never mind that intel rarely has fully disclosed data such as what is required in a merger or that the biggest challenge in intel today is getting inside the minds of people who think very differently... how data is interpreted is far more important than the actual data.
.
of course part of US' decision to quit talking about AA may be precisely because they decided (with the help of some sober consultants whose testosterone levels don't influence their decisions) that US can't win if it gets in a bidding war with DL or anyone else.... which is exactly the conclusion DL wanted. Let AA do what AA needs to do to turn their business around and let US compete based on the conditions it has after 2 rounds in BK court and a merger of its own... if it can't succeed on those terms, then dragging another airline into the mix isn't likely to do anything except drag more people down to the lowest paid employees category and bring financial performance for the entire industry down several notches, reason enough that DL decided it is worth ensuring that US keeps its hands off of AA.
.
Quite in contrast to US employees, DL's (including PMNW) fared far better through BK and mergers.
.
DL picked NW as a merger partner in part because the ability to achieve DL's intended outcome, including w/ respect to labor relations, was more predictable than it would have been with other carriers, including UA. Not surprisingly, the 3 areas which DL needs to focus on - the west, LHR access, and a larger presence in Latin America - could have been achieved with a UA merger - but it would have come at a greater possibility that DL would have been unable to limit the growth of representation. By now focusing on those 3 areas, DL can achieve its results and still ensure that its position on labor remains secure. Given how well the NW merger went relative to most in the industry - not unlike the way the Western merger went - perhaps DL's approach to labor is essential to obtain the flexibility in a growing, adapting business which is what DL has demonstrated it needs to be in order to win in an industry which rarely adapts well or grows w/o great difficulty.
.
The EU has had similar investigations into other alliances.. and there is no evidence that what DL has with AF is any different from what any other airline has with any other immunized alliance partner. I am not entirely convinced that these immunized alliances are in the best interests of consumers either but they were agreed to and approved and if the EU is now getting wet feet, they need to put it on the list of all the other things they want to amend regarding EU-US aviation protocols. (you do realize that there is a political element to aviation economics, don't you?)
