What? How were you able to see so far into the future? Virgin shareholders have yet to even vote on whether they are willing to accept Alaska's offer (though, as generous as the offer is, nobody expects they will vote not to accept it). Somehow, you have turned that into a "hostile takeover", despite that Virgin management chose Alaska as their suitor and solicited Alaska's offer. You've already closed the book on what Alaska plans to do with the Virgin fleet, routes and service. Never mind that Alaska management has said nothing that reflects what you're saying. In fact, they've indicated just the opposite. The Alaska senior management have clearly indicated their desire to continue and expand the Virgin route structure. They've been very clear on their intention to study closely the Virgin fleet and service and to incorporate that which makes sense. This chapter has only begun for Alaska but you've already determined what's going to happen and accepted that as fact. Oh, and yeah, Delta hasn't "maintained their hubs" as they've refined their business model. I give you NRT, CVG and MEM (and all the people in those places that were displaced) as prime examples. So far, Delta isn't winning any moral race if that was what you were implying.

We won't even get into the morality of their Sky Pesos program.

As for DL domestic service, I've just taken my very occasional trip (SFO/ATL). It was on a domestic config 763, which was just horrid. I would fly an AS 734 any day over that DL plane (where the F seats aren't even 1" wider than the Y seats, and the overhead bins are of the original delivery type, and there is one lav for a cabin of 30).

(1) Meals - a wash. A lunch and a breakfast. AS and DL probably about the same on this route length (as long as AS puts its snack basket out).

(2) IFE - DL wins by an Alaskan mile.

(3) PDB - DL wins by an Alaskan and Hawaiian mile. On every one of my DL flights over the past few years (albeit not a large sample size), full bar open, happily served, and occasionally, a second offered. (This is the same as the VX experience).

(4) Pillow and blanket at the seat - DL obviously wins this one.

The simple fact is that AS can up its game on 3 and 4 immediately as a fairly low cost item. 2, well, AS just needs to make the full array of movies complimentary. Now that the players aren't loaded with as much as the "use your own device" scheme, they expect me to pay for certain content. Any DL/AA/VX plane with personal screens, the premium cabin doesn't pay. That is also easily remedied. And the new AS F seat looks to be a better product than any DL seat that isn't of the int'l variety (incl. premium transcon).

Ironically, the FA on my last segment thanked me for my DL loyalty - apparently my 75K status showed as something DL high on his manifest. That started a conversation, and he didn't seem to have any issues with this Eskimo flyer, nor the company, generally.

I think DL does a good job onboard, not taking into account their seating on different aircraft. You're right, Eastbay, Alaska could easily implement two of those three changes and be much more competitive. I hope they'll move in that direction.

I so hope as well, after 55k so far this year besides a sore bottom the service seems to be slipping a tad bit food as well.

Bright side it seems that DL when they bought into Virgin Atlantic adopted some of their service idea's for the better. So let's hope AS management does something.

AS can not play the "local hometown boy" anymore, they are playing in the major's now!

By the by the JAL deal was a great move countering DL to Japan !!!!! Now that's smooth

"Delta, you have to date us before you ask us to go steady" -Seattle

Oh, plenty of Seattleites will put out on the "first date," especially when you tease them with Woodford Reserve Bourbon.

The poster you are replying to is on record as saying AS should have been shut down and senior executives thrown in jail over AS 261. I'm looking for a word, given the inaccuracy of the post you've replied to (it's not remotely a "hostile takeover") and a pretty obvious dislike of the company discussed in this forum... maybe it rhymes with "gator"?

It's really a matter of opportunity for them. If VX were BOS or WAS based, I think they would still have been an acquisition target. Problem is, there was no small, nice, East Coast airline to buy.

But now with a firm footing on the West Coast, I wouldn't rule out AS starting a Midwest or East Coast hub at some point down the road.

They'll have a focus city at DAL where SEA/PDX/SFO/LAX/DCA/LGA as a group of destinations wouldn't seem terribly silly. They could even keep a flight or two at DFW for feeding to AA.

I suppose AS could try something in PIT or some second-tier city similar to what they did in SJC/SAN (more focus city than hub), but I think it has to be way down the road past the merger.

PIT is the worse place to do a hub, ( green up in the DC area) What will be more interesting to see if there is departure from "point to point" flights.

But whatever it's down the road, AS does not move too quick

I'm not calling DL a "winner" in terms of Seattle (Alaska still has SEA in terms of loyalty and destinations within the US and Canada) but a winner in the overall US market. Additonally, VX and AS are two completely different airlines, I don't see how the boys in Seattle are going to keep a subfleet of leased A320's just to operate transcon routes out of LAX/SFO and an operation out of DAL.

Can you provide any sources that AS plans to keep most of VX's planes, routes, and service? From what I have been reading, AS seems to have intentions of buying VX without actually looking into what they weer buying.

That was the former AS and management, not the current one. If you can provide a source that indicates AS will keep most of VX's planes, routes, service, while adding those same amenities to their 737 fleet, I will redact my "hostile takeover" statement.

I hope so, seeing as how B6, who is mainly East Coast, at least has a hub at LGB and a sizable presence at other West Coast airports.

Can you please explain what buying a company with the rosy agreement of both parties and gutting everything one buys has any relation whatsoever to the definition of a "hostile takeover?"

I don't go by the textbook definition, in my opinion, it's when they destroy a brand/culture.

Ok, well your definition is wrong. Hate to break it to you.

^^^^^^^^^