Originally Posted by
tuolumne
Well first, I never said it's all because of SHARES, but now that you mention it, yes, that has been a completely verifiable failing in the integration process. Are you saying it wasn't?
And as far as having an old livery, I would say that was indicative of CO's reluctance to update many parts of their company - whether it be paper logbooks for aircraft, an old patched together res system with no front end GUI, a shyness towards updating their brand in any way, etc. It all strikes me as them believing they didn't have to, given the operating environment of having captive hub customers at two airports. That's what CO was - a 2-hub carrier. Now that they've layed their business model and ethos on top of the 5-hub UAL, the results have been disastrous. Again, are you still implying everything is ok?
You didn't mention SHARES; others constantly do. You mentioned the livery, which seems completely unconnected. You've based your entire premise on not updating a livery meaning they clearly didn't update a business plan. That's a very immature way of looking at a business, and ignores their stellar record heading into the merger as a business.
As for implying everything is OK - I don't understand what you're asking. Implying what's OK?