US airways puts in a bid for Delta!

[FWAAA]

<_< -----You do have a point! At what point will the Government say "No more!" The Airlines are big enough and any further consolidation would be detrimental to the economy!

You mean it's better for the economy to have six big legacy airlines losing money hand over fist, like from 2000 thru 2005? Fewer legacy airlines will equal fewer high-cost seats chasing the smaller and smaller pool of people willing to pay more than LCC prices, and the resulting profits for the fewer remaining legacies will be good for the economy, not bad.

The airline industry suffers from too many high-cost seats, too many high-cost hubs and too many high-cost employees. What the industry lacks is enough low-cost seats and low-cost employees. Those airlines are growing like gangbusters while the high-cost set (like your employer) are slowly shrinking and demanding wage concessions.

Profits = GOOD

Losses = BAD

Wouldn't profits make it easier for the mechanics, pilots, FAs and ramp personnel to get raises? I'd rather work for a hugely profitable company than a money loser. But then again, didn't you choose to work for money-loser TWA for many, many years? Now it all makes sense. Losses are all you really know, aren't they? 😛

Trust me - a profitable employer actually has some nickels to squeeze out of it when the employees threaten job actions. Loss-making employers continue to demand concessions. Profitable ones can be held up for raises.

 

[Bob Owens]

You mean it's better for the economy to have six big legacy airlines losing money hand over fist, like from 2000 thru 2005? Fewer legacy airlines will equal fewer high-cost seats chasing the smaller and smaller pool of people willing to pay more than LCC prices, and the resulting profits for the fewer remaining legacies will be good for the economy, not bad.

The airline industry suffers from too many high-cost seats, too many high-cost hubs and too many high-cost employees. What the industry lacks is enough low-cost seats and low-cost employees. Those airlines are growing like gangbusters while the high-cost set (like your employer) are slowly shrinking and demanding wage concessions.

Profits = GOOD

Losses = BAD

Once again, from the IRRA Conference on Airline Labor relations, the speaker from the Bush administration made it clear that the government was focused on having an Air Tranport system that provided cheap transportation, profitable airlines came second.

As long as the system is moving people and goods it will exist, even if it never makes a profit. The NYC Subway system is an example of a Transportation system thats in place primarily to service the economy, not make a profit.

Here we are five years into this mess yet we have not seen the consolidation that everyone claimed was inevitable. I say let it happen, the sooner the better. As the airlines consolidate so does the labor movement. As the airlines get bigger the harder it is for them to continue to operate during a strike. The only bad part is that it makes it more likely that the government steps in, however then its up to us to demand that we get the same rights as workers in most democratic societies have.

 

[whlinder]

You mean it's better for the economy to have six big legacy airlines losing money hand over fist, like from 2000 thru 2005? Fewer legacy airlines will equal fewer high-cost seats chasing the smaller and smaller pool of people willing to pay more than LCC prices, and the resulting profits for the fewer remaining legacies will be good for the economy, not bad.

I don't think anyone on this website will disagree. But you know the reaction from travellers: "Fares will be higher, therefore it is bad and the government should stop it."

 

[glasspilot]

😳 Learn something new about this Board every day! You can't edit new thread headings! Stepped on it, didn't I? It happens!----- 😉 Just be glad it doesn't happen when I'm working on your Aircraft!!!! :unsure:

I forgive you! You're ex-T-way like me!

 

[1 VF-1 2NV]

This US-DL announcement is just a way to have the airline industry's stock prices soar, I think .

 

[kirkpatrick]

So far no one has mentioned fleet compatibility. Any comments?

MK

 

[Nor'Easta]

Good one LCC...hopefully both parties will use lube for this "airline marriage." I'm still sore from my last union...

That's because AA didn't use lube to merge. They just slammed you hAArd! 😉

 

[MCI transplant]

😳 Learn something new about this Board every day! You can't edit new thread headings! Stepped on it, didn't I? It happens!----- 😉 Just be glad it doesn't happen when I'm working on your Aircraft!!!! :unsure:

<_< ---- Thank you Mr. Moderator!!! 😉

 

[MCI transplant]

You mean it's better for the economy to have six big legacy airlines losing money hand over fist, like from 2000 thru 2005? Fewer legacy airlines will equal fewer high-cost seats chasing the smaller and smaller pool of people willing to pay more than LCC prices, and the resulting profits for the fewer remaining legacies will be good for the economy, not bad.

The airline industry suffers from too many high-cost seats, too many high-cost hubs and too many high-cost employees. What the industry lacks is enough low-cost seats and low-cost employees. Those airlines are growing like gangbusters while the high-cost set (like your employer) are slowly shrinking and demanding wage concessions.

Profits = GOOD

Losses = BAD

Wouldn't profits make it easier for the mechanics, pilots, FAs and ramp personnel to get raises? I'd rather work for a hugely profitable company than a money loser. But then again, didn't you choose to work for money-loser TWA for many, many years? Now it all makes sense. Losses are all you really know, aren't they? 😛

Trust me - a profitable employer actually has some nickels to squeeze out of it when the employees threaten job actions. Loss-making employers continue to demand concessions. Profitable ones can be held up for raises.

<_< ---- What I said was that the "Government", may have their own ideas as to if this, or any other merger is a good idea at this time! But you do like to try and put your own spin on things don't you? That crack about TWA was uncalled for! Shows what a low life you really can be!---- :down:

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

I'm thinking, that it was a ballsy move, by parker, to put a sweet deal on the table, while DL/BK court, is obligated to get the best deal for the debtors !

AH,
now for politics;

If the GOP were to be in power in 2007, I think this deal would "fly"(after the congress got their "pound of flesh")

BUT,

The GOP(THANK GOD) will NOT be in power in '07, and parker said he would operate the "new" airline, as DL, which would mean a LARGER non-union airline(further losses of Union Jobs)

And just for "$hits and giggles", the newspapers(nationwide) (this very day), ran the story of how John Sweeney(Afl-Cio) helped BIG TIME, to get the union vote "out", resulting in victory's in some close races.

He now(deservedly)has a lil' list for the House and Senate.

Were I'm a bit confused, is how POWERFUL, is the BK court, who has a major obligation to accept a BIG offer for the debtors ??????/

NH/BB's

 

[1AA]

It amazes me how once bankrupt USAir now can offer 4 Billion in cash to buy another carrier but was unable to fund its pension plan obligations to their employees. They dumped the pension plan on the taxpayers shoulders and now want to buy another airline. USAir should be forced to comply with their financial obligations before buying anything else outside of their daily operational requirements. The DOT should reject this merger if it gets this far in order to protect the taxpayers. Enough is Enough!! :angry:

 

[jimntx]

and parker said he would operate the "new" airline, as DL, which would mean a LARGER non-union airline(further losses of Union Jobs)
NH/BB's

Even if the GOP had won the last election, do not assume that because the merged airline will operate as DELTA that it will be operated like Delta. Legally, you can not just change the name of the company and eliminate the unions on the premise that the new name is of a non-union company. Otherwise, we would ALL be named Wal-Mart Airlines.

And, any attempt to wipe out the seniority of either group--within a craft, like Flight Attendants--will send them running to their election cards so fast it will make management's heads swim. Though this has not been the friendliest union environment over the past few years, the laws protecting the right to organize still stand.

 

[jimntx]

So far no one has mentioned fleet compatibility. Any comments?

MK

It has been discussed extensively on both the Delta and the US Airways boards. My point from the very beginning has been that I don't see this happening in the end.

1. Hubs too close together--ATL-CLT, PHL-JFK-LGA, PHX-LAS-SLC with a LOT of service overlap. After all, they are the two major East Coast carriers.
2. Almost totally mismatched fleets. DL is all-Boeing (they still have a few DC-9s, but they've already announced then intention to retire those). US Airways/AWA is mixed, but predominantly Airbus.
3. Union vs. non-union workforces.
4. Governmental opposition from states and cities that are served almost exclusively by these two airlines.

One other thing...
Doug Parker has given total ASM reduction of 10% as one of the major reasons for this merger/acquisition. Show of hands--how many think that no other airline will step in and add those seats right back to the market? Particularly, since there will be some used airplanes on the market that the owner/lessors will be anxious to put back in service at almost any price. If service is reduced at CLT, I would be willing to bet you that SWA will be in there in a flash offering the lost service at a reduced price. Not so sure about ATL. A reduction there might make the operation "almost normal."

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

Thanx jimntx for the update.


NH/BB's

 

[SPG Trvlr]

<_< ---- What I said was that the "Government", may have their own ideas as to if this, or any other merger is a good idea at this time! But you do like to try and put your own spin on things don't you? That crack about TWA was uncalled for! Shows what a low life you really can be!---- :down:

What crack are you talking about. The other boards are already talking about the way AA handled TWA with the Merger and or aquisition talk. None from the other airlines have favored in anyway the job AA and it's unions dealt with it MCI. That reputation will be around for years so deal with it.