rkkwan

You'll still be CO Plat. Only alliance, remember. I doubt they'll merge the FF program, unless both decide to sell theirs to a 3rd party. But that's another story.

Also, a tighter CO/AS partnership won't hurt for the West Coast N-S market either.

Anglo Large Clawed Otter

Darn, and here I was hoping for unlimited upgrades on Mad-Dogs.

manneca

Slightly more info. http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/busin...nairlines.html

SamMarkand

Hmm...can't say that I would like to fly that combination of CO/AA. The CO flight attendants offer better service, but AA has marginally better scheduling in and out of San Antonio.

Either way, looks like we're in for some more bumpy air.

BritInNJ

I'd like to throw in my few cents.

If you look at the fleets of UA and AA they are a poor match for CO. Unless you have the time, man power, market to start disposing of hundreds of aircraft.

CO have followed a policey of Boeing aircraft, very limited variations. When the 737-300 & 500 s are finally put down there will be even less variation in the fleet.

What in the heck was the point of that for all these years only to throw that out the window.

There is a danger of merger mania. There are very few examples where huge companies merge, merge successfully and don't operate as legacy companies under one name.

If ego is put aside and people aren't just trying to run a bigger and bigger company, what is the point of the merger and why merge with an old monster, with all the associated problems. Really think UA is going to say yippee when CO takes them over. They will hate us. (sounds like football team talk!)

Why not look at more interesting options. Virgin for example would add fantastic international routes to CO.

Don't think of CO as a US airline but as a Global airline. Then LHR / LGW become true hubs for CO with continuing service to cool destinations. Not advocating Virgin but just using it as an example. Time to think out of the box.

Perhaps CO should class itself up. Don;t get me wrong CO is great. It could be better with little incremental cost. That cost would add value to the passenger experience which either charge a slight premium for OR shock don;t charge extra for it - have your planes FULL. Run an airline that people pick YOURS over any one else because you are better !

I get that southwest and easyjet are successful, but aren;t they the worst type of business to be in ..... low fare, low class/no class, nickel and dime business.

BUY AN OIL COMPANY.

IF CO owned an oil company it doesn't pay market rate for fuel. So what if it is $120 a barrel for oil. CO gets it jet fuel at cost. In fact under those circumstances CO would want high fuel prices because all other airlines suffer while they don't !

ctownflyer

Neat idea, but which oil company does CO have the $$$ to buy?

At any rate I love the idea of a CO joining OneWorld/AA alliance!
It would be far, far less disruptive than a UA merger would be...

Anglo Large Clawed Otter

Well, AA has 772s, 763s and 752s available for longhaul duty (where the $$$ are). Sure, the engines might not be the same as CO's models, but the fleet sizes are large enough to create economies of scale. For domestic, CO/AA would likely ditch the AB6s, perhaps the same for the AA 762s, definitely keep the 738s, and try to figure out how to phase out the Mad-Dog fleet ASAP, without destroying too much domestic capacity.

A good solution to the Mad-Dog issue would be a reworked pilot contract by the combined entity allowing regionals to use E90/70 & CR9 equipment in lieu of operating mainline equipment as small as MD-80s. What's used as bait to gain such concessions are the prospects of increased international flying, and more widebodies post-merger (bigger paychecks as you gain seniority, and better prospects of getting those bigger paychecks).

The inefficiencies created in the short term by disparate fleets would be more than overcome in the long-term by greater clout/pricing power deriving from the merger and increased market share, and more resources for expanding internationally. AF/KL have shown that a streamlined fleet are not necessarily essential to running a profitable airline. Being huge creates its own efficiencies (as oxymoronic as that sounds)

In sum, kudos to CO for doing all it could over the past decade to curb costs and place itself in a position to be in the driver's seat for the next round of industry consolidation. The Elephant in the room is now DL/NW. If their merger goes through, then everyone else on the playing field is at a serious disadvantage. Measured organic growth, as CO has pursued for the past decade, will not be sufficient to catch up and play on a level playing field with the DLNW behemoth. It would be like a never ending Yankees/Devil Rays series, with CO playing the part of the hapless D-Rays.

If UA didn't exist, I would be gung-ho for CO/AA. However, UA does exist, and is well-nigh crippled with all sorts of issues that place CO in a position to dictate terms in the event of a merger. Negotiating from a position of strength in such matters is always a good thing. I don't see CO having that same level of clout in an AA/CO tie-up. In sum, the Viking raids have already begun, and it's high time the longships started landing along Lakeshore Drive...

bernardd

While I agree it would be a great idea, there are HUGE political problems to CO merging with VS:

i) VS can't legally buy more than 25% of CO

ii) if the combined business is not majority owned by EU entities it loses rights to operate intra-European flights and, I would assume, flights to "cool" destinations in Asia and Africa

iii) I can't imagine SQ as 49% owners of VS are going to smooth the path of a classed up CO/VS combination that would compete against it



FWIW the reason I believe Southwest have been profitable for (IIRC) the last 34 years is exactly because they're not cheap and they don't nickel and dime their customers - they tell you want you're going to get and they deliver at least that in their own particular style. At the heart of it though is good, old fashioned service - they get the job done more often than most.

ByrdluvsAWACO

Show me one airline that can afford to buy an oil company.

Please explain how CO would buy this fuel at cost at intl destinations? No oil company owns a distribution network that large.

At cost isn't to far below what every other airline pays. Why do you think refiners are taking some plants offline. Their margins are razor thin even with high oil.

Two flaws..

1. Why would CO want to keep their costs high?
2. CO would be paying just about the same for fuel.

J.Edward

Should this come to pass I doubt it will resemble a traditional alliance.

That said my guess is by "alliance" AA and CO mean something along the lines of LAX/ORD for AA, SFO/DEN for CO, maybe something for US, maybe something for Chase.

Don't count on CO joining OneWorld.

<shrug>

farenthold

As a Texan and CO platinum a CO-AA merger offers me a lot of perks on the surface, but should they merge, I think in the long run I'd be hosed due to lack of compitition. They compete on almost 100% of the flights out of CRP and most Texas towns.

I'd get elite bennies on all the flights, but my guess is the fares would skyrocket to any non WN town. IAH/DFW hubs are too close. NYC/EWR hubs are too close. With UA Denver and ORD hubs open up where closest CO hub is CLE

Tango

The star alliance has gotten too big for its own good. With so many airlines, the direct benefit to each member is reduced. Membership benefits are not consistent from airline to airline--try getting an elite seat on US airways as a non US star elite--it won't happen. While One World is much smaller, each member airline has more to gain from more feeder traffic and the benefits are more seamless. Bigger is not always better.

hillrider

T5 will be a pain even after the mess is sorted: they won't even let you into the terminal as a transfer unless you're there 35 minutes prior to the flight departure, even though it takes 10 minutes or less to reach the A gates from the checkpoint. Furthermore, LHR & GB taxes can add $30 to a roundtrip vs. most other airports (ZRH, FRA, MAD, etc.), guaranteeing that flights through there would not be at the top of any shopping site's listing by price.

wsucougarchick05

That would be nice. And better reciprocity.

Currently, AS Mileage Plan members don't get Elite status if flying on CO flights using their Mileage Plan #, but One Pass members gain elite status on AS using their One Pass #. Which doesn't make sense to me...

cerealmarketer

I'll take a CO/AA alliance over a merger if only because my firm has a love affair with AA.

CO is our secondary preferred carrier but getting around the AA bias and AAirpass deals is like getting a Continental agent to reroute a ticket with the $50 standby. Perfectly legal in the system, but not worth it to educate them in practice.

Would be nice to be able to earn OnePass miles while taking advantage of our JFK-LHR deals where we're allowed to book AA first class for the price of heavily discounted business ($3000, fully refundable).

Continental's rationale for merger has always included the need to keep corporate contracts intact -- they seem to think the corporate contracts will follow whomever has the most comprehensive network.

Still doesn't fully answer the Asia question. But the Dreamliners coming online could eventually address a lot of that.