oneworld - AA to remain in OneWorld regardless of merger

Interesting news in the FT this morning suggesting that AA will remain in One World regardless of any merger. It's an interesting story (subscription only: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/00dab556-e465-11e1-affe-00144feab49a.html (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/00dab556-e465-11e1-affe-00144feab49a.html#axzz23PDEmLdF)) where Tim Horton, CEO at American Airlines, talks up a potential merger with US Airways.

Extract:

"He was clear, however, that American would remain part of the One World Alliance, centred on IAG, BA's parent, after any merger. US Airways belongs to the Star Alliance, led by Germany's Lufthansa.

Mr. Horton, chairman of One World also hinted that the alliance was on the bring of signing up onf of the fast-growing Gulf-based carriers."

We've known this for months.

Oh well, guess its good to know that they're still saying the same thing!

It would mean that US Airways would be merged into AA! Unless its the other way round and AA disappears!

I was searching schedule between LAS and LAX on AA.com. After the 5 non-stop option AA.com listed three transit routes. Guess what? All three transit routes are flying US from LAS to PHX and then AA to LAX...Mmmmmmmmm...Is there anything happening here?

It would mean that US Airways would be merged into AA! Unless its the other way round and AA disappears!

I think it would be AA. As US may well remain as indenpendant brand.

The question is whether American eagle or American Connection would survive as stand alone airline or not.

It would be AA as that is the strongest brand, just as America West was consumed by US and NW was consumed by DL

I believe if some other airline buys AA (which is more likely than a merger of equals or AA buying somebody) the management of the buying airline will decide what happens with the AA brand and the alliance membership.
In that type of situation it basically does not matter any more what the management of AA thinks / wants / believes. They will be redundant.

I wonder if AA pretends to be interested in US to parry off a US merger in the short term. Longer term, US may go bankrupt, and AA can then pick off choice pieces to bolster the AA northeast US network.

I believe if some other airline buys AA (which is more likely than a merger of equals or AA buying somebody) the management of the buying airline will decide what happens with the AA brand and the alliance membership.
In that type of situation it basically does not matter any more what the management of AA thinks / wants / believes. They will be redundant.

That's not how it works in the real world.

AA is a founding member of Oneworld. IF they are to be taken over, they would for sure stipulate that the new airline would remain in OW.

The only exception would be if AA is liquidated.

That's not how it works in the real world.

AA is a founding member of Oneworld. IF they are to be taken over, they would for sure stipulate that the new airline would remain in OW.

The only exception would be if AA is liquidated.

Exactly. But some people seems not to understand if AA were to bring into Star or stkytrash what US government would do in terms of anti-trust issues...

Let's say somehow DL or UA buys AA. AA will be gone from OW. Likely, US will join OW so there will be an American OW partner again.

It would mean that US Airways would be merged into AA! Unless its the other way round and AA disappears!In reality, when large companies merge, it is rarely as simple as one taking over the other. Usually, there are complexities that cause strange mixtures. By way of anecdote, at one time I worked for a company that was perhaps #2 or #3 in its industry and which managed a fairly hostile takeover of a similarly-sized competitor. It was billed as a true merger, and the new company adopted a name chosen to signify this. In reality, much of the management of the acquired company ended up replacing equivalent managers in the acquirer; internal processes ended up a mishmash of systems previously in use at one or the other.

In the case of AA and US, I'd expect separate decisions regarding the name of the new company, the details of the new FF program, which alliance to stay in, which managers remain, etc. Just as an example, we could see the AA name, much of US' senior management, the AAdvantage name but details changed, and it could end up in whichever alliance makes sense for the resulting company (e.g., positioning relative to competitors and desired partners). In such a scenario, it wouldn't be accurate to say that either US or AA was "merged into" the other, even though one name or the other survives.

Not surprising. If AA and US merged (Or US took over AA, whichever way you want to describe it), both the merged US/AA and United staying in Star would really not be an option, from an antitrust standpoint.

No way that the antitrust authorities would allow two of the remaining large carriers to remain in one alliance.

So, no real news here. If they are thinking about US/AA I think they have to think OneWorld, since I think United has the right to stay in Star as the more senior member.