PDA

View Full Version : Airline Mergers


sterlingice
04-16-2008, 09:43 AM
Ok, so we all know Delta and Northwest merged and Continental and United are talking about it. But how is this getting past anti-trust restrictions? I know, Dubya isn't exactly Teddy Roosevelt but, c'mon.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080415/bs_nm/airlines_continental_dc_3


Continental and United ready if others merge: sources

<!-- END HEADLINE --> <!-- BEGIN STORY BODY --> Continental and United ready if others merge: sources

By Jui Chakravorty DasMon Apr 14, 8:23 PM ET

Continental Airlines (CAL.N) and United Airlines (UAUA.O) have laid most of the groundwork for a merger, two people briefed on the matter said, and could have a deal ready "pretty quickly" if Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines announce a tie-up, one of them said.

Continental, which has said it would prefer to remain independent unless the competitive landscape changes, plans to get back to the negotiating table with United if a merger between Delta (DAL.N) and Northwest (NWA.N) is announced, both sources said.

Both the people requested not to be identified because of the confidential nature of the talks.

A Delta-Northwest merger, expected to be announced late Monday or Tuesday, would free Continental to pursue a merger with United because Northwest would forfeit a special "golden share" that gives it effective veto power over a Continental transaction.

Executives have said that if Northwest agrees to a deal, Continental can buy back that blocking share for $100.

Pilots unions at United and Continental have also held merger-related discussions, and merging those two work forces is not likely to be as major a hurdle as it has been with Delta and Northwest, the two sources said.

Continental's merger talks with United had stalled when the Delta-Northwest talks sputtered because the carriers' pilots unions at those two airlines could not agree on how to integrate seniority in a combined work force.

Continental Chief Executive Larry Kellner said on a conference call in January: "We like our position as the industry stands today but I suspect if you look forward, things will change."

"If we see something or hear something, we won't hesitate to act aggressively," he added.

UAL Chief Executive Glenn Tilton has been a proponent of airline consolidation for the past three years, saying the U.S. industry is too fragmented to compete effectively on a global level.

Continental was not immediately reachable for comment while United declined to comment.

A merger between United and Continental, the second and fourth-largest U.S. airlines respectively, would surpass a Delta-Northwest combination as the world's largest carrier.

After racking up $35 billion in losses and finally emerging from a five-year slump in 2006, U.S. airlines are hoping that mergers could lead to higher fares as combined carriers reduce flights and use their increased market power to raise prices.

The airlines also face a renewed sense of urgency to consolidate and cut costs amid skyrocketing fuel prices, a weak economy and a growing competitive threat from European carriers as trade barriers fall on trans-Atlantic travel.

Continental, whose shares closed at $21.89 on the New York Stock Exchange, has a market cap of $2.13 billion.

United Airlines, which closed at $23.61 on Nasdaq, has a market cap $2.72 billion.

Each of the airline stocks rose about 2 percent in post-market trade.

UBS analyst Kevin Crissey said in a report earlier this month: "We believe if Delta and Northwest get together, United and Continental will follow shortly thereafter."

"Additionally, we expect that Continental would receive a premium in such a deal."

(Reporting by Jui Chakravorty; Editing by Tim Dobbyn, Richard Chang)


I mean, for the love of God, the bolded section says "we're going to consolidate the market so we can charge you more, blatantly making things worse for consumers.

SI

Coffee Warlord
04-16-2008, 10:59 AM
I mean, for the love of God, the bolded section says "we're going to consolidate the market so we can charge you more, blatantly making things worse for consumers.

Causing more people to ditch those flights and fly Southwest / other low cost carriers. In turn causing even more trouble with airlines.

The capacity of airlines to fuck up their services never ceases to amaze me. It oftentimes simply looks like they WANT to piss off their customers.

miked
04-16-2008, 11:06 AM
Well, I'm not sure how airlines can sustain without doing something. Oil is at $115/barrel and rising. Delta is filling planes, running lots of new routes (including China) and is still losing money. It's kind of funny considering how much airline tickets cost that people would complain about it going 10% (which on lots of fares is like 20-30). I mean, you can fly from NY to ATL for like $200, not even close to breaking even for most airlines. The only reason Southwest and Jetblue did so well for a while was because of fuel hedges and leased airplanes. Once the hedges are done and they have to pay for their planes, they will have issues too (look at ATA).

Consolidation isn't bad, overconsolidation is. Even with a DAL/NW and CON/USA merger, you still have like 8+ carriers to choose from for lots of popular destinations.

Honolulu_Blue
04-16-2008, 11:24 AM
After racking up $35 billion in losses and finally emerging from a five-year slump in 2006, U.S. airlines are hoping that mergers could lead to higher fares as combined carriers reduce flights and use their increased market power to raise prices.

Interesting quote. That's mergers 101 right there. A merger is considered to "substantially lessen competition" if the combined entity has market power. Market power is defined as the ability to lower output and increase prices.

Traditionally, antitrust regulators have examined airline mergers on "city-pairs", Detroit-to-Houston, for example, being a "separate market". The DOJ would look at what percentage of flights (or of the market) between those two cities the combined airline will have. Based on what I have read the proposed Delta/Northwest merger may only raise concerns in about 12-14 city pairs.

Based on what little I know, I think the Delta/Northwest merger, from an antitrust perspective, will pass muster. They have a bunch of other issues, mainly labor/union issues, that are likely to cause more significant heartburn.

With each airline merger, however, any subsequent merger will face more scrutiny and will be harder to clear. If the Northwest/Delta merger causes a city pair to go from 4 airlines to 3, that's much easier, than going from a 3 to a 2.

The airlines will likely use a version of the "failing firm" defense, which argues that "but for" this merger, one of the two airlines would be driven out of business, which would be even worse for consumers than if there was a merger. The airlines will certainly point to the recent rash of smaller/regional carriers that have recently folded.

Another argument against these mergers, other than the obvious, lower output, higher prices, reduced quality of service, would be that the mergers could raise "barriers to entry", thereby making it harder for low cost carriers to break into markets (city pairs) or enter the industry at all.

Cringer
04-16-2008, 12:10 PM
The government is too busy worrying about a possible monopoly by a Sirius-XM merger to pay attention to stupid crap like airlines or oil companies.

Honolulu_Blue
04-16-2008, 12:21 PM
The government is too busy worrying about a possible monopoly by a Sirius-XM merger to pay attention to stupid crap like airlines or oil companies.

The DOJ already cleared that one. It's with the FCC now, which doesn't deal with airlines. That'd be the FAA.

cartman
04-16-2008, 12:28 PM
The DOJ already cleared that one. It's with the FCC now, which doesn't deal with airlines. That'd be the FAA.

So the FCC won't let me be
or let me be me, so let me see
They try to shut me down on MTV
But it feels so empty, without me

Cringer
04-16-2008, 12:34 PM
The DOJ already cleared that one. It's with the FCC now, which doesn't deal with airlines. That'd be the FAA.

Yes, and I am sure there are still congressmen running around with money in their pockets trying to prevent it still.

The airlines though, they will be merged and everything fine and dandy in under 6 months from announcement I am sure.

lordscarlet
04-16-2008, 12:43 PM
I hope this brings down the coast of railroad travel. :)

albionmoonlight
04-16-2008, 12:47 PM
I am amazed at how the ability to affordably get from one end of the country to the other in under 12 hours is considered standard these days.

rkmsuf
04-16-2008, 12:48 PM
I am amazed at how the ability to affordably get from one end of the country to the other in under 12 hours is considered standard these days.

spoiled brats

lordscarlet
04-16-2008, 12:53 PM
I hope this brings down the coast of railroad travel. :)

I was serious, btw.

Logan
04-16-2008, 01:07 PM
I was serious, btw.

It is pretty crazy when you think about it. I take the Acela a decent amount between NYC and DC, but I'd never take it if it wasn't being expenses. Even the regional line is pretty pricey.

lordscarlet
04-16-2008, 01:21 PM
It is pretty crazy when you think about it. I take the Acela a decent amount between NYC and DC, but I'd never take it if it wasn't being expenses. Even the regional line is pretty pricey.

Yeah. The only way to go if you pay yourself is by bus. $40 roundtrip with wifi. But I still prefer the train. It's a nice trip. The regional to NYC is around $150 one way, I believe. May only be $100, though.

Coffee Warlord
04-16-2008, 01:21 PM
I hope this brings down the coast of railroad travel. :)

I just wish the railroad industry could figure a way to afford/pull off modernization to make it a viable means of transportation on longer hauls.

cartman
04-16-2008, 01:28 PM
I just wish the railroad industry could figure a way to afford/pull off modernization to make it a viable means of transportation on longer hauls.

They do have the capability today, it is just that the freight lines control the traffic, and passenger trains are usually low on the totem pole for track access. Having to wait for cargo trains to clear busy tracks is one of the main delays for Amtrak long haul service.

Honolulu_Blue
04-16-2008, 01:41 PM
They do have the capability today, it is just that the freight lines control the traffic, and passenger trains are usually low on the totem pole for track access. Having to wait for cargo trains to clear busy tracks is one of the main delays for Amtrak long haul service.

Exactly. The freigh lines control the traffic and own the actual rail lines. That said, the Federal Government could, and certainly should, do a lot more to subsidize train travel. They need to take some of that money used for highways and roads and use it on trains.

Quick, fast, and easy train travel is definitely one the things I miss most about living in Europe..

sterlingice
04-16-2008, 01:50 PM
I really liked traveling by train in Italy. So much better than plane but traveling by plane there was so much better than here, too, so it's not a fair comparison.

SI

Cringer
04-16-2008, 05:50 PM
I am amazed at how the ability to affordably get from one end of the country to the other in under 12 hours is considered standard these days.

Unless someone is paying for my plane ticket, I drive everywhere. It's kind of in my blood now though, the love to drive across the country. It's just much more enjoyable. More expensive now though then before.

ISiddiqui
04-16-2008, 06:00 PM
http://consumerist.com/assets/resources/2008/04/stateoftheair.jpg

finketr
04-28-2008, 01:42 PM
well, the united and continental merger looks off now.