Merger Talks Gain Between Us Air And America West

[USA320Pilot]

DCAFlyer:

Must of what you have written is true. As I have said before, there are multiple investors involved in the talks, which is why the POR has been delayed and is so complex. US Airways senior management and its Board "shunned" United's corporate transaction offer in late March at a meeting in CCY, and the combined US Airways-America West would need to develop the midwest, which could be done by adding a hub in either ORD, STL, or DEN, dependent on what happens with United.

United begins a very big week with today's pre-trail hearing on the pension termination, tomorrow's pension termination hearing, and then Wednesday's S.1113 trial against the AFA, IAM, and AMFA. Those hearings and talks could influence Star and the America West-US Airways merger talks.

Here are a couple of more article's regarding Susan Carey's column in the WSJ:

US Air, America West merger talks heat up - Report: Deal could be reached sometime this month

See Story

US Airways merger talks gain momentum

See Story

US Airways, America West closer to a deal?

See Story

In regard to the report 60 aircraft could be removed. As I indicated before and the WSJ reported today, those aircraft would come from the combined fleet with both America West and US Airways losing aircraft.

Meanwhile, US Airways has announced within the past couple of months a potential fleet reduction of 59 aircraft. The two GE agreements will reduce 10 A319s and 21 B737s from the fleet; as well as the 10 aircraft announced last week that will be taken out of the inventory will be B737s. In addition, up to 28 EMB-170s could be transferred to Republic, thus that equals 59 jets that could be removed from US Airways with an orderly transfer.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[700UW]

28 E-170's are not counted in the mainline fleet.

Once again, don't let the facts get in your way.

 

[whlinder]

What the combined U/AWA will see is a new low-cost powerhouse ariline....

Well first it has to be low cost. Right now it isn't. Merging a high-cost airline with a sorta-low-cost airline does not make the combined airline a low-cost airline.

I would suspect that the domestic U/UAL codeshare will be dramatically scaled back, if not terminated altoghether, but that the STAR alliance affiliation will remain intact since the STAR carriers will be loathe to kick U out when UAL is still in trouble. Along those lines and for that reason, UAL stands the greatest chance of any US carrier of suffering because a shored-up U/AWA means that the STAR carriers will hold less dependence on UAL and LH might feel less of a need to invest in a floundering US airline. We might see a built-up quasi-domestic codeshare with AC.

I agree that the U/UAL codeshare would be scaled back, but it won't be eliminated unless the new U starts up service to South America and Asia upon completion of the merger. And Star will still be dependent on UA; the only Star Airlines that fly into PHX or LAS are LH, AC, UA and US. The new airline isn't a replacement for UA, but can certainly enhance the alliance. If UA fails, you aren't going to see all the Star carriers that serve SFO and LAX move their flights to PHX.

US Airways senior management and its Board "shunned" United's corporate transaction offer in late March at a meeting in CCY, and the combined US Airways-America West would need to develope the midwest, which could be done by adding a hub in either ORD, STL, or DEN, dependent what happens with United.

In your dreams.

 

[funguy2]

It is intresting that we are hearing reports that the New U will focus on the midwest, since neither carrier currently places an emphasis there.  Could there be a plan being devised for a possible eventual failure of UAL?  This is a very curious detail to me.

I believe the "focus" on the midwest is this...

Currently, either independent airline can only offer reasonably timed travel in one direction from the "Midwest".

The combined airline would be able to offer both coasts from a number of midwest cities... like ORD, MSP, MKE, IND, CMH, STL, DFW, IAH, MEM, to name a few...

However, there are a lot of places in the middle part of the country served by only one of the two carriers... HP flies to OMA, ICT, OKC, AUS, SAT, and COS. US flies to JAN, XNA, LIT, GRR, BNA, and probably a dozen more.

I believe the "focus on the midwest" will be to add service west from US-only served locations (i.e. JAN, XNA, LIT, etc) and east from HP-only (OMA, ICT, OKC, etc), thus allowing US-HP to pick up market share by simply flying more markets... Both coasts... Both NYC/DCA/BOS and LAX/LAS/SFO.

Thus, I don't believe the "focus on the midwest" to be any half-baked new hub idea (as I've said before, hubs are decreasing in number, particularly those in "marginal" cities, and all the good hubsites are "taken" for now); nor some kind of co-operative agreement with UAL (UAL has been absent from any of the media's "informed speculation").

Everyone seems to agree that the two route-maps are a good fit... tying together the loose pieces in the midwest is a no-brainer.

 

[us0004us]

"However, there are a lot of places in the middle part of the country served by only one of the two carriers... HP flies to OMA, ICT, OKC, AUS, SAT, and COS. US flies to JAN, XNA, LIT, GRR, BNA, and probably a dozen more."


using the emb170/190 to get the job done!

 

[USA320Pilot]

700UW:

USA320Pilot said: “In addition, up to 28 EMB-170s could be transferred to Republic, thus that equals 59 jets that could be removed from US Airways with an orderly transfer.â€￾

700UW said: “28 E-170's are not counted in the mainline fleet. Once again, don't let the facts get in your way.â€￾

USA320Pilot comments: Who said they were? I believe you should read my posts more closely so you can be better informed.

By the way, who operates US Airways’ EMB-170s -- under what operating certificate?

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[etops1]

hey, thanks for helping me out in fri on that flt from clt to lga.

 

[robbedagain]

USA320: would a MCI hub be better than say STL where AA and SWA have huge hubs? I would think that MCI might be better off as a hub like what it once used to be when usair express flew large numbers of flights thruout the uppermidwest. also what about something like OKC or thereabouts?

 

[OldGuyinPA]

If this merger is on ....then G.E. needs to tell the USAir..ways so-called executives to take a hike. Operationally the company is barely functioning.

Do you hear me now ????

 

[Hope777]

Robbed, MCI does not work. Have you ever been to the airport? It is not a Hub friendly place. Now one of the rumored hubs of years gone back, may work. OKC !

 

[Art at ISP]

I agree that MCI would be horrible as a hub--having to go through security for each 2 gates or so??? Every time it was tried it failed...

I think STL might work as a midwest hub. Or to stretch a bit, what about re opening the old AA hub at Nashville? There appear to be limited choices for a midwest hub....

I would rule out ORD and DEN as they are near saturation as it is (although DEN would be better suited for increased traffic than ORD??)

I don't claim to have the answers, just the occasional question.....

 

[sfb]

MCI: Poorly designed for hub operations and Southwest is the largest carrier with 60 daily departures. Midwest serves most major cities not served by WN non-stop from MCI.

STL: AA's hub is still comparable to or larger than US's PIT "focus city." Southwest offers over 60 daily departures from STL.

BNA: Southwest is the largest carrier with 85 daily departures and AA has point-to-point service to LGA, DCA, and LAX (it appears they no longer fly BOS-BNA). There are perhaps ten unused gates and AA probably holds the leases on several of those.

Remember, while AWA manages to get by in PHX and LAS, part of the reason they manage to do so is by charging a significant premium on markets without competition from WN. Unrestricted coach from PHX to BOS is $604 each way, while they match WN at $299 each way from PHX to PHL. Unrestricted coach from PHX to DFW is $451 while PHX-IAH is again $299.

Intentionally focusing resources in Southwest-dominated markets seems like a poor choice of business plan to me.

 

[robbedagain]

i have never been to mci. i just thought that may be it would. sorry bout that. now wouldnt okc be a nice one or even say omaha?

 

[funguy2]

I agree that MCI would be horrible as a hub--having to go through security for each 2 gates or so??? Every time it was tried it failed...

You folks are missing the point about why a hub at MCI doesn't work...

While inconvenient, most passengers do not consider whether or not to purchase their ticket on the basis of hub-airport gate/security layout (except maybe disabled people). I am sure there are examples of hubs that were developed in airports with less than adequate facilities where the facilities eventually caught up to the demands placed on them by the hub.

The reason why an MCI hub doesn't work is economics. There are simply not enough O&D passengers to support a hubbing carrier + competing carriers. This was the case for EA's hub there... for BN's hub there... for US's focus city there in the past, Vanguard's hub there... and I suspect that is the reason why YX doesn't create a more substantial hub there.

How many times does something have to fail before it is deemed a bad idea?

Furthermore, there's not a lot of big cities between MCI and PHX which could not be efficiently handled via PHX+CLT... For example, do you build an MCI hub to add service from ICT/OKC/OMA to the east? Or do you add a couple flights from ICT/OKC/OMA to CLT to complement HP's PHX service? Which one sounds more cost-effective?

As for North/South at MCI... there's not very many potential spokes North of MCI... and adding service to almost any city in that region North of MCI would invoke a very harsh reaction from NW.

 

[TBONEJ4J]

700UW:

By the way, who operates US Airways’ EMB-170s -- under what operating certificate?

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="267741"][/post]​

They are operated by recalled US Airways Pilots on the US Airways Certificate. The same pilots who have been shafted by the MEC again and again, and who are shortly to receive yet another shafting in the Republic deal. :down:

Did anybody notice that the 170/190 is no toy airplane? Those are US Airways pilots' seats being given away. Seats that will be sorely missed if the HP merger is consummated and a bunch of other seats get parked. :angry:

Of course the new-hires at Chautauqua will be only too happy to fly the 737 replacement.