8.5-3-3. We know 3 1/2 are efficiencies and 2 1/2 are profit sharing. We know that after real estate and automobiles are taken out of the government inflation numbers our 2012 inflation rate is amounting to an annual 8.1%. We also know that the Fed has increased the money supply at historically unprecedented levels. (portends inflation)

So lets do the math:

4-8.5-3-3

First, focus on 8.5%. Let's take out the known company savings, which could also be classified as concessions. This is 3 1/2% for efficiencies and 2 1/2% for profit sharing. This is 6%.

8.5%-6%=2.5%

now our agreement is this:

4%-2.5%-3%-3%

This is hardly a good agreement when the company is losing money. It certainly is way under real inflation. Considering leverage, the financial state of the company, and the good-will sacrifices we have made, this is not representative of reality.

But we are talking about "Bird-in-the-Hand".

The "Bird-in-the-Hand" is the company under our leverage. That is the "Bird-in-the-Hand" we want to focus upon. This "Bird-in-the-Hand" leverage goes away, with any chance of real gains, the second this TA passes muster. Vanished. Three and one half more years under draconian wages and complaining pilots. This is after 7 1/2 years since the first per-bankruptcy "Do it once, do it right" promise. By the way, where are they now? Gone, just like this management team will likely be in a few short years.

The real "Bird-in-the-Hand" is the leverage we hold over the company this very day. Today you can make a decision that tells management that they need to balance the cost savings more fairly. If they will not do it out of good moral principles, we will do so out of good moral principles and the power, thank God, we have been given by their relying too heavily of 50 seat contract flying of our passengers.

The "Bird-in-the-Hand" is a downed TA. The "Bird-in-the-Hand" is the current leverage we have this very day.

I was wondering why I heard over a year and a half ago, several times through Line Check Airman, that RA wanted to get an early agreement for us, unlike the other carriers with bad relations. Many thought he was being paternal and gracious. Now we know it was all about covering management mistakes, burdensome costs on an over-reliance on 50 seat aircraft, and we were the ones that he wanted to carry the water. Shame on him.

For those of you who said it the TA did not pass the "smell test"

All I can say is thank you for the guts to say what you thought was right for your professional brothers and sisters, without pandering to pressure. Continue with facts and reasoned thinking.



What to do now?




First and foremost is to look at the facts and make a decision. Definitely vote. Make your voice heard. I still run into busy family guys and girls who still haven't seen the TA! I ran into an old friend yesterday! That's June 5th!

So don't assume everyone knows. One guy said. "18% over 3 1/2 years! I'm voting YES!". We can laugh or pity those who are not acquainted with the facts, but they affect your career and mine! Engage in conversations in a congenial and calm manner. Present the facts, the arguments are overwhelming. ''

A key point to all of this discussion is that the leverage is a one time event.

As far as who does the duties after a failed TA? This is a tough one. For me I think every NC member and MEC member acted in good faith. I believe Tim O'Malley is a hard working, honest and dedicated leader. But I also believe that there have been egregious errors in the assessment of the TA landscape, the knowledge of the intentions and Achilles's heel of management's predicament, and egregious errors in the proper representative character of the pilots-especially in light of the effort of the contract survey and it's being apparently discarded by the leadership, in principle, the rates.

There is not one person who says the rates are GOOD. Not one. Even Tim O'Malley openly admits this.

With all this leverage. The company's financial state. The pricing power and new revenue streams and the moral obligation to repay past sacrifices, with "Bird-in-the-Hand" safety, why would anyone vote YES to this TA?

Only the most uninformed and reckless character would.
 
igneousy2 - you are a very sick man...
If your prediction were to actually come true, I think I would quit this airline hobby and become a dentist.
We work for the only Legacy airline that has not gone BK. Lets hope it stays that way.
Where is LGA by the way? I've never heard of it.


not my prediction...just presenting the argument for AA buying AS.

My prediction is that another player is going to join the AA fray at the AA carcas once the exclusive period is over, I can see why US Air entered early, get the unions on board, etc. The 2nd to the party has no advantage to tip their hand too early so I don't think they'll "come-out" until the end of September.

My prediction for AA is that a heavy hitter like Delta or United or both are going to enter the frey. I think Delta needs the Miami hub too badly if they want to compete against UAL/CAL to let it go cheap. I also think that somebody will pay top dollar for AA's NYC and LHR slots. I do believe that AA is worth far more in pieces then whole.

As far as Alaska --- maybe we can can get some crumbs leftover after all the feasting is over...maybe those 787 deliveries! ;)

...and LGA is a landfill about 15 miles East of EWR.

Does that make you feel better? :)
 
igneousy2 - you are a very sick man...
If your prediction were to actually come true, I think I would quit this airline hobby and become a dentist.
We work for the only Legacy airline that has not gone BK. Lets hope it stays that way.
Where is LGA by the way? I've never heard of it.

Ha, Ha, I think you're pretty safe. From what little I know the chance of an AA/US merger prior to them exiting bankruptcy is about 50%. If not prior, then almost 100% after. The only difference being if it's after the bankruptcy exit, Horton and his team will walk with about $100 million in AA equity.

The term sheet APA has signed with US allows unlimited Alaska code share. Parker thinks highly of Alaska. I believe he would like a mutually beneficial arrangement with Alaska Air Group as opposed to trying to muscle in on the west coast. The only thing that I could see effecting the code share would be a Delta acquisition of Alaska. I have no idea if that is a possibility or not.
 
.

The term sheet APA has signed with US allows unlimited Alaska code share. Parker thinks highly of Alaska. I believe he would like a mutually beneficial arrangement with Alaska Air Group as opposed to trying to muscle in on the west coast.

Actually the Alaska code share agreement in the term sheet is basically a cut and paste from the current American scope section. American already has the ability for almost unrestricted codesharing with Alaska Airlines. The only restrictions are Hawaii flying and flying into AA hubs...
 
Actually the Alaska code share agreement in the term sheet is basically a cut and paste from the current American scope section. American already has the ability for almost unrestricted codesharing with Alaska Airlines. The only restrictions are Hawaii flying and flying into AA hubs...

I guess technically it's a side letter... Supplement R of the APA contract... This point in the term sheet is nothing more than keeping a part of the current APA contract...
 
Ha, Ha, I think you're pretty safe. From what little I know the chance of an AA/US merger prior to them exiting bankruptcy is about 50%. If not prior, then almost 100% after. The only difference being if it's after the bankruptcy exit, Horton and his team will walk with about $100 million in AA equity.

The term sheet APA has signed with US allows unlimited Alaska code share. Parker thinks highly of Alaska. I believe he would like a mutually beneficial arrangement with Alaska Air Group as opposed to trying to muscle in on the west coast. The only thing that I could see effecting the code share would be a Delta acquisition of Alaska. I have no idea if that is a possibility or not.

I think Delta really likes AK feed in LAX and SEA. AK did just move to terminal 6 in LAX, right next door. I don't see it falling easily, if it were to happen.


Bye Bye---General Lee
 
Actually the Alaska code share agreement in the term sheet is basically a cut and paste from the current American scope section. American already has the ability for almost unrestricted codesharing with Alaska Airlines. The only restrictions are Hawaii flying and flying into AA hubs...

Yes I know, that is why I said they would be safe in the event of a US/AA merger.:rolleyes:
 
not my prediction...just presenting the argument for AA buying AS.

My prediction is that another player is going to join the AA fray at the AA carcas once the exclusive period is over, I can see why US Air entered early, get the unions on board, etc. The 2nd to the party has no advantage to tip their hand too early so I don't think they'll "come-out" until the end of September.

My prediction for AA is that a heavy hitter like Delta or United or both are going to enter the frey. I think Delta needs the Miami hub too badly if they want to compete against UAL/CAL to let it go cheap. I also think that somebody will pay top dollar for AA's NYC and LHR slots. I do believe that AA is worth far more in pieces then whole.

As far as Alaska --- maybe we can can get some crumbs leftover after all the feasting is over...maybe those 787 deliveries! ;)

...and LGA is a landfill about 15 miles East of EWR.

Does that make you feel better? :)


Yup, look for a break-up. Sharks are circling, and already starting to take some yummy bites. Morale at the bottom of AA list is so bad, that most don't care what happens. The end is near.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom