US/UA Merger Master Thread

[Richard]

Since we already have 2 and a half threads discussing the potential merger, we're going to create the master thread here. Please continue the merger talk here.

Thank you.

 

[InternationalShannon]

First of all, I want to make it clear that I do not wish any carrier to go out of business, that would be terrible for its employees.

That being said, I cautiously ask ...if we don't merge with United, and they end up closing up shop, wouldn't it eliminate competition for US and open up International opportunity?

Based on the news, it is a very real possibility for them.... I would hate that to happen for the employees sakes.

Does anyone have any ideas how US would be affected if United didn't make it? I also realize we aren't exactly a cash cow either, so it could work vice versa...

 

[gaucho99]

First of all, I want to make it clear that I do not wish any carrier to go out of business, that would be terrible for its employees.

That being said, I cautiously ask ...if we don't merge with United, and they end up closing up shop, wouldn't it eliminate competition for US and open up International opportunity?

Based on the news, it is a very real possibility for them.... I would hate that to happen for the employees sakes.

Does anyone have any ideas how US would be affected if United didn't make it? I also realize we aren't exactly a cash cow either, so it could work vice versa...

Good question, but I don't think UA would liquidate any time soon. They've got cash on hand plus assets they could sell off to get more cash. I'm certain they have or would come up with other plans to stay afloat if the merger does not happen. Same with US. But both carriers would be in bad shape. The merger will allow us to keep strong points and dump bad ones and work towards becoming a healhy combined carrier.

 

[hp_fa]

Does anyone have any ideas how US would be affected if United didn't make it? I also realize we aren't exactly a cash cow either, so it could work vice versa...

From a numbers viewpoint the easy and simple answer is that any reduction in airlines aids the survivors by at least lessening capacity on a near-term basis. The remaining airlines can concievably charge more, based upon supply & demand, plus enter markets that may have previously been unavailable to them. However, in the longer term the leasing companies that own the planes or the planes that were owned by the failed airline(s) will eventually find a place to fly somewhere, or a low cost start-up airline (or two) will try and enter the picture.

Whether it is a leasing company or some other form of owner or estate, they are going to want to get those planes flying so they can generate return on the investment.

Anyway, that is my quick and dirty response.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Sorry - didn't see that the article was linked in the other merger thread.......deleted by me.

Jim

 

[tadjr]

From the closed thread " they should at least keep the USAirways logo", if you look at the new uniforms vs the old, there is no name on them, just the flag. Could be easily switched to whatever name you want on a new nametag and keep the flag as a logo for whatever airline we should eventually join with.

Also regarding UA people wanting this, not sure if they actually do, although I havent heard anything bad from the TPA people. They were the ones that actually brought over a seniority list and said they'd exchange if we were willing to. Also interesting to note is that they currently have 51 agents (17 FT and 34 PT inside) to work 9 flights, while we have 60 agents (35 FT and 25 PT inside) to work 23 flights. Wonder how the numbers will cruch (if) we end up merging? UA staffing or US staffing model?

 

[RowUnderDCA]

please don't keep the logo.

 

[YVINTERN]

SWOOOSHY SWOOSHY SWOOOOOOSHHHHYYYYY lmao...

 

[N965VJ]

United pilots union sour on possible US Airways merger
Thursday, May 8, 2008 - 9:26 AM EDT
Charlotte Business Journal

The head of United Airlines' pilots union says a merger with US Airways Group Inc. should be a last resort for the Chicago-based carrier.

Steve Wallach, chairman of the United Master Executive Council of the Air Line Pilots Association, says labor and operational problems would complicate the merger.

"We are aware of continued speculation in the media of a possible merger between United Airlines and US Airways, and have serious concerns that the highly touted financial benefits to be derived from such a merger are unlikely to be achieved because these benefits are based on assumptions that have no basis in reality," Wallach says. "We therefore believe that a merger with US Airways should be a last resort and not a first choice for United."

Link to the rest

 

[Hi-C-Camp]

First of all, I want to make it clear that I do not wish any carrier to go out of business, that would be terrible for its employees.

That being said, I cautiously ask ...if we don't merge with United, and they end up closing up shop, wouldn't it eliminate competition for US and open up International opportunity?

Based on the news, it is a very real possibility for them.... I would hate that to happen for the employees sakes.

Does anyone have any ideas how US would be affected if United didn't make it? I also realize we aren't exactly a cash cow either, so it could work vice versa...

International Shannon, I really hate to tell you, but UAL can stay afloat longer than US due to hard assets they can sell off, that US doesn't have.. Not that anyone wants that to happen, It's kinda sick for you to say these things since US took 2 trips through BK, and almost went belly up... It's not like any airline is poised for the future in our current environment....

 

[Winglet]

The merger will allow us to keep strong points and dump bad ones and work towards becoming a healthy combined carrier.

Dump the bad ones? Which ones do you think? Who wants to buy the junk? I see a combined UAL/LCC having to divest of some of the best stuff like DC. One thing for sure, if management doesn't change completely in both companies, the road is heading towards a cliff. And that road gets shorter as oil prices rise.

The acrimony among the employee groups, the USAPA debacle, deciding who's going to get the ax in resulting shrinkage, and the huge costs of integrating the merging companies makes this one a poor bet, IMHO. This merger is a last ditch maneuver for Tilton to merge with someone . . . . anyone. Tilton justs wants to get out and take his merger winfall elsewhere.

If a go-it-alone UAL could get some good management, I think they could survive and regain health. LCC may be yet another deep wound to bleed from.

Employees in this industry no matter what company, need to keep their personal finances in order. If oil goes to $150-200, there's going to be a real blood-letting among the workers . . . . . and rich escape bonuses for the senior execs and their minions.

 

[safety stud]

There are many on this board that think the UAL/US merger is a bad thing. I for one don't think so. Merging the two would create a massive route structure that would rival anyones. The fact that the price of fuel is so high, and ticket prices are now starting to rise to compensate this issue is a valid point in this process. I am sure the structure of this merger is complex to say the least. With labor being the biggest stumbling block. The combined carrier however would be set up to last the long haul. I am also very sure of the fact that like the AWA/US merger, different financial institutions are present in the final financial transaction. As they say in business, 'Money talks, and the Bulls**t walks".

I do see changes on the east however. PHL, most likely will loose many of it's international destinations. Those would likely go to IAD for UAL. They are far better structured to deal with massive international travel. PHL would become a massive domestic and carribean connecting hub. The elimination of another east hub would probably exist with either BOS, LGA or DCA closing and the two remaining open doing all of the Shuttle flying. PHX, would become a ghost town with the majority of flying going to LAX and SFO. No need to keep 3 large bases on the west to cover what 2 would easily do. I don't see PHX closing, but only being about 10% of the size it is now.

I also see another base opening in MCO. Carribean and South American travel would generate a great revenue base there. This of course would be down the road once the dust has settled. So If I was in PHL, and PHX, I wouldn't be buying a house right now, nor would I get comfortable with the base I'm in. Like everything else, time will tell what the final outcome is going to be. Bear in mind, we are just worker bees, and I could be totally off base on my predictions.

Just my opinion...

 

[700UW]

PHL is US' #1 revenue producing and profitable station, it wont be reduced.

UA all ready tried to have mini-hubs at MCO and MIA, and they failed.

 

[EMBFA]

Oh yeah, I'm sure an MCO hub is in the cards...

 

[Planemx]

We are hub and spoke.......PHL is a hub - we force people to fly to/from it. If GEG was a hub it would look great on paper too. Remove the need to fly thru PHX and it shrinks.....that goes for all the stations.