Originally Posted by BunkerF16

Fair question. And a good one.

My position back then was based on limited understanding at the time on my part on how the process works. Especially within the ALPA to ALPA framework. Since those comments, I was a part of the B6 M&A committee, went through the training, reviewed several mergers, read many arbitration rulings and why/how they came up with their decisions. I see a lot of the same reasoning I had back then happening now. It's human nature when you don't understand the process more fully to not see why people from different airlines can be slotted next to each other and have several years of DOHs between them. Conversely, I can why someone on the other side wouldn't understand and be upset by potentially losing several % points in seniority when merged in. I'm not advocating in public what I WANT it to be one way or another. I'm only trying to pass on my mistakes and what I learned from my time on the committee.

Also, just for the record, both my position back then and now advocates for a higher % be attributed to DOH vs RS, even if my understanding and position was flawed in the post your quoted.

Originally Posted by emersonbiguns

Can anyone name a LCC or ULCC that has made the transatlantic a part of their route network and survived?

Originally Posted by emersonbiguns

Can anyone name a LCC or ULCC that has made the transatlantic a part of their route network and survived?

Originally Posted by emersonbiguns

Can anyone name a LCC or ULCC that has made the transatlantic a part of their route network and survived?

Originally Posted by FahQ2

Cemented you say? Blue has a handful of routes on narrow bodies across the pond. The North Atlantic has been the prized cash cow of the legacies for decades, not to mention a dozen or so flag carriers from the other side of the pond. I’ve flown the organized track system more than any of your pilots, and all those voices on the HF should be reminders of the capacity they can dump on your routes at any time. It’s a niche, and it’s ok to be happy for some variety, but it’s fragile at best.

As for the wide body mirage (which has also lived rent free in the heads of many Nk pilots for years) there are really only two aircraft that would work for B6; the 787 or the 330neo. The 787 is the clear winner in terms of efficiency, the 330 provides some fleet commonality. But whatever, the point is both aircraft list for around $280 million each, if you can get delivery slots. Plus you need widebody gates, ground equipment (highloaders, cargo pods, tugs, etc).

A dozen of either would list for 3.4 billion, and we haven’t even talked about pilot, FA, maintenance, ramper training, whether landing slots for another US carrier are available in the target markets B6 would want…. Or the fact you don’t carry commercial cargo on your pax flights which help supplement smaller pax loads.

But your management didn’t spend (or announce their intention to spend) $3.6 billion on setting up long haul operations with an initial fleet of a dozen widebodies. They have the money as one of your colleagues emphasizes in every post “CASH”.

No instead they are spending that money on pilots, FA’s aircraft, routes, and orders that bolsters its existing business model in the national and narrow body range international market, which should tell you all you need to know about the direction your company intends to go.

It’s amusing to see B6 pilots in their forum talk about what a dumpster fire their operation is, then come over here and with their pinky in the air looking down their noses at NK. Sell the widebody/brand image dream somewhere else, we’re all stocked up here.

Originally Posted by symbian simian

And I didn’t disagree with that, but future QOL was specifically exluded as far as future orders go (AS/VA merger arbitration). I get it, life isn’t fair. My reply was specifically aimed at him for saying JB is a much better company than NK.

Originally Posted by KNOTAPILOT

Much I don’t think. Better? What do you think? To the ones defending Spirit model and bashing the JetBlue even saying they’ll close shop if it isn’t for the merger, do you think a company making so much money, and knowing they have the future market dominated would just sell off?

Originally Posted by NKSpilot

Let's back up a little bit in saying they would "just sell off"


I'm starting to think maybe I was wrong in initially hoping Jet Blue gets a deal

Originally Posted by NKSpilot

C. I'm starting to think maybe I was wrong in initially hoping Jet Blue gets a deal

Originally Posted by Excargodog

What you or I “hope” doesn’t matter a bit. What matters LEGALLY is what is the best deal for the stockholders, because if NK management fails in their due diligence to the owners they are going to get their butts sued and they know it. The principal stockholders are not management which IIRC has a grand total of 46 hundredths of a percent of the outstanding stock. The principal stockholders are actually mutual funds and Vanguard alone owns a quarter billion dollars worth of SAVE, nearly nine percent of outstanding shares.

I don’t know if you ever heard the old Mark Twain quote:’ Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel’? Well, there’s a corollary about not getting in a stockholder fight with anyone who has more accountants and lawyers than you have pilots, and between Vanguard, Fidelity, and Invesco, that’s very much the case. The NK management was already facing a class action suit alleging that they hadn’t done due diligence by spending 18 months setting up the F9 deal without even asking for other offers.

https://www.globenewswire.com/news-r...-the-Firm.html


And I have no doubt that there were sweetheart deals involving people in NK management getting jobs in the new combined company, and the lawsuit could have probably been settled fir a few million regardless, but not when someone else comes in with a 30% better offer.

Now NK management HAS to play it straight, or be ready to convince a civil court that the extra half billion dollars plus really isn’t that good a deal.