[JMedwick]

US Airways has made an offer to buy Delta.

In such a deal what cities are the winners and loosers. Since I only know about the hubs and headquarters, that is where I will start.

US Airways:
HQ: Tempe, AZ
Hubs: Phoenix, Philly, and Charlotte, N.C


Delta:
HQ: Atlanta
Hubs: Atlanta, Cincinnati and Salt Lake City

Who looses their hub? Where does the HQ end up?

Given that US Airways just moved their hub from Crystal City, VA to Tempe combined with the fact that US Airways would be the buyer, I think Atlanta looses the HQ. As for hubs, I say Atlanta stays a hub due to its size, and Phoenix still remains a hub because of the HQ. I guess Charlotte would be the obvious looser due to its proximity to Atlanta, so too may Salt Lake City due to its proximity to Phoenix. What does anyone else think?

[atl26]

Firstly I think this merger is somewhat weird. I dont see the inherent benefit of this in the long run. I think we will see Atl ans the main hub Obviously. Phoenix as the west coast gateway Cinncinati will be kept. New York will be kept and expanded at the expense of Philadelphia(the o&D and sheer visitor numbers alone justify this). cHARLOTTE will become a focus city with service to the major us cities some feeder and a few international. I just can't see charlotte (and im not meaning this to offend) with the Massive Atl hub down the road being kept as a Major hub. Charlotte will keep a large portion of its routes but not at the levels they are now.

But this reminds me of the recent bid by Ryanair in Ireland for the Flag Carrier Aer Lingus. The shareholders and to a degree the government are 100% against it. I think the same will be tru wit htis on. To much concentration on the East coast, not to mentionI think the creditors of delta are behind there plan to exit bankruptcy. If the merger was to take place and I hope it doesnt, I think UsAirways/HP would find that their would be many stipulations they would have to abide by such as fleet and alliances etc.

[john3eblover]

US Airways has made an offer to buy Delta.

In such a deal what cities are the winners and loosers. Since I only know about the hubs and headquarters, that is where I will start.

US Airways:
HQ: Tempe, AZ
Hubs: Phoenix, Philly, and Charlotte, N.C


Delta:
HQ: Atlanta
Hubs: Atlanta, Cincinnati and Salt Lake City

Who looses their hub? Where does the HQ end up?

Given that US Airways just moved their hub from Crystal City, VA to Tempe combined with the fact that US Airways would be the buyer, I think Atlanta looses the HQ. As for hubs, I say Atlanta stays a hub due to its size, and Phoenix still remains a hub because of the HQ. I guess Charlotte would be the obvious looser due to its proximity to Atlanta, so too may Salt Lake City due to its proximity to Phoenix. What does anyone else think?


First of all, if this merger (or buyout) were to go through, there is no way that the headquarters would leave Atlanta. Atlanta is home to the busiest airport in the world, and one of the most efficient well run. The name of the airline would be Delta as stated in the articles, so the HQ would most logically remain in Atlanta where the largest hub is.

SLC is not the hub it once was because Delta has been drastically reducing their domestic routes and increasing their international routes. Cinci is also not the hub it once was. The REAL hub that Delta is building up is JFK (in NYC).

IF the merger were to go through, there are bigger questions. Issues of compatable aircraft - Delta is all Boeing, US Airways is largely Airbus.

There are also issues of hubs and many other things.

But people, there have been rumors of mergers and buyouts and speculations for the past few years. I highly doubt this will end up happening

[JACKinBeantown]

There are people giving away T-shirts and other Delta crap at Madison Square Park today. Coincidence?

[John F]

I think the biggest winners are the low cost airliners who are trying to get a foothold in some of the major markets that Delta will undoubtedly scale back if this merger goes through. It also helps the smaller carriers because the legacy airliners keep getting bigger and more complex, teeming with more problems via labor and what not.

The losers are the hubs if not east coast travelers. Doesn't US Airways operate hubs in Charlotte and Philly along with Phoenix? I believe they left Pittsburgh as a hub... You can't operate all of these major bases of flights as well as pick up Atlanta, Cinncy and JFK.

But I digress. The Airline industry is not my strong suit to discuss.

[Daltnpapi4u]

If that was the case why did US/HP HQ move to PHX when CLT is their main hub? I doubt HQ will be decided based on size of one of their hubs US/HP has already proved that.

On another note I think NW will be better to merge with. DL doesnt seem to offer US much of anything from what it looks like.

Also US now has a site up for the merger

http://www.usairways.com/awa/content/operations/merger/default.aspx

First of all, if this merger (or buyout) were to go through, there is no way that the headquarters would leave Atlanta. Atlanta is home to the busiest airport in the world, and one of the most efficient well run. The name of the airline would be Delta as stated in the articles, so the HQ would most logically remain in Atlanta where the largest hub is.

SLC is not the hub it once was because Delta has been drastically reducing their domestic routes and increasing their international routes. Cinci is also not the hub it once was. The REAL hub that Delta is building up is JFK (in NYC).

IF the merger were to go through, there are bigger questions. Issues of compatable aircraft - Delta is all Boeing, US Airways is largely Airbus.

There are also issues of hubs and many other things.

But people, there have been rumors of mergers and buyouts and speculations for the past few years. I highly doubt this will end up happening

[Major AWACS]

US is an Airbus fleet DL is a Boeing fleet not to mention the horrible east coast overlap the two have. US is still having issues with its AmericaWest merger let alone integrating another carrier. Shareholders might like it but I don't think the US DOJ will.

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going

[JMedwick]

First of all, if this merger (or buyout) were to go through, there is no way that the headquarters would leave Atlanta. Atlanta is home to the busiest airport in the world, and one of the most efficient well run. The name of the airline would be Delta as stated in the articles, so the HQ would most logically remain in Atlanta where the largest hub is.


That makes little sense. Lets review some facts:

1. When US Airways and America West merged, the US Airways name was kept and the HQ moved to Tempe, the site of the America West HQ, though I will admit that Phoenix is the combined company's largest hub.

2. The current CEO and many higher-ups within US Airways are America West folks. With US Airways being the acquiring company (in the same way as BellSouth and AT&T) and US Airways run by Phoenix folks, do you really think that they will move to Atlanta?

3. "Atlanta is home to the busiest airport in the world, and one of the most efficient well run." The efficient and well run line makes me laugh. Take a look at the on-time stats for Atlanta as reported by the US government compared to other large US airports.
Air Travel Consumer Report (http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/reports/2006/November/0611atcr.pdf)
After taking a look at that you no doubt see that from 6 pm -10pm less than 50% of arriving flights come in on time with a cumulative on-time arrival percentage of 60%. From 8pm-9pm, only 48.7% of departures leave on time. Atlanta has a cumulative on-time departure rate of 65.3%. ORD has no hour-long periods below 50% and a cumulative on-time departure rate of 69%Those figures are far below any other US airport, even ORD. I am sorry, but no matter how you slice it, Atlanta looks like a hub that is too large for its own good and anything but a model of efficiency for anyone.

[Rail Claimore]

I never would have guessed this one. Delta and Northwest, yes... though there are aircraft compatability issues there as well. But Delta and US Airways?

If it goes through, PHL will lose some of its flights, but it's still a large-enough O&D market to keep most of its operations. CLT and SLC have the most to lose out of this one.

Delta is already the leading transatlantic carrier, and Delta will be #2 to Latin America by the time they emerge from Chap 11. This merger does nothing, however, to address their biggest geographical weakness: Asia. US Airways has nothing in that part of the world and Delta has just one route, ATL-NRT, with another coming next year, ATL-ICN.

I'd also expect United to complain considering US Airways is a partner airline in Star Alliance.

[john3eblover]

That makes little sense. Lets review some facts:

1. When US Airways and America West merged, the US Airways name was kept and the HQ moved to Tempe, the site of the America West HQ, though I will admit that Phoenix is the combined company's largest hub.

2. The current CEO and many higher-ups within US Airways are America West folks. With US Airways being the acquiring company (in the same way as BellSouth and AT&T) and US Airways run by Phoenix folks, do you really think that they will move to Atlanta?

3. "Atlanta is home to the busiest airport in the world, and one of the most efficient well run." The efficient and well run line makes me laugh. Take a look at the on-time stats for Atlanta as reported by the US government compared to other large US airports.
Air Travel Consumer Report (http://airconsumer.ost.dot.gov/reports/2006/November/0611atcr.pdf)
After taking a look at that you no doubt see that from 6 pm -10pm less than 50% of arriving flights come in on time with a cumulative on-time arrival percentage of 60%. From 8pm-9pm, only 48.7% of departures leave on time. Atlanta has a cumulative on-time departure rate of 65.3%. ORD has no hour-long periods below 50% and a cumulative on-time departure rate of 69%Those figures are far below any other US airport, even ORD. I am sorry, but no matter how you slice it, Atlanta looks like a hub that is too large for its own good and anything but a model of efficiency for anyone.

Ok, first of all, we know that the Delta name will be kept. They have stated this. And why? Because, Delta airlines at the 3rd largest US carrier is a more respected and widely known Airline, one that is valued more than US Airways. This was also stated in the article, and is common knowledge.

Secondly, I'm not sure why you keep citing the merger between HP and US Airways. Its a completely different thing. And in that circumstance, US Airways was the more common name, and that's probably why it was kept. It also had a bigger fleet, but CLT is a poor place to have a main hub. Basically, what you had there was the gutting of US Airways by HP. HP was a superior airline, and better off financially, but US Airways was more well known, so they took the name, and changed everything else.

With Delta and US Airways, do you honestly think that CLT is superior to Atlanta? Do you think that US Airways is a better airline?? Do you honestly think that the city of Tempe is a better city for a headquarters than Atlanta? Who even knows where Tempe is?? Do you think that Delta is just going to agree to let US Airways gut them and take them over?

Regarding Hartsfield-Jackson's efficiency and importance as a hub and main airport, I really don't understand what we're arguing about. Yes, Hartsfield can have some delays from time to time. This comes from handling over 85 million people each year. Hartsfield-Jackson is one of the most important airports in the world, and yes, its design is one of the simplest yet most efficient. Now that all 5 runways are finally all operating at the same time, you can expect the delays to be reduced significantly.

As much as you want Delta to merge or be taken over by US Airways, it isn't going to happen. And if it does, expect there to be not much of US airways left.

[Major AWACS]

[QUOTE=Rail Claimore]
Delta is already the leading transatlantic carrier, and Delta will be #2 to Latin America by the time they emerge from Chap 11. QUOTE]

A bit of a tangent but not even close. American and Continental will be one and two for a long time to come. Delta is battling with US Airways now for third place among us carriers to Latin America.

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, Wir Lieben Fliegen

[JMedwick]

Regarding Hartsfield-Jackson's efficiency and importance as a hub and main airport, I really don't understand what we're arguing about. Yes, Hartsfield can have some delays from time to time. This comes from handling over 85 million people each year. Hartsfield-Jackson is one of the most important airports in the world, and yes, its design is one of the simplest yet most efficient.

The design may be efficent, but its operations are not. No matter how you slice it, Hartsfield has periods of the day where delays are more commonplace than being on-time. I don't know how you want to measure it, but to me, if the flights don't arive and leave on-time, then the airport is not very efficent, because lets face it, that is what matters to the users of the airport. How can you argue an airport that has the worst delays in the nation is efficent is beyond me? So efficent people are late? If they can't efficently run an airport with 85 million people a year without incuring signifigant delays (such high traffic is largely because the airport is a hub), then maybe some of the hub activity should be moved to other airports.


As for the merger, I think it is pretty clear that the name of the combined airline has little to do with where the HQ is going to locate. I mean heck, by your logic why would AT&T not have moved their HQ to NYC or New Jersey or Atlanta through their various mergers. No, instead the HQ sits in San Antonio. Why? Because very often the aquiring company gets the spoils, including choosing where the HQ is. Tell me again why long time America West officals would move to Atlanta? Oh I see... Its because the name of the company will be Delta... :koko:

[Daquan13]

They just bought America Worst not too long ago!

Now they want Delta Skelter too?

[DonTallPaul]

With Delta and US Airways, do you honestly think that CLT is superior to Atlanta? Do you think that US Airways is a better airline?? Do you honestly think that the city of Tempe is a better city for a headquarters than Atlanta? Who even knows where Tempe is?? Do you think that Delta is just going to agree to let US Airways gut them and take them over?


The actual merits of an Atlanta vs. Tempe HQ discussion aside, the comment of who even knows where Tempe is a little off base. Being from Atlanta I want to see Delta remain here, maybe even see the combined companies HQ come here. But come on, that's just classless. Tempe is a sizeable suburb of Phoenix and generally well known (considering it is a suburb). I doubt the well people have never heard of Tempe will come into play in the discussion, and MOST people in the business community are probably pretty familiar with it. Hell, most people who watch college football bowl games probably know the city very well.....

[JMedwick]

^ Exactly. There are plenty of good reasons for the HQ to locate in Atlanta (the largest hub would be there, the city is larger) but there are plenty of reasons for the company to locate its HQ in Tempe (many execs are from the Phoenix area, company HQ was just moved to Tempe, US is the aquiring company)

[Grego43]

Hartsfield-Jackson is one of the most important airports in the world, and yes, its design is one of the simplest yet most efficient.


Busiest airport in the world, yes....one of the most important, not even close...most important only for Delta. ATL has high O&D traffic, but most passengers are just connecting. ATL is surely an important airport for people in the SE United States, but doesn't have the worldwide importance of an ORD, JFK, LAX, CDG, HKG, NRT, FRA, LHR, AMS, etc where multiple foreign carriers have operations. If Delta were to disappear tomorrow, other airlines would pick up the O&D slack, but the transfer numbers would plummet.

[Daltnpapi4u]

US did not buy HP, HP bought US but just kept US name. Also the reason why the HQ is in Tempe its where HP is from. I think if US does take over DL the HQ will continue to be Tempe. They will not base their decision on what city is more known or populated.

They just bought America Worst not too long ago!

Now they want Delta Skelter too?

[nergie]

Ok, first of all, we know that the Delta name will be kept. They have stated this. And why? Because, Delta airlines at the 3rd largest US carrier is a more respected and widely known Airline, one that is valued more than US Airways. This was also stated in the article, and is common knowledge.

Secondly, I'm not sure why you keep citing the merger between HP and US Airways. Its a completely different thing. And in that circumstance, US Airways was the more common name, and that's probably why it was kept. It also had a bigger fleet, but CLT is a poor place to have a main hub. Basically, what you had there was the gutting of US Airways by HP. HP was a superior airline, and better off financially, but US Airways was more well known, so they took the name, and changed everything else.

With Delta and US Airways, do you honestly think that CLT is superior to Atlanta? Do you think that US Airways is a better airline?? Do you honestly think that the city of Tempe is a better city for a headquarters than Atlanta? Who even knows where Tempe is?? Do you think that Delta is just going to agree to let US Airways gut them and take them over?

Regarding Hartsfield-Jackson's efficiency and importance as a hub and main airport, I really don't understand what we're arguing about. Yes, Hartsfield can have some delays from time to time. This comes from handling over 85 million people each year. Hartsfield-Jackson is one of the most important airports in the world, and yes, its design is one of the simplest yet most efficient. Now that all 5 runways are finally all operating at the same time, you can expect the delays to be reduced significantly.

As much as you want Delta to merge or be taken over by US Airways, it isn't going to happen. And if it does, expect there to be not much of US airways left.

Bit of homerism here, ATL is not that important in the world scheme of things. Yes ATL is critical to S. Eastern USA but let's not overplay its importance it is no LHR, LAX, JFK. It is not the main gateway, yet, to any part of the world say like SFO and LAX are to the Pacific.

[john3eblover]

The actual merits of an Atlanta vs. Tempe HQ discussion aside, the comment of who even knows where Tempe is a little off base. Being from Atlanta I want to see Delta remain here, maybe even see the combined companies HQ come here. But come on, that's just classless. Tempe is a sizeable suburb of Phoenix and generally well known (considering it is a suburb). I doubt the well people have never heard of Tempe will come into play in the discussion, and MOST people in the business community are probably pretty familiar with it. Hell, most people who watch college football bowl games probably know the city very well.....

Cmon Don, it was a sarcastic and exaggerated comment. I think my point was fairly obvious.

[nergie]

Hartsfield-Jackson is one of the most important airports in the world, and yes, its design is one of the simplest yet most efficient.


Busiest airport in the world, yes....one of the most important, not even close...most important only for Delta. ATL has high O&D traffic, but most passengers are just connecting. ATL is surely an important airport for people in the SE United States, but doesn't have the worldwide importance of an ORD, JFK, LAX, CDG, HKG, NRT, FRA, LHR, AMS, etc where multiple foreign carriers have operations. If Delta were to disappear tomorrow, other airlines would pick up the O&D slack, but the transfer numbers would plummet.

I guess we were thinking the same thing at same time, my response was a bit delayed.

[Grego43]

Oh by the way...

Continental Airlines: HQ Houston Largest hub Newark
Southwest Airlines: HQ Dallas Largest hub Chicago
USAirways: HQTempe Largest hub Charlotte
Airtran HQ Orlando Largest hub Atlanta

[nergie]

Oh by the way...

Continental Airlines: HQ Houston Largest hub Newark
Southwest: Dallas Chicago/Vegas/Phoenix
USAirways: Tempe Charlotte
Airtran Orlando Atlanta

Just to add to this thought

Northwest MSP Detroit

[Grego43]

I guess we were thinking the same thing at same time, my response was a bit delayed.


Great minds think alike...:yes:

[plinko]

*imagining the operational horrors this could create at LAX*

I would imagine that this will put all of USAirways flights into Terminal 5 to consolidate. Frees up Terminal 1 for SWA and maybe another low cost domestic only carrier? (Jet Blue?)

The lack of an inter-terminal tram (within the security zone) is already problematic enough.

[john3eblover]

Bit of homerism here, ATL is not that important in the world scheme of things. Yes ATL is critical to S. Eastern USA but let's not overplay its importance it is no LHR, LAX, JFK. It is not the main gateway, yet, to any part of the world say like SFO and LAX are to the Pacific.

I didn't say that ATL was more important than SFO or LAX. ATL is a very important airport though, it's international traffic is growing much faster in recent years. The mere fact that so many people connect through the airport MAKES it one of the most important airports. In case you havent noticed, if there is a delay in Atl, then most of the country will experience some delays. I can't believe we're arguing about the importance of the busiest airport in the world.

I hope most of you understand we are discussing the importance of the airport Hartsfield-Jackson Intl Airport, not the city of Atlanta. I would NEVER make the mistake of trying to assert that the city of atlanta was anything special. God knows that would be a mistake with all the people around here who seem to hate that city for whatever reason.

[Grego43]

You are missing my point...the ONLY reason ATL has any importance is the mere fact that so many people connect thru there. It has no world-wide significance other than being busy...none.

I'm not trying to be a ball buster, but your statement, "In case you havent noticed, if there is a delay in Atl, then most of the country will experience some delays", is not true. ATL traffic has no bearing on traffic outside of the Southeast unless that traffic is heading to the Southeast. It is a fallacy to think that ATL impacts the nation's traffic in the way ORD does.

p.s. Which "people around here" in this thread said anything about hating ATL?

[SteveD]

I didn't say that ATL was more important than SFO or LAX. ATL is a very important airport though, it's international traffic is growing much faster in recent years. The mere fact that so many people connect through the airport MAKES it one of the most important airports. In case you havent noticed, if there is a delay in Atl, then most of the country will experience some delays. I can't believe we're arguing about the importance of the busiest airport in the world.

I hope most of you understand we are discussing the importance of the airport Hartsfield-Jackson Intl Airport, not the city of Atlanta. I would NEVER make the mistake of trying to assert that the city of atlanta was anything special. God knows that would be a mistake with all the people around here who seem to hate that city for whatever reason.
:previous: true...Atlanta seems to raise the ire of so many people. It's fascinating. Also, for those of you making comments about ATL's delays, the airport just completed repaving one of its five runways. The terrible delays were in large part a result of a runway being out of service for two months as it was torn up and reconstructed. Now, with FIVE parallel runways in operation, those numbers should substantially improve.

[john3eblover]

You are missing my point...the ONLY reason ATL has any importance is mere fact that so many people connect thru there. It has no world-wide significance other than being busy...none.

I'm not trying to be a ball buster, but your statement, "In case you havent noticed, if there is a delay in Atl, then most of the country will experience some delays", is not true. ATL traffic has no bearing on traffic outside of the Southeast unless that traffic is heading to the Southeast. It is a falicy to think that ATL impacts the nation's traffic in the way ORD does.

Well then we just disagree. You seem to think that most of the traffic come and going from Atlanta is somehow related to the southeast...? ATL handles more takeoffs and landings per day than ORD does. Most of its traffic is NOT to the southeast. ATL impacts the nations air traffic more than any other airport. Thats just the way it is.

[john3eblover]

And also, since this seems to be a point of confusion, when an airport like ATL or ORD handles a lot of connecting flights, that airport affects the status of flights around the country.

For instance, if the flights in ATL are delayed by weather ( quite common in the summer ), then thousands of flights around the country will be delayed because their planes are sitting on the ground in ATL, or haven't even left FOR atlanta yet because of the weather. Its like a domino effect. To assert that ATL is somehow only important in terms of Southeastern air traffic is just crazy. A large portion of the traffic to Atlanta is coming from either New York or Chicago or Dallas or LAX...none of which are southeastern cities.

[Grego43]

Well then we just disagree.

I agree... ;)

[DonTallPaul]

Cmon Don, it was a sarcastic and exaggerated comment. I think my point was fairly obvious.

Sorry man, hard to tell with all the idiots on the internet sometimes :cheers:

[john3eblover]

Sorry man, hard to tell with all the idiots on the internet sometimes :cheers:

I know exactly what you mean :banana:

[nergie]

Well then we just disagree. You seem to think that most of the traffic come and going from Atlanta is somehow related to the southeast...? ATL handles more takeoffs and landings per day than ORD does. Most of its traffic is NOT to the southeast. ATL impacts the nations air traffic more than any other airport. Thats just the way it is.

Whoa, check those numbers for total aircraft movements. ORD is ahead of ATL even with the FAA caps in place.

[john3eblover]

According to this link, ATL ranked ahead of ORD for all of 2005. Now I realize that its 2006, but 2006 isn't over, so those numbers haven't been tabulated yet. ORD might be ahead this year, but it's not over yet.

http://www.airports.org/cda/aci/display/main/aci_content.jsp?zn=aci&cp=1-5-54-57_9_2__

Rank City (Airport)

Total
Movements


% Change

1
ATLANTA, GA (ATL) 980 386

1.6

2
CHICAGO, IL (ORD) 972 248

( 2.0)

3
DALLAS/FT WORTH AIRPORT, TX (DFW) 711 878

( 11.6)

[john3eblover]

Whoa, check those numbers for total aircraft movements. ORD is ahead of ATL even with the FAA caps in place.


not according to this website, up to October 19th ATL has more than ORD

http://www.airports.org/cda/aci/display/main/aci_content.jsp?zn=aci&cp=1-5-212-231_9_2__

Year to date Aircraft Movements

January - July 2006


Last update: October 19 2006


Aircraft Movements

landing and take-off of an aircraft.
Airport

Total


%Chg
1 ATLANTA, GA (ATL)

560 166


(3.8)
2 CHICAGO, IL (ORD)

559 862


(0.9)
3 DALLAS/FT WORTH AIRPORT, TX (DFW)

408 120


(1.7)
4 LOS ANGELES, CA (LAX)

379 477


0.2
5 LAS VEGAS, NV (LAS)

358 882


3.3
6 HOUSTON, TX (IAH)

352 208


7.1

7


DENVER, CO (DEN)


346 446


6.5
8 PHOENIX, AZ (PHX)

314 336


(3.0)

[urbanflyer]

What an inane pissing contest.

[STrek777]

[QUOTE=Rail Claimore]
Delta is already the leading transatlantic carrier, and Delta will be #2 to Latin America by the time they emerge from Chap 11. QUOTE]

A bit of a tangent but not even close. American and Continental will be one and two for a long time to come. Delta is battling with US Airways now for third place among us carriers to Latin America.

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, Wir Lieben Fliegen

I am so sorry but I am going to need to check you on this one. Delta IS the leading carrier over the Atlantic, IS the second largest carrier into the Caribbean, IS the second largest carrier into Central and South America. We only trail AA by a small margin. Granted in terms of fleet size AA and UA are both larger than us respectively. However, according to DOT numbers and by US own admission DL boards over 115 million passengers in a year making us the second largest carrier in the USA by passengers carried. We have almost no international competition out of ATL giving us a huge stake in the market by default. NYC is one of the largest hubs for corporate travelers in the world and now it is one of the largest gateways to Western Europe and the largest gateway to Eastern Europe... which DL controls.

Delta has announced that it will be the first USA carrier to offer flights on the new 777LR and completely lay flat seats in Business Elite. DL is also making strong in rows into the China market and it is fairly certain that we will get our bid in 2008. Keep in mind that DL also holds the DOT contract rights to TPE, HKG, and SIN just to name a few. Rest assured that once the aircraft become available DL will be taking the Pacific routs head on.

In regards to the company take a look at our complement of aircraft. No other airline has as many international capable aircraft as we do and 10 more 757 ETOPs are on the way. We are also the only carrier completely remodeling the interior of our aircraft from the MD-88 to the B-777. If you are curious take a look on Delta.com and you will see what I am talking about. Also we are moving our company to a 50% domestic and 50% international while maintaining a killer instinct cost structure. Every annalist sees this and quite a few have commented that the only time anyone will be able to attempt a hostile takeover of DL is while the company is in bankruptcy. Once we exit our business plan will be unstoppable.

I challenge any airline to fly over 1,100 flights a day out of any hub and do better than DL. FL can try and bash us all day but when you get down to the brass tacks FL only flies a fraction of the flights that DL does. ATL handles almost 90 million passengers a month and does it with very little disruption. Neither DFW, ORD, LAX, SFO, SEA, JFK, or IAD can boast such numbers with relatively positive results. ATL is in a league of its own and on very few points can it fairly be compared to other airports.

DL management may have been stunned today but expect a fight and expect her employees to stand behind her. This company is a giant and it is quite arrogant and very rude of US to think they can use our restructuring efforts against us. Delta created the markets, DL is fighting to rebuild its passengers trust, DL is investing huge sums of money into its infrastructure, and DL and her employees will reap the rewards of our labor. US has mistaken us for a sleeping lamb but they have awakened the inner wolf!

Have a great day : )

[urbanflyer]

No other airline has as many international capable aircraft as we do

This is patently false. What a vague and overzealous statement lacking anything resembling a qualifier.

DL is also making strong in rows into the China market and it is fairly certain that we will get our bid in 2008.

There's nothing certain about any carrier's bids for China. It's open season.

Keep in mind that DL also holds the DOT contract rights to TPE, HKG, and SIN just to name a few. Rest assured that once the aircraft become available DL will be taking the Pacific routs head on.

Transpac sectors require a minimum of two aircraft per city so this scenario is going to take quite awhile to play out given DL's current financial constraints.
On top of that, it will be difficult to enter a market where Asian carriers already outclass the US competition in every way. Further, there has been internal discussion at DL regarding new plans to expand Asia service from LAX...which is questionable considering it's already a highly competitive market.

Once we exit our business plan will be unstoppable.

Certainly DL is making good progress toward establishing a good business plan, but "unstoppable" is a ridiculous statement to make. There's a few folks at a little organization called OPEC that could easily kill any plan.

[john3eblover]

What an inane pissing contest.

I like how you first degrade the thread and make it seem like you are somehow above discussing things, and then chime in with your own tirade. Nice dude, you are so much classier than the rest of us.

[john3eblover]

[QUOTE=Capt AWACS]
ATL handles almost 90 million passengers a month and does it with very little disruption. )

Well, a year, but I know what you meant ;) Thought i'd correct it before someone jumped all over you

[urbanflyer]

If you call factual information on the industry from an insider's perspective "a tirade", then I'm sorry, I can't help you.

Discussing the finer points of an airline's operational plans and goals is completely unrelated to "my airport is bigger and more important than yours".

[Major AWACS]

I am so sorry but I am going to need to check you on this one. Delta IS the leading carrier over the Atlantic, IS the second largest carrier into the Caribbean, IS the second largest carrier into Central and South America.

Continental serves more destinations and carries more traffic to Central and South America.


We only trail AA by a small margin.
No you trail them by alot. AA carries more pax to Mexico City than Delta does to all of Mexico. Continental flies to more cities in Mexico than any other US airline and Continental flies to more foreign destinations than any other US airline-fact. Now I can't stand Delta as their service sucks ass and they just don't do good things for me. I only fly them now on corporate or government travel. But that is for another thread...maybe when Delta gets out of Bankruptcy.


Granted in terms of fleet size AA and UA are both larger than us respectively. However, according to DOT numbers and by US own admission DL boards over 115 million passengers in a year making us the second largest carrier in the USA by passengers carried. We have almost no international competition out of ATL giving us a huge stake in the market by default.

Who cares??? And Atlanta is on the same level of Houston and Cotinental's hub for international traffic and Houston has more int' O and D traffic and many more int'l carries and competition. Just to provide one comparison, there are many more. Much of the ATL traffic is connecting. Which is not a bad thing per se but has no bearing on the US airways discussion you quoted me on.


NYC is one of the largest hubs for corporate travelers in the world and now it is one of the largest gateways to Western Europe and the largest gateway to Eastern Europe... which DL controls.
Yeah and the fact Continental has the largest hub in the NYC metro means nothing :rolleyes: again not part of my discussion


Delta has announced that it will be the first USA carrier to offer flights on the new 777LR and completely lay flat seats in Business Elite.

Yeah good because Continental has had the highest rated premium service in the USA for years. Last time I fly Delta biz class it was horrible. THey need to upgrade.

DL is also making strong in rows into the China market and it is fairly certain that we will get our bid in 2008.

Delta has one flight to Asia you can call "Strong inrows" LOL Delta is not even on the radar for that slot. AA was tops until the latest pilot union fiasco with a CO a close second. At least according to Industry experts in FI and JANES


Keep in mind that DL also holds the DOT contract rights to TPE, HKG, and SIN just to name a few. Rest assured that once the aircraft become available DL will be taking the Pacific routs head on.

And still losing to Northwest in the process but luckily Skyteam might give them some interline traffic if they can ever get the planes


In regards to the company take a look at our complement of aircraft. No other airline has as many international capable aircraft as we do and 10 more 757 ETOPs are on the way. We are also the only carrier completely remodeling the interior of our aircraft from the MD-88 to the B-777.
[quote] You might want to check your statement on the aircraft... or provide a source. I can think a few others that have more. and of course you are remodeling the interiors, becauser they are drab and old.

[QUOTE=STrek777]
If you are curious take a look on Delta.com and you will see what I am talking about. Also we are moving our company to a 50% domestic and 50% international while maintaining a killer instinct cost structure. Every annalist sees this and quite a few have commented that the only time anyone will be able to attempt a hostile takeover of DL is while the company is in bankruptcy. Once we exit our business plan will be unstoppable.

Let us see if the RASM improves domestically before making such bold statements. Delta has improved since bankruptcy but it has dumped pensions and done some other things that are still yet to be tested. Time will tell.


I challenge any airline to fly over 1,100 flights a day out of any hub and do better than DL. FL can try and bash us all day but when you get down to the brass tacks FL only flies a fraction of the flights that DL does.

I challenge any airline to fly any flights a day and make money. Oh wait,
Southwest, COntinental and American already do that...




ATL handles almost 90 million passengers a month and does it with very little disruption.

I'll go ahead and hope you meant to say "year" ;)


Neither DFW, ORD, LAX, SFO, SEA, JFK, or IAD can boast such numbers with relatively positive results. ATL is in a league of its own and on very few points can it fairly be compared to other airports.

That is all nice but has no bearing on the flights to latin America. IAH had better on time performance and ORD had more airline competitionn.
Atlanta is designed as a good connecting airport...if you are flying Delta or some Skyteam partners. Delta has a lot of work to do.

I wish them luck and hope their service comes up to par with other carriers so when I fly them they can get my bags the same place the get me with a smile and maybe an actual meal. but let us not get overzealous.

Anyway again, I don't think the bid will go through because of fleet issues and to much east coast overlap but you never know in business. Good luck.:banana:

Oh and john3 that was not my quote you have it was someone else...

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,
Capt-AWACS, Not all pilots are alcoholic, we don't go to meetings

[Grego43]

Well said, Capt AWACS...I'm glad that someone is doing their homework...

[STrek777]

No other airline has as many international capable aircraft as we do

This is patently false. What a vague and overzealous statement lacking anything resembling a qualifier.

DL is also making strong in rows into the China market and it is fairly certain that we will get our bid in 2008.

There's nothing certain about any carrier's bids for China. It's open season.

Keep in mind that DL also holds the DOT contract rights to TPE, HKG, and SIN just to name a few. Rest assured that once the aircraft become available DL will be taking the Pacific routs head on.

Transpac sectors require a minimum of two aircraft per city so this scenario is going to take quite awhile to play out given DL's current financial constraints.
On top of that, it will be difficult to enter a market where Asian carriers already outclass the US competition in every way. Further, there has been internal discussion at DL regarding new plans to expand Asia service from LAX...which is questionable considering it's already a highly competitive market.

Once we exit our business plan will be unstoppable.

Certainly DL is making good progress toward establishing a good business plan, but "unstoppable" is a ridiculous statement to make. There's a few folks at a little organization called OPEC that could easily kill any plan.

Delta Aircraft Fleet as of June 30, 20061

Aircraft Type Current Fleet Orders Options Rolling Options
Owned Leased Total
B–737–200 4 13 17
B–737–800 71 71 50
B–757–200 68 53 121
B–767–300 4 20 24
B–767–300ER 50 9 59
B–767–400ER 21 21 19
B–777–200 8 8
MD–88 63 57 120
MD–90 16 16
CRJ–100/200 57 84 141
CRJ–700 27 27 41
Total 389 236 625
*** Taken directly from Delta.com now lets count together ***
Concidering that depending on your market you can fly anything from a CRJ to a 777 internationally how many aircraft do you think we have I count 625 with about 60% of our fleet bought and paid for and only about 40% leased. Now let's assume that we are only going to look at routs to South America, Europe, Middle East, or Africa and the aircraft that can make it on flights longer that 5 hours. We see that delta has the 757, 767, and 777 to accomodate our passengers on such routs and in 2008 will take posetion of 2 aditional 777s an 10 additional 757s. That brings the total to 243 aircraft that can fly international routs by 2008. So yes it is true that No other airline has as many international capable aircraft as we do.

Delta has opened up regional sales offices in PEK, HKG, and TPE and we are in the process of signing China Southern as the newest member of Sky Team. China Southern is the largest airline in the Peoples Republic of China. So yes we are percistantly pressing into the China market. So yes we are making strong in rows into the China market and it is fairly certain that we will get our bid in 2008.

For your last coment once Delta is finished converting the interiors of our 767 fleet to all international configuration we will have at least 10 777s at our disposal to fly over the Pacific.

Before you make any coments please consult Delta.com because I assure you none of my coments were baseless generalizations.

[BarbulaM1]

Year to date Passenger Traffic

January - July 2006



Last update: October 19 2006

Passenger Traffic

total passengers enplaned and deplaned, passengers in transit counted once.

Airport Total
%Chg

1 ATLANTA, GA (ATL) 49 468 789
(4.1)

2 CHICAGO, IL (ORD) 44 808 112
0.8

3 LONDON, GB (LHR) 39 633 827
0.6

4 TOKYO, JP (HND) 36 095 415
2.5

5 LOS ANGELES, CA (LAX) 35 802 162
(0.3)

6 DALLAS/FT WORTH AIRPORT, TX (DFW) 35 695 706
2.8

7 PARIS, FR (CDG) 32 733 659
5.8

8 FRANKFURT, DE (FRA) 30 150 230
1.3

9 DENVER, CO (DEN) 28 017 549
10.4

10 BEIJING, CN (PEK) 27 021 777
20.0



Passenger Amounts are more accurate than aircraft movements...

[matguy7070]

First of all, if this merger (or buyout) were to go through, there is no way that the headquarters would leave Atlanta. Atlanta is home to the busiest airport in the world, and one of the most efficient well run. The name of the airline would be Delta as stated in the articles, so the HQ would most logically remain in Atlanta where the largest hub is.

If this merger happens, ATL would likely remain Operations Hub for Delta Airlines... most likely it will not remain Financial or Headquarters for Delta Airlines. ATL would most likely lose Delta's Fortune 500 and headquarters be moved to Arizona in conjunction with US Airways. Regardless if Operations are held in ATL, the company will not be based there any longer.

We will have to wait to see how this plays out. It may be in Delta's best interest to sell out with the financial state they are in.

[austin356]

This is not a smart Merger other than US can snag a deal w/ delta being Bankrupt.

United/Delta would be smart. The US/Delta would have too much overlap and minimal cost savings.

[Lexy]

Ok, first of all, we know that the Delta name will be kept. They have stated this. And why? Because, Delta airlines at the 3rd largest US carrier is a more respected and widely known Airline, one that is valued more than US Airways. This was also stated in the article, and is common knowledge.

Secondly, I'm not sure why you keep citing the merger between HP and US Airways. Its a completely different thing. And in that circumstance, US Airways was the more common name, and that's probably why it was kept. It also had a bigger fleet, but CLT is a poor place to have a main hub. Basically, what you had there was the gutting of US Airways by HP. HP was a superior airline, and better off financially, but US Airways was more well known, so they took the name, and changed everything else.

With Delta and US Airways, do you honestly think that CLT is superior to Atlanta? Do you think that US Airways is a better airline?? Do you honestly think that the city of Tempe is a better city for a headquarters than Atlanta? Who even knows where Tempe is?? Do you think that Delta is just going to agree to let US Airways gut them and take them over?

Regarding Hartsfield-Jackson's efficiency and importance as a hub and main airport, I really don't understand what we're arguing about. Yes, Hartsfield can have some delays from time to time. This comes from handling over 85 million people each year. Hartsfield-Jackson is one of the most important airports in the world, and yes, its design is one of the simplest yet most efficient. Now that all 5 runways are finally all operating at the same time, you can expect the delays to be reduced significantly.

As much as you want Delta to merge or be taken over by US Airways, it isn't going to happen. And if it does, expect there to be not much of US airways left.

Not a homer today are we? LOL!! ATL has ground stoppages almost everyday on the half-hour. "Well run" and "efficent" don't belong even remotely close to the words Atlanta Hartsfield. LOL!!! Come on. Everyone pretty much knows where Tempe, Arizona is. Not everybody is a complete idiot.

[nergie]

For all the Atlanta forumers let be a little realistic here. If ATL was as critical as say ORD to the smooth operation of the US aviation network would you not think the FAA would impose similar flight caps at ATL becuase of the consistent poor performance.

As for Delta looking towards the Pacific it is about time, they are getting the stuffing knocked out of them in the F. East. Just do not think this is going to happen relatively soon.

So they are number one to Europe, that really is not saying much because these routes are so competitive. I basically can get to anywhere Delta flies from ORD or DTW with one stop. If I fly Delta I have to make a stop in either JFK or ATL. Much rather stop in LHR, FRA, or AMS than JFK or ATL.


Not saying that Atlanta is not a good place to live. I have family OTP in Rosewell and in Midtown so I have seen the good and bad Atlanta has to offer. But saying the airport has significant importance worldwide is pushing it.

[BarbulaM1]

To be significatly important in the world you need a dominate carrier with more than 20% :P. Not a Super Fortress hub, cause there aren't any sizable Delta hubs anyware else in the world But ATL, DL runs a nearly 1 hub system. (I know I know, JFK and SLC.... but they arn't close to secondary operations of other airlines like United with ORD, DEN, IAD, SFO, LAX or AA with DFW and ORD).

[WonderlandPark]

This may be getting more interesting:

US Airways’ $8 billion bid for Delta may unleash new consolidation
By Harry R. Weber
Associated Press
US Airways made a hostile $8 billion bid for Delta Air Lines on Wednesday, ignoring Delta’s repeated statements that it isn’t interested in a merger. The move could start a stampede of competing bids in a long-predicted industry consolidation.

Analysts said United Airlines’ parent company may make its own move to acquire Delta, and takeover bids for Northwest Airlines, which like Delta is being reorganized in bankruptcy court, can’t be ruled out.

[PHX31]

The America West Airlines - now US Airways - building in Tempe has plans of erecting more towers on its parcel of land. These plans have been on the drawing board for a while, but I've heard of more and more talk of actually building the second tower lately, coincidence?

High-rise looms on airline's land

Oct. 5, 2006 12:00 AM


US Airways is moving closer to adding a high-rise on its downtown land. The property, at Third Street and Mill Avenue, has been slated for development for decades.

The grassy expanse likely will be replaced by a multistory building with retail space on the ground floor and office space on the upper levels. It will be the second of three buildings that planned there, according to a development agreement with the city.

The Tempe-based airline is the process of negotiating and finalizing building proposals with a developer. . US Airways plans to go public with those plans in the coming weeks, said Paul Lambert, vice president of corporate real estate.

The airline fielded proposals from a half-dozen developers who had dramatically different ideas for what should be built on the 7.5 acres, Lambert said. Whatever goes in will be directly adjacent to a new light-rail stop.

As of now, third-party renters will use the building, Lambert said. However, the possibility exists that US Airways will use the floor space for corporate expansion.

The land is jointly owned by the airline and Tempe.

- Katie Nelson


And here is a picture of Tempe, courtesy of azndragon837, it's definitely growing up fast with several 10-30 story towers U/C and dozens more planned. The US Airways building is on the far left (9-10 stories (?)):

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v72/Azndragon837/Downtown%20Tempe%20102506/SkyscraperPage%20Images/Tempe17.jpg

Carry on

[urbanflyer]

Concidering that depending on your market you can fly anything from a CRJ to a 777 internationally how many aircraft do you think we have I count 625 with about 60% of our fleet bought and paid for and only about 40% leased. Now let's assume that we are only going to look at routs to South America, Europe, Middle East, or Africa and the aircraft that can make it on flights longer that 5 hours. We see that delta has the 757, 767, and 777 to accomodate our passengers on such routs and in 2008 will take posetion of 2 aditional 777s an 10 additional 757s. That brings the total to 243 aircraft that can fly international routs by 2008. So yes it is true that No other airline has as many international capable aircraft as we do.

Where are you getting these crazy numbers?

The 10 ETOPS 752s-to be, 763ERs, 764s and 772s are the only aircraft that can fly the international routes you mentioned. You can forget the existing 121 752s because the PW2037 engine makes it impossible for them to receive ETOPS certification. The 767-300s don't have the legs for international flights either and would suffer huge payload restrictions that would make such flights pointless to operate.

So, taking this into account (including the expected 772s and 752s coming on board), you have 100 "international capable" aircraft. This is only a few more than CO, who have 85 aircraft that would fit this criteria (though they deploy their existing fleet very well) and NW, who with the retirement of the DC-10, will be down to 74 or so. This doesn't compare favorably to the 161 752 ETOPS, 763ER, 772 and 744 at UA, or the 190 752 ETOPS, 763ER, 772 and AB6 at AA. DL has a ways to go in this department.

Delta has opened up regional sales offices in PEK, HKG, and TPE and we are in the process of signing China Southern as the newest member of Sky Team. China Southern is the largest airline in the Peoples Republic of China. So yes we are percistantly pressing into the China market. So yes we are making strong in rows into the China market and it is fairly certain that we will get our bid in 2008.

surely you mean inroads...operating some codeshares with China Southern is not nearly the same thing as having DL metal plying Chinese skies. The most important factor in service to Asia is customer recognition, and as a resident of Japan I can assure you that DL's customer awareness in this region is a few hairs short of non-existent. They will need a very aggressive growth presence to overcome that reality. LAX would be a good start provided that they can go above and beyond what is already offered in existing markets.

For your last coment once Delta is finished converting the interiors of our 767 fleet to all international configuration we will have at least 10 777s at our disposal to fly over the Pacific.

As I mentioned before, transpacific sectors require 2 aircraft minimum per city served, so this gives you a maximum of four destinations, possibly more if DL were to secure fifth-freedom rights at some point. Full utilization is impossible given the reality of maintenance and the small fleet size.

Before you make any coments please consult Delta.com because I assure you none of my coments were baseless generalizations.

I don't need to consult Delta.com - I can consult friends who are both longtime DL CS management staff and a 772 captain who is #4 on the DL seniority list.

[john3eblover]

well, as fascinating as all this nonsense is,

Delta Air Lines Responds to Reports of Merger with U.S. Airways

ATLANTA, Nov. 15, 2006 – Delta Air Lines’ CEO Gerald Grinstein issued the following statement today regarding U.S. Airways’ proposed merger with Delta:

“We received a letter from U.S. Airways this morning and will of course review it. Delta’s plan has always been to emerge from bankruptcy in the first half of 2007 as a strong, stand-alone carrier. Our plan is working and we are proud of the progress Delta people are making to achieve this objective.

The Bankruptcy Court has granted Delta the exclusive right to create the plan of reorganization until Feb. 15, 2007. We will continue to move aggressively towards that goal."

Delta Air Lines (Other OTC: DALRQ) offers customers service to more destinations than any global airline with Delta and Delta Connection carrier service to 290 destinations in 46 countries. With more than 50 new international routes added in the last year, Delta is America’s fastest growing international airline and is a leader across the Atlantic with flights to 28 trans-Atlantic destinations. To Latin America and the Caribbean, Delta offers more than 400 weekly flights to 49 destinations. Delta's marketing alliances also allow customers to earn and redeem SkyMiles on more than 14,000 flights offered by SkyTeam and other partners. Delta is a founding member of SkyTeam, a global airline alliance that provides customers with extensive worldwide destinations, flights and services. Including its SkyTeam and worldwide codeshare partners, Delta offers flights to 445 worldwide destinations in 92 countries. Customers can check in for flights, print boarding passes and check flight status at delta.com.

[urbanflyer]

Par for the course. Grinstein is taking pages from the Gordon Bethune playbook and is comfortable knowing that any merger is wholly unecessary given DL's market position and resources.

[Rail Claimore]

For all the Atlanta forumers let be a little realistic here. If ATL was as critical as say ORD to the smooth operation of the US aviation network would you not think the FAA would impose similar flight caps at ATL becuase of the consistent poor performance.

ORD was much worse than any other hub airport BEFORE the flight caps came, that's why ORD was the one to get them. Add to that the fact that having so many operations on a less-than-ideal runway layout with 5 crosswinds certainly raises safety concerns. ORD isn't much more important to the nation's air traffic system than ATL or DFW for that matter. If any of those three airports gets bogged down with delays, the effects will be felt to some extent nationally and to a huge extent regionally.

One could also make the opposite argument that flight caps were not imposed on ATL because ATL is more important a hub than ORD, and people need to get where they're going regardless of delays... I don't necessarily believe that, but the flight caps excuse you used doesn't hold much water.

ORD is a more well-rounded airport than ATL considering it serves more international destinations, but ranking 4th and 7th respectively, they're not international gateways to nearly the same extent as JFK, LAX, and MIA.

As for Delta looking towards the Pacific it is about time, they are getting the stuffing knocked out of them in the F. East. Just do not think this is going to happen relatively soon.

I don't know why you say "it is about time" considering Delta had considerable operations in East and Southeast Asia until the late 90's out of their hub at PDX. They whored their MD-11s considerably during that time. I don't expect such expansion to happen any time soon either, unless they manage to get into China, and even then, like urbanflyer said, they'd have to do a lot of logistics works with regards to planes to be able to provide such service.

So they are number one to Europe, that really is not saying much because these routes are so competitive. I basically can get to anywhere Delta flies from ORD or DTW with one stop. If I fly Delta I have to make a stop in either JFK or ATL. Much rather stop in LHR, FRA, or AMS than JFK or ATL.


I don't see the point of this argument. Of course people living in Chicago and Detroit are going to fly United, American, and Northwest to get to where they're going in Europe, and especially Asia. I usually have to stop at ORD and DTW when flying to Asia anyway. The same applies to people in Atlanta flying to Europe. They'll use Delta, because why would they want to stop somewhere else in the US or Europe to get to their destination.

But regardless, people near ORD or DTW are going to have to make one stop in Europe to get to most of the non-hub destinations there. Delta flies more European destinations than United and American combined.

Delta European Destinations: 26 total

Brussels
Copenhagen
Nice
Paris
Berlin
Düsseldorf
Frankfurt
Munich
Stuttgart
Athens
Budapest
Dublin
Shannon
Milan
Rome
Venice
Amsterdam
Moscow
Barcelona
Madrid
Zurich
Istanbul
Kiev
Edinburgh
London Gatwick
Manchester

United European Destinations: 7 total

Brussels
Paris
Frankfurt
Munich
Amsterdam
Zurich
London Heathrow

AA European Destinations: 11 total

Brussels
Paris
Frankfurt
Dublin
Shannon
Rome
Madrid
Zurich
London Heathrow
London Gatwick
Manchester

Granted, I couldn't care less about Delta or Atlanta considering I'm primarily a transpacific traveler. ORD will work fine for me once I move up there in a few weeks as it is. But to say ATL doesn't have impact beyond the Southeast is a bit farsighted.

[vertex]

well, as fascinating as all this nonsense is,

Delta Air Lines Responds to Reports of Merger with U.S. Airways

ATLANTA, Nov. 15, 2006 – Delta Air Lines’ CEO Gerald Grinstein issued the following statement today regarding U.S. Airways’ proposed merger with Delta:

“We received a letter from U.S. Airways this morning and will of course review it. Delta’s plan has always been to emerge from bankruptcy in the first half of 2007 as a strong, stand-alone carrier. Our plan is working and we are proud of the progress Delta people are making to achieve this objective.



Poor Gerry, he is down to a walk-on part in this unfolding drama, and he doesn't even know it yet. Or maybe he does, and all of the noise he is making is nothing more than a death-rattle.

[nergie]

ORD was much worse than any other hub airport BEFORE the flight caps came, that's why ORD was the one to get them. Add to that the fact that having so many operations on a less-than-ideal runway layout with 5 crosswinds certainly raises safety concerns. ORD isn't much more important to the nation's air traffic system than ATL or DFW for that matter. If any of those three airports gets bogged down with delays, the effects will be felt to some extent nationally and to a huge extent regionally.

One could also make the opposite argument that flight caps were not imposed on ATL because ATL is more important a hub than ORD, and people need to get where they're going regardless of delays... I don't necessarily believe that, but the flight caps excuse you used doesn't hold much water.

ORD is a more well-rounded airport than ATL considering it serves more international destinations, but ranking 4th and 7th respectively, they're not international gateways to nearly the same extent as JFK, LAX, and MIA.



I don't know why you say "it is about time" considering Delta had considerable operations in East and Southeast Asia until the late 90's out of their hub at PDX. They whored their MD-11s considerably during that time. I don't expect such expansion to happen any time soon either, unless they manage to get into China, and even then, like urbanflyer said, they'd have to do a lot of logistics works with regards to planes to be able to provide such service.



I don't see the point of this argument. Of course people living in Chicago and Detroit are going to fly United, American, and Northwest to get to where they're going in Europe, and especially Asia. I usually have to stop at ORD and DTW when flying to Asia anyway. The same applies to people in Atlanta flying to Europe. They'll use Delta, because why would they want to stop somewhere else in the US or Europe to get to their destination.

But regardless, people near ORD or DTW are going to have to make one stop in Europe to get to most of the non-hub destinations there. Delta flies more European destinations than United and American combined.

Delta European Destinations: 26 total

Brussels
Copenhagen
Nice
Paris
Berlin
Düsseldorf
Frankfurt
Munich
Stuttgart
Athens
Budapest
Dublin
Shannon
Milan
Rome
Venice
Amsterdam
Moscow
Barcelona
Madrid
Zurich
Istanbul
Kiev
Edinburgh
London Gatwick
Manchester

United European Destinations: 7 total

Brussels
Paris
Frankfurt
Munich
Amsterdam
Zurich
London Heathrow

AA European Destinations: 11 total

Brussels
Paris
Frankfurt
Dublin
Shannon
Rome
Madrid
Zurich
London Heathrow
London Gatwick
Manchester

Granted, I couldn't care less about Delta or Atlanta considering I'm primarily a transpacific traveler. ORD will work fine for me once I move up there in a few weeks as it is. But to say ATL doesn't have impact beyond the Southeast is a bit farsighted.


Your statement is incorrect. Norman Mineta said when ORD was backed up it affected the US travel network more than any other airport in the US. Not me talking but the former Transportation Secretary.

I am transpacific also, but I can connect to anyone of those cities from ORD, btw I can take the flag carriers to several of the cities you mention non-stop from ORD. I also can fly to LHR, AMS or FRA and connect. Point is I do not need Delta or ATL to get anywhere. I could care less about ATL and Delta, but my point is people are making a bid deal about the Delta's dominence going to Europe. I really do not see it as such a big advantage, airlines fly routes that best suit them. UA, CO and AA overall have a much more effect route structure with multiple hubs that opens up service the entire country. Take SFO for example, I can get on plane go to LHR and then connect to Kiev. But ORD is my home airport and it serves my sadistic travel schedule of 250-350K+ miles a year just fine.

[Grego43]

Correct Nergie, folks don't seem to grasp that ATL's delays have very little effect, when any at all, on the rest of the US outside of the Southeast.



"...and it serves my sadistic travel schedule of 250-350K+ miles a year just fine."

OUCH, Nergie! I thought my 175k-200k miles/year was bad (and approx. 125k on Delta, natch)...I feel for you, brother.

[nergie]

Correct Nergie, folks don't seem to grasp that ATL's delays have very little effect, when any at all, on the rest of the US outside of the Southeast.



"...and it serves my sadistic travel schedule of 250-350K+ miles a year just fine."

OUCH, Nergie! I thought my 175k-200k miles/year was bad (and approx. 125k on Delta, natch)...I feel for you, brother.

Thanks, also I really do not hear of airlines fighting to get into ATL market. Where as both domestic and foreign airlines always target Chicago. Emirates, Thai Airways, Oasis and Quantas are all in line to start flying from ORD.

Thanks for the sympathy, but when your based in Chicago but working out of Singapore, Sydney and HK coming home is something of a major accomplishment. I handle Asia, and Oceania projects for my company. Before that I was mostly in Europe, S. America and Africa.

[oliveurban]

Delta bid could pit Tempe vs. Atlanta in fight for HQ
Chad Graham
The Arizona Republic
Nov. 16, 2006

In the wake of Wednesday's $8 billion bid by US Airways for Delta Air Lines, experts say Tempe would seem to be the logical city for the proposed new company's headquarters.

Last year, it beat out Arlington, Va., to become headquarters for the merged US Airways and America West. US Airways has a gleaming nine-story office tower that stands on the banks of the Rio Salado with room to expand and a long-term lease.

But this merger is different, and the competition will be stiffer.

US Airways officials declined to speculate where the new Delta's headquarters would be if the merger was approved.

"What I do know is both Phoenix and Atlanta . . . will have large parts of the new airline and also will have very large numbers of management employees in both places," US Airways CEO Doug Parker said.

Regarding last year's merger, US Airways' Virginia headquarters was relatively small. "They had about two or three floors in Crystal City," he said. "We couldn't have moved our headquarters there. That was a much, much easier decision."

About 1,500 to 2,000 workers are employed at Delta's Atlanta headquarters, and US Airways' headquarters has 717, according to representatives.

And although Arlington seemed to put up little resistance to losing US Airways, there are indications that Atlanta will put up a hardy fight to keep Delta.

"Delta is vital to the city, to Hartsfield-Jackson (International Airport) and to the region. Obviously losing that flagship would be a difficult blow," A.J. Robinson, head of Central Atlanta Progress, told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution on Wednesday.

The company, headquartered there since 1941, is almost as closely identified with the city as the Coca-Cola Co. At one point, the carrier called itself the "Airline of the South."

"The corporate headquarters' function is the most coveted prize in the field of economic development," said John Boyd of the Boyd Co., a corporate-relocation specialist in Princeton, N.J. "It really speaks to a city's prestige and its image in terms of the number of Fortune 500 companies. Atlanta will fight tooth and nail to retain the headquarters presence in Atlanta."

Like the rest of the country, Valley economic development officials were caught off-guard by Wednesday's announcement. They scrambled to contact US Airways officials and determine what steps they could take to ensure the headquarters would remain in Arizona.

"We will need to find out how this will shake out over the next few days and see what they have planned," said Mary Ann Miller, president and CEO of the Tempe Chamber of Commerce. "Obviously, they like Tempe because they stayed for the last merger, so I am optimistic."

There is much at stake.

The proposed company counts combined revenues of more than $26 billion, making it larger than Arizona's three other Fortune 500 companies in terms of 2005 revenue: Avnet at $11 billion, Phelps-Dodge Corp. at $9 billion and Allied Waste Industries at $5.7 billion. The current US Airways ranked No. 4 among Arizona companies on the list, with $5.1 billion in revenue. That figure doesn't account for a full year of the America West-US Airways merger.

Corporate positions are among the highest-paying around and have a ripple effect on the general economy. They are exactly the kind of jobs that economic development officials are trying to attract to the Valley to counter the area's high percentage of mediocre-paying jobs.

"I think what you do is kind of wait and see if this thing really begins to get serious, and if it does, you have the best economic development folks in our state start working together to retain the headquarters," said Phoenix Deputy City Manager David Krietor, who until recently served as the director of Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport. "I think Phoenix would obviously work hard, but this is a big issue for the governor (Janet Napolitano) and Tempe, too."

Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon said he spoke with top US Airways executives on Wednesday and said he is excited about the potential economic benefits to the region, regardless of where the carrier's headquarters might be.

Still, he echoed the call to keep the proposed new company's headquarters local.

"The Phoenix market is a critical market for any airline in the U.S. because we are one of the fastest-growing cities and regions in the country," he said.

"That said, US Airways is a state asset, and I know we would work closely with our partners throughout the state and be very aggressive in (our efforts) to maintain the headquarters."

Regardless of what city is picked, the headquarters would not attract tens of thousands of new workers.

If Tempe is chosen, "Atlanta is probably going to remain a big hub," said Rajeev Dhawan, director of the Economic Forecasting Center at Georgia State University. "There will be some job losses at the managerial level. That's not good news for the chamber of commerce people."

But passengers may not pay much attention to where the airline is based, he added.

"(They) want a reliable airline that can have more planes and fly more routes," he said. "(They) don't care what the name is. I, as a citizen of Atlanta, want an airline that flies me out properly and gets me where I want to go at a good price."

[atlantaguy]

Your statement is incorrect. Norman Mineta said when ORD was backed up it affected the US travel network more than any other airport in the US. Not me talking but the former Transportation Secretary.

I am transpacific also, but I can connect to anyone of those cities from ORD, btw I can take the flag carriers to several of the cities you mention non-stop from ORD. I also can fly to LHR, AMS or FRA and connect. Point is I do not need Delta or ATL to get anywhere. I could care less about ATL and Delta, but my point is people are making a bid deal about the Delta's dominence going to Europe. I really do not see it as such a big advantage, airlines fly routes that best suit them. UA, CO and AA overall have a much more effect route structure with multiple hubs that opens up service the entire country. Take SFO for example, I can get on plane go to LHR and then connect to Kiev. But ORD is my home airport and it serves my sadistic travel schedule of 250-350K+ miles a year just fine.


Well nergie - It goes both ways. We have no need for ORD here, with the exception of connecting to some podunk town like Decatur or Rhinelander that we don't have nonstops to. And guess what? We also have nonstop flag service to London, Paris & Frankfurt. By the way, we also have nonstops to European cities that gasp! Chicago doesn't have. Moscow, anyone?

This is all nothing more than sour grapes. What some folks fail to realize is that the Delta hub here is massive. As in, larger than American & United's respective hubs at ORD combined.

[Grego43]

Atlantaguy, its you that doesn't grasp what has been said here...Yes, ATL is a massive operation, but its not all about size. ATL's relative lack of importance in the entire aviation world is what we've been discussing...ATL is not as relevant as say JFK, ORD, LAX, HKG, LHR, CDG, FRA in the big picture.

ATL is important to Delta, and only Delta (oh, and Airtran, sorry). This is not meant to be a pissing match between ORD/ATL.


"...What some folks fail to realize is that the Delta hub here is massive. As in, larger than American & United's respective hubs at ORD combined."

Yes, and that is why Atlantans are soiling in their collective pants over the prospect of a US buyout of Delta. If ATL's status as a hub is diminished at all, ATL will take a huge economic hit. On that note, I don't believe Atlanta has a thing to worry about if the aquisition occurs...CLT, now that's another story.

[vertex]

I'm starting a pool to see how much longer this thread lasts.

I'm guessing 5 posts.:D

[john3eblover]

I'm starting a pool to see how much longer this thread lasts.

I'm guessing 5 posts.:D


...:koko:

[ChunkyMonkey]

If US and DL merge, I think Atlanta will win out in being the headquarters, mainly because it is located in the east where most people live, not to mention being closer to the ever important transatlantic routes. Phoenix seems to be so far from the action.

[atlantaguy]

Atlantaguy, its you that doesn't grasp what has been said here...Yes, ATL is a massive operation, but its not all about size. ATL's relative lack of importance in the entire aviation world is what we've been discussing...ATL is not as relevant as say JFK, ORD, LAX, HKG, LHR, CDG, FRA in the big picture.

ATL is important to Delta, and only Delta (oh, and Airtran, sorry). This is not meant to be a pissing match between ORD/ATL.


"...What some folks fail to realize is that the Delta hub here is massive. As in, larger than American & United's respective hubs at ORD combined."

Yes, and that is why Atlantans are soiling in their collective pants over the prospect of a US buyout of Delta. If ATL's status as a hub is diminished at all, ATL will take a huge economic hit. On that note, I don't believe Atlanta has a thing to worry about if the aquisition occurs...CLT, now that's another story.

So sorry, but I do indeed grasp whats been said. I give a big, fat bullshit to ATL's supposed lack of importance in the aviation world. I would argue that it is every bit as important as ORD. The O & D #'s here are nothing to sneeze at.

[PHX602]

If US and DL merge, I think Atlanta will win out in being the headquarters, mainly because it is located in the east where most people live, not to mention being closer to the ever important transatlantic routes. Phoenix seems to be so far from the action.

Where the HQs is based has no effect whatsoever on international routes. Both cities will not give up the base without a fight but in Delta's position if they decide to go ahead with this merge I expect the HQs to remain in Tempe.

[john3eblover]

People, delta has already refused the offer from US Airways. All that remains now is to see what the creditors decide to do with US Airway's hostile takeover offer.

[PHX602]

:previous: It's still interesting to discuss how the merger would play out.

[Steely Dan]

how the fuck does a thread about a possible merger of US airways and delta turn into the 800th iteration of a ATL vs. ORD retard festival?

all future posts in this thread that mention ohare will be deleted. keep it on topic folks.

[john3eblover]

:previous: It's still interesting to discuss how the merger would play out.

well of course

[john3eblover]

Delta chairman addresses US Airways proposal in memo to employees
Atlanta Business Chronicle - 6:58 PM EST Wednesday

* Print This ArticlePrint this Article
* Email this ArticleEmail this Article
* ReprintsReprints
* RSS FeedsRSS Feeds
* RSS FeedsMost Viewed
* RSS FeedsMost Emailed

After US Airways Group Inc. went public with its $8 billion buyout offer to Delta Air Lines Inc., Delta Chairman and CEO Gerald Grinstein told his employees the airline wants to exit bankruptcy in the first half of 2007 as an "independent, stand-alone company -- not as a merged, acquired, or otherwise consolidated airline."

Atlanta-based Delta (Pink Sheets: DALRQ) released late Wednesday Grinstein's memo, which follows in its entirety:

"Internal Memorandum

Date: November 15, 2006

To: All Delta Employees

From: Jerry Grinstein, Chief Executive Officer

Subject: Delta's Focus and Goals Remain Unchanged

"Today, Delta unexpectedly received from U.S. Airways an unsolicited letter proposing the merger of our two carriers as part of Delta's emergence from bankruptcy. You have heard this news already since US Airways simultaneously made the letter public. Delta people have participated in the hard work and tough choices driving our company's already remarkable restructuring progress. I know you care deeply about

what this means for our airline.

"Our goal is for Delta to exit bankruptcy in the first half of 2007 as an independent, stand-alone company -- not as a merged, acquired, or otherwise consolidated airline. While Delta is obligated to review this proposal carefully, we remain skeptical that it would make sense to deviate from our plan. We are working hard to regain an industry position of strength and leadership. From that position, we can best control our own destiny and pursue the direction that best benefits all Delta constituents, including Delta people, now and in the future.

"With the backing of our Creditors' Committee, Delta already had declined discussions when US Airways approached us earlier this fall. Obviously, others are recognizing the success we've achieved together by reducing costs, increasing revenue, and improving customer products and services, along with other significant progress. You have good reason to be proud of the positive response you're helping our company earn.

"The Bankruptcy Court has granted Delta management the exclusive right until February 15, 2007 to create our own plan of reorganization. During this "exclusivity" period, other parties are not allowed to submit competing plans. I've said before and continue to believe that the history of mergers in the airline industry is almost always one of failure, with over-promise of synergies and under-delivery of results. That continues to be my view.

"Now more than ever, your support and commitment are key to the goal we all share: Delta's long-term success. Thank you for remaining focused on our operations and taking care of Delta customers and each other, especially in the busy Thanksgiving travel season ahead.

"Jerry Grinstein"

[nergie]

Well nergie - It goes both ways. We have no need for ORD here, with the exception of connecting to some podunk town like Decatur or Rhinelander that we don't have nonstops to. And guess what? We also have nonstop flag service to London, Paris & Frankfurt. By the way, we also have nonstops to European cities that gasp! Chicago doesn't have. Moscow, anyone?

This is all nothing more than sour grapes. What some folks fail to realize is that the Delta hub here is massive. As in, larger than American & United's respective hubs at ORD combined.

Good for you, now there was talk about United possibly making a bid for Delta in USA today. How would that work out, think about the pissing contest that would occur about HQs and hubs if that ever came to fruition.

[john3eblover]

I know that I'd personally feel much better about a United-Delta merger...i don't know about anyone else though

[vertex]

I'm starting a pool to see how much longer this thread lasts.

I'm guessing 5 posts.:D...:koko:

how the fuck does a thread about a possible merger of US airways and delta turn into the 800th iteration of a ATL vs. ORD retard festival?

all future posts in this thread that mention ohare will be deleted. keep it on topic folks.


Not counting john3eblover's observation, it took exactly 6 posts before an intervention by a mod...

[DBR96A]

WINNERS

Pittsburgh - Pittsburghers would have license to laugh back at everyone who laughed when PIT was de-hubbed
Charlotte - De-hubbing yields lower air fares and increased competition at CLT

LOSERS

Atlanta - ATL is about to become a hub for U.S.E.L.E.S.S. Airways! *lmao*
Cincinnati - see Atlanta
Phoenix - Not only is PHX a U.S.E.L.E.S.S. Airways hub, but now Phoenix gets their corporate headquarters! *lmao*

NO DIFFERENCE

Philadelphia - They've already been stuck with U.S.E.L.E.S.S. Airways and their shitty service for years, although they could land on the "winners" list if air traffic gets diverted to New York

[atlantaguy]

The afternoon headline from Atlanta:

US Air bid could delay Delta's exit from bankruptcy
Concerns may lead creditors to pass on buyout offer

By RUSSELL GRANTHAM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 11/16/06

US Airways' proposed takeover of Delta Air Lines could be scuttled over antitrust issues when federal regulators examine the deal.

At the least, Delta’s exit from bankruptcy could be delayed by months.

A person familiar with the bankruptcy case said such concerns are among the reasons a court-appointed creditors committee, which holds huge sway in Delta's Chapter 11 reorganization, might pass on the deal.

The source said creditors might decide the proposed $8 billion merger is better than keeping Delta independent. But it will likely take weeks of analysis by Delta management and the creditors committee before deciding to encourage the deal, that person said.

US Airways took its blockbuster proposal public Wednesday after being twice rebuffed by Delta's management, which had informed creditors about the earlier overtures.

The merger would combine airlines whose routes overlap 36 percent — more overlap than any other combination offers, said the source. That dramatically raises the odds that the Department of Justice will reject or seriously delay the merger, according to the source.

To get government approval, US Airways would not only have to shed one of two competing shuttle subsidiaries the two airlines operate in the Northeast, but might have to shed more than 10 percent of its overall operations, the person said.

That might include dismantling its U.S. Airways' Charlotte hub, which serves many of the same markets as Delta's Atlanta hub.

[john3eblover]

WINNERS

Pittsburgh - Pittsburghers would have license to laugh back at everyone who laughed when PIT was de-hubbed
Charlotte - De-hubbing yields lower air fares and increased competition at CLT

LOSERS

Atlanta - ATL is about to become a hub for U.S.E.L.E.S.S. Airways! *lmao*
Cincinnati - see Atlanta
Phoenix - Not only is PHX a U.S.E.L.E.S.S. Airways hub, but now Phoenix gets their corporate headquarters! *lmao*

NO DIFFERENCE

Philadelphia - They've already been stuck with U.S.E.L.E.S.S. Airways and their shitty service for years, although they could land on the "winners" list if air traffic gets diverted to New York

In case you havn't been keeping up, if there was a US Airways/Delta merger, the hub at Atlanta would be kept.

It's the corporate headquarters location that was in debate.

[nergie]

I know that I'd personally feel much better about a United-Delta merger...i don't know about anyone else though

Form route structure and aircraft type it make sense. The two airlines strengths lie in two different international arenas and they operate very similar fleets.

[urbanflyer]

The two airlines strengths lie in two different international arenas and they operate very similar fleets

How do you figure? There's not a single Airbus in the current DL fleet. US has a different engine on their 757s. US doesn't have any MD aircraft...the list goes on.

[WonderlandPark]

UAL and DL makes more sense, at least from the international perspective, UAL is Boeing heavy, has a strong trans-Pac route system. But both would be post BK, so that merger may not be possible.

If I were DL no way I would want to merge with USscare/AmericaWorst.

[PHX602]

LOSERS

Atlanta - ATL is about to become a hub for U.S.E.L.E.S.S. Airways! *lmao*
Cincinnati - see Atlanta
Phoenix - Not only is PHX a U.S.E.L.E.S.S. Airways hub, but now Phoenix gets their corporate headquarters! *lmao*

I'm sure Atlanta would be better off with a profitable U.S.E.L.E.S.S Airways than a L.I.Q.U.I.D.A.T.E.D Delta.:tup:

[urbanflyer]

^
There's no evidence to suggest liquidation is in the cards for Delta. The same was said about United and now they've posted a $100 million profit two quarters in a row.

[nergie]

The two airlines strengths lie in two different international arenas and they operate very similar fleets

How do you figure? There's not a single Airbus in the current DL fleet. US has a different engine on their 757s. US doesn't have any MD aircraft...the list goes on.

I think you mean UA, but I will have to defer to your insider knowledge as to the fleets. From an international route structure this merger makes sense.

[Upward]

I will watch this with interest, because I'm originally from Phoenix, and most of my family is there and Cincinnati. All of my frequent-flyer miles are on these two airlines, and if they combined, I'd have enough miles for a free first-class ticket!

[PHX602]

^
There's no evidence to suggest liquidation is in the cards for Delta. The same was said about United and now they've posted a $100 million profit two quarters in a row.

That's right, but what I was trying to say is that the only way Atlanta could be a loser in this situation is if the bankrupt airline was to liquidate, since that is highly unlikely Delta has nowhere to go but up from where they are now.

[Grego43]

My two cents is as follows:

The gov't regulators are going to have to allow more consolidation of the airline industry. The gov't. and the public cannot continue to bail out an industry which time and again finds its easiest route to profitablility through bankruptcy court. How many pension plans are we funding at this time? The American public needs to be weened from crazy, money-losing fares such as $139 RT FLL-LGA and the way to do that is less competition. Radical yes, but what the consumer is saving on the front end is being paid with interest through our collective rear ends. We are paying in real dollars, fares that are less than they were in 1970s.

[matguy7070]

There's no evidence to suggest liquidation is in the cards for Delta. The same was said about United and now they've posted a $100 million profit two quarters in a row.

You are correct... but Delta is not "shedding" as much or as fast as UA did to warn off liquidation. Delta's bankruptcy is far worse than UA had twice.

[urbanflyer]

The American public needs to be weened from crazy, money-losing fares such as $139 RT FLL-LGA and the way to do that is less competition. Radical yes, but what the consumer is saving on the front end is being paid with interest through our collective rear ends. We are paying in real dollars, fares that are less than they were in 1970s.

So many have been saying this for years but nothing is ever done about it. Consumers don't make the connection between taxpayer funding of airline employee retirement and the "freedom" to pay what amount to airborne bus fares that never reflect the true cost of providing the service.

[Sulley]

But I like my $87 (with taxes) roundtrip fares between BUF and MCO :(

Selfish, yes... and I understand the consequences, but I love my short term gains!

[urbanflyer]

^
So do the airline CEOs who come in for a brief stint, drive the company into the ground, and depart with a golden parachute.

[JMedwick]

Based on the above comments, it seems clear that the biggest looser in such a deal would be CLT, which would be dehubed and because of the overlap, might loose many flights on US Airways, other than flights to a few locations and other US airways hubs. Given the overlap on the east coast, I wonder whether Philly has anything to worry about the JFK routes for Delta. Loosing a hub can be a big blow, especialy if a city is not large enough to demand lots of O&D service (see Pitt).

[Grego43]

The upshot for a de-hubbing of a facility such as CVG or CLT would be the likely influx of LCCs...(ie PIT). I fly to CVG quite a bit and the fares are outrageous due to Delta's virtual stranglehold. PIT has enjoyed lower fares and an increasing O&D as more discounters enter the market...about the only pluses to US's draw down.

[atlantaguy]

Delta execs: Stand-alone plan is better

By RUSSELL GRANTHAM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 11/17/06

In the first interview since US Airways landed a surprise $8 billion takeover bid on Delta Air Lines, the Atlanta carrier's financial chief presented its case for staying independent.

Delta Chief Financial Officer Ed Bastian said Friday that the merger is likely to delay its emergence from bankruptcy "many months," and won't survive antitrust concerns that federal regulators are likely to raise. And if the deal were to be approved, he said, thousands of Delta jobs would be lost.

He said Delta's management plans to present a business plan next month that will result in higher long-term value for creditors, who will effectively have veto power over whatever plan Delta follows to emerge from Chapter 11.

"I don't believe that they'll get a bigger payday [from the proposed merger]. I think that that payday will be with the Delta stand-alone proposal, given what I know," said Bastian.

He argued US Airways' proposal would delay Delta's emergence from bankruptcy, raising the risk that high fuel costs or other events could hurt operations.

"When you're sitting on that level of risk in this industry, and you're close to receiving the value in your hand, why would you opt to basically take a lap and wait another year or more for that value to be received?" asked Bastian. "I think that's a big risk factor."

[PHX31]

/\ What else would you expect him to say?

[atlantaguy]

Not much - just thought it would be interesting to share.

This is FAR from over. Expect all kinds of counter-proposals. I wouldn't be surprised if some come up over the weekend, but I have a feeliing this is just the beginning of a very interesting winter.

For anyone that's really into this type of thing, you may want to check out the forums at airliners.net - all sorts of wild & crazy scenarios are playing out there on the Civil Aviation forum.

[Lexy]

Be warned though, Airliners.net is sometimes full of bull and can cause one to lose their sight for a period of time. Some of the crap that gets plastered on their site is almost borderline stand-up comedy.

[urbanflyer]

^
Seriously. A.net is a mix of industry insiders and armchair buffoons and the latter occupy a great deal of the overall posting action. :rolleyes:

[john3eblover]

whatever, airliners.net is amazing