J.Edward

New ones?

Anglo Large Clawed Otter

Or AS ones. That would be a quick way to rapidly increase capacity and gain a west coast presence to boot (assuming a *A entrance). Once in *A, having a west-coast presence would be key to feed into all the other alliance members' asia routes. Just take all the 73NGs and dump the 734s and Mad Dogs.

pbarnette

Do you think they are that keen to add domestic capacity? Wide bodies are hard to come by, as we have discussed ad nauseum. I guess I just don't see, *A or no *A, CO looking to beef up domestic service and become a feeder for LH and their associated minions.

Anglo Large Clawed Otter

If they do join *A, and NW/DUAL are SkyTeam, a west-coast presence would become a necessity. I guess CO could De-Hub CLE and shift flights west to get into a bloodbath war with entrenched UA/AS (assuming there's anything other than ERJ's to shift from CLE). Just buying AS' established west-coast presence would be far easier.

enmascarado

I am wondering what does all this merger mean with respect to OnePass miles...

Should I go now and spend them as soon as I can?

Should I hoard them more than ever for some SQ or LH F trips?

Should I just go about as usual without any change?


P.S.: Mods, there seem to be two redundant threads right now, this one and the one about the Delta/United Merger. Maybe some merging of our own should be considered?

J.Edward

I think that sounds right -- I do not think CO would want to prioritize domestic growth over international. As for new (widebody) planes, I suspect CO would be able to find both the financing and the various delivery slots for expansion. They might not be for tomorrow but I suspect they'd be soon enough to facilitate CO's appetite for conservative growth.

entropy

CO+AS gives a nice bump in the 737 numbers.

Does it add domestic capacity? yes, but in the part that CO really is lacking. AS would give CO a stronghold in the west that they haven't had since they were based in LAX.

I could imagine better fleet utilization, a more or less immediate jettison of the MD80s, and thus deferring the retirement of some of the older CO 733 until all the 738's AS ordered are on property.

Then, CO would have a more diverse domestic feed and the ability to concentrate west coast traffic to run high demand int'l long haul. Obviously they'll need more widebodies for that.

Depending on what goes down with the DL/UA deal.. CO could beef up LAX significantly. One could easily see a 772/W taking the primarily LAX based O/D TLV traffic with connections from SEA/SFO.

J.Edward

Why not merge AS + NW + CO into a holding company, keep the various brands where appropriate and start to slowly integrate the products together?

For example, if NW is known in Asia have the planes based there say Northwest - part of the blah group.

Likewise if AS is known in the SEA area why not have the planes there keep the AS scheme?

Ditto for IAH/EWR.

At the same time 'synergies' can be reached by standardizing the product (i.e. a single NG BC is chosen for this entity to replace WBC and BF) and a new domestic F product is chosen to go into the domestic planes.

CO & NW can exapnd upon their already profitable codeshare with AS helping to bolster up the Pac-NW [a]and[/b] this entity can continue to leverage (that is if the anti-trusters don't shoot it down) the code-sharing with KLM.

Anglo Large Clawed Otter

All good points. I would expect the more esoteric portions of the AS network to disappear (odd point-to-points from secondary L.A. airports, PDX, but not the intra-Alaska - as it's a virtual monopoly). L.A. is definitely a huge prize, but faces quite a bit of competition (less, I guess, if you're getting massive *A feed there). I guess SEA could also be a hub, and would likely be robust enough to be significantly more built-out (and important to the overall CO bottom-line) than CLE.

pbarnette

Or don't integrate them. Do what AF/KL seems to be doing - keep one as the premier carrier and degrade the other into your in-house LCC.

J.Edward

I think you're on the right path there but the only thing I add (enter captain obvious) is that if these odd P2P services can financially justify their existence leave them.

I also think there's merit in allowing the brands to continue to operate -- granted it may make sense to standardize the products within the brands (catering, seats, etc.) but why tinker and spend the $$$ on re-branding?

I would think that a slow, measured steps towards integration under a common holding company would allow for the so called 'synergies' and sidestep (at least for the time being) the more sticky issues regarding mergers.

entropy

A holding CO merger would be the best way to go certainly for 2 large carriers.

Step 1: Merge duplicate functions (purchasing, websites, planning)
Step 2: Merge FFP
Steps 1&2 eliminate the cost and duplicate resource expenditures (the "synergy")

AS/QX work that way, they are technically separate carriers.

senatorgirth

Great idea! Let's call the company Texas Air. We can name one airline "Eastern," which will be strongest in the eastern part of the U.S. and call the other half "Continental" which will be the international and western-focused carrier. And let's give it a common FF program...and bring in a guy named "Frank" to run the whole thing. It'll be great!

J.Edward

If UA and DL get together you might want to call it PanAmerican.

Seriously though, airlines mergers have many messy aspect (the integration of employee groups comes to mind.) That's why I thought to mention a common holding company. If this approach was taken the group could begin to realize the benefits of consolidation without the ills that have traditionally accompanied it.

senatorgirth

I think you're right, with the caveat that the efficiencies would not be as great as could be possibly realized in a fully successful merger. Still, I think that new technologies and the evolution of marketing techniques could make pulling off such a feat easier today than in the past. The airlines could share a common online presence, codesharing and partnering activities, and branding and marketing efforts that simply didn't exist 20 or 30 years ago.