WT:
I and a whole lot of people have no problem seeing mergers where everyone can win...
____________________________________________________________________
Ok WT, outside of DL/NWA (which I have reservations about just who benefitted the most), when was there ever a merger where everyone won? I can't recall one. IMHO mergers are always sloppy, ill conceived and hard as hell to implement. But never have I seen one where everyone gained. There are always those in the right seniority bracket or at a place in their personal lives that gained at the expense of others (case in point Eastern/Trump shuttle). It is just the way it is. Heck, just ask the Airtran people who the real gainers are with the WN merger er' buyout.
Like it or not Parker does seem to have the winning hand in this deal. If the mou is approved by US pilots, he will have managed to put just enough of a carrot out there to put an end to the Nic debacle. And as unbelievable as it seems he now has the US f/as seeing dollar signs, even though if you look at the math the T/A that US f/as will be voting on is for a lesser dollar amount than the last one even with the signing bonus. Because he as already saved the 40 million that would have been allocated for the first year of TA1. That 40 mil. is gone and will never ever be available to benefit the US f/as economically. In this case the carrot used is the mou discussions with APFA (seniority issues).
The only way this merger works is it is done quickly, decisively, and accurate. When the next crisis hits the airline industry, and you know it is right around the corner, then management will have the justification to break out the axe and start chopping and trimming in the form of layoffs and route reductions. It is a question of which hub gets the axe. There is just no way the new AA keeps the current headcount competing with DL and UA.
So, to proceed with the merger or not to? I think the writing is on the wall right next to the fly paper and bug zapper.
Kat,
You raise several good points, as do the replies to them from others.
First, you are correct that mergers are never painless… someone always gives. The whole notion of mergers is that the merged company can be more efficient than the two previous parts. There are very, very few mergers that have resulted in no job losses or cuts and all revenue gains… I can’t think of a one in the airline industry.
Second, DL/NW will probably go down as one of the smoothest and most effective mergers of US airlines. DL achieved what it wanted thru the merger and the human cost was relatively low. Further, DL employees – including the former NW employees – are financially better off than they were on the day of the merger. Yes, some point to increases in health care costs, but health care and other benefits costs have gone up throughout America. DL employees will divide the largest profit sharing of any US airline next week.
Third, the reason why DL/NW worked so well is because DL was able to reduce the overlap assets that existed to grow the new, merged company. CVG and later MEM assets were moved to NYC where DL has gained far more revenue than how those assets were being used before. The challenge for any merger is to grow revenues BEYOND a simple combination of the two previous companies; it will require deep cuts if the combined company does not find new sources of revenue. I am not at all sure where AA and US can grow their revenues beyond what they already have; part of AA’s turnaround plan ALREADY requires growing revenues in order to make their standalone plan work – the amount required to fund a merger will be even larger. UA has yet to demonstrate that the merger has resulted in revenue growth – and that merger is going on a couple years old. WN is now making significant cuts, largely to FL’s operation, in order to meet the financial justification for its merger.
Fourth, there have indeed been cuts at DL – but DL said on the day of the merger that the cuts would come largely from Delta Connection carriers – and that is exactly where the cuts have come. You need only look at the traffic reports in the industry to see that DL is taking capacity out of the Connection carriers while insulating its own employees. Perhaps AA and US can come up w/ a plan that will involve keeping mainline growth flat while taking out regional carrier capacity, but I and others have doubts.
Fifth, I do not at all believe that Parker and US execs are necessarily going to gain any more thru the merger than they will if US remains standalone. There is an adage in American finance that stocks rise on rumors of a merger and fall when it is actually announced. Wall Street likes prospects of a merger and the hope for improved finances; LCC stock has had an enormous runup over the past year based on expectations of a merger w/ AMR but it is very likely that there will be a dramatic drop after an announcement is made – if it happens – and Parker knows this. The opportunity to make money on LCC stock is now.
Sixth, you and others have long believed that Parker was in the catbird seat regarding this merger. If the context is to gain more out of his own labor groups, then yes you are probably right. But if the context is the larger deal, I’m not at all certain your statement is true. We really don’t know that AMR’s creditors – who have to ultimately decide if a deal is worth it – believe a deal is in their best interests. So far as we know, the creditors have used the prospects of a merger solely to create a whiplash in negotiations between AA and US execs who have been trying to outbid each other. We really have no information at this point that the creditors have chosen AA standalone over a merger or vice versa.
Finally, speed with which the merger is finalized is not the merger of whether it will succeed or not. The measure that will last is whether it has achieved the goals necessary. Rushing to close hubs and cut costs will more likely than not result in lost revenue and opportunities down the road. Competitors will act on the merger; it will take months if not years to integrate systems and learn the ins and outs of the combined route system – all the computer simulations in the world can’t accurately predict what will happen when pieces that were not predicted – such as macroeconomic changes and competitor actions – are beyond what was expected. With personnel issues, once a decision is made, the consequences will be long-lasting – and they will not be anywhere close to as favorable as you and others expect.
I get really concerned when I hear you and wings and others say that as near-retirees, you expect to personally gain as a result of the merger and thus want to see it happen. It is no more noble to argue against the execs when you have the potential to gain at the expense of someone else – potentially someone else lower on the seniority list.
What cannot be denied is exactly what Jim has pointed out – that AA and US both have poor track records for successfully consummating mergers w/o significant negative effect on employees and customers. Whether that is totally within mgmt’s control or not, the results are there and employees who know the history of the industry will look at those issues far more honestly than will giddy investors who salivate at the prospect of a deal and then castigate management when they fail to deliver.