AA + NW

Aug 20, 2002
10,154
687
www.usaviation.com
With AA nearing a "crossroads"(of sorts), I think AMR should look at NWA !

(Let me be VERY CLEAR, I DO NOT suggest HDQ, do to AA AMT's, what NWA did to their AMT's) !!!!!

Both company's are VERY Independent ! Both carriers have specific niches, and I'm suggesting AA copy NW, in a lot of ways.

As far as competition, DFW is their MSP......MIA is their DTW, and (to a lesser extent) ORD is (somewhat like) MEM.

AA's JFK is like their SEA.

AA specialties are JFK/LAX-SFO.....JFK/LHR...and SA !
NW is ...NRT/ASIA(Which AA needs more of)

NW closed a LOT of domestic stations(to the IAM), and I suggest AA do the same, BUT unlike NW, turn the "closed" stations over to A/E !(Another reason AMR should NEVER sell A/E)

Forget Mesaba/Mesa/Pinnicle for a moment.............Nw, with COMPASS, is slowly(but surely) becoming like A/E, but THEY have Ejets.

Compass's $$ goes to NWA. A/E's $$$ goes to AMR.

NW has numerous 787's "right around the corner" AA has NONE,....Ahhhh but why ?
Maybe, just maybe, AA has NO intention's of buying any, opting to make the different models of the 777 the equivalent of NW's 787, as it pertains to AA's routes/needs.(It's been argued on this board before, that the 777 should/could replace the A-300's/767's), with the next generation 737 to follow.

While NW contracted out small station "work", let AA "contract out" small station work to A/E !!

Unlike carriers like DL, who are trying to land a Widebody on ANY paved strip east of JFK, UAL(who's management is trying to sadly annihilate them to a large extent), or LCC, who hasn't a CLUE, as to what time or DAY it is, IMHO, AA and NW have a lot of similarities that AA should look at closely !!


????????????
 
The fleets dont match at all. Even NW 787's will likely come with engines different than what AA would choose. AA doesnt need more domestic flying or three more hubs either. Short of buying off a piece it would be a bad deal short and long run.
 
I believe that these mergers are a thing of the past, with fuel hitting 100+, labor contracts including pensions, and the "R" word being used more and more in economic terms.

AMR will just put pressure on selected carriers on selected routes hoping that these "born again" legacy carriers will trip once more and finally fade away, allowing AMR to salvage the best routes
 
AMR will just put pressure on selected carriers on selected routes hoping that these "born again" legacy carriers will trip once more and finally fade away, allowing AMR to salvage the best routes


The last legacy actually to go under was Pan Am in December of '91,since then we've seen the legacy carriers stumble along like a pack of drunks, bobbing and weaving,but not quite falling down.

With companies writing exploitation of the Chapter 11 process into the management handbook,we won't actually see any legacy carriers go out of business.There will always be employees willing to surrender the wallet (Again),Leasing companies willing to take less on an airframe as opposed to having it sit in the desert and passengers expecting to pay less than two hundred dollars to fly across the country at 30,000 feet in an aluminum tube travelling over 500 mph.


The last thing this company needs is to go blow a wad of cash on NW, that is what will ensure a trip to Chapter 11 faster than anything else.

Easy for you to sit on the sidelines and root for it, but as a guy still active,the last thing I want is another group of PO'ed employees from another airline coming in.

Management can't focus on the core issues here as it is, don't dangle a shiny object in their line of sight, they'll drive the bus off the cliff...
 
I believe that these mergers are a thing of the past, with fuel hitting 100+, labor contracts including pensions, and the "R" word being used more and more in economic terms.

AMR will just put pressure on selected carriers on selected routes hoping that these "born again" legacy carriers will trip once more and finally fade away, allowing AMR to salvage the best routes


You better think again, AMR will be the first into BK this time, First ones with labor contracts up, Still a very high debt load, Costs in other areas that 4 other players knocked out in BK... Pensions and labor costs are high, old fleet... They (mgmt) will play "chicken" once again and the unions will give it up - once again - or they will file BK... Plain and simple... I will go with the first scenario, losing those pensions seem mighty scary, and AMR will always want that card to play,, But hey, as StrAAight says, you guys sit the bar (standard) so sit it high!!!
 
You better think again, AMR will be the first into BK this time, First ones with labor contracts up, Still a very high debt load, Costs in other areas that 4 other players knocked out in BK... Pensions and labor costs are high, old fleet... They (mgmt) will play "chicken" once again and the unions will give it up - once again - or they will file BK... Plain and simple... I will go with the first scenario, losing those pensions seem mighty scary, and AMR will always want that card to play,, But hey, as StrAAight says, you guys sit the bar (standard) so sit it high!!!


Can't help yourself, can you?

It's like a sickness with you.

As a matter of fact, it is a sickness. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
True, AA doesn't need more hubs, or more airplanes or more disgruntled employees who hitched their wagon to the wrong star.

What AA needs (and what all legacies need) are more high-dollar customers. Think about the people who comprise the top 25% to top 50% of AA's customers measured by annual spend; NW has some of those as well. Problem is, neither NW nor AA has enough of them to offer what the top spenders would like to see (better seats/meals/service/etc) at the same time as consistent profits. The easiest way to acquire a large new pool of customers is to buy/merge with another airline and do whatever it takes to try to capture those customers. Offer them status matches, convert their mileage balances to the surviving program, etc.

So if AA buys NW, the first thing it does is trim hubs. Yep - fewer duplicative hubs and fewer duplicative flights.

About the NW 787s: I'm certain that it isn't too late to specify RR engines for them - they haven't been assembled yet.

About the non-compatible A330s: Someone would take them off AA's hands if it buys NW.

One possibility is a pre-packaged bankruptcy (as often mentioned by eolesen) by both NW and AA along with a merger. That permits both airlines to jetison the unwanted stuff (hubs, planes, real estate, etc.). Think about it - buh-bye to AB6s, A330s, MD-80s, DC-9s, etc.
 
SORRY fellow posters,....I should have been MORE clear.

I AM NOT SUGGESTING AA "BUY" NW, I'm suggesting that they follow their lead, to the way there running their business.

Sorry to make you all RE-POST :wub:


(But I've got to tell you FWAAA, that I LIKE your pre-packaged Idea)
 
One possibility is a pre-packaged bankruptcy (as often mentioned by eolesen) by both NW and AA along with a merger. That permits both airlines to jetison the unwanted stuff (hubs, planes, real estate, etc.). Think about it - buh-bye to AB6s, A330s, MD-80s, DC-9s, etc.

what replaces the nines and the eighties?

NWA's a319's?
 
Same here (with all due respect).

Doesn't misery love company? Ya gots plenty in common, and it's not like there are any real valuable career expectations left to be "stolen" by the other group of pissed-off employees.


AdAstraPerAspera said:
what replaces the nines and the eighties?

NWA's a319's?

Sure, until 738s can be ordered and the carbon fibre 737 replacement comes along. Plus some Embraer 170/175/190/195 models (scope clauses would be modified or pay rates would be agreed-upon as part of bankruptcy filing). Additionally, they wouldn't all be replaced. With $100/bbl oil, a bunch of them will simply be parked.

Anyway, probably won't happen. And Bears clarified that he wasn't talking mergers or acquisitions anyway.
 
Doesn't misery love company? Ya gots plenty in common, and it's not like there are any real valuable career expectations left to be "stolen" by the other group of pissed-off employees.




Sure, until 738s can be ordered and the carbon fibre 737 replacement comes along. Plus some Embraer 170/175/190/195 models (scope clauses would be modified or pay rates would be agreed-upon as part of bankruptcy filing). Additionally, they wouldn't all be replaced. With $100/bbl oil, a bunch of them will simply be parked.

Anyway, probably won't happen. And Bears clarified that he wasn't talking mergers or acquisitions anyway.

Seems as though the 80's aft pressure bulkheads are cracking a tad and Boeing has dreamed up a band-aid for it. Perhaps the answer won't lie in replacing the domestic aircraft, but setting them down.

The S80s (my opinion) aren't much better than the F100s. They are more 'workable' (many items of the Fokkers weren't accessable without chopping a few holes hither and yon in secondary structure) but still a throwaway aircraft, very much unlike a Boeing.

The thought of replacing a S80 with any ScAAirbus is not pleasant to me and many others, but ... Whiskey - Tango - Foxtrot?
 
Seems as though the 80's aft pressure bulkheads are cracking a tad and Boeing has dreamed up a band-aid for it. Perhaps the answer won't lie in replacing the domestic aircraft, but setting them down.

The S80s (my opinion) aren't much better than the F100s. They are more 'workable' (many items of the Fokkers weren't accessable without chopping a few holes hither and yon in secondary structure) but still a throwaway aircraft, very much unlike a Boeing.

The thought of replacing a S80 with any ScAAirbus is not pleasant to me and many others, but ... Whiskey - Tango - Foxtrot?

I'll take an 80 over an F100 any day. I lost count how many pack changes I did on the F100, just getting to it could be an ordeal. Especially if the guy before you gorilla torqued the screws. Then there was the APU, APU changes on the MD-80 is much easier. And I disagree on it being a throwaway aircraft. Look at all the old Douglas planes still flying.