Now that the APA has thrown its temper tantrum, let’s take a guess at where things go for American Airlines for a while.   I think that the APFA will see their membership vote no to their contract because, at the end of the day, having a similar temper tantrum will feel more satisfying.  This won’t matter because I think the bankruptcy court is going to give AA exactly what it wants:  imposed terms on both the APA and APFA.

It’s possible the court will wait for the APFA vote and the judge has shown previous interest in seeing rational agreements happen but . . . the APA vote is a signal to the court and judges are able to be emotional as well.  I think AA gets terms imposed and I think Tom Horton gets to chuckle at the unions.  He provoked them and got what he wants.

(Update:  The court did delay its ruling on the APFA contract.  I expect the APFA will also turn down its last offer.)

US Airways and Doug Parker now have a much more difficult uphill battle to pursue a merger.  The pilots just damaged his credibility badly and markets will take notice.  He won’t have influence through the unions because they are giving up a voice at the table as creditors.  They’ve lost some credibility in the PR wars going on and Tom Horton wins this round.  It isn’t good.

A merger still is quite possible and still the most sensible thing to do.  In some ways, it’s even smarter to do it in bankruptcy as opposed to after AA’s exit.  There are decisions that can be made that are easier to execute in bankruptcy as opposed to out of bankruptcy.  Creditors (future shareholders) are more willing to accept those decisions in bankruptcy than outside of it.   A merged company before bankruptcy exit probably sees a little less shareholder value at the exit but probably sees much more value created for shareholders after 3 to 5 years.  If (potential) shareholders are willing to see the long term, this deal makes sense.

But Doug Parker & company now have to go to work hard on bondholders and influential members of the unsecured creditors committee.  They have to present a sterling and realistic business case.  All their ducks need to be lined up perfectly and even with that, one more thing has to happen:

The current AA executive team has to make a mistake.  It doesn’t have to be a very big one but it needs to be enough to cause some to question their ability to deliver on a stand-alone plan.   Another quarterly loss could do it.  Possibly declining revenues might as well.  Delta and United could do US Airways a favor and engage in predatory behavior against AA in its cornerstone markets and that would certainly do it.

A US Airways / AA merger makes huge sense when it comes to competing with UA and Delta.  Those two have proven that their scale is helping them in ways that AA can’t experience.  It is crystal clear that both airlines need each other in the future.

And if you don’t think this fight is about who runs the company, you are kidding yourself.  It really does boil down to that and, in a way, you want that kind of discussion to happen.  Doug Parker is seen as having “failed” at 3 attempts to merge with Delta, UA and Continental.  I would argue that he didn’t “fail” but that marriages with those airlines were a bit less optimal than they would have been with AA.  The real truth is that if anyone is the “ugly chick” in the airline world for the past 5 years, it’s been AA, not US Airways.

After all, it’s AA that has lost $10 Billion in 10 years, not US Airways.  It’s AA that has refused to address its costs and revenues, not US Airways.   It is AA who has an atrocious relationship with its unions, not US Airways.  US Airways’ union problems are a product of the unions, not management.  And the circumstances under which those problems occurred can’t happen again because of new federal laws.

I’ll point out that US Airways not only didn’t like AA for a merger partner for 6 years, it went to the very best prospects over and over again.  That wasn’t dumb, that was smart.  They didn’t lose because they were bad ideas, they lost those merger attempts because their counterparts wanted to remain in charge at those airlines.

You see, those executives didn’t fear US Airways.  They feared Doug Parker and the reason they fear Doug Parker and his team is that they are aggressive, smart and overperform.  There is firm, consistent evidence of that.  Parker & company can make quite a few other executive teams look stupid and no one wants to look stupid.

So, I think Parker will go radio silent for the next few weeks, await some outcomes in bankruptcy court and spend their time quietly working with bondholders and lenders to firm their business case for creditors and shareholders.  Tom Horton isn’t dumb but if I had to choose between him and Doug Parker to run a modern airline against the likes of Jeff Smisek and Richard Anderson, I’d choose Parker.  Parker is aggressive, hungry and willing to think outside the box when it comes to an airline.  Horton hasn’t shown any inclination at adopting new behaviors in light of a changed industry.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

American Airlines, as a part of its commitment to investigate merger partners during their bankruptcy, has sent out its Non-Disclosure Agreement to all parties interested and confirms that US Airways is one of those parties.  The NDA was crafted by American Airlines and, supposedly, in consultation with creditors.

It’s the last part that has me wondering if US Airways CEO Doug Parker knew something about the NDA coming his way before it showed up.  Parker seemed to qualify what he thought US Airways support would be for the AA bankruptcy process based on what US Airways perceived the merger process to be at AA.  Parker indicated that he thought the NDA would be an indicator of just how “real” and fair AA would approach a merger.

And the fact that he was spinning that NDA 2 weeks ago makes me think that some parties on the unsecured creditors committee leaked details of that NDA to US Airways.  Details that might indicate that the merger process at AA is window dressing rather than real.

I suspect that there might be some kind of gag written into that NDA that prohibits anyone from talking about AA in any way.  and I’m not certain that that is going to fly with US Airways or anyone else for that matter.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

Doug Parker of US Airways came to the DFW area with AA union leaders in tow to do media interviews in both Dallas and Fort Worth and make the case for a merger between US Airways and American Airlines. I have to believe that American Airlines executives would have liked to have arranged for his plane into DFW to be diverted.

So far, AA hasn’t reached any agreements with either the pilots or flight attendants. The pilots refused to send the last and best offer to its membership and we’re not surprised whatsoever. At the end of the day, even with the contracts abrogated, AA *still* has to come to terms with its unions and it’s doing a very poor job of that. Even the bankruptcy judge has pointed out that both parties will be stuck with each other.

There is a perception in these struggles that unions are always about more money. It is often portrayed as more, More, MORE on the part of airline unions and the thing is . . . it isn’t true. More money is rarely the true issue with employees.

We hear over and over again that more money doesn’t make for a more happy employee or a more productive employee. It’s quality of life that does so. The secret to Southwest’s success with its employees and productivity isn’t the high wages (although they are very high), it’s the cooperation that exists between company and unions that provides high quality of life.

Furthermore, employees really do want to see their companies succeed. Company success provides more stability than anything else for employees. So when American Airlines union leaders start talking about how they recognize that concessions will be fairly drastic no matter what the bankruptcy outcome and that their chief focus is now on company viability, don’t go thinking that is a smokescreen.

It isn’t. American’s biggest problem with its labor is not money. It’s a loss of confidence. That loss of confidence didn’t happen over night and it didn’t happen accidentally. There is little leadership at AA and that has been true since Gerard Arpey took over many years ago. AA executives are very, very good at managing certain aspects of an airline. They manage finances and fleets very well. They can apply the science in running an airline with the best of people out there.

What they haven’t been able to do is inspire employees and bring about both revolutionary and evolutionary change. They haven’t been able to get their labor to start marching together and working together to compete. That’s leadership and leadership isn’t accomplished by cutting management ranks and consolidating responsibilities. It’s about finding one Great CEO who then has to find many great managers to execute a vision and leadership.

Believe it or not, US Airways and Doug Parker do this. They do it despite big problems with their pilots and flight attendants. Despite the bickering that exists in those two labor groups alone, they still operate an airline that has improved its quality in every area and dramatically so. They get employees to cooperate and to excel at their jobs. Look at the fantastic job done in cleaning up the problems in Philadelphia, for instance.

AA unions see that and recognize what’s been lacking in their own company for a long time: leadership.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
1 Comment »

US Airways CEO Doug Parker made a more detailed case for the US Airways / American Airlines merger they are pursuing at the annual US Airways shareholders meeting. Parker is in the position of having to denigrate the airline he wants to merge with somewhat in that he has to make a case that the stand-alone approach doesn’t bring profitability while the merger approach does.

Parker argues that the two airlines together can compete globally whereas the without US Airways, American Airlines doesn’t quite get there. The problem with that viewpoint is that he’s arguing scale at various point while also saying that US Airways doesn’t *need* a merger partner to continue its profitability. So why can’t American Airlines survive without US Airways?

The answer is that the two airlines both face long term profitability risk when facing Delta and United in the marketplace. US Airways *does* need a merger partner just as badly as American Airlines does. US Airways brings an executive team, a profitable operation and network that is complementary to American Airlines. AA brings scale to the table.

The labor issues still linger out there and while they aren’t as rosy as Parker makes them out to be for such a combined airline, they also aren’t as bad as some make them out to be as well. One thing US Airways has proven is that you can run a profitable airline with a fractured labor force. They’ve done it.

Labor unions, particularly pilots and flight attendants, have got to realize that their ability to survive is predicated on accepting new models of flying at the airlines. Preserving jobs is one mandate and that’s understandable. But all unions are going to have to accept the idea that preserving those jobs may require flying on smaller aircraft at vastly lower pay scales.

AA may do US Airways a favor in getting the labor contracts thrown out in court. If a merger goes through, a new contract could take several years to get negotiated into place while new, lower terms are imposed upon the unions which save the airlines money until that new contract is agreed upon. If the unions wants to realize salary improvements, they’ll have to cede some ground on productivity, health benefits and retirement funding. The sooner they do so, the sooner they realize real gains in overall compensation and particularly so on the US Airways side.

On a related note, the USAPA (US Airways pilots union) is now expressing moderated concern about a merger from their point of view. This isn’t surprising since AA pilots would dominate a combined airline from both a seniority and numbers perspective.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

There is a bit of hot talk again about more consolidation among US airlines as a result of American Airlines (AMR) President Tom Horton responding to a question about whether or not they included in such a consolidation.  He replied “Yes, it could.”

Does it mean they’re actively seeking a partner?  No, it does not.

I suspect that Horton’s response was more off the cuff than anything and simply not closing doors on the idea.  I do not think the current management team is seeking that kind of consolidation simply because it really does mean that many of them must go. 

Does it mean US Airways is a suitor to American Airlines?  No, it does not.  Even Doug Parker realizes that American Airlines tends to simply buy companies to shut them down from competing with AA.  He knows that the management isn’t about to give up the reins in a merger of equals and he knows that they are the one airline that has far bigger problems than US Airways.

Mind you, I continue to think that AA could stand a dose of US Airways management.  But a merger doesn’t begin to look attractive until there is a deal with the various labor groups and one can see what the financial impact is of those deals. 

In short, I don’t think there will be anymore consolidation in the near term (12 to 18 months).

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

At the beginning of each new year, I like to review what I thought would happen over the previous year and where I think things might go in the next year.  Let’s take a look.

North America:

I thought that not much would happen with AA labor in the past year and that pretty much was the case.  We’ve now seen several years of virtually no movement on solving these issues and I suspect that 2012 is the year that we see some kind of movement.  Look for the flight attendants to be the aggressive parties but the pilots to be the leaders.  All they need is a management group that wants to get something done.  This might end up being a make or break year for AA CEO Gerard Arpey and it could well be based on coming to an agreement with their labor groups.

United Airlines (and Continental) really didn’t go where I thought which was the status quo.  Instead, they merged and got going on getting somewhere and I like that.  I didn’t think they would merge and said so at the beginning of last year.  They proved me wrong.  However, I think CEO Jeff Smisek hasn’t considered carefully what he needs to get agreement on to move forward with each phase of the merger.  Look for this year to be good for United financially but bad on getting labor groups to agree on something.  I don’t think they are headed in the same direction as US Airways . . . yet.

This is a year for Delta Airlines to continue rationalizing its routes and aircraft.  They spent much of last year doing so and saw great financial results.  However, their goal of a sustained 10%+ profit margin makes me think we’re going to see some weird stuff out of them somewhere around the beginning of spring.  Probably in the form of new and innovative fees.

US Airways pretty much performed as predicted and I like how they are earning a profit but I hate how they still have no agreement with their flight crews that will permit them to quit operating two airlines in one.  If Doug Parker were to have a New Year’s Resolution, it should be to hire someone who’ll get that taken care of this year.

LCC(s) and Regionals:

I didn’t see a merger partner for Southwest except, perhaps, Sun Country.  Southwest proved me very wrong on that but I like the results.  One concern I have is the somewhat “plodding” progress towards consummating this merger into one company.  Does it indicate a plodding approach to actually consolidating operations?  One good thing is this brings the potential for greater international flights and, hey, Southwest, consider just keeping that Airtran reservations system and then spending some real time to pick or develop a new one that will last another 30 years.  You could do a lot worse.

Frontier/Republic is holding its own and I thought they would hold their own.  I think they’ll hold their own this year but I don’t see them merging with anyone and I don’t see them growing subtantially either.  Brian Bedford could prove me wrong and I hope he does.

Airtran made the Milwaukee market.  They deserve the credit for the huge growth that city has seen in air travel.  Southwest needs to commit to doing the same when they lead the game.

I slammed Virgin America a few times last year for appearing to be afraid to compete.  In particular, with American Airlines.  Finally, Virgin America made the plunge and came to DFW with flights from both San Francisco and Los Angeles.  I liked the move and I think there is room for them to grow here.  Time will tell.  One thing I’ve noticed so far:  AA doesn’t seem to be attacking them quite as badly as one would have expected from AA just 5 years ago.   Mr. Cush, let me suggest that you could really do well with some flights from DFW to the NYC area.  In particular, to Newark. 

Alaska Airlines has moved closer to Delta in the past year and that worries me a bit for Alaska.  They’ve generally been an airline willing to do a deal with anyone that made sense.  Now, they appear to be more and more the Delta lackey and that could harm them in the long run.  Another thing:  Alaska doesn’t have any more logicical merger partners that make sense.  American Airlines may have missed an opportunity here by not getting closer to Alaska instead of withdrawing more and more. 

I don’t think we’re going to see any big mergers in the US this year.  We might see one minor merger and that’s OK with us.  I think this year we’ll see legacy and SuperLegacy airlines attempt to earn as much money as they can to retire as much debt as they can and to bank as much war chest as they’re able.  However, I see competition heating up this summer and I think the LCC and new entrant carriers are going to put pressure on the legacy and SuperLegacy airlines in the form of adding capacity *and* routes.  The question is, will the industry discipline we’ve seen hold strong or will someone crack?

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

The Dallas Morning News Aviation Blog has this post HERE about analysts beginning to like the idea of a merger between American  Airlines and US Airways.   This marriage occurred to me back in April and you can read my post HERE.  Eric Torbensen at the Dallas Morning News thinks it is a terrible idea and I disagree.

The real reason to perhaps not do a merger between these two airlines is that American Airlines is terrible at mergers.  Their employees don’t embrace them and their executive corps approaches them like predators.  As a result, mergers at AA tend to be plain “consumption” rather than growth or partnership.

Now, if they could embrace a merger, I believe one such as this could be good for them.  First, a merger like this wouldn’t definitely not be sexy.  The sexy merger partners are now fully occupied and, frankly, there was perhaps just one that really would have qualified as sexy and doable for AA and that was Northwest Airlines.  They’re gone. But just because an AA / US Airways marriage isn’t the sexiest thing on the planet and just because it doesn’t necessarily bring the gains that another partner would have provided doesn’t mean that it doesn’t make financial sense. 

This one could.  Look at the route maps first.  US Airways offers a hub presence in two areas of the United States where AA is actually a bit weak.  Phoenix is a nice hub in the web and while it isn’t the strongest hub in the country, it does pretty well.  Yes, Southwest is there but guess what?  AA knows how to compete with Southwest. 

Charlotte is a nice Southeastern US hub that pvovides coverage in area that AA hasn’t gotten much traction.  AA tried having a hub in Raleigh (didn’t work) and has, from time to time, tried to expand Nashville.  It has Miami but that really is more of an international gateway city than it is a domestic hub.   So AA has presence in some weak(ish) focus cities for the SE that the Charlotte hub could change for them. 

So, in terms of a domestic network, it works.  It really is quite complementary to AA’s existing system.

There is some compatibility between the executive leadership of the two companies.  Doug Parker is a former AA manager, for example (and his wife still is an AA flight attendant) and some of the other executive staff has roots in AA as well.  Some that don’t are from Northwest and the cultures between Northwest and American Airlines aren’t dissimilar either. 

But let’s talk about the romantic international part of this.  No, US Airways doesn’t offer much to AA that it doesn’t already have.  It’s US Airways weakest area.  But it isn’t a money loser and there are some hidden benefits.  American can probably either A) redirect feed for those flights to one of their existing gateway cities or B) bolster the US Airways international product and make the US Airways international flights a bit more of a competitor.    The smart team would do both.

There is another benefit:  A more diversified fleet.  There is some overlap between the two companies (737, 757 and 767 equipment but the US Airways mainstay aircraft are Airbus aircraft now.  The A320 series aircraft could be useful to redeploy onto AA routes currently being served by the MD-80 fleet.  The Airbus A330 equipment could be redeployed to AA routes requiring a little more capacity than a 767 but which aren’t in need of a 777’s size or range.

Finally, such a merger would offer Oneworld domestic coverage in areas of the US where it is definitely weak.  The Oneworld alliance leans on AA only in the US and the other two alliances were bolstered by at least 2 airlines domestically.  This is a great opportunity to improve the Oneworld alliance. 

There is value in such a marriage.  The problem is, the people who know how to do this kind of marriage and make it work are at US Airways, not AA.  Doug Parker and Company understand the value of a union like this and know that you embrace the partners strength and use it.  Gerard Arpey and Company come from a school that is more about being a predator and consuming your competition without really embracing them as partners.  Since AA is so much larger than US Airways, it’s Arpey who would lead such a merger and I don’t think he’s the right one. 

Actually, I think Doug Parker could do fantastic things for AA.  If he can succeed with US Airway’s assets and weaknesses, he very likely could do wonders for an airline like AA with its resources.  But the AA board would have to want him and despite the recent flare ups against Arpey from analysts, Gerard Arpey still holds the full confidence of AA’s board of directos.  He isn’t going anywhere anytime soon.

Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline News, Airlines Alliances by ajax
2 Comments »

I just saw this report on a New York Times blog HERE today.  To summarize, supposedly people writing this blog have had it confirmed by insiders that United and US Airways are in merger talks.  Mind you, this wouldn’t be the first time this rumour has gone out although it has been some time since I’ve seen it.

 

It would make sense on several levels.  I’ve always thought that those two companies were more compatible than United and Continental both from a fleet point of view as well as a hub point of view.  It would definitely have some challenges in front of it as a merger in certain markets (Washington D.C. for instance) and labor issues that exist at both companies would kind of worry me about getting a real deal done.

 

I also wonder at who would run such a proposed entity.  Doug Parker of US Airways hasn’t shown much interest (if at all) in being second fiddle to anyone else in any proposed mergers.  United’s Glenn Tilton would likely be amenable to stepping up to a non-executive Chairman role or leaving altogether but there is a firm “second in command” at United in John Tague serving as President already and who likely expects to rise further with some real justification.  Since he and Mr. Parker are essentially contemporaries, they would definitely be in competition with each other to get the top executive job.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

There has been quite a lot of talk in the media about mergers recently.  Financial analysts are high on the idea and two airlines in particular have batted their eyes at potential suitors again. 

 

The CFOs of both United Airlines and US Airways have made recently comments stating they see more consolidation needed in the US airline industry and both said their airlines remain open to the idea of merging with someone.  No big surprise because both of those airlines are arguably the poorest performing legacy airlines in the US.   It’s also no big surprise that financial analysts now want to see another merger because they’ve seen the financial response to the Delta/Northwest merger. 

 

I don’t see it happening myself.  Neither US Airways nor United Airlines happen to be particularly attractive properties for another airline for one.  Neither American nor Continental really have anything to gain by mating up with those two for example.  Well, Continental could benefit from UA’s Chicago hub and its international business.  American already has a nicely balanced business and, more importantly, it needs to focus on its labor problems and get those solved first. 

 

Continental has done better by managing itself and its employees carefully and really isn’t inclined to pick up one of the two airlines with some of the worst labor relations around.  They’re kind of smart over at Continental.  Now that they’re in the Star Alliance, they have the best of both worlds going for them.

 

So why don’t UA and US join together?  Well, their hubs would fit together kind of nice and there would be some nice synergies to be realized in consoldating operations.  Even their fleets kind of work together.  However, UA is headed by Glenn Tilton who isn’t interested in giving up his position to someone else unless they, too, are an airline titan.  He’d benefit from a merger personally but his ego doesn’t seem to want to let him have UA be the “consumed” airline.  He wants to buy and consume someone else. 

 

US Airways is being managed by Doug Parker who has plenty on his hands already with a pilot group that is so dysfunctional that it would make wife-beating appear respectable and his airline is short cash anyway.  He’s got no money to buy anything with and his somewhat anemic route structure isn’t all that attractive to any other airline.  No one wants his labor problems at all. 

 

Besides, I”m not sure consolidation is what this industry needs.  A liquidation could actually be the better answer.  More on that tomorrow.

Filed under: Airlines Alliances by ajax
No Comments »

United Airlines, an airline that has offered spotty-at-best service for more than 10 years, seems to have the 9 lives of a cat to most people.  Unfortunately, of all the legacy airlines, it is the one that should have melted away some time ago.   It emerged from bankruptcy in 2006 after spending 3 years and over $300 million reorganizaing itself to operate in a world with $50 / barrel oil without a realistic plan to deal with contingencies.

 

The problem is, oil was already at $60 / barrel when it started fresh.  Since 2006, United has been the one airline that always manages to arrive to the party in rumpled clothes and only a $5 bill to pay the door charge.   Those rumpled clothes are an aging fleet (although all of the truly old Boeing 737s are now being withdrawn from service to cut capacity) of aircraft that do not match the interior quality or service level of most of its competitors. 

 

The management team, most importantly CEO Glenn Tilton, has spent more than 2 years maneuvering to merge this airline with another and, yet, has been rebuffed by all potential candidates such as Continental, Delta and US Airways.  Indeed, they took a particularly condescending attitude towards US Airways’ offer to explore mergers when Glenn Tilton implied that he and his team would remain in place and “mentor” the US Airways management team including Doug Parker. 

 

Say what you will about US Airways but it isn’t the company we knew in the 90’s or even 3 years ago.  Doug Parker and team are really America West and they’ve been better at executing to plan than virtually any other management team at a legacy airline.  If anything, Mr. Tilton would be well served by Mr. Parker’s mentorship. 

 

Now the marriage dance in airline mergers is essentially over.  Delta and Northwest are walking down the aisle, Continental has chosen to stand alone (wisely in my opinion) and American Airlines has decided to pursue trans-atlantic partnerships with British Airways and Iberia Airlines.  There is no one else left for United to pursue a merger of equals and they lack the cash and operating plan to purchase a smaller airline as well.  Indeed, Continental Airlines is joining the Star Alliance (of which United is a founding member) and that may benefit United but if they think they will remain the shining star in the US market for that alliance, they are sadly mistaken.

 

Continental’s management team is stable, smart and agile in this market.  They are uniformly the choice of airline among business travelers (and that is who pays the bills) and possess a young, modern, harmonized fleet of aircraft that serve the routes efficiently.  Continental has hubs that will serve that alliance well in both NYC, Houston and Cleveland and offer Star Alliance members excellent codeshare options throughout the United States.

 

United Airlines has a fleet of 747s that are some of the oldest -400 models and by all passenger accounts they are in desperate need of refurbishment (unplanned for 3 years and not recognized for another 2 years while United showed its legs to potential suitors).  They possess a large 777 fleet which, on the surface, would imply some modernity there.  However, about half of that fleet are early model “A” market 777s powered by the less powerful and efficient Pratt & Whitney engines.  No lip gloss found there.  The other half are 777-200ER models that would at first glance appear to be more modern intercontinental aircraft.  They aren’t, really.  They’re what Boeing originally referred to as “B” market 777s and, once again, they are powered by the less reliable and efficient Pratt & Whitney PW4000 series engines.  I would point out that every other operator of this aircraft in the US is using the more powerful and efficient Rolls Royce Trent or GE90 engines (American Airlines, Delta Airlines and Continental Airlines.)

 

Their 767 fleet, a large one comprised of 767-300ER models, shows the same flaws as their 777 fleet.  While some were built as recently as 2001, they are all powered, once again, by the less fuel efficient Pratt & Whitney engines.  I’m sure a theme is beginning to reveal itself here. 

 

The same also remains true for their 757 fleet in that they are powered by the lesser Pratt & Whitney engines while other airlines are utilizing the real rocket of that type, the Rolls Royce RB211 powered 757 that, with winglets, is capable of ETOPS trans-atlantic operations.

 

Ignoring the soon to be gone 737 fleet (which is old and dingy but not powered by Pratt & Whitney for once), the remaining aircraft are various Airbus A320 types.  While they are not old by airline standard, most are more than 10 years old and some are approaching 15 year of age now. 

 

An old airplane is not an unsafe one but, in United’s case, it is an uncomfortable one.  While other airlines have paid attention to maintenance, comfort and even tuning engines, United has spent its time navigating bankruptcy and its management team has bet their golden parachutes on a merger.  With no other really suitable partners, they are now faced with operating an airline that by most standards, is not competitive.  What’s worse, they have lost 2 years time that could have been spent executing a service plan that might work.

 

If the cost pressures airlines are facing continue for another year, they (United) will be faced with another potential bankruptcy and, this time, it should be a liquidation.  There is no argument for this airline continuing its operations under the present regime nor is there an argument for it continuing to operate simply to support air transportation in the United States or abroad.  There are plenty of air carriers that can take up the slack and operate more coherently than United.   In fact, the only part of United ceasingly to exist that I find distasteful is that it potentially offers American Airlines an even greater lock on Chicago’s O’Hare airport.  Since I experience that kind of fortress here in the DFW area, I know just how expensive that can be for a consumer.

 

Successful airlines share a few qualities that I’ve noticed over the years.  They generally possess a young, fuel efficient and harmonized fleet.  They buy the airplanes configured for performance on a variety of routes.  They have leadership rather than just executive management.  They focus on a clean, comfortable flight experienced that is defined by the service provided by its employees.  Such an airline also carefully watches its money and nurtures its finances to avoid running cash short on the wrong day.  It takes care of its employees not by offering the best salaries but by offering a living wage, a hospitable workplace and with fair treatment in both hard times and good.

 

That is the antithesis of United Airlines and, so, they go on the Death Watch.

Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline Service, Death Watch by ajax
No Comments »