Been there, done that.
WE HATE TO SEE YOU GO, BUT BYE FELICIA, IE SPIRIT AIRLINES
- Thread starter tigerred59
- Start date
QP!
Verified User
Stop using your feelings to MAKE UP facts that are not facts.
What you say above is NOT factual. It is,by definition, counter factual. It is made up bull shit which is an assumption on a future that never happened.
We have no idea how the merger of struggling Airline A plus struggling Airline B would have turned out and it is entirely possible that it would lead to an even quicker failure of both.
Meaning if we want to play your counter factual game of just making stuff up based on feeling i can state 'that move by Biden admin kept Spirit afloat longer and actually may have saved Jet Blue. And my counter factual is every bit as valid as yours is.
It's possible that Jet Blue would be the one going out of business had they purchased Spirit. However, we have to "imagine" that... because it was not factual.
QP!
Verified User
it is also NOT FACTUAL to say Spirit would still be around if bought by Jet Blue, which is you asserting your feelings as facts when they are not.
It is every bit as relevant a guess to say 'both would be broke and Biden saved Jet Blue from that' as it is to go with your guess.
T. A. Gardner
Serial Thread Killer
I would assume that Jet Blue purchasing Spirit would have nixed most of Spirit's flights that duplicated their own to various locations unless there was data showing that both company's flights were full or close to full on those routes. Jet Blue likely would have kept routes that were different from their own to expand their network and possibly dumped routes that flew with low passenger counts different or not.
Correct. I did note that they would not maintain the policies and procedures that caused Spirit to fail back under their braindead hero and to therefore seek to sell.
I will also note that bankruptcy is not usually the end of a business, it usually is the first step towards getting out of a hole. Not every time, just usually.
QP!
Verified User
Ahhh here we go everybody.
Damocles now that i have called out his bullshit in a way he cannot dispute will pretend the below post by him was "satire" and not a WRONG point of FACT he tried to pretend it was...
In no way can Damocles know the counterfactual or alternate reality that Spirit and/or Jet Blue would have survived had they merged. It is entirely possible they BOTH would have failed before this point due to what can happen when you put one struggling company with another and it COMPOUNDS problems and does not fix them.
So again, it is every bit as much fact (by Damo usage) to say Biden saved Jet Blue but not allowing the merger.
QP!
Verified User
I would assume that putting shit with shit compounded the shit and both would fail in the way that shutting duplicate stores, and cutting inventories did not save Sears and Kmart.
Now what?
What happens next when we BOTH stop playing the guessing game and representing it as any thing more than that?
AI Summary:
Analysts often refer to the merger of two failing companies as a "double suicide" or "two drunks supporting each other." [1, 2]
The logic behind these attempts is usually to achieve "economies of scale"—the idea that by combining, the companies can cut overlapping costs (like having two HR departments) and find enough savings to become profitable. However, in practice, the massive debt, clashing cultures, and failing business models often combine to accelerate their collapse. [1, 2, 3]
Famous Examples
- Sears and Kmart (2005): Perhaps the most famous modern example. Both retailers were losing ground to Walmart and Target. Hedge fund manager Eddie Lampert merged them to form Sears Holdings, hoping that combining their real estate and brands would save them. Instead, the lack of investment in stores and the weight of their combined problems led to a long downward spiral and eventual bankruptcy in 2018.
- Penn Central (1968): The Pennsylvania Railroad and New York Central Railroad were bitter rivals that merged in a desperate attempt to survive a declining industry. Just two years later, the combined entity filed for what was then the largest bankruptcy in American history.
- Sprint and Nextel (2005): While not both "bankrupt" at the start, both were struggling against leaders like Verizon and AT&T. Their $35 billion "merger of equals" was a disaster because their cellular technologies were incompatible, and their corporate cultures (bureaucratic vs. entrepreneurial) clashed so violently that employees left in droves. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
Why These Mergers Fail
- Compounded Debt: Two companies with poor cash flow often end up with a debt load that the new, larger entity still cannot service.
- Internal Focus: Instead of fixing the products or winning customers, management spends years focused on the "integration" of HR, IT, and accounting systems.
- Culture Clash: Employees who were formerly rivals are forced to work together, often leading to "turf wars" and the loss of the best talent.
- Negative Synergies: The expected cost savings are almost always smaller than projected, while the costs to merge (severance, rebranding, legal fees) are much higher. [1, 2, 3, 4]
QP!
Verified User
Are you betting on Sears/Kmart merger to save Kmart... Sears?
As the same type synergies you and Terry are SPECULATING OVER to save the airlines are amongst the SAME ONES investors were told would save Kmart and bolster Sears.
Go place your money and tell them you are doing so based on FACT.
or switch now to 'satire' as you know you will as i continue to expose your stupidity. That much is FACT!
QP!
Verified User
You absolutely did in this post.
This is you saying you KNOW EXACTLY what the situation would be NOW if things were different.
So obviously you are at the 'satire' point unless you want to own a lie???
The only thing I was saying is that if Spirit was purchased by Jet Blue it would no longer be Spirit... It would be Jet Blue. Anything further than that is more of the imagination and feels of the people who want me to be saying something. It is you building the strawman you want to argue rather than reading what was written.
evince
Truthmatters
Then stop imagining this is Greg’s fault mmmkay?
evince
Truthmatters
who is Greg, Desh?
This is a bit like "Dammit Dave"... It's a meme. It basically does exactly what I said it does, it indicates some sarcasm...
QP!
Verified User
Nothing you say above fixes the lack of FACT and pure speculation of your post.
I will first address the point that changes NOTHING. As a fully combined Spirit and Jet Blue COULD GO BANKRUPT quicker. You have no way to address that counter factual as it is a probability that exists right beside your SPECULATION.
Second, when a more 'major brand' buys a discounter, it is more common in business to run it as a 'wholly owned subsidiary' for the first years (not comingling the discount brand with the better brand) while over the longer term phasing out the Discount brand and making it more of a sub brand within the company.
Again we DO NOT KNOW which way this would go so your attempts to claim FACT are lies or just stupid (or satire... you know you want to switch and say it so just do it).
---------
AI Summary:
Q: What is the general way a discount airline is usually acquired into a bigger brand airline?
A:
In the airline industry, keeping a discount airline as a wholly owned subsidiary is the most common initial strategy, but history shows that these brands are almost always rebranded or absorbed into the parent company eventually. Typically after a few years.
While companies like the Lufthansa Group have successfully maintained long-term low-cost subsidiaries (like Eurowings), the majority of these ventures follow a predictable "life cycle":
1. The Subsidiary Phase (The "Firewall")
Initially, a major airline will buy or start a discount carrier (often called a "Carrier within a Carrier" or CWC) as a separate subsidiary. The goal is to create a firewall between the two business models:
- Labor Costs: Subsidiaries can often hire pilots and crew under different, lower-pay contracts than the main airline’s unionized staff.
- Brand Protection: It prevents the "budget" reputation from devaluing the parent's premium service.
- Operational Isolation: If the discount venture fails, the parent is legally and financially shielded from some of the losses. [1, 2, 3]
2. The Integration Phase (The Rebrand)
Over time, the complexities of running two separate operations (different IT systems, maintenance, and marketing) often outweigh the benefits. This usually leads to the discount brand being absorbed or rebranded to match the parent:
- Southwest & AirTran: After Southwest acquired AirTran in 2011, it operated it as a subsidiary for a few years before fully absorbing it and rebranding everything to Southwest.
- United & Ted / Delta & Song: Both United and Delta created their own internal discount brands (Ted and Song) to compete with low-cost carriers. Both were eventually folded back into the main "United" and "Delta" brands to simplify operations.
- WestJet & Swoop: In 2023, WestJet integrated its ultra-low-cost subsidiary, Swoop, back into its primary fleet to streamline its business. [1, 2, 3, 4]
Summary of Outcomes
| Outcome [1] | Example |
|---|---|
| Full Rebrand | AirTran (rebranded to Southwest) |
| Absorption | Ted (folded into United), Song (folded into Delta) |
| Strategic Subsidiary | Vueling (owned by IAG/British Airways), Eurowings (Lufthansa) |
| Failed Independence | Go Fly (started by BA, sold to EasyJet) |
Airlines eventually find that "brand confusion" and "internal competition" (where the cheap subsidiary steals customers from the expensive parent) are more expensive than simply having a single, unified brand with different fare classes. [1, 2]