You don't have to be a private company to merge with a private company. It is possible, but I think Franke wants his money, and a merger would probably not add too much value to the stock while diluting the total number of shares available. The big reason for stock added value is when both companies lower their costs due to synergies they separately didn't have, but I think there isn't much more room for lower costs at either company. I think F9 will IPO before they do anything like a merger. Time will tell.

I always thought it was the hostage and internment committee. Or does that depend on if it's a hostile takeover or not?

 

Totally right! This is why I don't see a Spirit-Frontier merger.

The private company statement I made was not in reference to a merger with Frontier as a requirement, but taking this company private and merging with Frontier could result in a bigger IPO, but would delay that IPO for years.

The only reason to really take this company private would be to consolidate the investment and reduce public scrutiny/reporting. The only other reason would be to accelerate growth without the restrictions we're seeing now in regards to negative analyst sentiment associated with increase capacity. But, that train has left the station, that growth has been announced.

 

3. A serious split between the MEC members as it relates to negotiations. As someone just reminded us, it's only been a few months since we had Council 18 attempt to remove elected Reps from 77 and 109 with Article VIII proceedings*. Does anyone think that it's all hugs and kisses within the MEC?

I'll give you 1, and 2, if you'll add in 3 Ram.

*All you haters can't deny this one. No matter how much you want to blame DFW and the BBQ club for all your problems, the facts are that the MEC implosion came from DTW toward LAS and FLL.

Edit: I'll add to your question of "who in their right mind". I'll say why? Public meetings are for show. The real deals are almost, if not, always made behind the scenes. Why call a meeting at National HQ Herndon, announce the meeting, deny members the ability to attend, etc, all for nothing more than an "update"? If the MEC is doing it's job, it's all already totally up to date. If it's not totally up to date, then maybe tar and feathers....strike the tar and feathers, that's another guys line....then maybe the torches and pitchforks are necessary.

 

Or what? Be left in "no mans land"?

If it's that important, let them MEC ratify. They all wanted, fought for, the positions of responsibility, let them have the cojones to make the tough decision.

 

Can someone PM a recent gouge?
Thanks in advance

 

Why do you think it's a good idea to MECRAT? No contract should ever be approved without the full (eligible) membership voting on it. Not for any reason. Ever.

 

Where did I say that it was a good idea to MEC ratify?

 

This is a pro MEC ratify statement. You called it important, and said for them to go ahead and make that tough decision because thats what their position entails.

I would never have said 'go ahead if they think it's important' if I was against it. I would have said "They better not be thinking about MEC ratify" if it was me. If that was not your intent, then I misread your post.

For the record, what do you think about MEC ratify? Are you for or against it?

 

Nice mec update. Special meeting just to get an update from nc? Why DC? Pick up the damn phone and have a conference call!

 

I thought someone would have jumped on the 'membership must vote on all issues effecting pay' resolution that I've heard about yet never made it into the policy manual.