Continental/United Merger (Houston, Dallas, Fort Worth: school, salary, costs)

[EEstudent]

Wait how is this merger going through? I'm not an Econ major, but there are anti-trust laws that would stop this am I right?!?

[Wolfpacker]

Originally Posted by EEstudent

Wait how is this merger going through? I'm not an Econ major, but there are anti-trust laws that would stop this am I right?!?

What exactly would be the anti-trust issues? I mean, both airlines would have to give up slots and gates at certain airlines, but that's about it.

[rightsofar]

Originally Posted by Txgal33

It would be terrible! We have some good friends who work for them.

Isn't the cost of living much higher in Chicago? I guess that wouldn't matter to the top tier management, but to the peasants that actually run the company, it would matter a great deal.

[jfre81]

The longshot wins the race sometimes, but it's pretty safe to bet the favorite here.

In any case, the airline industry was getting bailed long before Wall Street. The city was doing well before Continental moved here and won't cease to exist because it's gone. Sure, it's a loss, but it's a loss that would almost definitely happen regardless if this merger didn't happen, as Continental would simply go under. Now, I suppose there's an outside chance the merged company will leave some kind of corporate presence downtown, but I wouldn't assume that.

The only real upside to a move to Houston is the big-money execs who are the only ones who will benefit from this won't have to pay a state income tax, and Chicago will sweeten their already cozy dealings with United to keep it there. If they moved it here - the city of Chicago owns O'Hare Airport and United will probably no longer be welcome there, or at least as welcome. And between ORD and IAH, guess which one's a bigger deal. That, more than any so-called prestige of Chicago vis-a-vis Houston as far as the cities themselves go, will be why Continental will be going there instead of United coming here.

[Trae713]

Originally Posted by Oildog

Another reason to dislike the POTUS.

You do realize that, when Continental and United were in merger talks in 2008, Chicago was going to be the HQ. Someone named Bush was President then.

And I think Houston has a good chance of keeping the HQ. Especially if it's true that they'll match and beat any offer Chicago puts together (according to ABC 13 today).

[TVC15]

Originally Posted by Oildog

Another reason to dislike the POTUS.

The airline industry was deregulated in 1978 under the Carter admin...not this current POTUS!

Sad news! I was a flight attendant for Continental in my early 20's based out my hometown of Houston. ;(

http://www.answers.com/topic/airline-deregulation-act

[SouthernBoy205]

How many people in Houston are employed by Continental?

[Supermac34]

This deal, in theory, will create an airline with almost limitless possibilities when it comes to non-stop flights, and airport access. It is actually amazing that United's hubs/strengths/weaknesses are almost the exact opposite of Continental's. The new airline would have a hub at every major regional airport in the nation (almost), expanded reach to International destinations (CO is poor to Asia, but United is strong). You will soon be able to fly non-stop, or one-stop major hub hop from IAH to just about anywhere in the world.

The issues have to do with the unknowns. What will happen to fares as there is less competition? What will happen to the elite priviledges (watered down more or expanded?) What will happen to the service/food/seats/etc? Will you finally see Y+ out of IAH on United/CO flights? Will you finally see three class services non-stop to London? It should be interesting. If the merged company takes the best from both companies, it'll be a big win. If they take the "low cost" options and worst things from both, then it'll be a big loss for consumers.

My main concern is I hope they keep the CO food in FC/BF.

One of the strange things to me is how this initially was CO interested in United. CO was stronger financially, more efficiently run, less labor costs, more flexible on their routes, etc. United is the hulking, archaic, and bloated company in this equation. High labor costs/issues, less flexiblity on routes, higher cost per passenger, losing more money. So it went from CO interested in aquiring United, to both companies interested in merging, and now we're wondering what United will pay for CO. I know in the last quarter, CO wasn't quite as good as it normally is financially, but in the most recent past, CO has been one of the most stable airlines around with United always on the verge of bankruptcy. Its been a very recent, very strange shift.

[vertigo5110]

Originally Posted by A&M Bulldawg

How many people in Houston are employed by Continental?

Quite a few...including my father. He works in their mechanics division.

Like somebody else said, I think as long as Houston (and the state of Texas) is willing to match and beat any offering Chicago (and the state of Illinois) has, then a surprise ending MIGHT happen.....MIGHT.

Continental has good reason to stay here this is its home market after all. Personally, if I were the CEO of Continental, that'd be one stipulation for me to agree to anything but that's just me. I agree with yet another earlier post (sort of)...I don't understand why this merger is even happening. Continental is a good company who has always provided awesome, quality service. United really IS full of disgruntled people and their service can suffer. I'd fear that Continental would only suffer and lose customers as a result of this.

I KNOW nobody over at United and Continental are reading this but if they were my message would be to THINK OUTSIDE OF THE BOX! People are leaving major cities like LA and (yes) Chicago for Houston for a REASON! Don't dismiss this city!!

[Supermac34]

One thing I would mention, as I have been through a couple major mergers and aquisitions with companies I work for, including the Compaq/HP merger. Rarely, if ever, does the new merged company close down the old offices, especially in the short term. Yes, there will be staff reductions, but my bet would be that even if the HQ is in Chicago, there would be a significant workforce still kept in Houston.

The merged company will "adopt and go" with various corporate solutions, often cherry picking the cheapest and best option. Corp IT in Continental costs half as much? Keep them and integrate United with it. Corporate Finance employees make 25% less in Houston? Keep them. Not to mention that it will take years and years to integrate the companies and you need employees from both legacy systems to integrate.