Us Airways / America West Merger

[deltawatch]

A proposed merger between bankrupt US Airways Group (UAIRQ.OB: Quote, Profile, Research) and America West Holdings (AWA.N: Quote, Profile, Research) removes one ray of hope for other carriers who wanted US Air to crumble and take out some capacity.

The merger talk also calls into question the future of United's code-share agreement with US Air. Code-sharing lets travelers buy tickets for a flight on one airline and connect to another to complete the trip.

In the United/US Air agreement, United flies many US Air passengers and derives considerable revenue from that traffic.

A marriage of US Air and America West could trigger a change to US Air's code-share with United, analysts say. McDonald noted, however, that a merger is far from complete and that United ultimately could profit from a new relationship with America West by way of US Air.

http://yahoo.reuters.com/financeQuoteCompa...01186997_newsml

 

[firstamendment]

F##k United. This has ALWAYS benn a lopsided deal..much like US and BA. How much effert is given to US in the UA Inflight Magazine or ANY margeting for that matter? I doubt much. Again, We are to believe UA cares when they ONLY want to reap the benefits....Been there, done that. I, for one, hope we end the one sided relationship with the ungrateful SOB's. Buh Bye!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :down: :down: :down:

 

[Pylit]

I second the motion. Ever been to ORD? Look at their flight info monitors in the terminal - you'll never see a UAL flight to XYZ then on the next line a USAirwayz flight to the same destination - the code share. Contrast that to the US/UAL displays all over the US system. Definitely something is wrong with this picture.....

As for the OLD OVERCAPACITY WHINE - guess what - IF one of the majors fail, the capacity would be replaced WITHIN A YEAR. No great relief there. Ahem, excuse me, but who is complaining the loudest about overcapacity? Maybe our Texas-based LC cousins? And just how many NEW AIRPLANES are they ADDING TO THIER FLEET this year....and the next....and the next?

US is lowering capacity - unforunately. Just look at our projected fleet plan. (Sad).

End of rant.

 

[USA320Pilot]

If the US-HP merger proceeds, I would like to see the new US terminate the domestic code share agreement with UA, leave the Star Alliance, and join Oneworld.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[eolesen]

If the US-HP merger proceeds, I would like to see the new US terminate the domestic code share agreement with UA, leave the Star Alliance, and join Oneworld.

[post="274720"][/post]​

Rest assured, oneworld doesn't want U. But strangely, I do think it's more and more likely that UA could be kicked out of Star.

 

[tadjr]

If the US-HP merger proceeds, I would like to see the new US terminate the domestic code share agreement with UA, leave the Star Alliance, and join Oneworld.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="274720"][/post]​

Why would you want this? Oneworld has 600 destinations on 8 carriers. Star has 795 on 16 major and 3 regional carriers. Star seems miles ahead of Oneworld as far as integration and implementation of a global system. Just curious why you think Oneworld would be better for US.

 

[kiloromeo]

the 8 or so legacy carriers will merge into about 3 when the last shoe drops

AW-US-UAL

DL-CAL

AA-NW-AL

 

[USA320Pilot]

Tadjr:

It's no secret that US "shunned" UA and then chose HP for its M&A partner. In my opinion, UA could hold a grudge against US because of the animosity between the two companies. Nobody knows how a scorned partner can react when faced with uncertain times.

It's my understanding that the UCT and then the ICT did not amicably happen because of Tilton's resistance and when Iraqi War and SARS ended relatively soon, the deal never closed because UA did not violate its DIP financing requirements. Then with Wolf and Siegel's departure, Lakefield opted for HP and it's my understanding that the UA "executive suite" is quit miffed at US' new M&A agreement.

It will be interesting to see if logic prevails within CCY and WHQ over the proposed merger and the alliance, as well as what the Justice Department has to say about a US-HP-UA domestic alliance.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[tadjr]

In my opinion, UA could hold a grudge against US because of the animosity between the two companies. Nobody knows how a scorned partner can react when faced with uncertain times.

It's my understanding that the UCT and then the ICT did not amicably happen because of Tilton's resistance and when Iraqi War and SARS ended relatively soon, the deal never closed because UA did not violate its DIP financing requirements. Then with Wolf and Siegel's departure, Lakefield opted for HP and it's my understanding that the UA "executive suite" is quit miffed at US' new M&A agreement.

[post="274743"][/post]​

Well, if UA holds a grudge and wants to see all the US codeshare $ go to Oneworld, then I guess I know why they are in the shape they are.
But, UA is only 1 partner of the 19. If LH is making money off of US being in Star, then I would venture to guess that LH would trump UA in that decision.

IF UA was the one to not want to close the deal with US, then what business is it of theirs for US to go looking around. Sounds like my last relationship. You dont want to commit, see ya. We're still friends, but you're going to have to get used to my new friend if you want to hang around me now.

 

[justanadd]

AA-NW-AL

[post="274731"][/post]​

I certainly hope not. NW/CAL YES!

 

[USA320Pilot]

PineyBob & Tadjr:

I agree with both of your points and Kilomeo's thought on further industry consolidation of:

AW-US-UAL

DL-CAL

AA-NW-AL

which could happen too.

Meanwhile, I believe the US-HP is virtually a "done deal" and UA & US will both remain in the Star Alliance because both companies need every "nickel" they can muster, especially in bankruptcy.

Regards,

USA320pilot

 

[700UW]

AL is Allegheny, a carrier that was merged into Piedmont.

You all must mean Alaska Airlines which I believe is AS.

 

[ClueByFour]

Well, if UA holds a grudge and wants to see all the US codeshare $ go to Oneworld, then I guess I know why they are in the shape they are.
But, UA is only 1 partner of the 19. If LH is making money off of US being in Star, then I would venture to guess that LH would trump UA in that decision.

[post="274750"][/post]​

I believe that Star rules indicate that the first "in country" partner gets to decide the fate on other partners. It may not matter what LH wants.

As for the big "secret" of US scorning UA--there is not secret. It never happened.

 

[USFlyer]

Honestly, this UA being scorned thing is a bit ridiculous. I didn't realize companies have "feelings", and, to be honest, I find it hard to believe anyone would pony up money to merge two bankrupt carriers. Talk about throwing good money after bad ...

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

PineyBob & Tadjr:

I agree with both of your points and Kilomeo's thought on further industry consolidation of:

AW-US-UAL

DL-CAL

AA-NW-AL

which could happen too.

Meanwhile, I believe the US-HP is virtually a "done deal" and UA & US will both remain in the Star Alliance because both companies need every "nickel" they can muster, especially in bankruptcy.

Regards,

USA320pilot

[post="274752"][/post]​

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"320",
GOD knows you've stated some unbelievable "off the wall" ####, over time, but I must admit you've been right a "few" times lately.

But to suggest a AA + NW "hook up" leads me to believe you've taken up "smoking CRACK" !! (AS IS with AA, just not officially)

Now don't get me wrong, A AA + BIG RED "hook up" would be MY personal "ultimate dream come true", but it will NEVER happen !!!!!!!


But it does'nt cost anything to dream. A AA/AS + NW, with BA thrown in "for good measure" would be a combination, that would RULE THE WORLD, "hands down" !!!

NH/BB's