Combining with Alaska Airlines for a Stronger
08-13-2024, 01:26 PM
#811
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2015
Posts: 339
On the ALK/VA merger the DOJ actually filed a lawsuit to block it (12/6/16), with a proposed settlement for court approval regarding the AA codeshare. It was announced the same day as “wins approval” and “Justice Department Clears Alaska Air Group's Acquisition of Virgin America”. Could this perhaps be the case here?
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justi...eqIRiasPKYKScw
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justi...eqIRiasPKYKScw
08-13-2024, 01:34 PM
#812
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2022
Posts: 1,208
On the ALK/VA merger the DOJ actually filed a lawsuit to block it (12/6/16), with a proposed settlement for court approval regarding the AA codeshare. It was announced the same day as “wins approval” and “Justice Department Clears Alaska Air Group's Acquisition of Virgin America”. Could this perhaps be the case here?
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justi...eqIRiasPKYKScw
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justi...eqIRiasPKYKScw
DOJ was more lenient back then and Virgin was not a zombie. Every shake is different. Just starting to wonder how much Alaska REALLY wants us.
08-13-2024, 01:44 PM
#813
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2015
Posts: 339
No matter the outcome, I hope theres a management shakeup up top.
And I do think the dismissal of the civil suit is timely…
08-13-2024, 02:00 PM
#814
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2022
Posts: 1,208
08-13-2024, 08:59 PM
#816
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,205
But DOJ might take a bird in hand deal... if the roll they dice on a lawsuit, they might lose in court or the next administration might drop it.
08-14-2024, 02:47 AM
#817
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2022
Posts: 1,208
It could be. I think if they extend the deadline, then I’d be leaning to a with Conditions verdict too, if that comes out tomorrow. I think the fact it is in Hawaii is positive, even in a block scenario. Wouldn’t they file in Washington to simply block it, unless they cite exclusively local harm? Alaska is the one they’d be going to war with.
08-14-2024, 05:21 AM
#818
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,205
But they are inherently conservative fiscally and business-wise, almost amazingly so for an airline. So they will not give up so much that they don't feel they can reliably execute on their vision for the merger. As a hypothetical example, they will not proceed if the fed wants them to divest 50% of existing HI/West Coast routes, defeats the purpose.
If they can't do this on their own terms, or fairly close to it, they'll just bag it and get in back of the line for organic 787 deliveries.
08-14-2024, 05:59 AM
#819
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2015
Posts: 339
My sense is that they do really want to do this.
But they are inherently conservative fiscally and business-wise, almost amazingly so for an airline. So they will not give up so much that they don't feel they can reliably execute on their vision for the merger. As a hypothetical example, they will not proceed if the fed wants them to divest 50% of existing HI/West Coast routes, defeats the purpose.
If they can't do this on their own terms, or fairly close to it, they'll just bag it and get in back of the line for organic 787 deliveries.
But they are inherently conservative fiscally and business-wise, almost amazingly so for an airline. So they will not give up so much that they don't feel they can reliably execute on their vision for the merger. As a hypothetical example, they will not proceed if the fed wants them to divest 50% of existing HI/West Coast routes, defeats the purpose.
If they can't do this on their own terms, or fairly close to it, they'll just bag it and get in back of the line for organic 787 deliveries.
08-14-2024, 06:15 AM
#820
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,205
Yeah that seems to imply that they are close. If they were miles apart company would either just drop the whole thing, or ask for and DOJ would grant a lengthy extension to go back to the drawing board (.gov is in no hurry one way or another).
My guess is DOJ has tentatively offered/agreed to some terms, and the company needs more time to crunch numbers and analyze if it will work for them. So the terms might be painful...
My guess is DOJ has tentatively offered/agreed to some terms, and the company needs more time to crunch numbers and analyze if it will work for them. So the terms might be painful...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
