14 replies to this topic

[Independence76]

Quote

US Airways lands $11 billion merger with American



DALLAS (AP) - US Airways CEO Doug Parker has landed the big merger he sought for years. Now the soon-to-be CEO of the new American Airlines has to make it work.

The fleet needs new planes and new paint. Frequent flier programs have to be combined. American's on-time performance must improve. And the airline needs to win back business travelers who have drifted to competitors. But Parker's nothing if not persistent.

After months of courting, the companies on Thursday announced an $11 billion merger that will turn American into the world's biggest airline, with 6,700 daily flights and annual revenue of roughly $40 billion. It's a coup for Parker, who runs the much-smaller US Airways Group Inc. and believes that mergers help airlines achieve higher revenue and consistent profits.

When the deal closes later this year, the four biggest U.S. airlines â€" American, United, Delta and Southwest â€" will all be the products of mergers that began in 2008. Those deals have helped the industry control seats, push fares higher and return to profitability. But it's not easy to stitch two airlines together.

Some of Parker's work has already been done. American parent AMR Corp. has cut costs and debt since it filed for bankruptcy protection in late 2011. Pilots from both airlines have agreed on steps that should make it easier to combine their groups under a single labor contract, a big hurdle in many airline mergers. But when the deal closes â€" expected by September as part of AMR's plan to emerge from bankruptcy protection â€" there will still plenty to do.

More of the article:
http://money.msn.com...&ocid=ansmony11

[Mumbles]

lol

[_NW_]

I for one, hope they stick with the current US Airways livery...

But since AA just spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on that crappy new scheme...   that's unlikely.

[Independence76]

_NW_, on 15 February 2013 - 05:16 AM, said:

But since AA just spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on that crappy new scheme...   that's unlikely.

Doug Parker showed some disinterest in the new branding at the employee Q&A yesterday morning. AA said the new colors would stay, but if Parker's taking over and he doesn't like it, then....

[_NW_]

One could only hope

[Independence76]

_NW_, on 15 February 2013 - 05:32 AM, said:

One could only hope

Some people on Airliners.net are warming up to the new logo, surprisingly. I tend to generalize those types of people as "optimists."

Point blank: the new livery and branding is awful and it appears FutureBrand did not understand the fragility of anything they were touching. It was not designed with an international state-of-mind and portions of it seem rushed. I get the feeling we're going to see Helvetica back in 10 or so years. This isn't a lasting livery. It's modernization trash with extremely little to offer. Someone in management thought they wanted a fresher logo on their desk, so they went ahead and paid useless money for one. Bankruptcy is even less of an excuse to do that sort of thing.

I'll also clarify for people: US Airways had absolutely no part in the branding process and I do not believe it was designed for a post-merger environment. The design aspects of a flag on the tail, in my opinion, was simply coincidental (not to mention awful) and did not affect the design firm's choice. At the time, merger talks were still going on and it was still fairly uncertain.

[_NW_]

The logo..  is meh.  The tail, will never grow on me.

[Kentaro]

Nothing particularly unique about the new livery, but I don't mind it. I think it's growing on me a little as well. Really not that bad (insert obama face)

[Gunfighter]

I think this was entirely a front for AA to attempt to dump their MD 80 series, and have someone with a little more financial sense, aka, US Airways, to bring about the phase in of the A320 order they just completed. With all that said and done, I don t think this was on anyone s part. Competition was the name of the game, especially after deregulation, and now with all these mergers going through its bringing about a new climate change in the aviation industry. Delta and Northwest was the first to go-my next bet-Alaska Southwest...see what they decide to do.

[LA_PHX]

^

Gunfighter, on 15 February 2013 - 06:53 PM, said:

I think this was entirely a front for AA to attempt to dump their MD 80 series, and have someone with a little more financial sense, aka, US Airways, to bring about the phase in of the A320 order they just completed.

Yes, let's declare bankruptcy, cause havoc within the company, and initially resist a takeover just to get rid of our MDs. Doug Parker has been looking for a merger partner for US Airways for some time now. With AA going through bankruptcy and the unions willing to deal with him, he found his partner.

Quote

With all that said and done, I don t think this was on anyone s part. Competition was the name of the game, especially after deregulation, and now with all these mergers going through its bringing about a new climate change in the aviation industry. Delta and Northwest was the first to go-my next bet-Alaska Southwest...see what they decide to do.

I wouldn't expect another large merger at this point. With this last merger, the industry is coming into one of its most stable periods in quite some time. And what exactly would the benefit be to Southwest or Alaska in a merger between the two?

[Independence76]

Gunfighter, on 15 February 2013 - 06:53 PM, said:

Delta and Northwest was the first to go-my next bet-Alaska Southwest...see what they decide to do.

Don't count on it for at least another 20 years. AS is very happy where they are and SW is fairly happy as well (they're still slow to accept the AirTran merger, so another similar carrier merging with them would be a nightmare for them).

Edited by Independence76, 16 February 2013 - 12:14 AM.

[Mohammad]

I think American Airlines's new livery is a nice change. The company had the same livery for decades, it was about time they changed it. It's beginning to grow on me. The main body of the aircraft is kept simple and clean-looking. The American flag in the tail is a nice patriotic feature in my opinion. It looks symbolic and it has that "all-American" look. And what a coincidence that AA and US merge now, just after AA's new livery was unveiled and everyone noted how the tail looks like a modification of the US Airways tail livery. Can't say it wasn't taken into consideration when they were designing the new look, they probably knew the merger would happen at some point.

When United and Continental first merged, I hated United's adaptation of Continental's livery. But now that it grew on me, it actually looks much better than UA's previous liveries (my opinion ofcourse).

[LA_PHX]

Mohammad, on 24 February 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

When United and Continental first merged, I hated United's adaptation of Continental's livery. But now that it grew on me, it actually looks much better than UA's previous liveries (my opinion ofcourse).

I don't mind the body of the aircraft all that much but I really miss seeing these tails:

[pieterjan456]

Yup me too LX
And I think the new AA livery will need time, no matter how old their bare metal livery was, i really liked it!

[UnitedGuy]

pieterjan456, on 24 February 2013 - 03:03 PM, said:

Yup me too LX
And I think the new AA livery will need time, no matter how old their bare metal livery was, i really liked it!

Same here, I LOVED the bare metal. However, as more planes are painted in the new colors, the livery grows on me even more. The same thing happened with the new United livery. Sure, I miss the tulip, but now that the new scheme is pretty much fully implemeted, I don't mind it at all!