View Poll Results: My opinion of the announced AA - US merger is:
This is the best of all possible worlds; great idea!
33
3.93%
This portends a stronger airline, with some changes for all
192
22.88%
I am neutral - pros and cons for all
199
23.72%
I think this is a somewhat bad idea with some real challenges
226
26.94%
I am completely opposed to this merger; terrible idea!
189
22.53%
Voters: 839. You may not vote on this poll
AA - US Merger Agreement / Announcement / DOJ Action Discussion (consolidated)
Aug 29, 2013, 6:20 pm
#2731
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6,582
So why is it ok for AA to prosper and US to fail but when people say AA will fail and US will prosper people lose it?
Wouldn't it be better for AA to be the size and scope of dl and UA and get rid cancer that is us air?
We all know US air is on borrowed time. So why not let AA merge with us air and get their European network and new airbuses and keep us air from going under and causing real harm in the market.
Like I said before People seem a-ok with letting us air die on the vine and not letting them merge with AA and they would rather have a weak aa than let their little snowflake be violated by Us.
Wouldn't it be better for AA to be the size and scope of dl and UA and get rid cancer that is us air?
We all know US air is on borrowed time. So why not let AA merge with us air and get their European network and new airbuses and keep us air from going under and causing real harm in the market.
Like I said before People seem a-ok with letting us air die on the vine and not letting them merge with AA and they would rather have a weak aa than let their little snowflake be violated by Us.
Aug 29, 2013, 6:20 pm
#2732
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
I'm sorry. I had come to understand that you were previously in favor of US Airways' takeover of American (it's not a merger by any stretch of the definition, look at the executive lineup as one of many indicators) - and now you speak of US Airways as a "cancer"?
Please clarify your position so we don't remain confused.
Please clarify your position so we don't remain confused.
At first it was because Parker was a stand up guy, would do great things. Then it was that AA would fail absent a merger. Now its US will fail. All that is needed is Parkers great leadership (as he has admitted, producing profits by keeping pilot pay low) to fix things... 
Aug 29, 2013, 6:31 pm
#2733
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
That's why I'm so shocked they allowed 2 other similar mergers (3 if you can air tran/swa even though the doj doesn't) to happen and now have a problem with this one. Dal was the bigger more global airline that merged with the more regional nwa, UA was the bigger more global airline that merged with the more regional cal, now AA is the bigger more global airline that SHOULD be allowed to merge with the more regional us.
And even if the prior mergers didn't lessen competition, reducing the industry from four big legacies (plus WN) to just three big legacies (plus WN) may have a more detrimental impact on competition than the earlier mergers, which did not result in as much market concentration as this one.
If you divorce emotion (and W-2 earnings) from the current situation, it's not rocket science. It's just antitrust law.
Aug 29, 2013, 6:39 pm
#2734
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 12,097
Update from http://aviationblog.dallasnews.com/2...-hearing.html/
In an order Thursday, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly outlined what she wants each side to bring to court Friday.
Here’s what she spelled out, quoting from the order:
[...]
In the order, the judge sided with the U.S. Department of Justice on the number of interrogatories that each side must submit to: 10 from DOJ to each airline and 15 from the airlines to the DOJ.
Here’s what she spelled out, quoting from the order:
[...]
In the order, the judge sided with the U.S. Department of Justice on the number of interrogatories that each side must submit to: 10 from DOJ to each airline and 15 from the airlines to the DOJ.
Aug 29, 2013, 6:46 pm
#2735
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 12,097
Right now AA is protesting because they have an obligation to back the merger (I believe). And of course Horton is still eyeing a nice severance package - 20M or not. I would not be surprised if the AA tune changed again right after December 13.
Not from Parker, of course...
Not from Parker, of course...
AA could break away before 13 December, but it would have to pay $135 million.
Aug 29, 2013, 6:48 pm
#2736
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 12,097
Analysis from http://www.thestreet.com/story/12022...s-details.html
Sounds fair and in keeping with her reputation.
In an order issued Thursday, Kollar-Kotelly appeared to be favoring a trial date on the earlier side. She called on the parties to "immediately begin serving written discovery to the extent possible." She added that the DOJ and the seven state attorneys general suing to block the merger would be permitted to propose up to 10 interrogatory questions to each of the two airlines. The airlines are allowed to propose up to 15 interrogatory questions to the plaintiffs DOJ and states collectively.
[...]
"The kinds of things she is asking -- how much information has already been collected, how much can be done in writing -- is all geared toward making the proceeding go faster," one antitrust source said. "She recognizes that giving the government the schedule it wants would put the deal in jeopardy but she's also concerned about letting the government get the information it needs."
[...]
"The kinds of things she is asking -- how much information has already been collected, how much can be done in writing -- is all geared toward making the proceeding go faster," one antitrust source said. "She recognizes that giving the government the schedule it wants would put the deal in jeopardy but she's also concerned about letting the government get the information it needs."
Aug 29, 2013, 8:53 pm
#2737
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: in the vicinity of SFO
Programs: AA 2MM (LT-PLT, PPro for this year)
Posts: 19,781
That's why I'm so shocked they allowed 2 other similar mergers (3 if you can air tran/swa even though the doj doesn't) to happen and now have a problem with this one. Dal was the bigger more global airline that merged with the more regional nwa, UA was the bigger more global airline that merged with the more regional cal, now AA is the bigger more global airline that SHOULD be allowed to merge with the more regional us.
Aug 29, 2013, 8:56 pm
#2738
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: DCA/IAD
Programs: AS, US, Hilton, BA, DL, SPG, AA, VS
Posts: 1,628
Aug 29, 2013, 9:20 pm
#2739
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: RDU
Programs: HHonors Gold
Posts: 103
From the DOJ press release:
The department’s complaint states that executives of both airlines have repeatedly said that they do not need the merger to succeed. The complaint states that US Airways’ CEO observed in December 2011, that “A[merican] is not going away, they will be stronger post-bankruptcy because they will have less debt and reduced labor costs.” US Airways’ executive vice president wrote in July 2012, that, “There is NO question about AMR’s ability to survive on a standalone basis.” And, as recently as January 2013, American’s management presented plans that would increase the destinations it serves in the United States and the frequency of its flights, and would position American to compete independently as a profitable airline with aggressive plans for growth.
The department’s complaint states that executives of both airlines have repeatedly said that they do not need the merger to succeed. The complaint states that US Airways’ CEO observed in December 2011, that “A[merican] is not going away, they will be stronger post-bankruptcy because they will have less debt and reduced labor costs.” US Airways’ executive vice president wrote in July 2012, that, “There is NO question about AMR’s ability to survive on a standalone basis.” And, as recently as January 2013, American’s management presented plans that would increase the destinations it serves in the United States and the frequency of its flights, and would position American to compete independently as a profitable airline with aggressive plans for growth.
Last edited by RDUpax; Aug 29, 2013 at 11:57 pm
Aug 29, 2013, 9:37 pm
#2740
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
I take a very different read from her order, and what is says. She wants FACTS, such as (1) what document discovery is needed, (2) what depositions are really need to get taken and why and (3) what experts there will be used (or likely used) and are they ready to go now?
Looking at US's schedule (posted by Terry Maxon) its crazy. DOJ asks for 50 depositions, US says 10. Kollar whats to know who would be deposed (I've been asked the same question as scheduling) and if DOJ has a list, they will get those. They were certainly be over 10.
Then US wants (1) witness lists due on September 27, yet discovery does not close until October 24. That is crazy, how can you know your witnesses (which includes depositions) until discovery is closed?
(2) US wants all discovery done in 7 weeks (by October 24). That is crazy. You need to be able to stage these things to some extent, you serve rogs, doc requests, then do depositions. I have NEVER seen a judge set a 7 week discovery period. It can't be done, unless DOJ can in all honestly give Kollar no real discovery it needs to do. This is why Kollar asked them to come with a list.
(3) Then US want's PLTs Expert reports due on October 7, 2013. This is impossible, unless the DOJs experts have already done their work. Its why Kollar asks about what work the experts have already done. And as a practical matter, the experts can't even start their reports until discovery is done, or nearly done. So if DOJ can identify things they need (depostions, documents, data) USs proposal will not fly.
(4) But showing that US's lawyers are not serious, they want their reports due on October 25. So they Jam DOJ and give themselves extra time? That will not fly. If they were serious (and were trying to argue it was due able) they would have bit the bullet and given themselves the same deadline as they are trying to stick DOJ with. That they did not, shows it is unreasonable.
I can see Kollar (if she wants to corner US's lawyers) asking US if they are prepared to provide their expert reports a week from now, and have them deposed a week after that, with anything they do not put in their reports being foreclosed from consideration by the Court.
(5) then they want DOJ to depose experts on reports that were provided on October 25 by November 4. That is patently unreasonable in a case involve economic analysis. DOJ will have to have their experts look at what US's experts have done, check the math, run the numbers, then prep DOJs lawyers for a deposition. Even rushing, this is a two to three week process. No reasonable judge would accept what US is suggesting.
(6) US has no date for rebuttal experts, which is a usual step. How they justify leaving that out is beyond me.
(7) then since USs schedule is so compressed, they want the trial to start 8 days after USs experts are deposed. Even with rushed transcripts (a day) there is no way to then have any motions filed on any expert, and there is a right to challenge experts under Daubert. In essence there can be no motions on USs experts. While its a bench trial, I find it hard to believe any judge would accept this schedule.
My guess is that Kollar will put DOJ to the test, but if they can present a reasonable discovery plan (so she believes they are not running out the clock) they she is not going to go with USs schedule. Instead she wants to make a record so that she can write an opinion that lays out a convincing case for the schedule she will enter. Her order is asking for that information, and anyone reading a preference of any schedule in her order does not understand how Court's work.
Looking at US's schedule (posted by Terry Maxon) its crazy. DOJ asks for 50 depositions, US says 10. Kollar whats to know who would be deposed (I've been asked the same question as scheduling) and if DOJ has a list, they will get those. They were certainly be over 10.
Then US wants (1) witness lists due on September 27, yet discovery does not close until October 24. That is crazy, how can you know your witnesses (which includes depositions) until discovery is closed?
(2) US wants all discovery done in 7 weeks (by October 24). That is crazy. You need to be able to stage these things to some extent, you serve rogs, doc requests, then do depositions. I have NEVER seen a judge set a 7 week discovery period. It can't be done, unless DOJ can in all honestly give Kollar no real discovery it needs to do. This is why Kollar asked them to come with a list.
(3) Then US want's PLTs Expert reports due on October 7, 2013. This is impossible, unless the DOJs experts have already done their work. Its why Kollar asks about what work the experts have already done. And as a practical matter, the experts can't even start their reports until discovery is done, or nearly done. So if DOJ can identify things they need (depostions, documents, data) USs proposal will not fly.
(4) But showing that US's lawyers are not serious, they want their reports due on October 25. So they Jam DOJ and give themselves extra time? That will not fly. If they were serious (and were trying to argue it was due able) they would have bit the bullet and given themselves the same deadline as they are trying to stick DOJ with. That they did not, shows it is unreasonable.
I can see Kollar (if she wants to corner US's lawyers) asking US if they are prepared to provide their expert reports a week from now, and have them deposed a week after that, with anything they do not put in their reports being foreclosed from consideration by the Court.
(5) then they want DOJ to depose experts on reports that were provided on October 25 by November 4. That is patently unreasonable in a case involve economic analysis. DOJ will have to have their experts look at what US's experts have done, check the math, run the numbers, then prep DOJs lawyers for a deposition. Even rushing, this is a two to three week process. No reasonable judge would accept what US is suggesting.
(6) US has no date for rebuttal experts, which is a usual step. How they justify leaving that out is beyond me.
(7) then since USs schedule is so compressed, they want the trial to start 8 days after USs experts are deposed. Even with rushed transcripts (a day) there is no way to then have any motions filed on any expert, and there is a right to challenge experts under Daubert. In essence there can be no motions on USs experts. While its a bench trial, I find it hard to believe any judge would accept this schedule.
My guess is that Kollar will put DOJ to the test, but if they can present a reasonable discovery plan (so she believes they are not running out the clock) they she is not going to go with USs schedule. Instead she wants to make a record so that she can write an opinion that lays out a convincing case for the schedule she will enter. Her order is asking for that information, and anyone reading a preference of any schedule in her order does not understand how Court's work.
Aug 29, 2013, 9:39 pm
#2741
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DL: Silver; AA: EX PLAT; UA: Silver; HY: DIA; HH: DIA; MR: TIT
Posts: 1,708
Aug 29, 2013, 9:42 pm
#2742
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DL: Silver; AA: EX PLAT; UA: Silver; HY: DIA; HH: DIA; MR: TIT
Posts: 1,708
Clearly US's network planners are not optimistic:
http://airlineroute.net/2013/08/28/u...ia-w13update2/
http://airlineroute.net/2013/08/28/u...ia-w13update2/
Aug 29, 2013, 9:53 pm
#2743
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DL: Silver; AA: EX PLAT; UA: Silver; HY: DIA; HH: DIA; MR: TIT
Posts: 1,708
The funny thing is that the markets reaction today to "news" that the merger might not be dead [and as I and others have noted, this speculation is misinformed, and is missreading boilerplate language] does a great job of proving DOJs case. See e.g. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/airlin...195738522.html
noting that the chance to raise prices due to a AA/US merger perhaps going though caused their stocks to rise today.
How are US/AA going to be able to prove the opposite not only of what they have said in writing (consolidation leads to higher prices and higher fees) but what clearly the entire financial community believes? They can't, and as such can't win this lawsuit.
noting that the chance to raise prices due to a AA/US merger perhaps going though caused their stocks to rise today.
How are US/AA going to be able to prove the opposite not only of what they have said in writing (consolidation leads to higher prices and higher fees) but what clearly the entire financial community believes? They can't, and as such can't win this lawsuit.
Aug 29, 2013, 10:04 pm
#2744
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
There is a legal doctrine called "admissions" The idea is that if someone says something that is against their interest, it was probably true when said. That Parker, etc said things, has meaning, and will have a lot of impact on Judge Kollar. The notion that you were just running our mouth, taking freely in e-mails, making presentations, but hey, I take it all back... does not fly. 
These statements are what will kill them...
You are right, strange things happen. But I would not be betting on a merger if I were you. And as I noted above, I was initially for this merger. I have been convinced by he evidence that its actually quite bad for consumers and would result in higher prices. The Judge will be similarly convinced.
These statements are what will kill them...You are right, strange things happen. But I would not be betting on a merger if I were you. And as I noted above, I was initially for this merger. I have been convinced by he evidence that its actually quite bad for consumers and would result in higher prices. The Judge will be similarly convinced.
Aug 29, 2013, 11:15 pm
#2745
Join Date: Jul 2013
Programs: AA EXP; UA 1k; MR Platinum; SPG Gold
Posts: 167
Then US assets and routes will be scooped up, cancer-free, by someone else (including AA and others, maybe another startup). Sounds like the best scenario for the 240,000,000 Americans who fly, although the 130,000? AA+US workforce will not get their immediate payouts -- including Horton's $20m.
Claim we won't have twinkies anymore?
Hostess(/legacy interstate bakeries) goes under...
and... twinkies are back.
If there is money to be made, it will always get scooped up - often better, faster, stronger.