Continental/United Merger (Houston, Dallas, Atlanta: maintenance, centers, approval)

[astrohip]

It sounds like it's a done deal. United is buying Continental. (BTW, they are buying Continental; it ain't no merger. United stock will survive, the HQ remains in Chicago, the name is United. It's not a merger, it's a purchase.)

Terrible loss for Houston. Spin it anyway you want, we are losing what is considered one of our best corporate giants.

I'm still having trouble figuring out why the CO board is doing this. There are three stakeholders--shareholders, employees, customers. (And no, Houston/location doesn't enter into the final decision--at least, not directly.)

Shareholders--we are not getting much more than the stock has been worth lately. So why do it?

Employees--CO employees are, for the most part, very happy working at CO. Heck, CO is one of the few airlines that actually still funds its pension obligations. United employees are known for being arrogant, unhappy whiners.

Customers--the rankings tell all. CO is consistently rated in the top 5 of major airlines. United is consistently rated in the bottom half.

So tell me again, why are they doing this? Oh yeah, so they can say they run the largest airline in the US.

[AK123]

Originally Posted by LAnative10

Chicago (like it or not) is more prestigeous in every field except oil and gas

Medicine?
The Port?
Not that it would change anything, but...

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by AK123

Medicine?
The Port?
Not that it would change anything, but...

Perhaps in Medicine you are right. Chicago also has a very large port. I don't know which port is more important.

Either way, other than NYC, LA, and perhaps San Francisco, Chicago is the most prestigious city in the US.

But either way, that wouldn't weigh real heavy on this decision.

[vertigo5110]

This is upsetting to me. Now, the REAL results of this purchase are coming to the surface. The Chronicle is reporting that there WILL be jobs lost, routes cut AND that Continental customers could experience and increase in rates.

From the consumer's perspective, especially the Houstonian consumer, this sounds like a TERRIBLE idea. This is really frustrating. I guess I'll be flying American Airlines/Southwest from now on. Congrats United on just making the flights of many Continental flyers less convenient.

Continental merger may be costly for consumers | Business | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

[Spade]

I really don't like this. There are too many airlines merging and soon there will be a monopoly on air traffic because there will be few in the air. Maybe I'm wrong on this. But this does not look good.

[Oildog]

^^Agree less competition means higher $$$. Ever flown in Canada? Look at the prices where there is little competition.

[irishlover]

Doesn't the Justice Department have to approve any merger? And, won't that potentially take several years?

"Antitrust review of a merger's impact on consumers focuses on nonstop routes where parties compete directly, proximity of hubs and other big operations, and the potential for fare increases in concentrated regions."

So, it's really not a done deal until the Justice Department gives its OK.

[the mean fish]

Originally Posted by LAnative10

Perhaps in Medicine you are right. Chicago also has a very large port. I don't know which port is more important.

Not that I think it really matters in this conversation about United/Con. but the port of Chicago doesn't even come up in the world ranking of ports for number of containers or total tonnage.

http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/Stati...GS%2020081.pdf

Houston is 15th in the world and second in the US when it comes to total tonnage. The port of Houston is vital to the entire US economy in many ways.

Hang on, I found some more info.

http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/Stati...%20TONNAGE.pdf

Based on only US ports Houston ranks 2nd while Chicago is 33rd (2008 numbers based on total trade)

[kcatheart]

How does this affect (if at all) people who already bought tickets for Continental flights in the future months?

[blkgiraffe]

Originally Posted by LAnative10

Perhaps in Medicine you are right. Chicago also has a very large port. I don't know which port is more important.

Either way, other than NYC, LA, and perhaps San Francisco, Chicago is the most prestigious city in the US.

But either way, that wouldn't weigh real heavy on this decision.

I agree with everything except the ports. Regardless of what type of port Chicago has; it doesn't come close to Houston's.