Odds of AMR Merger Becoming Far More Favorable Again
- Thread starter azstrik
- Start date
jimntx
Veteran
Got it. So what they are saying in that article is that the merger will happen...unless it doesn't. Well, that's certainly clears up things for me. Now, I can sleep at night.
Article has no substance and shows no insight on the proposed merger. Quote "As you can tell, this merger is more important to AMR than it is to US Air." Huh? The writer of this piece has not got a clue but because he writes for yahoo, he must know what he is talking about.
Jacobin777
Senior
What "brilliant" journalism..LOL. 
😛
😛
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2003
- Messages
- 5,311
- Reaction score
- 584
http://news.yahoo.com/why-airline-mergers-inevitable-200427977--finance.html
jimntx
Veteran
Ms. Karim has an incisive grasp of the obvious. Though I don't think she is correct that mergers in the airline business are either inevitable or intrinsic to the nature of the business.
Most of the pre-9/11 mergers were simply a case of an airline with deep pockets (DL or AA) buying up a smaller airline for the sole purpose of eliminating a competitor. Does almost any vestige of Western, Reno, or Cal??? (what was that other airline on the West Coast that AMR bought?) exist today? No, and there was no or little interest in the purchases by the DoJ because during most of that time, air fares, routes, frequencies were controlled by the government (I may have my calendar of events turned around here; what can I say...I'm old); so, the anti-competitive, anti-trust issues did not arise.
Today if an airline disappears (bought, merged, or closed up shop) the percentage of competition lost is greater. Therefore, it goes with the territory that the people charged with looking for anti-trust issues have a clearer target.
Quite frankly, I think there are going to be more of us who bite the dust over the next few years. The attempts to steal hub business from each other--see also, DL growth on West Coast, UA adding flights into ATL and MSP--is just beginning. Some of us will not survive because our managements will not be nimble enough to realize that what worked 20 years ago doesn't work anymore.
Most of the pre-9/11 mergers were simply a case of an airline with deep pockets (DL or AA) buying up a smaller airline for the sole purpose of eliminating a competitor. Does almost any vestige of Western, Reno, or Cal??? (what was that other airline on the West Coast that AMR bought?) exist today? No, and there was no or little interest in the purchases by the DoJ because during most of that time, air fares, routes, frequencies were controlled by the government (I may have my calendar of events turned around here; what can I say...I'm old); so, the anti-competitive, anti-trust issues did not arise.
Today if an airline disappears (bought, merged, or closed up shop) the percentage of competition lost is greater. Therefore, it goes with the territory that the people charged with looking for anti-trust issues have a clearer target.
Quite frankly, I think there are going to be more of us who bite the dust over the next few years. The attempts to steal hub business from each other--see also, DL growth on West Coast, UA adding flights into ATL and MSP--is just beginning. Some of us will not survive because our managements will not be nimble enough to realize that what worked 20 years ago doesn't work anymore.
wings396
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 3,672
- Reaction score
- 1,122
Western merged with Delta in 1987, and a fair amount of their system exists today.
PSA was purchased by US, and was mismanaged to the point of total destruction.
AA just has a track record of buying smaller competition in order to dismantle them instead of trying to capitalize from their acquisition.
PSA was purchased by US, and was mismanaged to the point of total destruction.
AA just has a track record of buying smaller competition in order to dismantle them instead of trying to capitalize from their acquisition.
FrugalFlyerv2.0
Veteran
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2003
- Messages
- 2,931
- Reaction score
- 3,341
.... and yet most US and some AA employees are still cheering for US and AA to combine .... wtf?
It'll be interesting to see, if this 'merger' is approved, what parts of US network remain and what parts are discarded.
Remember when US employees were ecstatic over Dave Siegal becoming CEO? That worked out great, huh? Most employees buy into the political campaign type promises these recycled CEO's offer without looking at the history of past mergers.
Mergers always bring layoffs as the point of the merger was to reduce costs and mergers bring many duplications of employee positions. Be careful what you ask for, you might get it!
Jacobin777
Senior
Small update:
"For these reasons, the Special Master does not accept Defendants’ contention that they have a significant need for access to this information."
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2013/10/heres-the-special-masters-report-on-american-airlines-us-airways-request-for-information-on-third-parties-interviewed-by-doj.html/?nclick_check=1
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2013/10/heres-the-special-masters-ruling-on-production-of-documents-about-past-mergers.html
"For these reasons, the Special Master does not accept Defendants’ contention that they have a significant need for access to this information."
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2013/10/heres-the-special-masters-report-on-american-airlines-us-airways-request-for-information-on-third-parties-interviewed-by-doj.html/?nclick_check=1
http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2013/10/heres-the-special-masters-ruling-on-production-of-documents-about-past-mergers.html
jimntx
Veteran
Well, I guess this won't be the slam dunk for the merger that everyone thought it would be. "DoJ has no case. You let the others merge. You have to let us merge. It's not fair." This approach just doesn't seem to be working.
jimntx
Veteran
It's indicative of American society in general. Everyone wants a quick fix that requires the minimum of effort or responsibility on their part. It's like when someone (and according to my doctor, this attitude is pervasive) goes to the Dr., is told "you have the flu" (for which there is no medication other than let it run its course), and they demand some medication to cure it.
Yes, I know there is Tamiflu and other flu medications today, but they do not "cure" the flu. They just shorten it's duration.
If this merger goes through, you can bet the rent money that there will be layoffs. The "new" American will be only slightly larger than DL or UA as far as route system, a/c, etc, but will have approx. 30,000 more employees (between 100,000 and 110,000 active) than either DL or UA (both have approx. 70,000 active). There is no way to compete financially if your payroll is almost
50% larger to put the same number of a/c and revenue seats in the air.
American society in general today? How about all throughout human history. Wouldn't have an airline industry today if people thought the horse and wagon was just fine. And of course they prefered horse and wagon over walk and carry everything. Examples are endless. The desire in human history to reduce effort and responsibility is what drives science and technology.
True, current medications do not "cure" the flu but reduce the side effects (cough, runny nose, headache, etc) to enable one to sleep and recover quicker to, as you say, shorten the flu's duration. That is why the medications are recommended by doctors to help one let the flu run it's couse in a shorter time period. Also, one can get a flu vaccine yearly to help reduce the risk of getting the flu in the first place, but wait, that would be a quick fix with no effort or responsibility on one's part to get and fight the flu in the first place.
