Continental & United Merger

[HtownWxBoy]

This may have already been talked about so apologize if it has been... but any idea on what will happen to the Continental building Downtown... will those employees just become employees of the new airline and stay in the building? Any idea?

[KinkaidAlum]

I've had horrible experiences with United. In fairness, they were all over 10 years ago, but they were so bad that I swore I would never fly them again and I haven't. I've had luggage totally lost. They never found the bag at all and did not reimburse me well. I've had them blame the weather for a missed connection even though the plane I was on from IAH to ORD had to make an emergency landing at MCI and we were on the ground for over 5 hours. That was the real reason I missed my flight but United blamed the weather and failed to provide me a hotel room because of it. I've missed so many connections at Chicago O'Hare that I can't count them on one hand.

I've heard mixed reviews lately about United and I guess that is a bit of good news overall because for about a 5 year period, I heard nothing but complaints about that airline.

The bottom line is there's a reason why Continental ranks above United in every ranking I've found on-line (ranging from OAG's Awards to Fortune Magazine to Petfinder.Com to Greenopia to JD Power + Associates to Wichita State University's annual rankings).

[Deut28Thirteen]

From conversations I've had, I think we'll see IAH grow, especially to places in Europe and possibly the Middle East.

The documents that both airlines have released don't have the merged operations certificate in effect until 2012, which means that they'll be operating as separate entities at least until that point. I would guess another 3-5 years after that sees the move to a specific city and at that point, whichever of the two make more fiscal sense, they'll have the airline move there.

Hopefully by 2012 they would come to their senses and see that Houston would be the better city to operate their business and to see it grow. I thought IAH had a pretty good number of flights to Europe and the Middle East already. I am not sure how much of that was Continental. How much flights do IAH have to Africa, Australia, and Asia cause seems like Continental was lacking in that dapartment where United does better in all those continents.

[citykid09]

Hopefully by 2012 they would come to their senses and see that Houston would be the better city to operate their business and to see it grow. I thought IAH had a pretty good number of flights to Europe and the Middle East already. I am not sure how much of that was Continental. How much flights do IAH have to Africa, Australia, and Asia cause seems like Continental was lacking in that dapartment where United does better in all those continents.

Lets all think positive like this.

[Houston19514]

Me, too - and it's visible from my bedroom window.

Not 2 years, quite yet. It's been white since Hurricane Ike.

Also, Southwest may be based in Texas, but its operational service out of Chicago is unparalleled by anything even remotely near the Texas market.

For the record, Southwest has 219 daily departures at Midway; 133 at HOU; 132 at DAL

[TheNiche]

For the record, Southwest has 219 daily departures at Midway; 133 at HOU; 132 at DAL

I'm not sure whether you were trying to back me up or refute me; most of the people that reply to me with data are adversarial.

Anyway...thanks for backing me up.

[skwatra]

I'm not sure whether you were trying to back me up or refute me; most of the people that reply to me with data are adversarial.

Anyway...thanks for backing me up.

i actually read that as him refuting you, citing 255 flights in TX versus 219.

either way, thanks for pointing that out. I had no idea SW had that many flights out of Chicago daily. I wonder what the numbers were for flights out of Houston before the Wright Amendment was revoked?

[KinkaidAlum]

Not sure why you'd assume we'd see more European flights out of Houston now. The fact of the matter is we've only seen non-stop flights to London, Paris, Amsterdam, and Frankfurt from Continental. The Frankfurt service is brand new and is a direct result of the Star Alliance relationship with Lufthansa. In fact, Paris and Amsterdam have both been downgraded quite a bit over the last few years, with both losing 777 service and Amsterdam losing the extra 4 times a week flight as a result of leaving SkyTeam.

Continental has been shuttling IAH passengers via Newark for years. Now, they'll get to shuttle us through Washington Dulles and Chicago as well.

I think we'll continue to see service to the four cities we already do, but Rome service is now a pipe dream and I'd be surprised to see us land Madrid when MAD already sees service from EWR and IAD.

Quite honestly, I can't see IAH expanded too much more. Maybe we'll land a China flight, but that's way more in doubt now that they can send us all through SFO or LAX. More flights to the South are possible, but there aren't many options left; among them Santiago, Chile and a return to Cali, Colombia and Guayaquil, Ecuador. Continental already serves all major airports in Central America and we don't have the O&D for more service to Brazil.

[lockmat]

They're already running a ad at chron.com with the very top banner. I guess they're slogan is "Let's fly together." Was that United or Continental's before? I think Continetnal was, "fly right," correct?

[Hartmann]

Not sure why you'd assume we'd see more European flights out of Houston now. The fact of the matter is we've only seen non-stop flights to London, Paris, Amsterdam, and Frankfurt from Continental. The Frankfurt service is brand new and is a direct result of the Star Alliance relationship with Lufthansa. In fact, Paris and Amsterdam have both been downgraded quite a bit over the last few years, with both losing 777 service and Amsterdam losing the extra 4 times a week flight as a result of leaving SkyTeam.

Continental has been shuttling IAH passengers via Newark for years. Now, they'll get to shuttle us through Washington Dulles and Chicago as well.

I think we'll continue to see service to the four cities we already do, but Rome service is now a pipe dream and I'd be surprised to see us land Madrid when MAD already sees service from EWR and IAD.

Quite honestly, I can't see IAH expanded too much more. Maybe we'll land a China flight, but that's way more in doubt now that they can send us all through SFO or LAX. More flights to the South are possible, but there aren't many options left; among them Santiago, Chile and a return to Cali, Colombia and Guayaquil, Ecuador. Continental already serves all major airports in Central America and we don't have the O&D for more service to Brazil.

The expanded Europe service is based on the need to service Africa and the Star Alliance hub at Munich. Continental started Newark-Munich and would love to start Houston-Munich but doesn't have the planes to do it.

Paris and Amsterdam were downgraded in favor of connecting passengers through LHR (bmi), FRA (Lufthansa), and Newark. The Paris flight was to feed Air France flights and the Amsterdam flight, while serving oil traffic (corporate contracts with Shell) also served as a connector to KLM's amazing African network.

With a flight to Brussels, Continental can connect to Brussels Airlines even more amazing African network and feed the oil traffic going to Lagos, Dakar, etc. through there.

Madrid is big because of Continental's Latin American routes. Right now there is a monopoly on routes from MAD to Latin/South America and prices are fairly high. Connecting in Newark or IAD would require a second connection in Houston anyway, why not make the flight direct and non-stop and use one of the extra planes you'll now have sitting around?

Guayaquil is still served by Continental. Santiago, Chile is a huge market, just take a ride on a LAN flight out of there, it's nuts and I think Continental has been eyeing it for a while now.

I doubt Houston will get a China flight, the money on them is too fickle. What I predict is, once the approval of the Tokyo Haneda slots goes through, Newark-Narita will become Newark-Haneda, linking up to of the largest cities in the world (Haneda is preferred over Narita in Tokyo) and Houston will get an extra Narita flight or a non-stop to Guam.

That's the other place I think we'll see some expansion, Guam. That place is a cash cow for Continental and I have no doubt that they will connect it with United's Asia network. With all of the government and local traffic going through there, they'll rake it in.

Sure they'll shuffle passengers to O'Hare and San Francisco to get to Asia, but the numbers on the London and Frankfurt flights have been really good. People prefer to connect in Europe (I know I do), and if Continental can feed African flights as well as connecting European traffic, they'll do it. The ATI that is in the process of being granted/reviewed for United, Continental, and Lufthansa is huge. They can share revenue and really push traffic for each other.

[totheskies]

I'm reserving judgement on the merger until I see how Smisek behaves in the United chair. If he really wants to stay "Houston's hometown airline" then he better put up some money for it. Keep the sponsorships for our sports teams, arts and music groups! Show us that you still care!!!

[longcat]

Fine - Chicago won and took the headquarters. Daley has another prize to tout. But I don't see why Houston has to sit idly by and stay commited to United then - is there any chance we could open up terminal E eventually to American, Delta...etc? Get some more competition on all the routes that CO/United are going to be assuming they can raise rates on now? I'm not familiar with how all the ownership / gates rights stuff works at the airport - are we locked into CO, or since we're just like any other city out there now without a hometown airline, can we stop showing any favoritism to CO? I'm sure the $ that CO put into the IAH upgrades came with some strings / contractual rights though.

[LTAWACS]

Lets all think positive like this.

I concur.

[VicMan]

United itself wants a "fortress" hub in Houston where it is dominant, and the airline will be willing to defend it.

Firstly, American already hubs Dallas. It will have no interest in trying to open a Houston hub.

Secondly Delta hubs at Atlanta to the east (Delta used to hub Dallas, but it closed its Dallas hub). However Delta could replace Air France on the Houston to Paris route if the airlines agreed to let that happen, because Delta and Air France share revenue on transatlantic flights.

Fine - Chicago won and took the headquarters. Daley has another prize to tout. But I don't see why Houston has to sit idly by and stay commited to United then - is there any chance we could open up terminal E eventually to American, Delta...etc? Get some more competition on all the routes that CO/United are going to be assuming they can raise rates on now? I'm not familiar with how all the ownership / gates rights stuff works at the airport - are we locked into CO, or since we're just like any other city out there now without a hometown airline, can we stop showing any favoritism to CO? I'm sure the $ that CO put into the IAH upgrades came with some strings / contractual rights though.

[Trae]

The expanded Europe service is based on the need to service Africa and the Star Alliance hub at Munich. Continental started Newark-Munich and would love to start Houston-Munich but doesn't have the planes to do it.

Paris and Amsterdam were downgraded in favor of connecting passengers through LHR (bmi), FRA (Lufthansa), and Newark. The Paris flight was to feed Air France flights and the Amsterdam flight, while serving oil traffic (corporate contracts with Shell) also served as a connector to KLM's amazing African network.

With a flight to Brussels, Continental can connect to Brussels Airlines even more amazing African network and feed the oil traffic going to Lagos, Dakar, etc. through there.

Madrid is big because of Continental's Latin American routes. Right now there is a monopoly on routes from MAD to Latin/South America and prices are fairly high. Connecting in Newark or IAD would require a second connection in Houston anyway, why not make the flight direct and non-stop and use one of the extra planes you'll now have sitting around?

Guayaquil is still served by Continental. Santiago, Chile is a huge market, just take a ride on a LAN flight out of there, it's nuts and I think Continental has been eyeing it for a while now.

I doubt Houston will get a China flight, the money on them is too fickle. What I predict is, once the approval of the Tokyo Haneda slots goes through, Newark-Narita will become Newark-Haneda, linking up to of the largest cities in the world (Haneda is preferred over Narita in Tokyo) and Houston will get an extra Narita flight or a non-stop to Guam.

That's the other place I think we'll see some expansion, Guam. That place is a cash cow for Continental and I have no doubt that they will connect it with United's Asia network. With all of the government and local traffic going through there, they'll rake it in.

Sure they'll shuffle passengers to O'Hare and San Francisco to get to Asia, but the numbers on the London and Frankfurt flights have been really good. People prefer to connect in Europe (I know I do), and if Continental can feed African flights as well as connecting European traffic, they'll do it. The ATI that is in the process of being granted/reviewed for United, Continental, and Lufthansa is huge. They can share revenue and really push traffic for each other.

Continental/United needs to step on Delta's throat, and have a non-stop to Lagos (from IAH), just like Delta does with Atlanta. It's a cash cow waiting to happen.

[asubrt]

Continental/United needs to step on Delta's throat, and have a non-stop to Lagos (from IAH), just like Delta does with Atlanta. It's a cash cow waiting to happen.

I was just thinking this last night. Nigeria is a country with such major oil ties and an exploding population that Continental (or United now) should definitely connect it with IAH.

Could the new airline add more Brazilian destinations? Belo Horizonte, Brasilia, Recife, and Salvador are all major cities and most of them are only served by American via Miami. You'd think with the giant new United network that IAH could fly to some of these destinations and compete with American.

Are there any other routes that may or probably be added, besides Madrid, Brussels, Munich, Lagos, Guam, Dubai, and Rome/Milan (unlikely, but there was mention before)?

[mfastx]

They're already running a ad at chron.com with the very top banner. I guess they're slogan is "Let's fly together." Was that United or Continental's before? I think Continetnal was, "fly right," correct?

Yes, I believe that Continental's was "work hard, fly right." However I don't think that "Let's fly together" was United's slogan, I think it's just the slogan for the new company.

[KinkaidAlum]

Actually, Continental dropped both Guayaquil, Ecuador and Cali, Colombia from the route map about a year ago. They no longer fly to either city. They did start double-daily non-stops to Bogota though.

Chile is a small country. The only way to make Santiago work will be via cargo. The new cold storage facility might help. However, with American offering service to DFW, it might be hard to land the much needed biz passengers to make such a flight work. I see this one as having a 50/50 chance of getting off the ground.

As for Madrid, until the US relaxes its transit visa stance, I just don't see it happening. The only way to make that flight work is to open up an easy one stop connection point to Mexico via IAH. Hopefully that will eventually happen under Obama's administration. Until then, it wont happen. There's just not enough O&D between Texas and Spain to work out on its own.

Brussels, Munich, and Zurich are all possibilities from IAH to connect to other Star Alliance hubs but none of them were announced before the merger and I am not sure that just merging with United will be enough to start such routes. Sure, Continental has lacked wide-bodies, but they had options to pick up used 777s and didn't take them. They've also delayed deliveries on options too. Additionally, and especially with regards to Munich and Zurich, those foreign carriers (Lufthansa and SWISS) could have helped out and stepped into the IAH market. Since they haven't, it makes me think the numbers are too risky.

Now, what I do think is likely is more regional jet growth from IAH. I could see more service to airports in Mexico like Culiacan, Puerto Escondido, Monclova, and the like. I also see more connections in the Midwest where United is strong (like service to Springfield, MO and Cedar Rapids, IA.)

[Hartmann]

Actually, Continental dropped both Guayaquil, Ecuador and Cali, Colombia from the route map about a year ago. They no longer fly to either city. They did start double-daily non-stops to Bogota though.

Chile is a small country. The only way to make Santiago work will be via cargo. The new cold storage facility might help. However, with American offering service to DFW, it might be hard to land the much needed biz passengers to make such a flight work. I see this one as having a 50/50 chance of getting off the ground.

As for Madrid, until the US relaxes its transit visa stance, I just don't see it happening. The only way to make that flight work is to open up an easy one stop connection point to Mexico via IAH. Hopefully that will eventually happen under Obama's administration. Until then, it wont happen. There's just not enough O&D between Texas and Spain to work out on its own.

Brussels, Munich, and Zurich are all possibilities from IAH to connect to other Star Alliance hubs but none of them were announced before the merger and I am not sure that just merging with United will be enough to start such routes. Sure, Continental has lacked wide-bodies, but they had options to pick up used 777s and didn't take them. They've also delayed deliveries on options too. Additionally, and especially with regards to Munich and Zurich, those foreign carriers (Lufthansa and SWISS) could have helped out and stepped into the IAH market. Since they haven't, it makes me think the numbers are too risky.

Now, what I do think is likely is more regional jet growth from IAH. I could see more service to airports in Mexico like Culiacan, Puerto Escondido, Monclova, and the like. I also see more connections in the Midwest where United is strong (like service to Springfield, MO and Cedar Rapids, IA.)

You're right about GYE, but it must have been killed later than that as I flew it in August of last year.

Santiago serves not only Chile but southern Argentina and since it's the only large airport in Chile, it makes sense to have a flight there. The funniest thing about Chile is the number Europeans who have relocated there and fly to the States. Cargo could definitely sustain it.

I don't know about any options to pick up used 777s (who dumped them?), the only option I thought they had was to pick up a number of 757-300s and they did. They had options with Boeing to build more 777s but opted to hold off for the 787. They actually have two 777s sitting on the tarmac at PAE waiting for replacement seats for the Koito screw-up.

Zurich and Geneva aren't as good of an option for connections as SWISS's network is rather weak and as an airline are sustained mostly by originating/departing traffic from those two cities. Munich has connection options but Lufthansa has a real love for Frankfurt and they only run a few flights to Munich from the U.S. United sees Munich as a huge hub and sends a decent number of traffic there. Brussels still makes sense to me because of the African traffic. Unless they decide to start a non-stop to Africa, Brussels Airlines fills the gap.

If the prices are right, people will put up with the transit hassle for flights to MAD. There are a decent number of people who transit the U.S. from Latin America on their way to Europe and Asia. Price is the key.

You're probably right about regional Mexican destinations, Continental is notorious for starting flights to random places in Mexico.

[20thStDad]

Maybe it's not United that I've been hating...I think it's mostly the Denver airport. That place sucks, from delays to power outages to the damn layout. Most of the times I've flown United, I went to or through Denver.

[skwatra]

just flew in to DEN tonight. definitely agree on that airport, its a pain. and that evil mustang scares me...

though the United staff was extra friendly. wonder if that had something to do with flying out of IAH? They offered me an Economy Plus upgrade though it was a middle seat. the flight attendants were super nice and friendly, and the pilots were out of the cockpit thanking people when we landed. almost didn't seem genuine.

[KinkaidAlum]

The Denver Airport was a good idea on paper and then 9-11 happened. Having one central terminal makes going through security a NIGHTMARE. Seriously, everyone who flies United (large hub), Frontier (large hub), Southwest (large operation), Continental, American, Delta, Air Canada, Lufthansa, Air Tran, Jet Blue, etc... has to go through security in the same building and then take a train to their terminal. HORRIBLE IDEA, Homies.

[Subdude]

The Denver Airport was a good idea on paper and then 9-11 happened. Having one central terminal makes going through security a NIGHTMARE. Seriously, everyone who flies United (large hub), Frontier (large hub), Southwest (large operation), Continental, American, Delta, Air Canada, Lufthansa, Air Tran, Jet Blue, etc... has to go through security in the same building and then take a train to their terminal. HORRIBLE IDEA, Homies.

That is the proposed eventual configuration for IAH, isn't it?

[lockmat]

Maybe it's not United that I've been hating...I think it's mostly the Denver airport. That place sucks, from delays to power outages to the damn layout. Most of the times I've flown United, I went to or through Denver.

I haven't been to Denver's airport, but I don't think IAH is the best design either.

[Hartmann]

That is the proposed eventual configuration for IAH, isn't it?

I don't think so. If it is, that's a terrible idea.

[Hartmann]

The Denver Airport was a good idea on paper and then 9-11 happened. Having one central terminal makes going through security a NIGHTMARE. Seriously, everyone who flies United (large hub), Frontier (large hub), Southwest (large operation), Continental, American, Delta, Air Canada, Lufthansa, Air Tran, Jet Blue, etc... has to go through security in the same building and then take a train to their terminal. HORRIBLE IDEA, Homies.

When Continental was located in terminal A with Lufthansa and Frontier, it wasn't so bad because you could clear security at terminal A and avoid the lines at the main checkpoint. Now that Continental is over on United's side of the terminal it stinks.

Pittsburgh, Atlanta, and Charlotte are laid out the same way.

[rgr]

The Denver Airport was a good idea on paper and then 9-11 happened. Having one central terminal makes going through security a NIGHTMARE. Seriously, everyone who flies United (large hub), Frontier (large hub), Southwest (large operation), Continental, American, Delta, Air Canada, Lufthansa, Air Tran, Jet Blue, etc... has to go through security in the same building and then take a train to their terminal. HORRIBLE IDEA, Homies.

washington dulles is laid out that way. i never thought it was so bad, but i guess i'm just used to it.

[lockmat]

Though no one said so, a thanks (or apology) might have been in order to Elk Grove Township.

Last summer, Chicago officials wooed United’s operations center away from Elk Grove Township, a suburb near O’Hare International Airport, with the promise of about $35 million in incentives, including $10 million in grants. About 2,500 United workers are scheduled to move into one of the city’s most prominent skyscrapers — the Willis Tower, formerly known as the Sears Tower — by this fall.

That corporate grab — and an earlier defection from Elk Grove Township to Chicago of United’s corporate offices for $5.5 million in incentives — may have helped seal the decision to base the combined United-Continental airline in Chicago, rather than Houston, home for decades to Continental.

United is already spending tens of millions of dollars getting its new Chicago offices in shape, and by the time officials in Houston heard about the likelihood of a merger, talk of incentives Houston might have offered wound up being largely “one-way conversations,” in the words of the Houston mayor, Annise D. Parker.

...

(Houston will, after all, be the merged airline’s biggest hub). [for the largest airline in the world; not bad]

...

No shame at all!!! lol, sad. Just can't shake the old Chicago ways.

As for Elk Grove Township, where United had been since the 1960s, there were no hard feelings, said Nanci L. Vanderweel, the township’s supervisor. And she was relieved that Chicago had won this competition.

“I can understand why they would be fighting,” she said of Houston. “But, believe me, if it had gone the other way, Mayor Daley would be throwing out every incentive that was legal and then some.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/05/business/05united.html?src=busln

[LTAWACS]

...

...

No shame at all!!! lol, sad. Just can't shake the old Chicago ways.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/05/business/05united.html?src=busln

This is why Chicago is inferior.

[GovernorAggie]

I don't think so. If it is, that's a terrible idea.

Subdude is correct.

http://system.gocampaign.com/files/file.asp?f=11430