The lounge would be known as the Red President's Carpet Club, with a new decor theme of abundant photos of "red" presidents like Mao, Stalin, and Khrushchev coupled with floors covered with plenty of berber, cut-loop, and thick pile rugs.

I'm speaking as a Boeing shareholder.

Model by Model:

A320 family superior to 737 & 757 families

787 superior to A330 superior to 767 (now out of production)

A350 (not out for a while) superior to 777 superior to A340

A380 vs 747-8? I guess the Airbus carries more folks.

There are advantages to having your entire fleet be from one supplier.

I would say that things are more uncertain as of late Tuesday, especially articles that speak of a DL memo released to employees and reported on by the ajc.com ...but I would hardly call the DL/NW merger 'toast'.

haha sorry, the odds are way too good in your favor :p

Pilots key as Delta-NWA deal 'no longer looks imminent'
The Delta-Northwest merger has "stalled over a dispute between their pilots," USA TODAY writes, adding "a deal announcement no longer looks imminent." That comes even though "unionized pilots stand to gain stock and labor contract improvements valued at $2 billion if the carriers merge," USA TODAY says. Despite that potential upside, pilots of the two airlines apparently have not been able to set aside differences on how their two seniority lists would be combined.

That news comes as The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (free registration) says Delta's management sent a memo to employees saying the company has "not arrived at a potential transaction" that meets its goals. The memo -– titled "Update on Consolidation" -– also says goals of the merger included keeping the Delta name and the company headquartered in Atlanta, according to the Detroit Free-Press. In the memo, the Journal-Constitution says Delta CEO Richard Anderson and CFO Ed Bastian also "listed several (other) conditions that any deal would have to meet, including requirements that the 'seniority of our people would be protected' and that it would speed up Delta's expansion of its overseas network."

As for the pilots snag, USA TODAY says NWA's "pilot negotiators worry that under terms offered by their union counterparts at Delta, more Delta pilots would be poised to advance to better-paying jobs flying the largest jets, and many Northwest pilots with comparable experience would be blocked from advancement."

The New York Times (free registration) takes a broader look at the subject, with a story today that runs under the headline: "Pilots' battles over seniority play havoc with airline mergers." The Times points to the problems US Airways has had in combining its two groups of pilots following the 2005 America West merger. The Times writes that that airline's pilots still "face months, or even years, of litigation over the seniority list. This turmoil makes clear why Delta and Northwest management want a seniority deal before they announce a merger." The Houston Chronicle is among other news outlets taking a look at the topic. "Call it the pilot veto," the Chronicle writes under the headline: "Why pilots can slow mergers."

It might get interesting if things go nowhere with NWA and their pilots and DL starts (or goes back to) talking with UA to see how things goes there....

Given the interest, financial and otherwise, that AF has in DL and that KLM has in NWA, I would be a little surprised that this deal would not go thru eventually. The international airlines are chomping at the bit once Open Skies goes into effect, and are looking at pressuring the US to increase the foreign ownership limitation now in place. There have even been threats already that Open Skies will be abrogated if the US doesn’t let foreign airlines buy a higher, read controlling, interest in US carriers. For AF-KLM, a DL-NWA merger would be the best thing to happen.

However, if it does fall apart, I have no doubts that DL would explore a merger with UA, and, if that happened, CO would be in a much worse position.

Can US airlines buy a controlling stake in European carriers?

Rumor: DL-NW talks are dead
 

"According to a source close to the negotiations, the deal hasn't been called off but there are signs of trouble." which doesn't mean they're DEAD. :rolleyes:

TED must die. The DL/NW merger must go through. I must have F-Cabin Q-UP access to Florida, SJU, et. al. Only Larry the Barbarian can smite TED, with his ferret cohorts and mighty sword. rar!

That's because what you're reading now on that webpage is a rewrite from the original article.

It appears that WCCO and at least one Atlanta station had "merger deal is dead" stories on their websites about noon today, then rewrote them to "talks hit a snag" in the late afternoon. A kind of semi-retraction.

It's a pretty academic question because I can't see any of the US carriers having access to the funds to buy a healthy European carrier, plus it seems AF is likely to swallow AZ in the near future.

From a legal point of view I believe there are no restrictions that stop a US carrier from acquiring the stock of a European carrier, and there's no 25% rule. In the absence of the open aviation area that's been proposed, the operator of an intra-European flight has to be European, and presumably any bi-lateral agreements with Asia or African countries would presumably require the operator on those routes to be European or from the agreement country.

If I have that right, CO would therefore be able to buy a European carrier and operate longhaul flights to the US, but would have to shutdown or sell pretty much any other route It's hard to envisage scenarios where that would be attractive.

I agree with the above 2 posts. On UA, when given a choice between an A320 and a 757, it's a real dilemma as to which plane I will choose: the 757 offers a bunch more seats for upgrade opportunity, but if I'm going to be stuck in coach, I definitely want it on the A320. On a 737 vs. A320 while on UA, there's no debate: A320 hands down.

Now what's interesting is what happens when you throw the A321 into the mix, ala US. That plane is a true dog, especially when flying transcon... something the plane isn't designed to do. In that case, the 737-NG series beats Airbus hands down. Even the A320 has some difficulty in strong headwinds flying transcon Westward, although it seems to be a bigger problem for B6 out of JFK vs UA out of IAD, for some reason. Maybe 200 nm longer great circle route combined with convoluted departure procedures out of JFK... just speculating.

So what's better about CO?
 

The slightly provocative title of this post notwithstanding, as I and another UA FFer previously posted, I'm still trying to understand why so many CO loyalists are so loyal to CO? You folks generally like the management, staff and the airline in general at CO more than UA flyers generally like UA. That's very impressive. I know boca's post wasn't a "this is how UA is better list," but I'd still add to it the following things that I hope a CO takeover would retain from UA:

10) E+
11) F suites, especially since they're being improved
12) improved C seats
13) better upgrade opportunities, both domestically and internationally
14) better award availability
15) better service in the event of irregular operations

To answer my own question, from this thread and others, it sounds like CO is better in the following significant ways:

1) better service, aside from irrops
2) more reliable
3) possibly a more sustainable business model, which I realize could be crucial
4) cleaner aircraft

These are not minor matters at all. Reliability, for instance, is absolutely crucial for business travelers who have to make a meeting, and is no small consideration for other travelers. I don't find UA so bad in any of these respects (though as a 1K I probably get treated better than many UA flyers re service, and as I stated #3 could be crucial), but assume that CO is significantly better.

To generalize, it seems like UA has a big edge in the hard product in the air (aside from worse aircraft cleanliness on the one hand and better irrops service on the other), but that CO is better otherwise. Personally, I value the hard product more, including E+ and the upgrade and award availability, but can certainly see how other folks can see things differently.

Anyway, am I missing anything here? I'm not trying to start a "one airline is better" argument, but rather to understand folks' admirable loyalty to CO.

I know all of this could be academic in view of the Northwest/Delta merger possibly going down the tubes, but I'm still interested.