|
You forget who is negotiating for us. People who dislike this country and think we are too powerful and have too much of the world's resources. I wouldn't put too much stock in our government negotiators pushing back against the Japanese.
|
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 714727)
That's not the Japanese government goal. NRT slots can currently be easily obtained. The airport is suffering a loss of traffic. If/when the economy recovers, that shouldn't be true. They're trying to make sure that our absolute number of slots in NRT is frozen, while the total number of available slots is increased, thereby diluting our market share. Couple that with the inability to get commercially viable slots into Haneda and you get tremendous yield pressure, especially for Asia connecting traffic (interport).
As you state, there are alternatives, but they are all more costly and risky. Yes, the alternatives are more risky, but we both need to realize that this is only one piece to the DAL puzzle and we cannot only focus on it, create fear for the whole based on this part. We will be successful in Asia, even if we have to take a few steps back. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 714728)
I'd like to hear some analysis on getting us off Travelocity, Orbitz and the other third party sales channels. Everywhere I go people complain to me about bag fees, which were driven by the fight to get to the top of the page on search engines. Southwest has built real loyalty by not nickel and diming revenue from the back end of the sale. Obviously we need Haneda access. I just hope what we have to pay for it pays us back. |
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 714732)
You forget who is negotiating for us. People who dislike this country and think we are too powerful and have too much of the world's resources. I wouldn't put too much stock in our government negotiators pushing back against the Japanese.
|
Lets also not forget that the Japanese were looking for some entity to come in and save them from propping up JAL. We offer a great option. The Japanese are tough businessmen, but in the end they are fair if you are fair.
The simple fact is both parties need each other. That is how mutually beneficial deals come to fruition! |
Heyas,
Of course, the piece we are missing is AMRs counter proposal. If the lose this, the lose Asia. They could: 1) Go "all in" to make sure they are the winner. 2) Run the price so far up the deal is untenable for DAL. 3) Lose, and plot their revenge. Think Alaska. Without the Alaska feed, most of the west coast cities cannot support the large international gateways DAL has in mind. It would be an abject lesson to DAL why you don't outsource your mission critical items. Nu |
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 714732)
You forget who is negotiating for us. People who dislike this country and think we are too powerful and have too much of the world's resources. I wouldn't put too much stock in our government negotiators pushing back against the Japanese.
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 714749)
Heyas,
Of course, the piece we are missing is AMRs counter proposal. If the lose this, the lose Asia. They could: 1) Go "all in" to make sure they are the winner. 2) Run the price so far up the deal is untenable for DAL. 3) Lose, and plot their revenge. Think Alaska. Without the Alaska feed, most of the west coast cities cannot support the large international gateways DAL has in mind. It would be an abject lesson to DAL why you don't outsource your mission critical items. Nu And thats the extent of my knowledge on dogfighting. |
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 714749)
Heyas,
Of course, the piece we are missing is AMRs counter proposal. If the lose this, the lose Asia. They could: 1) Go "all in" to make sure they are the winner. 2) Run the price so far up the deal is untenable for DAL. 3) Lose, and plot their revenge. Think Alaska. Without the Alaska feed, most of the west coast cities cannot support the large international gateways DAL has in mind. It would be an abject lesson to DAL why you don't outsource your mission critical items. Nu I have long stated that we should not open up parts of our operation to external corporate forces. Us winning on the JAL deal, or us losing AS would be a good example. |
There's an "issue" with AMR's financing proposal that would give me great concern, if I were JAL.
Specifically, A great deal of the "AMR" investment funding comes from Texas Pacific Group (TPG) which [I believe] is still run by David Bonderman. Mr. Bonderman is not a passive investor and if he puts money into a company the terms are typically structured to his advantage. He made a ton of money investing in Continental a number of years ago. More recently he "screwed the pooch" by putting something like $1.35 billion into Washington Mutual shortly before it went bust and was bought by JP Morgan/ Chase. I think the Japanese are generally pretty shrewd folks. Would they really want to get in bed with TPG? |
Originally Posted by Wasatch Phantom
(Post 714755)
There's an "issue" with AMR's financing proposal that would give me great concern, if I were JAL.
Specifically, A great deal of the "AMR" investment funding comes from Texas Pacific Group (TPG) which [I believe] is still run by David Bonderman. Mr. Bonderman is not a passive investor and if he puts money into a company the terms are typically structured to his advantage. He made a ton of money investing in Continental a number of years ago. More recently he "screwed the pooch" by putting something like $1.35 billion into Washington Mutual shortly before it went bust and was bought by JP Morgan/ Chase. I think the Japanese are generally pretty shrewd folks. Would they really want to get in bed with TPG? You are correct. They know TPG. It was one of the point my buddies at Oak Hill made to me last week. Time to work on plan B http://www.iainandjane.com/images/wo...ci/waa_ben.jpg |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:35 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands