Dr. HFH

FWIW, this from S&P:

knirbed

Is this what we have to look forward to if the merger goes through?

US Airways Union Assails 'Back Room Deal' With AMR Workers

http://www.thestreet.com/story/11824...o&cm_ven=YAHOO

eponymous_coward

So, remind me, which Spirit planes have lie-flat C seating like the US A332/333s- the same seating that AA wants to install on a bunch of their planes? When did Spirit add F to their non-mainline fleet? When did they add WiFi?

Oh, and AA gave away SJC and STL, and got back---nothing.

"USELESS AIRWAYS is JUST LIKE SPIRIT ZOMG" is really really tiresome to keep hearing, because it's obviously not true.

diver858

Good find, knirbed.

AMR management suggested early on that any deal would require LCC to first resolve its labor issues. Without formal agreements with its pilots, FA and ground staff, I simply do not see how the AMR Board, UCC could support a merger with or acquisition of LCC.

Assuming this is indeed the case, announcements of LCC labor settlements would be the first sign of any serious deal discussions with AMR.

Wilbur

You were doing OK until we got to these gems.

Northworst Airlines - 90's and 00's motto: "your slaveship in the sky" - hadn't been a great airline since the days of Northwest Orient.

And RyanAir? I can't imagine anyone who decries the lack of competition and service from current legacy airlines actually desiring to fly RyanAir on a regular basis.

belynch

Let me preface this by saying I don't have a dog in this race. I've been casually watching the events unfold and reading this thread. I don't work in the aviation industry but, like most of us on FT, find it fascinating and try to be a scholar of it.

I used to be a US1 who became very disenfranchised after the HP merger (and various major screw-ups that resulted from it). The US of today is remarkably different than the US of 4 - 5 years ago. I find there to be more parallels to WN than any other domestic carrier (the obvious exceptions being the limited international network, domestic F, and :-: membership). As much as I'm surprised to say this, they actually fill a decent niche.

While I used to go out of my way to avoid US with the exception of Shuttle flights I find myself flying on them with an increasing frequency over my dominant carrier, UA (where I'm a 1k). For quick trips on the east coast they run a relatively reliable operation (as well as anyone can with the airspace issues and weather) and their fare structure is tolerable when booking within 72 hours (as my buying behavior forces me to be). Some would argue they leave money on the table, but it takes that $500 in savings to get me to connect in PHL or DCA and deal with no chance of an upgrade, etc.

If I was an AA elite looking at this merger I'd be worried about a handful of things:

• Doug and crew have demonstrated they suck at merging two operations and two cultures. Maybe they learned a lot after HP/US, but I'd be very worried. If they announce a computer merge date of X, don't fly them for X+30. There's also likely to be ongoing AA vs US culture issues. Legacy HP and US still go after each other.
• If left at the helm, US management does a horrible job rewarding customer loyalty. The FFP would likely be slowly gutted.
• Over time they will fix operational issues. They seem to be good at that. I personally value an ontime plane more than an upgrade. They love people like me for that very reason.
• On a domestic level you will most likely see some product deterioration. If they can't drive a premium for it, they won't do it (that makes fundamental sense on a business level, but as US airline elites we've been conditioned to feel differently).

No one is probably still reading this post; but if there's a thesis it's that if history is any guide, a combined US/AA (if led by US management) would likely be a flaming bag of poo for about 3 years. At which point it will emerge as a different carrier than what US and AA folks know it as today. It won't be great, it won't be terrible. And it'll get you from A to B.

Good luck with the merger ya'll. Despite the hyperbole here on FT, UA isn't all that terrible. DL is pretty good too if you don't care about the value of your miles.

SOBE ER DOC

Thank you for the personal attack on my intellectual capacity. Much appreciated.

The only objective way one can view the potential behavior of someone in a role is to view their past behavior in a similar role. Parker started with "US is a LCC." The it was "oh, wait, we're a legacy carrier." When oil prices spiked US did everything but start sky writing to drum up revenue with investing in HVCs that drive the profitability for airlines that run a hub and spoke model. Parker walked into the strongest carrier on the east coast and and watched an the competition ate this lunch. US had over 120 flights a day at LGA and could not figure out how to make that work in the most lucrative airline market in the world. That to me would be cause for termination.

Look, I used to a CP with US and watched the rather precipitous decline of that airline post-merger with HP. It was a disaster. I have NO reason to believe Parker will do any better with AA's assets.

SOBE ER DOC

Um...apples and oranges. Spirit does not have A333/A333s.

If you look at US's premium product it is laughable. They have the fewest number of premium seats of any domestic legacy carrier. Their international premium product is arguably the worst product (combined HARD and SOFT) of the legacy carriers with the fewest number of premium seats. At a time when other legacy carriers (even UA) are trying to up their game, US has been perfectly satisfied to scrape the bottom of the barrel.

All things equal (price and route), how many people do you know that would CHOOSE to fly US international in a premium cabin over DL, AA, UA or an international carrier?

morrisunc

I spend 100k plus on international business every year and do. Us envoy suite is best product on the market to Europe. Exactly how is aa c better than envoy suite?

uxb

And if the merger doesn't go through, then I'm sure someone crafty enough will include them in the shareholder suit. FWIW, I'd remain neutral on recommendations. Then again, I did buy into AA in Feb '09 and was wiped out by the BK, so YMMV.

You are going to hear whining regardless of who ends up he victor. You may see another mass exodus of workers that didn't get a buyout. Then, you'll see a bunch of newbies to fill the void. Only time will tell whether they are worse than the current pilots, FAs or ground crews.

edwards183

Coming from a company that was part of a troika that enabled the largest financial crisis since the great depression. I guess I will take their recommendations with a grain of salt.

edwards183

Really, you would take the US envoy suite over BA C? The hard product is at least equal, and the soft product of BA runs circles around US. And Virgin Atlantic's hard product is close to par and again the soft product is superior.

hmv

So instead of Horton or Parker...the unions will get both?

According to the WSJ: AMR chief Tom Horton is in talks about becoming board chairman if the American Airlines parent merges with US Airways.

morrisunc

1-2-1 seating vs 2-4-2. Hardly equal. US - Cathay business suite is best on the market. I don't eat airplane food. Crews on us envoy I find to be better than ba. However, I would rather serve myself and have the us suite than marginally better food and lounges. I was answering the poster who claimed delta aa and ual had better hard business products than us air and I was simply saying that isn't true. However I have never flown delta businessnclass

SylvesterDisco1978

Board chairman for major companies don't do much of anything these days, it's basically a sinecure.