Leaked: US and UA in merger talks for over a month
- Thread starter smoot4208
- Start date
- Status
Hey.. Chill Out
Veteran
- Dec 16, 2007
- 501
- 3
Or invent something with the professor...
Wait... I'm doing it wrong.
Wait... I'm doing it wrong.
phllax
Veteran
IAD and PHL are 2 completely different International markets: IAD is more business, while PHL is more leisurely. I think if they merge, that the levels of TATL service will remain pretty static as compared to now.
Looking at the current IAD international, UA serves the following international destinations:
AMS (763), PEK (744), BRU (777) EZE (763), 3x FRA (744, 763, 777), KWI (777), 4x LHR ( 2 each 763, 777), MEX (319), MUC (777), CDG (777), GIG (763), FCO (777), GRU (763), NRT (777), ZRH (763)
Caribbean: AUA, CUN, MBJ (Sat only), PUJ (Sat only), SJU, SXM (Weekends only), STT (Wed, Thur, Sat, Sun only)
With the exception of BRU, UA has competition to every other European destination. In PHL, US only has competition to LHR, FRA and CDG, and we all know how much better those carriers service is. US get's the other 17 (LGW, EDI is not returnin this year) destinations to itself, with the appropriate sized aircraft.
US also has more Caribbean service from PHL.
AA flies 20 daily 777 flights to LHR this summer alone. Plus a 763 to STN.
Two daily 763s to BRU. 6 more 763s to CDG. 763 to DUB. Two 763s to FCO. A 777 and a 763 to FRA. Daily 763s to MAD and MAN and MXP and ZRH and BCN.
Yes, AA doesn't fly to as many one-horse towns in Europe as US does. But I'd say that AA's European presence is focused on profitable markets instead of being focused on how many dots are on the map.
Let's review: AA has 47 777s, 58 763s and 34 A300s all devoted primarily to international routes. US has what? 9 A330s and 10 762s? Plus some 752s. And plans to fly vapor, err, A350s someday. I'd agree that US has a miniscule international operation by comparison.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Will some one please take this ugly girl to the prom?
She promises to get drunk if you will promise to marry her.
She promises to get drunk if you will promise to marry her.
TheLarkAscending
Veteran
- Banned
- #83
U.S. Airways could be next in line for merger
Thursday, April 17, 2008
By Dan Fitzpatrick, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Could US Airways be next?
Amid the turbulence caused by the prospect of a Delta Air Lines-Northwest Airlines tie-up, there was new talk yesterday that Pittsburgh's No. 1 air carrier could join forces with United Airlines as the industry searches for ways to survive the high price of oil, a slumping economy and tightening credit.
The Wall Street Journal was the first to report news of talks between US Airways and United, saying the two have been discussing a union for more than a month. At the same time, United also might resurrect negotiations with Continental Airlines, the newspaper said, with an agreement possible in the next few weeks. Separately, The Dallas Morning News reported that a US Airways-American Airlines deal also could happen, citing the view of certain analysts.
"The truth is, everybody is talking to everybody," said Darryl Jenkins, a well-known industry consultant in Virginia. "But not all these talks are serious."
In a message to employees yesterday, US Airways Chief Executive Officer Doug Parker did not confirm nor deny the reports, saying he could not comment on "any specific discussions or transaction." But he did reiterate his support for further consolidation among U.S. airlines, perhaps leaving the door open to a future deal.
"Rest assured if US Airways chooses to participate in any industry consolidation, we will do so because we believe it is in the best interests of our employees and our airline," he said.
United and US Airways have discussed a tie-up before. In 2000, in fact, the U.S. Justice Department nixed a proposed merger on antitrust grounds. Later, when David Siegel was CEO of US Airways, the carrier considered a takeover of United after emerging from its first bankruptcy. The option was code-named "Project Minnow," with US Airways as the small fish gobbling the bigger one. In the end, US Airways decided to merge instead with Tempe, Ariz.-based America West Airlines.
Last year, US Airways attempted a takeover bid for Delta but was rebuffed.
A US Airways-United combination is considered a "more remote possibility" when compared to the prospect of United-Continental, according the Journal's report yesterday. But the proposed cost savings with United-US Airways "could be at least as attractive as synergies in a United-Continental linkup" and potentially higher than the $1 billion Northwest and Delta expect to save as part of their merger, the Journal reported.
Mr. Parker warned employees yesterday that the Delta-Northwest combination "creates a formidable competitor" and "all airlines are going to have to make dramatic changes to their existing business models in order to be viable."
"Whatever we do, we will always take great care to ensure the path we choose returns value to our shareholders and customers, and also provides long-term stability for our employees."
But Colorado airline consultant Michael Boyd argued that US Airways would be a "lousy merger partner" for any of the big U.S. carriers. It "doesn't bring anything to the table," he said.
American, Mr. Boyd noted, already has a large hub in New York and thus would not need US Airways' hub in Philadelphia. United has a big operation in Denver, lessening the importance of US Airways' Phoenix hub, and it also has a big commitment to Washington, D.C., again lessening the importance of US Airways' Philadelphia hub.
If more consolidation occurs, "I don't see US Airways as a serious partner right now," said Mr. Jenkins, the airline consultant from Virginia. "If you were to talk to Doug Parker and [US Airways President] Scott Kirby I think they would agree with me. I think they believe they will be left out of the next round. But they also think they will be benefactors of consolidation as capacity is pulled back."
US Airways still has not completed the workforce integration of the old US Airways and America West, first announced in 2005. The pilots and flight attendants are without single contracts, and an upstart group of pilots is trying to wrest representation away from the Air Line Pilots Association. A vote on that issue will conclude today.
Before merging with another carrier, US Airways officials "have problems they have to attend to and get those settled first," Mr. Jenkins said.
No matter what happens, Mr. Boyd cautioned, "they are not putting a hub back in Pittsburgh" -- even in the event of a US Airways-United hookup. "The realities of the airline industry negate all that."
US Airways once had its largest hub in Pittsburgh, employing 12,000. Now it employs about 2,000 people in the area and is still the largest carrier at Pittsburgh International Airport, with about 34 percent of all traffic.
Before 9/11, it had almost 90 percent.
Dan Fitzpatrick can be reached at [email protected] or 412-263-1752.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
By Dan Fitzpatrick, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Could US Airways be next?
Amid the turbulence caused by the prospect of a Delta Air Lines-Northwest Airlines tie-up, there was new talk yesterday that Pittsburgh's No. 1 air carrier could join forces with United Airlines as the industry searches for ways to survive the high price of oil, a slumping economy and tightening credit.
The Wall Street Journal was the first to report news of talks between US Airways and United, saying the two have been discussing a union for more than a month. At the same time, United also might resurrect negotiations with Continental Airlines, the newspaper said, with an agreement possible in the next few weeks. Separately, The Dallas Morning News reported that a US Airways-American Airlines deal also could happen, citing the view of certain analysts.
"The truth is, everybody is talking to everybody," said Darryl Jenkins, a well-known industry consultant in Virginia. "But not all these talks are serious."
In a message to employees yesterday, US Airways Chief Executive Officer Doug Parker did not confirm nor deny the reports, saying he could not comment on "any specific discussions or transaction." But he did reiterate his support for further consolidation among U.S. airlines, perhaps leaving the door open to a future deal.
"Rest assured if US Airways chooses to participate in any industry consolidation, we will do so because we believe it is in the best interests of our employees and our airline," he said.
United and US Airways have discussed a tie-up before. In 2000, in fact, the U.S. Justice Department nixed a proposed merger on antitrust grounds. Later, when David Siegel was CEO of US Airways, the carrier considered a takeover of United after emerging from its first bankruptcy. The option was code-named "Project Minnow," with US Airways as the small fish gobbling the bigger one. In the end, US Airways decided to merge instead with Tempe, Ariz.-based America West Airlines.
Last year, US Airways attempted a takeover bid for Delta but was rebuffed.
A US Airways-United combination is considered a "more remote possibility" when compared to the prospect of United-Continental, according the Journal's report yesterday. But the proposed cost savings with United-US Airways "could be at least as attractive as synergies in a United-Continental linkup" and potentially higher than the $1 billion Northwest and Delta expect to save as part of their merger, the Journal reported.
Mr. Parker warned employees yesterday that the Delta-Northwest combination "creates a formidable competitor" and "all airlines are going to have to make dramatic changes to their existing business models in order to be viable."
"Whatever we do, we will always take great care to ensure the path we choose returns value to our shareholders and customers, and also provides long-term stability for our employees."
But Colorado airline consultant Michael Boyd argued that US Airways would be a "lousy merger partner" for any of the big U.S. carriers. It "doesn't bring anything to the table," he said.
American, Mr. Boyd noted, already has a large hub in New York and thus would not need US Airways' hub in Philadelphia. United has a big operation in Denver, lessening the importance of US Airways' Phoenix hub, and it also has a big commitment to Washington, D.C., again lessening the importance of US Airways' Philadelphia hub.
If more consolidation occurs, "I don't see US Airways as a serious partner right now," said Mr. Jenkins, the airline consultant from Virginia. "If you were to talk to Doug Parker and [US Airways President] Scott Kirby I think they would agree with me. I think they believe they will be left out of the next round. But they also think they will be benefactors of consolidation as capacity is pulled back."
US Airways still has not completed the workforce integration of the old US Airways and America West, first announced in 2005. The pilots and flight attendants are without single contracts, and an upstart group of pilots is trying to wrest representation away from the Air Line Pilots Association. A vote on that issue will conclude today.
Before merging with another carrier, US Airways officials "have problems they have to attend to and get those settled first," Mr. Jenkins said.
No matter what happens, Mr. Boyd cautioned, "they are not putting a hub back in Pittsburgh" -- even in the event of a US Airways-United hookup. "The realities of the airline industry negate all that."
US Airways once had its largest hub in Pittsburgh, employing 12,000. Now it employs about 2,000 people in the area and is still the largest carrier at Pittsburgh International Airport, with about 34 percent of all traffic.
Before 9/11, it had almost 90 percent.
Dan Fitzpatrick can be reached at [email protected] or 412-263-1752.
Neither of them wants to merge with LCC. What would make you think that other than the pure speculation posted on this board? At AA we have enough of all of those stations you mentioned, plus frequent and growing MIA-Caribbean. So, tell me again, what does LCC have other than DCA and LGA slots we might want. But, even that is based on the paraphrase of the famous Gloria Guinness line--You can't be too rich or too thin (or have too many slots at DCA and LGA).
Granted, US is not the airline everyone is scrambling to try and merge with. But from AA's point of view, if DL-NW hook up and UA-CO merge, I think AA might join up with US. It would give them a strong east coast prescece but more importantly, it would eliminate one more competitor to help bring fares up to a pofitable level. Just because US does not have a massive international route network does not mean they don't have any value for anothr carrie to hook up with.
PA18
Senior
- Aug 12, 2004
- 398
- 9
I haven't checked, but does anybody go over to the United board and highlight negative passages from news articles about them? Didn't think so.
I think it's unhealthy how much time we spend on the US Airways board, and we have an interest. Imagine working somewhere else but having such a hard-on for a US Airways message board. ?
I think it's unhealthy how much time we spend on the US Airways board, and we have an interest. Imagine working somewhere else but having such a hard-on for a US Airways message board. ?
Travelpro72
Veteran
- Jan 30, 2005
- 4,964
- 455
Ya know EMBFA I agree 100%. There are merger threads after merger threads and yet you don't find many US employees going to other airlines boards. You DO however have those that come here (nice ones welcome) that spew their venom about how lousy we are and how we're the airline nobody wants. While a bit of that may be true... I think you all need to go to your own boards and watch the MESS about to happen in your OWN backyards.
I think you all need to go to your own boards and watch the MESS about to happen in your OWN backyards.aredeeyou22
Veteran
- Nov 12, 2003
- 829
- 17
You also do not see our former VFF's that left for AA, CO, etc... writing hateful things about the "minor" grounding of the MD80's, and the huge disruption it caused. No big deal I guess. If that were DP and Scott tho, wow, look out!Ya know EMBFA I agree 100%. There are merger threads after merger threads and yet you don't find many US employees going to other airlines boards. You DO however have those that come here (nice ones welcome) that spew their venom about how lousy we are and how we're the airline nobody wants. While a bit of that may be true...
You also don't see anyone commenting on the fact that AA execs took their bonuses... If that were US Airways, look out...
You also don't see our former VFF's commenting on the $25 second bag rule that most other carriers have since implemented. When US Airways did this, it was the end of the airline and the world as we know it.... Disgusting how they nickel and dime us to death!
If this were US Airways, Art, US1Y, Piney, etc.. would be having a field day! (Wait till the others quietly remove glassware from the domestic flights.....
h34r: )Come on guys, where are you?
I agree and disagree with everyone saying US brings nothing to the table. In terms of aircraft and international flights, yes, we bring very little to nothing at all. But if you consider our east coast presence with a strong CLT hub and one of the healthiest balance sheets in the industry, that would be an asset to either UA or AA. The US franchise generates lots of revenue in spite of ourselves. In 2007 we had the worst operational statistics of anyone in the industry, yet we made money....lots of money. One could argue the only reason we aren't making money right now is because of high fuel costs. The only real SE city left to hub in after ATL is CLT. For anyone to compete effectively agianst DL/NW, they will need a strong SE hub. This fact alone makes us a strong takeover target. If you put together our balance sheet, CLT hub and east coast presence, the value of all three together are as valuable as any asian routes or international operation. They will be needed by either UA or AA to compete against DL/NW.
- Status
