mnredfox

Doesn't change much to me. AA is a good carrier, adding a bad carrier won't do much for me.

adamj023

At JFK, B6 is the best rated carrier, followed by DL, then the combined AA/US would be the worst of the 3 airlines with lots of flights at JFK based on customer service standards of the past.

AA and US pretty much just add marketshare and pile on more customers to the existing networks.

DOJ will likely force divestiture of repetitive slots to other airlines so if anything the merger actually will wind up giving slots to other carriers actually increasing competition on existing routes. But just making the marketshare larger so there is more profit for the firm as a whole, all the while reducing expense and overhead costs due to integration.

For consumers it will mean a better experience with better equipment utilization, better routing to more destinations and more convenience.

Fees go up with mergers but they shouldn't because revenues go up after mergers with lower overhead expenses, so customers should be getting savings due to cost efficiencies even after firms profit. But after mergers, firms get even greedier and so fares do wind up getting raised on average.

But mergers themselves are not anti competitive when slots are divested, since airlines before a merger often have codeshared agreements with other carriers, then it changes to native ownership.

Both AA and DL have been competing aggressively. DL has been a good airline for awhile now as a large legacy airline. AA only in recent times has been improving and the end of bankruptcy will make the airline so much better which will keep both firms on its toes to innovate with new services and improving the network for passengers rather than the old days of airlines leading on cut throat pricing.

The worlds aviation system will be in quite good shape for travelers and make movement by airplane the best most convenient method of transportation.

After the future merger and as a flyer, flying on either DL, B6 or AA will all be good or any other of the worlds airlines.

Flyers are on different airlines for different reasons. You can even make your own routings using multiple airlines of your choice to get somewhere. The possibilities are endless. These mergers don't get rid of competition, they just strengthen existing competition and make the system better.

AA's Pilots know this already.

AA, DL and B6 have room for profit and coexistence. I can't say any other airline experience between the three was better than another for the most part.

DL so far has been the best large scale carrier although at a premium cost.

Lets say I would fly from JFK to LHR, choices are:

DL/Virgin America
AA/British Airways
Aer Lingus Connection flight (from B6 terminal soon, low cost carrier)

Kuwait Airlines also does direct but I somehow doubt it would see a lot of JFK to LHR customers.

Or other airlines with connection flights but generally not cost competitive unless you need to get to the other nation first.

In each market a LCC (Low cost carrier) sometimes requiring a quick connection likely exists. So the merger does not impede competition.

I call airline mergers necessary housekeeping. Makes industry healthier.

DL keeps making moves as does AA and B6 and all three are going along nicely.

mridley2

Irrelevant to what US/Parker decide, DL will continue to install more AVOD on all remaining AC now that it's clear they see this as an additional source of revenue.

Deadtail

AA has a huge operation at LAX, which is a good hub for the west and minimal weather issues. Plus the reduced summer temps are an advantage as well. Do you really think AA is going to need two major hubs within an hour of each other? They certainly aren't going to cede anything to the competition in a premium market like LAX.

Regarding the South, both airlines are already there competing. CLT has flight restrictions which kill it as a competitor to ATL. Try and get an afternoon flight from the west coast to CLT.

Plus, there's a huge debt load at US that is going to need refinancing, new airplane deliveries, and three pilot groups that need merging. Money is going to be tight. Plus the way Doug Parker conducted himself with his other airline CEO colleagues, you can bet UA and DL aren't going to make this merger easy on him. I predict predatory fares for both business and personal travelers coming from DL and UA right at the time they are attempting to merge the airline and loyalty programs. The cultures at both airlines are 180 degrees apart. This is going to make the UA/CO disaster look easy. The one thing they have going for them is the huge size difference between the airlines. If they allow American and it's systems to swallow US, they will at worst anger 25% of the customer base. I predict a large consolidation of routes, or another BK.

A couple years ago when Charlotte could still be considered a mini NYC with regards to banking and finance, the merger could have been a huge success just from the corporate contracts alone. Banking has shrunk is Charlotte and is again consolidated in NYC, where Delta is less at risk.

mnredfox

Doesn't change much to me. AA is a good carrier, adding a bad carrier won't do much for me.

MastaHanky

I'm going to go against the grain and say that PHX is the least safe of all the hubs. Yeah, it's a huge metro, but the yield is abysmal, there is little international traffic outside of Mexico and Canada and it offers very little east-west connectivity that DFW can't offer.

I doubt they'll drop it completely, but I could see it taking a 20-40% hit in flights, being relegated to a more SLC-like role for western-US connections.

TrojanTraveler

All the more reason why they need PHX as a hub. If you define hub as part of a hub and spoke, and that means connections, and LAX is a premium market, why would you want to take up space with connecting passengers, who would likely be coming from a less than premium market and connecting to a less than premium market?

PHX has far fewer weather issues than DFW. So I'm not sure what they gain by signficantly downsizing PHX, and pushing those connections to DFW and LAX.

javabytes

Agreed.

hazelrah

Yes, each hub can concentrate based on the respective advantage of each hub LAX for O&D and PHX for smaller O&D and connecting trafffic. I could see some tailoring to PHX but not dehubbing. I gather the American West LAS legacy hub has already been largely dehubbed.

Not the least reason the Delta/US merger did not proceed.

Never been a better time to enter into the debt markets.


IMO not gonna happen from the Delta end that seems more interested in cutting capacity and raising fares (and diddling in the NYC market :-)).

I don't think it will be easy; quite the contrary there will be significant challenges.

GRALISTAIR

The Hawaii flights for example could all go to DFW/LAX

Deadtail

PHX is a small O/D market. Much of the traffic through PHX could quite easily connect through DFW. I think you're going to see PHX lose significant traffic and start to resemble MEM or CVG.

itsaboutthejourney

Short term, little change. DL will be far ahead in terms of a better product, better employee relations, and having gone through a much smoother merger.

Long term, DL is left with an uncompetitive loyalty program:
- No OW awards
- 3 award tiers, notorious among customers & analysts for poor low award avail.
- No way to redeem First on int'l partners
- Inferior SWU program
- Inferior MM program
- Poor communication with customers (ie: FlyerTalk engagement)

I think DL would be mistaken to think there is little to fear from post-merger AA competition.

I agree with Deadtail: Money is going to be tight. Plus the way Doug Parker conducted himself with his other airline CEO colleagues, you can bet UA and DL aren't going to make this merger easy on him

I also agree with politicalhack2: this merger could be an unmitigated disaster OR it just might be offering me a legitimate DL alternative.

I'm excited to see some competition that may push DL to improve its subpar loyalty program and continue other customer facing investments.

Delta 764

Actually, PHX is the 8th largest O&D market in the United States. In fact, I am pretty sure that PHX has a higher percentage of O&D than DFW. However, what the problem with PHX is are the low yields, since PHX is a primarily leisure destination.

indufan

I am not sure if I buy that. I have been to PHX nearly a hundred times for business. Plus, many of those O&Ds are going someplace else on business trips. Anymore, I don't notice lower air fares to PHX vs. anyplace else. At one time it was dominated by the WN effect or by the HP Saturday night stay rule. Local economy (as a relative factor) is also a factor and I wouldn't call that great in PHX. But that works both ways too, labor for the operation could be cheaper too. It's still an awful lot of people to walk away from. If they do, I believe Delta would be foolish to not consider the area.

Big and growing.

SkanderH

Will the upcoming merger between American and US air have any impact on DL frequent flyers?