United / US Airwys Merger?

gso-crew

Advanced
Jul 23, 2004
249
1
Mergers Won't Cure Airline Industry Woes: Former AMR Executive

Mergers aren’t a “magic elixir for fixing the U.S. airline industry, said Robert Crandall, former chairman and CEO of AMR Corp.

“The reality of airline consolidation is that it doesn’t generate any cost savings and in many respects it generates cost increases,†Crandall said Friday on CNBC's "Squawk Box." “It tends to create employee dissatisfaction and therefore further degrades service levels.â€

Mergers are enticing because managers see the “power of the network†but often make a basic miscalculation, he said.

“Where you find two airlines whose networks link as oppose to compete, you would, in that circumstance, have some system synergies that could be translated into revenue increases,†Crandall said. “But I would caution everyone involved (that) there’s a lot of downside as well.â€

He said the airline industry’s basic problem is that it can’t properly price its services because there’s so much competition between hubs.

“If you have a big consolidation, some of the hubs might get closed,†Crandall said. “Whether that would have any long-term positive effect I think is very much open to question because there’s a constant flow of new, aspiring airline moguls into the business.â€

Congress needs to fund upgrades to the nation’s air traffic control system and then get out of the way.

“This is one of the things that only government can do and that government has done very badly,†Crandall said. “It has been under-funded, under-planned, under-managed. We have a serious air traffic control problem and we’re falling behind Europe and Asia. We need to get on with it. Congress needs to get out of the way – give them the necessary money and get it done.â€

Labor, especially among legacy carriers, is a another problem, according to Crandall.

“There are very strong unions in the airline industry, and inability of labor and management to work with one another in any sort of a civil way has been a terrible curse for the business for years and years,†Crandall said. “It appears to be just as bad today as it ever was.â€

Southwest Airlines Southwest Airlines Co and JetBlue JetBlue Airways Corp are good carriers and will continue to grow, but have lost some of the competitive edge they once enjoyed, Crandall added.
 
If you don't believe the great Warren Buffet, maybe you will believe the great Robert Crandall.

I don't know how many times it can be said, and by how many people who are truely thought leaders in aviation and finance, airlines are CRAP, and always will be CRAP.

Airline stocks and mergers are nothing more than panzi schemes (read 'financial engineering'). Top management wins, along with a few lucky big time investors (read 'hedge funds') who jump out as soon as they can. Everyone else gets the long, hard shaft up the wrong hole, without the benefit of proper lubrication.

How many times do investors, employees, analysts etc, have to get screwed before they realize this.
 
Here's the Oracle of Omaha

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3679292/


My one quibble with the article is the typical business view that it's the nasty unions' fault.

Given the resources MSNBC has (GE and Microsoft have more money than God) one would think they'd have a research team and a few anaylsts on staff.

It shouldn't take a crack team long (God bless the internets) to find WN is as heavily unionized as the legacy carriers, and WN employees are paid better - there isn't a legacy frontline grunt alive who wouldn't trade their eye teeth for a WN contract.

As an aside, I'm guessing MSNBC is too busy repeating corporate gospel to report simple facts.

Here's just one example:

How is it US pays a significant portion of their rampers $10, and WN pays their rampers $25, and US loses money while WN turns a profit?

Here's another:

In the above scenario, why are the US losses blamed on employees? US has two BK's under their belts to get contracts of their liking. Who at US has the initiative regarding marketing, pricing, purchasing, scheduling, etc.? Who is responsible for planning,leading, organizing and controlling corporate activities?
 
In the above scenario, why are the US losses blamed on employees? US has two BK's under their belts to get contracts of their liking. Who at US has the initiative regarding marketing, pricing, purchasing, scheduling, etc.? Who is responsible for planning,leading, organizing and controlling corporate activities?

It all fits the paradigm established in Bizz schools decades back: If we could just dismiss all those irksome employee groups, sell the aircraft and all physical assets, and expect the passenger base to just send us their money...By Golly!..We could enhance shareholder value overnight!!..and garner huge bonuses for our brilliance!! :lol: Since we cannot seem to accomplish that as yet: Let's just trash the employees wholesale. After all...the employees aren't "special people" like "us"...they've not had the "wisdom" to live lives based purely on addictions to money and the enhancement of ego...and "everybody knows" that those are the only reasons to live a human life. After all; having any love of the astounding recent miracle of human flight, or a vision of enhancing the shared human experience via expeditious travel's just for suckers...Where's my bonus and stock options allready?
 
“If you have a big consolidation, some of the hubs might get closed,â€￾ Crandall said. “Whether that would have any long-term positive effect I think is very much open to question because there’s a constant flow of new, aspiring airline moguls into the business.â€￾


Same old story, legacy airline scales back a market/hub, LCC/Discounter rolls in, backfilling capacity and accomplishing nothing.
 
Same old story, legacy airline scales back a market/hub, LCC/Discounter rolls in, backfilling capacity and accomplishing nothing.

That's why I think that Parker was pursuing a new paradigm, consolidate legacies, but maintain dominance in markets by not totally dismantling a proximate, competing hub. Also, maintain a cost structure that can compete with LCCs.
 
That's why I think that Parker was pursuing a new paradigm, consolidate legacies, but maintain dominance in markets by not totally dismantling a proximate, competing hub. Also, maintain a cost structure that can compete with LCCs.

You mean there is a PLAN!

This is not the work of lurching from one self-inflicted crisis to another?

Sure could have fooled me.........
 
That's why I think that Parker was pursuing a new paradigm, consolidate legacies, but maintain dominance in markets by not totally dismantling a proximate, competing hub. Also, maintain a cost structure that can compete with LCCs.

You are correct but will it work in the long term.
 
You mean there is a PLAN!

This is not the work of lurching from one self-inflicted crisis to another?

Sure could have fooled me.........

Do I detect a note of sarcasm there? :shock: Call the Discipline Team! Bad Attitude Alert! Bad Attitude Alert!

How dare you suggest that management doesn't have everything under control! The bonus checks didn't bounce, did they? Therefore, all is well.
 

Latest posts