Continental & United Merger supposedly more serious [Merged Threads]
Feb 7, 2008, 10:20 am
#76
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: BUR
Programs: UA 1MM, DL former Gold, AA, SPG, HH Gold, SPG Gold, Marriott Gold
Posts: 884
There is no way that I would stay loyal to UA if this merger happens. CO is in my opinion the worst airline choice out there apart from Southwest. I would prefer no merger at all. Keep the competition up! That is what a market economy needs in order to function.
Feb 7, 2008, 11:59 am
#77
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: NJ USA
Programs: UA MM *G. Continental *G
Posts: 860
Furthermore I also think both brands will remain in existence, at least for the short term, as both entities will remain. Consolidation will start to occur in the administrative functions (i.e. purchasing, leasing, etc.) and then I suspect it will start to trickle down to the operational side (Chelsea used for catering, outstations being combined). I don't know if labor will ever be unified though as in the past it's gotten ugly when unions workgroups have been merged together. Likewise UA still has deep cost structure issues to address and I suspect through keeping both entities separated, at least for the time being, UA's issues can be addressed and not spill over into CO's.
.
.
One thing both of those mergers have done however is merging the loyalty programs of the partners!
Feb 7, 2008, 12:15 pm
#78
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA - 1K 1MM; Hyatt - Explorist; Marriott - Lifetime Titanium
Posts: 1,586
I wonder if this would be the opportunity for new combined UA/CO management to sell off the combined MP/OnePass program?
Feb 7, 2008, 12:36 pm
#79
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: EWR, ORD, IAH, LGA
Programs: UA GS, AA CK, DL PLT, HH DIA, MARRIOTT PLT, FAIRMONT LT PLT, HYATT DIA, SIXT PLT, AVIS PC
Posts: 506
One thing that is for sure if the merger goes through united.com will be forwarded to continental.com assuming the united team has the technical knowlege to enable forwarding. Its amazing how many .bomb threads will go away!!
Feb 7, 2008, 12:52 pm
#80
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: UA*Lifetime GS, Hyatt* Lifetime Globalist
Posts: 12,338
Impact on Flyertalk:
After the merger, both CO and UA forums will be closed. The new "UA-CO" forum will be huge.
For a period of time after the meger, we will need to get used to dealing with quesitons and remarks from posters in the CO camp.
After the merger, both CO and UA forums will be closed. The new "UA-CO" forum will be huge.
For a period of time after the meger, we will need to get used to dealing with quesitons and remarks from posters in the CO camp.
Feb 7, 2008, 12:55 pm
#81
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: bouncing around
Posts: 1,274
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/4.0 Sprint:MotoQ (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows CE; Smartphone; 176x220))
Re J Edward's post 2 posts up: actually I didn't think it through enough. med sized cities are only served by UA -or- CO to respective hubs, not -and-, thus no upsizing of a/c can occur. It'd only work for duplicated routes.
A common theme in above posts is that mgt often go with worst of both worlds in a merger, no doubt wanting to boost margin. If they can learn to hold the hatchet - imagine if hubs were kept, how many more routing alternatives the new airline would have in any weather condition! Even without weather, pax will fly less miles, earn less eqm/rdm, and spend less time between many city pairs simply due to non-stop flights or more direct hubs. This can be a win-win for airline and pax, if the mgt can see that often saving a few mil. now can cost a lot more later in lost flexibility.
Re J Edward's post 2 posts up: actually I didn't think it through enough. med sized cities are only served by UA -or- CO to respective hubs, not -and-, thus no upsizing of a/c can occur. It'd only work for duplicated routes.
A common theme in above posts is that mgt often go with worst of both worlds in a merger, no doubt wanting to boost margin. If they can learn to hold the hatchet - imagine if hubs were kept, how many more routing alternatives the new airline would have in any weather condition! Even without weather, pax will fly less miles, earn less eqm/rdm, and spend less time between many city pairs simply due to non-stop flights or more direct hubs. This can be a win-win for airline and pax, if the mgt can see that often saving a few mil. now can cost a lot more later in lost flexibility.
Feb 7, 2008, 12:58 pm
#82
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Washington, DC, USA
Posts: 739
3 cabin is here to stay on some routes. First, UA is still competing on flights to Asia and Australia, so 3 cabin is important... on the other hand, recent reports of F service/seat quality leaves one to wonder if they're serious. The second thing to remember: CO is making $ on 2 cabin 757's to Europe.
Hubs at EWR ORD, and IAD are here to stay. CLE is in the center of these three airports. No need for international flights of any significance. Transfer the connecting pax to IAD if N/S, or ORD/DEN if E/W. CLE will go away like PIT, IND, RDU, and BNA.
DEN... will shrink and be used purely for some transcon transfers. Problem is that IAH and ORD do the exact same thing. The N/S west coast traffic is served pretty well with nonstops and/or the competition.
IAD... i see more international stuff being sent back to EWR if it does not have sufficient O&D traffic from IAD. Also, you may see consolidation of traffic that currently is transferring at EWR and IAD... possibly to be shifted to iad as a concession to relieve NYC airport traffic.
DEN... will shrink and be used purely for some transcon transfers. Problem is that IAH and ORD do the exact same thing. The N/S west coast traffic is served pretty well with nonstops and/or the competition.
IAD... i see more international stuff being sent back to EWR if it does not have sufficient O&D traffic from IAD. Also, you may see consolidation of traffic that currently is transferring at EWR and IAD... possibly to be shifted to iad as a concession to relieve NYC airport traffic.
As for international traffic on the east coast, given the limits at EWR I could see the following system used for most routes:
1xday = 1 EWR
2xday = 1 EWR 1 IAD
3xday = 2 EWR 1 IAD
4xday = 2 EWR 2 IAD
5xday = 2 EWR 3 IAD
6xday = 2 EWR 4 IAD
Of course, this system would need to be adjusted based on actual O&D on a particular route. But it would deal with the capacity issues at EWR (and allow EWR to concentrate on NYC O&D) while also serving O&D at IAD well.
Feb 7, 2008, 12:58 pm
#83
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Clinging to the edifices of a decadent past from the biggest city in America nobody really cares about.
Programs: (ಠ_ಠ)
Posts: 9,077
My take on the situation was that while the short term cash injection would be nice, it would not replace the long term benefit of having the rewards program in house, even if AA or UA moved to spin theirs off (and I mention AA as the DO was about the time AA was being pressured to spin AAdvantage).
I mean, look at reward programs today...they're lucrative for all involved. The airlines can differentiate the product through them (just look at FT!), gain revenue through merrily minting miles for partner sales, and partners peddle higher priced options to customers who are all to eager to bank more FF points.
Anyways as to M+ or OnePass being spun off...I doubt it.
Feb 7, 2008, 1:29 pm
#84
Join Date: May 2004
Location: near FRA
Programs: UA 1K 2MM (*G)
Posts: 1,459
Just saw on German TV (n-tv) and the respective online page: Very close to a done deal are UA-CO and DL-NW. 
F.R.
F.R.
Feb 7, 2008, 1:57 pm
#85
Join Date: Nov 2007
Programs: UA GS, Marriott Plat
Posts: 22
New Yorkers have a lot to gain
- UA doesn't have any direct Asia routes from NY
- CO has some good routes, but their Business First seats Suck Canal Water
If a merger "merged" these two issues, it would be huge in this market.
Last edited by Perpetuum; Feb 7, 2008 at 2:00 pm Reason: clarification
Feb 7, 2008, 2:03 pm
#86
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Long Island, NY
Programs: United 1K, AA Plat Exec, DL Plat, Marriott Titanium Lifetime Elite, Hilton Gold, Hyatt Globalist
Posts: 1,872
7Continents is right. But it's not only a domestic issue. I'm GS on UA and Platinum on CO. But I fly other carriers to Asia because:
- UA doesn't have any direct Asia routes from NY
- CO has some good routes, but their Business First seats Suck Canal Water
If a merger "merged" these two issues, it would be huge in this market.
- UA doesn't have any direct Asia routes from NY
- CO has some good routes, but their Business First seats Suck Canal Water
If a merger "merged" these two issues, it would be huge in this market.
Feb 7, 2008, 2:20 pm
#87
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The Jersey Shore
Programs: UA *G MM, AA G MM
Posts: 1,866
Feb 7, 2008, 3:34 pm
#89
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,639
How bout this? Continental keeps its huge operation at EWR, United keeps its relatively big operation (I believe they pretty much have their own terminal) and combine LGA operations. And connect them with buses that board airside. If there's a JFK-EWR transfer, the transfer passengers get on a United bus from the airside at JFK (use a gate for this) and then they're driven right onto the tarmac and get off airside at EWR, where they move on to their next flight.
I'm sure TSA won't like that, but since when did we care about them?
I'm sure TSA won't like that, but since when did we care about them?
Feb 7, 2008, 4:27 pm
#90
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2000
Location: RDU
Programs: AA LT Gold, DL SM, HY Disc, Marriott LT Gold
Posts: 12,507
DL/NW and CO/UA are the worst possible hookup to me. I cannot imagine that a combined CO/UA will not institute either no E+ or 50% EQM/EQS on L/T/S fares and will not institute CO's upgrade policies.
The biggest reasons I stay with UA now over AA (where I was PLT or EXP from 1997-2003) are explus and the exit row aisle on the A320. Take those away from me, and I'm back to AA where the domestic upgrades are cheaper and the mainline planes generally have more F seats.
OTOH, if UA/CO does keep 100% EQM on all fares and qualifying on segments, I can imagine a bunch of fun east coast weekend segment runs each year.
The biggest reasons I stay with UA now over AA (where I was PLT or EXP from 1997-2003) are explus and the exit row aisle on the A320. Take those away from me, and I'm back to AA where the domestic upgrades are cheaper and the mainline planes generally have more F seats.
OTOH, if UA/CO does keep 100% EQM on all fares and qualifying on segments, I can imagine a bunch of fun east coast weekend segment runs each year.