Ladevale:
I found your comments interesting, but there is more going on between the parties than has been disclosed. Will something happen?
Maybe, maybe not.
Before any transaction could occur the parties need to know if Glenn Tilton can prevent UA’s potential bankruptcy, which some Wall Street analysts like Jim Higgins and investors seem to believe will now occur. Until UA’s type of restructuring is answered, I believe nothing will occur, but we could know the answer to the restructuring question in short order.
There is one thing I do know, a voluntary restructuring to meet the ATSB's amended application deadline of September 16, per today’s Wall Street Journal, with employee, creditor, vender, and lessor agreements in place, will be a very difficult task to complete, if not impossible.
With both company's future uncertain, that could lead to the liquidation of either company, nothing will be done until UA's restructuring path is known.
In regard to your happiness comment, I’m not sure of your point. What I want is for US to prosper and at this point, it’s unclear what will occur at both UA and US. Although UA has certain strengths, the company’s restructuring is significantly behind US’ and it could be better for US and its employees to align itself with someone other than UA.
In regard to the regulatory review, The DOT's informal review of the UA-US code share plan was extended until September 23, but the regulators refused to open a docket on the carriers' request to form an alliance, despite the urging by the Air Carrier Association of America (ACAA) in Docket OST-02-12986.
In their DOT code share filing UA-UA asked for the filing to not be publicly disclosed, which indicated there could be more to their application, otherwise why would there be a need to keep the information confidential? DL & AA backed the ACAA request for both the UA & US ATSB applications and code share plans to have a docketed proceeding with full disclosure; however, the DOT declined the request to discuss details of the UA-US application and have kept the review on the front burner. Why would Norm Mineta have done this?
Recently, the Washington Post reported under the terms of the Texas Pacific Group (TPG) - US Airways agreement after September 23, US is free to consider other offers from other interested parties. This is the same day that the DOT's code share review is complete. Is there something to this date or is it coincidental?
Another interesting point is that the UA-US code share plan does not include joint pricing, scheduling, and sales functions, which is expected to eliminate antitrust concerns, but to my knowledge, DL, NW, & CO have not made the same concession. This point in itself, is a major difference between the two proposal's.
In regard to your Bob Crandall comment, the former AMR CEO offered the following observation of US in a recent Washington Post OpEd column: “As the US Airways reorganization proceeds, other carriers will find themselves confronted with a new, more effective competitor.” I'm surprised you missed this point, but evidently the UA ALPA MEC agreed with Crandall, since the pilot’s leaders approved the code share agreement and did not send the proposal our for membership ratification.
Ladevale, would you care to identify yourself and your position? It may be interesting to see if a “special interest” viewpoint exists?
Thanks for your comments.
Chip