Originally Posted by elmetal

Sure.


spirit stock is at $20.

Even if you had 1000 shares at $80, you could DCA down below 30 and there you go, you made money. not a lot, but you made money.

The point is, one is an actually good product, the other is not. and we all know what NK/F9 will be like as a passenger.

Originally Posted by BeatNavy

A hold/sell decision on a stock you own should have nothing to do with your purchase price…it’s all about current and future value (unless of course you’re doing something for tax purposes like tax loss harvesting). If you base your own current value (what you think it’s worth or could get back to) based off previous values, you’re doing it wrong. Today’s value (and your hopefully educated guess as to its future value) has nothing to do with its past value. When financial experts (investment banks, analysts, private equity firms, etc) run models for valuation for values/future values on companies, nowhere in their models is a past value of the company (ie the value of what you bought it for at any point in time). Past performance is not indicative of future results…

If you think a forced sale of a stock you own at a 50% premium to its current price is a bad deal because you bought it at a 69% premium to its current price, I suggest something like this https://www.amazon.com/Investing-Dum.../dp/1118884922, or probably just get a financial advisor/consultant.

If you think the value of the stock you own will go up, and you have valid reasons to think that (solid DD, financial models showing solid future value, etc), that’s a valid reason to hold and hope for a different outcome. In this case, if you think SAVE+ULCC will appreciate more than 50% in the time it takes B6+NK regulatory approval to pass, that’s a valid reason to hold and hope B6 doesn’t happen (strictly speaking from a shareholder perspective). If you think it’ll go up because you bought it at a higher price, while humorous, it’s not sound investing strategy. Most professional investors aren’t planning on a 50% ROI in a 12-18 month timeframe. So if that opportunity comes for a premium like that, most tend to take it, unless there are compelling reasons not to. So far, as someone who doesn’t really care for the deal from a personal standpoint, I haven’t seen much from Ted that constitutes “compelling.” But I guess we will see what happens June 10th.

Originally Posted by turbojet28

If Bill Franke had an inclination that the institutional shareholders weren’t on board with this deal, common sense would say that he would’ve already adjusted his offer by upping the cash portion, adding a reverse termination-fee, or both. The fact that he has been completely silent seems to say that he either is very confident in this deal winning or that he doesn’t really care if it falls apart. I find the latter option a little unlikely.

Originally Posted by Stayontarget

I would agree and my next post related did have tax loss harvesting involved. However, I still believe the LCC model does have greater potential for future gains. Many disagree and that’s okay.



But speaking from personal experience the two largest reasons I chose a flight are frequency and price. Well besides actually serves the destination but…duh. LCC have price generally sorted out, so now all I need is more frequency. The merger has a good potential to create that or at least accelerate that. With JetBlue I just see another airline trying to be a 4th legacy and not really standing out from their competition. I hope they succeed since more competition is good but I would prefer the LCC model to succeed and grow.

Originally Posted by Stayontarget

I don’t work at Spirit. I’m aware of the math and that wasn’t my point. My point that as a shareholder, why should I consider JetBlues offer superior? In my case it’s not. I would just rather have the shares converted to Frontier stock as, while never a guarantee, it’s probably going to increase over time. Sssssynergy for those that have been easily triggered haha. Even if I do decided to sell at a loss in the future it will be on my terms and to my tax advantage when I decide.

Originally Posted by elmetal

Why would merging increase frequency? If they wanted frequency we'd have started adding frequency 80 planes ago. They have zero intention of a southwest style frequency structure.

Frontier is actually worse in this regard. The overwhelming majority of their routes are 3-5x a week or once a day..

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Stayontarget

While I can’t for sure, I’m guessing the model begins to change if the fleet is almost instantly doubled and then doubles again in 10 years. I just don’t see 3000 individual city pairings each day.

Originally Posted by elmetal

We've all almost doubled in the past 5 years. We have close to zero extra frequency anywhere.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by elmetal

We've all almost doubled in the past 5 years. We have close to zero extra frequency anywhere.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk