Seeking Alpha

Airline regulation: The barn door is already open

  • Years of deregulation may have backfired for consumers as fares continue to soar and local markets shrink to a few carrier choices, according an op-ed piece in The New York Times from Joe Nocera.
  • The two dominant carriers - United Continental and Delta Air Lines - have an almost insurmountable lead with established global networks, while Southwest Airlines (LUV) rules the roost in the low-cost segment.
  • Even if the American Airlines-US Airways merger is blocked, consumers face escalating fares with capacity trimmed and options limited, warn analysts.
  • Sector analysis: JPMorgan thinks airline stocks (DAL, LUV, AAMRQ.PK, JBLU, LCC, ALK, HA, SAVE, ALGT, RJET) could slip after a strong YTD run if American emerges from bankruptcy as a stand-alone.
Comments (52)
  • joro_ianev
    , contributor
    Comments (392) | Send Message
     
    "Years of deregulation may have backfired for consumers as fares continue to soar and local markets shrink to a few carrier choices, according an op-ed piece in The New York Times from Joe Nocera."

     

    Really? We will blame deregulation?!? How about blaming actually the opposite - overt regulation of the industry that is putting barrier to entry. Also, how about NSA and the ever-increasing airport fees? Those make up almost 50% of the ticket's price these days.
    17 Aug 2013, 03:06 PM Reply Like
  • Jake2992
    , contributor
    Comments (831) | Send Message
     
    So you think we should deregulate even more, when what deregulation Republicans have done has only made air travel more expensive for middle class consumers?

     

    "Also, how about NSA and the ever-increasing airport fees? Those make up almost 50% of the ticket's price these days. "

     

    Do you have a source?
    17 Aug 2013, 04:51 PM Reply Like
  • RDLF
    , contributor
    Comments (10) | Send Message
     
    Jake, Air travel is far less expensive than before deregulation. In no time in the history of the world has a human been able to go so far so fast for so little.
    18 Aug 2013, 07:35 AM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Jake,
    What is your source for deregulation being the Republican's fault? I think we could actually blame Democrats. Ever since FDR the left is been hard at work increasing the role of government in the lives of all Americans. But more specifically lets look at history which is always a great "source" for one's stand on an issue. Because of the high level of regulations created by Democrats, in the 30s and 40s, the growth of the airline industry in the 60's proved daunting. There now existed high barriers to entry for fledgling airlines, slow government response to existing airlines entering to compete in city-pairings and other obstacles which caused artificially inflated passenger ticket prices. The cost of an airplane seat had skyrocket compared to previous prices. In order to address these growing concerns airline deregulation began in the USA in 1978. It was, and still is, a part of a sweeping experiment to ultimately reduce ticket prices and entry controls holding sway over new airline hopefuls. And it has worked from the standpoint of the cost of an airplane ticket. See the following link for support. http://bit.ly/18DCUST The article shows the cost of an airplane ticket adjusted for inflation over the past 30 years. Though Americans complain incessently over the cost of flying, the cost is dramatically lower due to deregulation. Most Americans who complain are known as low information voters. They have little basis for their complaint other than emotion which is why most complainers who target their complaints at business are Democrats. Airline deregulation had begun with initiatives by economist Alfred E. Kahn in the Nixon administration, carried through the Ford administration and finally, at the behest of Ted Kennedy, signed into law by President Jimmy Carter. So you see Jake, it was a Democrat in the White House and Democrats who controlled both houses of Congress that signed into law "deregulation" though they did have help from Republicans who initiated the entire idea years earlier.
    18 Aug 2013, 09:16 AM Reply Like
  • Jake Huneycutt
    , contributor
    Comments (1382) | Send Message
     
    Other Jake,

     

    You do realize that deregulation was initiated under the Carter Administration and passed under a Democratic Congress?

     

    Canada has a similar system to the US prior to deregulation. It's simple enough to go to Priceline and compare US airfare prices to Canadian ones. For instance, you could compare a Toronto-Vancouver flight with a Buffalo-Seattle one.

     

    Theoretically, the Toronto-Vancouver one should be cheaper (since there's more demand and greater economies of scale which helps drive down price). In reality, Toronto-Vancouver is consistently 40% - 100% more expensive.
    18 Aug 2013, 11:17 AM Reply Like
  • Jake2992
    , contributor
    Comments (831) | Send Message
     
    Yes I am aware the original bill was passed by Carter. And, just as the article says, initially deregulation decreased the price of an airline ticket, now it is on the rise again. As time went on Republican administrations and legislators added additional sweet heart deals, amendments, and deregulated far too much. This was not the intent of the Democratically passed billed.

     

    One of the great myths of laissez faire capitalism: free market competition will be good for the consumer. Left to their own devices companies will aggregate to their best advantage, create an oligarchy and the consumer will eventually pay more and get less.

     

    Now we are seeing just that as airline tickets are on pace to become more expensive than at any point in history thanks to radical Republican deregulators. There is a fine line between too much and too little regulation.
    18 Aug 2013, 04:43 PM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Jake,
    Just how cheap should the government keep airplane tickets? How 'bout we just have the government tell the airlines how much they should charge? I mean, if its a fine line between too little or too much, I think we should put the government in charge to do it "just right"!! Much of the reason behind ticket prices increasing is that the airlines have been actually able to garner a slight profit for a change. If you'd bother to read the link I provided, you'll see all the years the airlines have been able to have profits. You can count them virtually on one hand. Flying as a passenger is not an entitlement. But if folks think it should be then we must make it affordable which equates to an industry that runs in the red......just like our government in Washington!!!! Approaching $17 trillion.....
    18 Aug 2013, 05:38 PM Reply Like
  • markcc
    , contributor
    Comments (1380) | Send Message
     
    Fact Check: The The Airline Deregulation Act is a 1978 was passed by LBJ (Democrat), Nixon (Republican) did not take office until 1969.

     

    Airport fees? Fuel is 40-45%, you say airport fees 50%, then all the planes and people 5-10%, no way!
    19 Aug 2013, 12:52 AM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4024) | Send Message
     
    Hmmm. Need to re-check your fact check. :)
    19 Aug 2013, 06:57 AM Reply Like
  • markcc
    , contributor
    Comments (1380) | Send Message
     
    Correct, it was 1978, Carter.
    19 Aug 2013, 07:23 AM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Joro is on to something. The airline industry is the most regulated business on the planet. They can't even fly to a destination without government approval. This is akin to having Apple ask the government for permission to launch a new OS. Fees, taxes, etc makeup nearly 75% of a ticket's cost in actuality. Because of what the government does including embracing the far left's agenda to environmentally strangle free enterprise, the Concorde no longer flies leaving the airline industry flying at a slower speed than it did in the early 60s when Convair 880s and 990s flew around at
    mach .90!
    17 Aug 2013, 03:23 PM Reply Like
  • Jake2992
    , contributor
    Comments (831) | Send Message
     
    "because of what the government does including embracing the far left's agenda to environmentally strangle free enterprise"

     

    Tell us SPECIFICALLY what the government has done to make airline travel more expensive and how that relates to environmentalism. To me it looks like you have just mashed together a bunch of words you heard on Fox News to try and make a sentence, which you have done, but still fell way short of making anywhere near a substantive statement.

     

    The answer, in part, is that deregulation worked all too well at first, and then it didn’t work well at all. The natural tendency of companies to seek monopoly power took over, and nobody tried to stop it until now, when it is really too late. The airlines set the rates, not government. It's like your crazy right wing uncle telling you it's gas taxes that make gasoline expensive, when in reality we subsidize gas prices with tax dollars.
    17 Aug 2013, 04:54 PM Reply Like
  • financialsuccess2013
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Ooooooooh Nooooooooo Mr. Bill!!!!!!! You'e got it all wrong!! (again) Airlines having to get government permission akin to Apple???? Yeah, if Apple could Fly and crash not only OS's, but devices, metal tubes full of passengers and crew! Real live People! And land in other countries...........esp. countries you may think are great (well, certainly corporate America seems to think are great due to "slave" labor wages and No regulation on working conditions, environmental pollution, etc. etc. Yes, the airlines are regulated - And Thank Goodness for that!
    18 Aug 2013, 02:03 PM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Hey financialsuccess! I wonder if you actually have had success....I don't quite follow your logic. Approving where an airline has a route has everything to do with "crashing"?? Letting an airline merge with another is all about crashing?? Establishing routes and approving route authority has nothing to do with "crashing" but everything to do with a centralized planned economy. If I recall the last time that was done, the entity that embraced that idea really did "crash"........economi... Germany is indeed great and its not due to "slave labor" rather, the government getting out of the way. And now all the idiot governments in Europe expect the country that rejects their idiot approach to economics wants the exact country that is doing it right to bail them out!!!!
    18 Aug 2013, 04:07 PM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Tendency of free enterprise is to make a profit Jake. The problem is there's a growing number of citizens who equate profits with evil.
    18 Aug 2013, 05:40 PM Reply Like
  • Philip Marlowe
    , contributor
    Comments (1202) | Send Message
     
    You guys are fricking hilarious.
    17 Aug 2013, 03:30 PM Reply Like
  • johnrodney
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Don't forget the government now gets 20% in taxes on flights.
    17 Aug 2013, 03:48 PM Reply Like
  • markcc
    , contributor
    Comments (1380) | Send Message
     
    For the first time, most of the industry turns a sustainable profit, is that so bad? Or do we just want to pound the airlines to get them to sell below cost?
    17 Aug 2013, 03:49 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4024) | Send Message
     
    Yes. They should be run exactly like the US Postal Service.
    17 Aug 2013, 04:49 PM Reply Like
  • chopchop0
    , contributor
    Comments (3882) | Send Message
     
    Agreed. Airlines are trying to actually make money loll. Whodathunk
    17 Aug 2013, 08:18 PM Reply Like
  • Jake Huneycutt
    , contributor
    Comments (1382) | Send Message
     
    Apparently, the author of the NYT article has never been to Canada. Even with consolidation pushing prices upward in the US, American airline prices are dramatically lower than the Canadian market.
    17 Aug 2013, 03:50 PM Reply Like
  • Day Trader001
    , contributor
    Comments (767) | Send Message
     
    As much as I would like to see the merger between LCC & AMR, American can survive as a “Stand Alone Airline”!

     

    All other airlines have already filed bankruptcy and reorganized more than once. AMR has been pinned down by union contracts, aging fleet, high fuel cost, and debt, but never filed for bankruptcy.
    Now employees & unions are ready to negotiate their contracts and the bankruptcy judge is ready to solve this issue of reorganization. Sadly, if they reevaluate the filling the people they owe money too are history along with shareholders. What will be good for the airline will obviously hurt others as it always does in most bankrupt situations.
    Hopefully the DOJ will backtrack and accept a slot deal, but they refused this when LCC & UAL wanted to merge so why not with AMR?
    Should AMR make the move to be a stand-alone I would not but the stock until after the deal is done, then load up! Every major airline that came out of bankruptcy has seen a sharp rise in share price.

     

    If the DOJ backs off, load up on LCC and hold! The combined company will be a strong one with great profit potential.
    17 Aug 2013, 04:01 PM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Hey day trader. AA won;t have a chance as stand alone. They have a few routes to Europe. LHR/MAD/ZRH/BCN/CDG/MLN and Rome. No flights to eastern Europe, no flights to Africa, none to the Med, none to the Mideast, a few to China, one to Japan, none to Australia, New Zealand or anywhere else around Indonesia. United and Delta having joined up with Continental and Northwest will clean AA's clock with their routes. The current administration wants to look like its "protecting" the uninformed consumer out there, when in fact they're going to screw the consumer. Its such a shame, but then again this current occupant on PA Ave is so shameless.
    18 Aug 2013, 09:26 AM Reply Like
  • Day Trader001
    , contributor
    Comments (767) | Send Message
     
    Mrb,

     

    Looks like you have two statements there, and you are off track on the first! American’s international route system has always been strong and viable for AMR. In fact, the majority of major US airlines have patterned Intl. route structure after AMR just like all US carriers patterned their Hub & Spoke system from Us Airways.

     

    Not flying to a few, or limiting service to a few countries is not by any means going to make or break an airline. Eastern airlines had during their time a good Intl. base, but where are they now.
    AMR’s issues are as I listed above not because they do not serve Africa. They should have filed bankruptcy years ago like all other airlines did for a restructure. Their contracts, pensions, and hourly rates were the best in the business, and they still couldn’t pull the rabbit out of the hat. So just because they are now following suit of the others does not mean they cannot stand-alone.

     

    I worked for US Airways 27-years, took 7-pay & benefit cuts, transferred twice, and had more than my share of seniority losses. Been through “many” mergers & buyouts for the good and bad. LCC needs AMR much worse than AMR needs LCC why do you think they are going after them! Also keep in mind the people running US Air are not US Air people, they are from America West and they do a very fine job.

     

    Yes, American Airlines can survive they have already proved that many times over! AMR could also be targeting someone else. Nothing is off the table AMR has many avenues open to them.

     

    As far as the government interference goes, we all know that’s a bunch of Crap!!
    18 Aug 2013, 01:23 PM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Hey Daytrader,
    American’s international route system has NOT always been strong and viable for AMR. It only began under Bob Crandall who excercised initiative, vision, and intelligence. He completely restructured AA, began the hub and spoke, and perks like Admirals' Club and Reward mileage, to name a few. His leadership zoomed AA to the top of the airlines. I don't think USAIR was able to set into place hub and spoke like AA did. But Crandall being confident and successful made the government look bad in light of deregulation. He held many an interview badmouthing the government's "tendency" to regulate the living daylights out of everything. The government had to get back at him so in later years they dissed AA and rewarded routes to competitors who were not nearly as successful and were not nearly as in good a position to expand their service to other countries. AA did not file for BK because they thought that they could stay above the red ink but when you try to compete with carriers who stiff their creditors, leave stockholders with worthless stock and raid employee pensions and benefits, it is a losing effort. Over time they finally ran out of gas as their obligations exceeded their potential for profit albeit they went BK with $5 billion cash on hand. A company cannot compete when they need to meet all their obligations while their competitors don't. I believe the others abused bankruptcy laws to gut their obligations. JP Morgan believes like me, that if AA is banned from merging with someone else, it will bring all the airline stock wAAy down. So we'll see how this shakes out. But for now buying stock in AAMRQ is a really risky move.
    18 Aug 2013, 07:07 PM Reply Like
  • Day Trader001
    , contributor
    Comments (767) | Send Message
     
    Funny I just jumped back on this site and here mrb pops up again with another empty comment.
    You are singing to the choir, but only have partial facts. US Air started the Hub & Spoke system!
    No one in any of these good comments is suggesting buying AAMRQ stock! Should AMR exit bankruptcy AMR is the stock to buy then!

     

    I see you enjoy commenting / attempting to debate many other on this thread. Sir you are not worthy. If you are attempting to build up your 24-comments, I suggest seeking another path.
    18 Aug 2013, 07:18 PM Reply Like
  • Randy_J.
    , contributor
    Comments (31) | Send Message
     
    DT,

     

    Touché, good feedback!
    19 Aug 2013, 11:11 AM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Airline stocks lower again • 12:25 PM

     

    Airline stocks continue to suffer as the DOJ's suit to block the merger between American Airlines (AAMRQ.PK) and US Airways (LCC -1%) dominates the landscape for the sector.
    19 Aug 2013, 12:44 PM Reply Like
  • Randy_J.
    , contributor
    Comments (31) | Send Message
     
    Mrbill,

     

    Are you so hard up to make a comment that you have to copy a “Seeking Alpha Market Current posting?” Wow….
    19 Aug 2013, 02:51 PM Reply Like
  • Jake2992
    , contributor
    Comments (831) | Send Message
     
    And climate change deniers as well as thoughtless, political intransigence made it worse by not letting us get into high speed rail.

     

    Airline travel uses a tremendous amount of energy and now, as Mr. Nocera pointed out, it is a running wild oligopoly with incredible pricing power. High speed rail would help with both problems. It would reduce greatly pollution in longer distance travel and it would give the airlines real competition.

     

    Every other developed economy has high speed rail. President Obama tried to bring it here in 2009. It would have opened up new jobs, helped our internal transportation system, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. It was in the stimulus bill. So, what happened? Republican governors refused the money for development in their states.
    17 Aug 2013, 05:18 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4024) | Send Message
     
    I don't remember him ever proposing HSR for major airline hub cities... They were political routes, and he was trying to gin up support by throwing government dollars at localities in order to buy votes.
    17 Aug 2013, 05:56 PM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Jake, ever heard of carbon tax?? That affects airplanes. Ever heard of the trans Canadian America pipeline that has been squashed by B.O to keep the radical environmentalists in his pocket? What about leases for drilling off shore being tied up in government regulations and bureaucracy? What about subsidies to farmers so they can grow corn for ethynol which only keeps oil prices high. We could be all getting 50+ mpg if we could drive conventional diesel vehicles like they do in Europe, resulting in wAAy lower prices for fuel, halving the distribution of fuel in the country, and dramatically reducing the amount of refining that goes on. All those special blends only increases the price of fuel which is why you see fuel prices so high on the left coast. But then again, Obama's stated objective is to dramatically raise the price of fuel which certainly affects the airline industry. One more point. Wherever you see a blue state (formerly red, as it should be) prices for everything along with fuel, are higher and the incidence of government brokeness is everywhere. Government regulation and higher prices for everything go hand in hand. But try telling that to someone who is bent on controlling everything from toilets to telephones.
    18 Aug 2013, 09:36 AM Reply Like
  • BIG_BEN
    , contributor
    Comments (156) | Send Message
     
    I see HSR replacing only short flights and cars. Flights are still pretty cheap compared to the time tradeoff of long HSR journeys. The last several times i have visited europe, i traveled mostly by plane because TGV, Eurostar, etc were barely cheaper than flying and there were many competing time slots for airlines vs limited train slots. Maybe the hyperloop will change that though!
    18 Aug 2013, 11:45 AM Reply Like
  • Jake2992
    , contributor
    Comments (831) | Send Message
     
    JohnBin,

     

    Just because you don't remember something doesn't mean it didn't happen. He never set specific routes, he left it up to the states, including states with legislators and governors not friendly to Obama. Obama is more pragmatic than you give him credit for, he was willing to get the funding together to improve the impoverished red states, but they decided along ideological lines to refuse the funding. Citizens in states like Florida could be working at much higher rates if not for their obstructionist and radical Republican governors.
    18 Aug 2013, 04:32 PM Reply Like
  • Jake2992
    , contributor
    Comments (831) | Send Message
     
    "government brokeness "

     

    At the same time, there is price to pay for living in a red state, including lower levels of education and literacy.
    18 Aug 2013, 04:52 PM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Last time I looked red (former blue) states had more financial disaster zones than blue ones. Then again liberals always think they're smarter than their opponents. Reagan just an actor, no brains, Bush stupid and even Romney intellectually inferior. Clinton brilliant, Obama smartest man on the planet. The "smart ones" continuing to spend money like drunken sailors......sailors spending other people's money.
    18 Aug 2013, 08:53 PM Reply Like
  • markcc
    , contributor
    Comments (1380) | Send Message
     
    Mr. Bill: Is this a political blog or an investment blog? How do I make money on those comments?
    19 Aug 2013, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    I think the climate has been changing of oh, maybe 6,000 years or so but for God deniers maybe a few billion??? Greenhouse gas emissions is a non-starter. Another example of bad science. If you like AMTRAK, you'll love high speed rail. "Every other developed economy" comparison is apples and oranges. The infrastructure necessary in countries where most folks live in condensed areas where work and housing are co-located is completely different than here in the US. Let's leave B.O out of this. He knows nothing about aviation or any other type of business for that matter.
    19 Aug 2013, 02:04 PM Reply Like
  • markcc
    , contributor
    Comments (1380) | Send Message
     
    About Sixty Five billion dollars to put a HSR from LA to San Fran. That is two cities, you only have a few hundred more cities to connect! Then you have to maintain every foot of the system. Amtrak can only make high speed Acela work in the densest corridor, but still provides slow train service for half the price on the same tracks. Trains are a nice dream, but very little application in reality.

     

    Whats the investment angle on the airlines? Or was this a political blog?
    20 Aug 2013, 09:33 AM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    Mr CC: How's this for an investment blog with political overtones since that's the climate business operates in these days. Today's story about PG&E. Zealous government hacks penalizing the crap out of a company that is deemed too reliant on the wrong kind of energy. Put them out of business by targeting those who go against what's deemed environmentally correct. Probably a good idea to short utilities (fossil fuel reliant, especially coal along with nuke powered) that aren't environmentally correct!!!....or airlines that attempt to merge.......
    21 Aug 2013, 02:10 PM Reply Like
  • SoldHigh
    , contributor
    Comments (1013) | Send Message
     
    As if an opinion pc in the NYT would ever be in FAVOR of less regulation LOL
    17 Aug 2013, 06:29 PM Reply Like
  • justaminute
    , contributor
    Comments (843) | Send Message
     
    $400 to fly round trip from New York to LA is not expensive.
    17 Aug 2013, 07:14 PM Reply Like
  • User 509088
    , contributor
    Comments (1214) | Send Message
     
    business writes off their travel, right? and they use points cards which aren't taxed either for their holidays, right?

     

    so what are you suits whining about?

     

    and all you rand paul types out there, you'd like joe the plumber air, would you?

     

    no! wait! plumbers are regulated, they have building codes because there was no way to ensure they did their jobs properly without codes.

     

    objectivist dream- Halliburton electricians wiring up military showers and killing troopers because they didn't know what they were doing- deregulated electricians and fewer folks deployed overseas.

     

    no rules on safety or pilot rest or fly-ability of the aircraft or maintenance schedules or anything like that?

     

    in fact the airline regulators are guarantors that the current players will not be challenged by others who aren't already somehow connected to the status quo.

     

    didn't 2008 prove that business can't regulate itself? didn't 2008 prove that business is like sid vicious- serious abuse and self-control issues?
    17 Aug 2013, 08:37 PM Reply Like
  • JohnBinTN
    , contributor
    Comments (4024) | Send Message
     
    The vast majority of plumbing codes are unnecessary, and do nothing but add cost to the job (and bottom line, to the customer).
    17 Aug 2013, 08:43 PM Reply Like
  • chopchop0
    , contributor
    Comments (3882) | Send Message
     
    Actually 2008 proved that government regulation and fed policy can come together to create epic chaos and volatility
    17 Aug 2013, 09:16 PM Reply Like
  • joeg1969
    , contributor
    Comments (435) | Send Message
     
    Lost huge! Actually lost my pants on this one!
    Thank you D.O.J for representing America land of the free!
    18 Aug 2013, 06:28 AM Reply Like
  • joeg1969
    , contributor
    Comments (435) | Send Message
     
    You win some you lose some that's the way the ball bounces!
    18 Aug 2013, 01:39 PM Reply Like
  • Condorman
    , contributor
    Comments (9) | Send Message
     
    American wanted to stay independent and US Airways came in and engineered an unethical deal with AA labor which ultimately led to a capitulation to merge. Never should have happened. AA will be fine stand alone, but US Airways will go by the wayside without smoke and mirrors.
    18 Aug 2013, 05:48 PM Reply Like
  • chopchop0
    , contributor
    Comments (3882) | Send Message
     
    LCC is very profitable actually
    18 Aug 2013, 06:02 PM Reply Like
  • markcc
    , contributor
    Comments (1380) | Send Message
     
    US Airways beats American in profitability and still is dominant is its major hubs. Dont count them out.. Also, do count on smaller mergers among the remaining airlines, that includes US Airways and excludes American. I am sure they, LCC, are scouring the country for airline assets to buy.
    19 Aug 2013, 08:46 AM Reply Like
  • mrbill757
    , contributor
    Comments (47) | Send Message
     
    LCC could very well buy AA's gates, routes, etc if AA goes under....maybe take over AA's orders on future aircraft. AA is worth more in pieces than in whole.
    20 Aug 2013, 08:50 PM Reply Like
  • markcc
    , contributor
    Comments (1380) | Send Message
     
    Its way too early to count AA out. This bankruptcy had a big impact on the psychology in the company and a second bankruptcy would really fix things like it did when Continental went in and out of bankruptcy more than once.
    21 Aug 2013, 09:10 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs