![]() |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 792431)
Shouldn't be too big an obstacle to overcome with the South America flying we are doing now.
Hearing 757's to Hawaii rather than 737's to Guam, who knows? More 747 rumors always quashed with 747's going to storage. Are we still getting the Tupperware 767? |
They have also been talking about HNL to mainland China for some time as well. If they hit "Go" on those flights a hub of some sort would be the next logical step.
I will go as far to say that if Hawaiian gets a HND slot, it is probably worth the acquisition. |
Satchip;
I agree that it "appears" that AMR is the most favored son given their ORD focus, but the fat lady has not sung. If they actually make us divest slots in the LCC slot swap, then they will have to make them do so as well. If they even try to ramrod that through without a slot divestiture, many will cry foul! |
What are all of those people doing in the C141 cockpit? :D
Whereas I see a mess of an SLI for any LCC tie up, for JB to tie up with AMR even with a mostly stapled SLI that could still be a big win for JB pilots, if there are fences, given how many pilots will retire at AMR. Insane, AMR may go 20 years without hiring. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 792515)
Satchip;
If they even try to ramrod that through without a slot divestiture, many will cry foul! |
Rehash: mid January 08 NWA and DAL begin merger talks. April 08 we announce we will merge. August 08 the EU signs off. end of October 08 the DOJ approves it. Jan 1, 2010 we finally begin operating on SOC.
All that to say, that was an extremely fast merger with basically 6 months from announcement to DOJ approval and we were the only operation seeking such DOJ approval. I think what ACL mentioned about RA saying it was good to be the first out of the gate is really going to hold true given when we merged there were 6 legacy carriers and now just 5, to merge again takes it to 4. For AMR to merge with JB means they own JFK almost outright not to mention AMR just got their JA with BA. I don’t think one of those mergers or two will occur at the speed we did it. This government might want to be in the business of picking winners but it is also populist and may push all of this to the side until post election because none of it will be viewed as consumer friendly. Post election you will, according to most, see some type of split government which may calm anxiety about what the CBO called yesterday an unsustainable US fiscal policy. That might lift the markets somewhat in 2011 and we’ll be in position to win while others are wrestling. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 792520)
Whereas I see a mess of an SLI for any LCC tie up, for JB to tie up with AMR even with a mostly stapled SLI that could still be a big win for JB pilots, if there are fences, given how many pilots will retire at AMR. Insane, AMR may go 20 years without hiring.
|
Originally Posted by sinca3
(Post 792521)
Crying foul won't change a thing...
Also remember that DAL is ALPA-AFL-CIO and AMR is APA, and Jet Blue is nada. Labor has leverage and they will use it. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 792523)
Rehash: mid January 08 NWA and DAL begin merger talks. April 08 we announce we will merge. August 08 the EU signs off. end of October 08 the DOJ approves it. Jan 1, 2010 we finally begin operating on SOC.
All that to say, that was an extremely fast merger with basically 6 months from announcement to DOJ approval and we were the only operation seeking such DOJ approval. I think what ACL mentioned about RA saying it was good to be the first out of the gate is really going to hold true given when we merged there were 6 legacy carriers and now just 5, to merge again takes it to 4. For AMR to merge with JB means they own JFK almost outright not to mention AMR just got their JA with BA. I don’t think one of those mergers or two will occur at the speed we did it. This government might want to be in the business of picking winners but it is also populist and may push all of this to the side until post election because none of it will be viewed as consumer friendly. Post election you will, according to most, see some type of split government which may calm anxiety about what the CBO called yesterday an unsustainable US fiscal policy. That might lift the markets somewhat in 2011 and we’ll be in position to win while others are wrestling. |
Originally Posted by Waves
(Post 792508)
I'm not up on pensions like you are, but I'm not sure you are correct about DAL not being legally able to end pensions without being in BK. What law is forcing them to fund a pension plan for it's non-contract employees? Just wondering. As far as I know it is not mandatory for a company to have or continue to have a pension fund. What say you?
It's not mandatory that a company has a defined benefit pension plan. It is mandatory, with minor and rare exceptions, that once a company has a plan it must be funded in accordance with the law, and that earned qualified benefits cannot be reduced as long as the plan is in existence. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:28 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands