AtlBill From United States, joined Jan 2006, 9 posts, RR: 0 Posted (2 years 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2961 times:
Well it should be a no surprise that Delta responded and said no to the USAir proposal. However, just a day after meeting with its creditors, Delta responded very strongly saying the deal was bad for both airlines, bad for customers, bad for employees, and would not pass Anti-trust muster. This suggests that the Delta Board has some very strong support from its creditors. Thoughts and what will USAir do now?
Dallasnewark From United States, joined Nov 2005, 353 posts, RR: 1 Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2883 times:
Delta has no say in this. They are in bankruptcy. It is up to the shareholders to decude Delta's fate. Let me ask you a question, if you're a shareholder of Delta would you rather lose money but let Delta exist as a standalone carrier or make money and let USAIR take over?
Okie73 From United States, joined Mar 2006, 363 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2846 times:
Quoting Dallasnewark (Reply 1): It is up to the shareholders to decude Delta's fate. Let me ask you a question, if you're a shareholder of Delta would you rather lose money but let Delta exist as a standalone carrier or make money and let USAIR take over?
actually the Delta shareholders have no say, its the Delta creditors who will decide.
Why do you think the creditors would lose money if Delta went alone. Keep in mind, half of what USAir is offering is in USAir stock. I can assure you, the deal will not allow the creditors to get the stock and immediately turn it over. Post merger that stock could stay the same, go up, go down. So really it boils down to this....does the merger make sense. If it does, post merger USAir stock will rise. If it does not, and the synergies, efficiencies, etc do not materialize, the USAir stock will go down.
Delta will be stronger as a stand alone airline. Delta stock will do better by itself than would the stock in the merged airline.
Dallasnewark From United States, joined Nov 2005, 353 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2824 times:
Quoting Okie73 (Reply 2): actually the Delta shareholders have no say, its the Delta creditors who will decide.
Why do you think the creditors would lose money if Delta went alone. Keep in mind, half of what USAir is offering is in USAir stock. I can assure you, the deal will not allow the creditors to get the stock and immediately turn it over. Post merger that stock could stay the same, go up, go down. So really it boils down to this....does the merger make sense. If it does, post merger USAir stock will rise. If it does not, and the synergies, efficiencies, etc do not materialize, the USAir stock will go down.
Delta will be stronger as a stand alone airline. Delta stock will do better by itself than would the stock in the merged airline.
I still think that some other airline will come in and outbid USAIR, this potential hostile takeover will open the floodgates for others. I read in WSJ the other day that United can come in and outbid USAIR.
As I mentioned on the other thread as far as US/HP stock is rising, it just means that DELTA is undervalued or being run inefficiently.
LAXdude1023 From United States, joined Sep 2006, 3209 posts, RR: 11 Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2819 times:
Quoting Dallasnewark (Reply 1): Delta has no say in this. They are in bankruptcy. It is up to the shareholders to decude Delta's fate. Let me ask you a question, if you're a shareholder of Delta would you rather lose money but let Delta exist as a standalone carrier or make money and let USAIR take over?
If they have convenced the shareholders and creditors that they are on the upswing, then they could very well let them exit as a standalone. Of course DL doesnt want the merger. Its a losing situation for just about everyone there. DL has and is makeing a lot of changes and is improving. They have a lot to look forward to, so it would surprise me if they get to exit stand alone. It WOULD surprise me if this merger goes through.
Supa7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2799 times:
Quoting Dallasnewark (Reply 3): As I mentioned on the other thread as far as US/HP stock is rising, it just means that DELTA is undervalued or being run inefficiently.
Neither one could hope to gain synergies unless they merge. If they do merge, higher value would result, according to the market. This is why the stock have risen for US anyway.
Today, if US and Delta collude over pricing, it would be illegal. But after a merger, it would be ok. Cooperatively operating aircraft, staffing and property of 2 airlines with 1 master goal results in tremendously friendlier game opportunities. Killing Comair gets some gains. And finally, removing Delta's overhead results in some gains.
So, if the government permits it, there are a number of gains that Delta could never achieve on its own. Maybe it would make good money, but would it be enough compared to the merger? To deny it one must say Doug Parker is full of beans. Maybe so, maybe not.
OttoPylit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2711 times:
Parker's lie is already coming apart. In the initial bid, he said that the new carrier would operate with 10% less capacity, but no job losses would be expected. Now, according to the article:"US Airways Chief Executive Officer Doug Parker said this week that he expects job reductions to be accomplished without furloughs."
Its either one, or the other, buddy.
Its obvious that the only thing Parker plans out of this is to eliminate one of their main competitors, plain and simple. Something that the OLD US Airways is very fond of doing(Piedmont, PSA, Allegheny, etc.). Its a good thing that Delta has looked through and picked apart his lies, which account for just about every "pro" he has mentioned.
Why would Parker do this? Why would you want to take over an airline while its in bankruptcy and have to pay off all that debt? Could it be that the airline's transformation plan is on track and you(USAir) are about to get your a$$ kicked when they emerge in 6 months or so?
Yea, go ahead Parker, and keep wishing, but you don't have a chance. Delta's largest creditors are already sticking with Delta, they've made that clear. Sorry.
Surfdog75 From United States, joined Nov 2005, 221 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2592 times:
One very convincing argument for the creditors could be the fact that a takeover will most likely greatly increase the length of the bankruptcy process while the combined carrier finds more cost savings.
This would also likely add more affected creditors than the original bankruptcy as more aircraft and facilities leases would have to be rejected to get to the supposed synergies that Parker describes.
The existing creditors would also wait much longer to receive payoff/DL stock since they won't get it until the bankruptcy is concluded.
Over 4 Billion of the 8 Billion in the proposed payoff is in LCC stock with is up dramatically since issued last Spring and currently has a P/E of over 125. Could drop dramatically at any time.
Maybe not such a sweet deal for the creditors as more of them will be added, more leases rejected, and they will have to wait much longer for the payout.
Stock in the new non-merged Delta on the other hand would probably be issued in the Spring to early Summer 2007 right before the busiest travel period.
Why wait much longer for your payout in this volatile industry for something that will be extremely dragged out, face tons of regulatory scrutiny, will face boat loads of integration issues, and may not see many of the synergies promised.
KSUpilot From United States, joined Jul 2006, 656 posts, RR: 2 Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2547 times:
Quoting AirEMS (Reply 10): But why is USAir looking to merge again after the HP merge?
Do they want to be the biggest?
Is it a matter of survival?
I began wondering this as well. This one isn't a matter of survival, as that was the purpose of the HP merger. The two would not exist today if it weren't for a merger. This is not the case of DL, so far they are showing that they will get back on their feet and be a strong airline.
I guess US is just getting greedy. They pulled of the HP merger, but HP was desperate. A classic airline like DL will not go so easily.
HPRamper From United States, joined May 2005, 2086 posts, RR: 6 Reply 12, posted (2 years 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2429 times:
Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 6): Parker's lie is already coming apart. In the initial bid, he said that the new carrier would operate with 10% less capacity, but no job losses would be expected.
Logically, I think it's within reason that if there were a merger, a bunch of pilots and senior employees in other areas would take their retirements early. Abracadabra....no layoffs needed.
Logically, I think it's within reason that if there were a merger, a bunch of pilots and senior employees in other areas would take their retirements early. Abracadabra....no layoffs needed.
Very possibly, but if you listened to his statement, he said the airline would operate with 10% less capacity, but there would be no job reductions. And now he is saying there will be. Looks like he just can't make up his mind.
DeltaGuy From United States, joined Sep 2001, 4095 posts, RR: 19 Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2308 times:
Quoting HPRamper (Reply 12): Logically, I think it's within reason that if there were a merger, a bunch of pilots and senior employees in other areas would take their retirements early. Abracadabra....no layoffs needed.
I don't buy it. For example, think of how many hundreds of FA's and pilots that are on furlough for both US and DL. Spending money and doing another risky airline graft is completely irresponsible for those US employes out of a job, and is also completely insulting to those DL employees who are also out of a job. If this goes through, there'll be plenty more on the furlough list.
Think about this- this psycho Parker would be CEO of the new company. From what I've seen, this guy is better off as a lower end manager than a CEO of a major airline. Jerry Grinstein may have made some stupid choices before, but he has alot more potentional than Parker does.
DeltaGuy
Barack Hussein Obama is his own terrorist sleeper cell
FlyPNS1 From United States, joined Nov 1999, 3095 posts, RR: 13 Reply 15, posted (2 years 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2299 times:
Quoting OttoPylit (Reply 13): Very possibly, but if you listened to his statement, he said the airline would operate with 10% less capacity, but there would be no job reductions. And now he is saying there will be. Looks like he just can't make up his mind.
I think you are basically just arguing semantics.
While I don't think this merger will actually happen, just attempting to buy DL could serve two purposes for Parker:
1) Get the ball rolling behind industry consolidation. Right now, the industry really has no need for consolidation as plenty of capacity has already been removed. However, Parker wants consolidation now so he can become CEO of a complete global airline (the guy has a huge ego). Going after DL, could get the whole merger frenzy going which is what Parker wants.
2) Even if industry consolidation doesn't pan out, the attempt to merge with DL will force DL to give more to its creditors in order to keep them happy. This could mean more debt for DL and make DL a slightly less robust competitor.
DeltaGuy From United States, joined Sep 2001, 4095 posts, RR: 19 Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2264 times:
I hope DL and the FTC and creditors see behind Parker's twisted logic and screw him back over. The point that all of this commotion will cause the creditors to expect more is a valid one- too bad this deal couldnt have been kept under the rug- DL could have flipped them the bird the first time.
UselessAir is another bankruptcy waiting to happen- he'll get it back soon enough.
DeltaGuy
Barack Hussein Obama is his own terrorist sleeper cell
FCYTravis From United States, joined Sep 2005, 1191 posts, RR: 6 Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2258 times:
He said no union job furloughs, which is different than no job reductions.
The US Airways merger was accomplished without any unionized job furloughs, through normal attrition and early retirement offers. Management and administrative job reductions were accomplished with some layoffs, but mostly by the fact that most US East employees did not wish to to relocate to Tempe.
Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 14): For example, think of how many hundreds of FA's and pilots that are on furlough for both US and DL.
There are no furloughed US FAs. US has, in fact, hired several classes of FAs from the street since the merger, and has recalled 700 pilots.
USAir A321 service now departing for SFO with fuel stops in CAK, COS and RNO. Enjoy your flight.
WJ From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 297 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 2229 times:
Quoting DeltaGuy (Reply 14): Think about this- this psycho Parker would be CEO of the new company. From what I've seen, this guy is better off as a lower end manager than a CEO of a major airline. Jerry Grinstein may have made some stupid choices before, but he has alot more potentional than Parker does.
Mmm, psycho Parker... Is that a clinical evaluation, or just anger, as your company is in bankruptcy, "Delta Guy"?
From what you have seen, if you had been looking, is one CEO who saved one airline (HP) and then saved another (US) and turned them together into a $300million/quarter profit. Don't forget that HP was pretty much one of the only profitable carriers along with WN for quite a nice run, so if there is anything to say, is that I guess Parker knows how to run an airline.
Who knows if this DL thing will happen or not, but to dismiss it just because it sounds too big to actualy come true is foolish. People said the same things about the US merger and as before, no one here has enough details to call this one, so all we are left here with are childish opinions.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Jan 2006, 9 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 297 posts,