memebag Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 CityKid has no appreciation for the Jet Age. Terminals A and B were the coolest. I wish they could have preserved them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDeb Posted February 12, 2008 Share Posted February 12, 2008 The last time I was at IAH I rode the little trian they have and its nothing to brag about. That thing looked like it was straight out of the 80s. The reson I rode it is because I had just gotten back from Atlanta's airport and theirs is top of the line. Atlanta's is like a mini subway system in the airport and the airpot is also way nicer then IAH. Agian, when I got back to the Houston airport I walked around and it was very 70s looking. All I saw that was kind of interesting was a cow statue in a space suit with a Texas flag in his hand.The Atlanta airport is horrific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 Continental talking with American, not just UnitedBy Susan Carey | Of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL2:40 PM CST, February 15, 2008Continental Airlines Inc., which already is in preliminary talks with UAL Corp.'s United Airlines about a possible merger, also has discussed the concept with AMR Corp.'s American Airlines, said a person familiar with the situation........But a person familiar with the matter said Continental and United aren't in the final stages of negotiations by any means. Continental hasn't yet signed a confidentiality agreement with United that would precede serious discussions, this person said.http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi...0,7366803.story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanS Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 Continental talking with American, not just UnitedBy Susan Carey | Of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL2:40 PM CST, February 15, 2008Continental Airlines Inc., which already is in preliminary talks with UAL Corp.'s United Airlines about a possible merger, also has discussed the concept with AMR Corp.'s American Airlines, said a person familiar with the situation........But a person familiar with the matter said Continental and United aren't in the final stages of negotiations by any means. Continental hasn't yet signed a confidentiality agreement with United that would precede serious discussions, this person said.http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi...0,7366803.storyWhat benefit would there be in a merger with AA? There's too much overlap in their networks... If that happened, then CO's IAH hub could be seriously threatened given AA's dominance in Latin America (and using their hub, in Dallas, to get there vs. IAH)... I think it was American who said that airline mergers are a good thing because you can Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 A Continental-American marriage would be bad for Texas. It wouldn't be too bad for other places where the two aren't competing with each other, but in Texas it would mean less choice, less competition, less reason to keep prices low and service high.Again, my home airports are ORD and MDW. When I moved to Chicago from Houston American wasn't much of a player at ORD. Then something changed and it became very competitive. It got a non-stop into Shanghai, started advertising out the wazoo, and now I never fly United anymore. American's prices are so much lower and it goes so many more places than United. In Chicago, American keeps United running. I expect it's a similar relationship between American and Continental in Houston and Dallas. That's a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 It won't happen though. Continental is just using American has leverage to get a better deal out of United. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 Yesterday the story in the Chicago paper was that the Continental-United talks were serious. The United CEO would become chairman of the merged airline, and the Continental CEO would run things as CEO. My friend at Continental says it will effectively be a United takeover, but I think that is pure speculation. My guess is that the headquarters will remain in whatever city's politicians most need appeasing. I also think that it would make sense to ditch the United name and keep Continental. United has an absolutely wretched reputation, while Continental has a pretty good one (for an airline that is). So Psychic Subdude predicts that the bargain will be that Chicago gets the HQ in exchange for keeping the Continental name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H-Town Man Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 This is bad, bad, bad. Houston cannot lose its airline to Chicago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanS Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 This is bad, bad, bad. Houston cannot lose its airline to Chicago.Hmmm... wonder what they're saying in Chicago? ...someone is going to lose... and some people who I know who work at CO say its not going to be them... whatever that means... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 Yesterday the story in the Chicago paper was that the Continental-United talks were serious. The United CEO would become chairman of the merged airline, and the Continental CEO would run things as CEO. My friend at Continental says it will effectively be a United takeover, but I think that is pure speculation. My guess is that the headquarters will remain in whatever city's politicians most need appeasing. I also think that it would make sense to ditch the United name and keep Continental. United has an absolutely wretched reputation, while Continental has a pretty good one (for an airline that is). So Psychic Subdude predicts that the bargain will be that Chicago gets the HQ in exchange for keeping the Continental name.This was said in an article yesterday. Looks to me that the HQ would remain in Houston. With Houston also being cheaper to live in. Continental being the more prosperous airline and having the better name recognition (positively) is the reason. So:1. Houston is cheaper2. Is growing faster3. Not as sprawled4. Airport is not as crowdedThose are some of the reasons to me.Also this from a Chron comment:The other Chron article on the possible merger from today indicates that the Continental CEO (Kellner) would be the CEO of the merged company in a CO-United marriage. That could possibly mean the HQ would be Houston as well.Isn't United the one that just recently came out of bankruptcy (or very close to it)? I doubt that the same CEO that that happened under would be the head CEO of a Continental-United company. So, with Kellner keeping the CEO position, the HQ should remain in Houston.Oh, and this also came from that article yesterday:Continental, the nation's fourth-largest airline, would prefer to remain independent but determined it wouldn't remain on the sidelines if larger players merged.So maybe, CO should merge with an airline like Alaska to beef up its Western presence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KimberlySayWhat Posted February 16, 2008 Share Posted February 16, 2008 Hmmm... wonder what they're saying in Chicago? ...someone is going to lose... and some people who I know who work at CO say its not going to be them... whatever that means... Who's "them"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanS Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Who's "them"?"They" => good citizens of Chicago. "Them" => CO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanS Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 Who's "them"?"They" => good citizens of Chicago. "Them" => CO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
citykid09 Posted February 17, 2008 Author Share Posted February 17, 2008 If this happens, Houston better fight for the HQers. You know Chicago's greedy a** will and already is. Step up Houston!The city just got to a point where it recoverd form Compaq and Enron, don't push it back even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 If this happens, Houston better fight for the HQers. You know Chicago's greedy a** will and already is. Step up Houston!The city just got to a point where it recoverd form Compaq and Enron, don't push it back even more.Really? What point was that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted February 17, 2008 Share Posted February 17, 2008 This was said in an article yesterday. Looks to me that the HQ would remain in Houston. With Houston also being cheaper to live in. Continental being the more prosperous airline and having the better name recognition (positively) is the reason. So:1. Houston is cheaper2. Is growing faster3. Not as sprawled4. Airport is not as crowdedThose are some of the reasons to me.Unfortunately the HQ decision won't likely be made on the basis of a neat checklist of civic attributes. My point stands about appeasing the relevant politicians. Also, if Houston wants to be the headquarters of the merged firm, now is the time to open the wallet with tax incentives. Isn't that what got Chicago the headquarters when Boeing moved?More broadly, I really don't buy the argument that all these airlines need to merge. All they are doing is trying to reduce competition and increase prices to consumers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 More broadly, I really don't buy the argument that all these airlines need to merge. All they are doing is trying to reduce competition and increase prices to consumers.To the extent that most airlines haven't been profitable, a couple big mergers might not be all that bad. I'm not sure on this one, though. I've never really taken a close look at the dynamics of the airline industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.