Leeham News and Analysis
There's more to real news than a news release.
New American Airlines now a reality; big challenges ahead
December 6 passed without fanfare, but the New American Airlines is a reality.
The first day of stock trading, under the symbol AAL, begins today. The Ft. Worth Star-Telegram–the hometown paper of the Ft. Worth-based AA–has this story, posted Saturday. The New York Times provides this analytical piece.
We know the US Airways management team reasonably well and we think they will be much better than the former American management. American hasn’t been the same since Bob Crandall retired in 1998. Crandall’s successor, Don Carty, had a lousy tenure. He originated the acquisition of Reno Air, a small airline headquartered in Reno (NV), for reasons that passed all understanding. In doing so, he created ill will with the AA pilots union (which, in fairness, wasn’t hard to do with this bunch of malcontents), creating all sorts of labor issues. Carty also acquired Trans World Airlines, another merger of mysterious motives that appeared more to do with market share than business sense. TWA’s only US hub by this time was St. Louis (MO), a mere 250 miles from AA’s massive Chicago O’Hare hub. TWA’s fare structure was low, competing as it was with fellow-hubber Southwest Airlines and able to attract traffic on price rather than quality.
We’ll never know whether the TWA merger would have been a success. The 9/11 terrorist attacks happened shortly after the acquisition, and by 2003, American was on the ropes. Carty negotiated steep concessions from the employee unions, but the deal unraveled when it was revealed that management simultaneously lined up for tens of millions of dollars in executive bonuses. Carty was forced out in the quid pro quo to complete the concession deal.
Carty’s successor, Gerard Arpey, gained respect from the employees. Over the next few years, more concessions were sought by Arpey as he strove to keep American from following all its peers into bankruptcy. But those bankruptcies allowed all the competitors to shave pension plans, cut wages and benefits and other costs while American remained burdened with higher costs across the board. In November 2011–10 years after 9/11–American finally succumbed and filed for Chapter 11. Arpey, who disagreed with the decision, resigned and was succeeded by Tom Horton.
We were never impressed with Horton, particularly with his view that he deserved $20m in the bankruptcy restructuring. He’s non-executive chairman of American but will leave the company soon. He provided this farewell message to employees.
Doug Parker, the CEO of US Airways and America West Airlines, who engineered the merger, is the new CEO of American. Parker and his team never got the respect we think they deserved for keeping US Airways alive, profitable and competitive with perhaps the weakest route system of the US legacy airlines.
Parker was an early proponent of adopting ancillary fees, a practice passengers really don’t like. But the industry had changed dramatically and free meals, free checked baggage and other stuff of history became just that for all the airlines: history. Today, most carriers make their profits from fees and not the tickets they sell.
Parker will have challenges to bring American back into the forefront of top tier airlines. Its reputation and employee morale have been battered. US Airways continues to rank near the bottom of passenger surveys. Employee group integration at US Airways from the merger with America West continues to be difficult; now add American to the mix.
AA and US will continue to fly under separate banners and certificates for some time, following the examples of United-Continental and Delta-Northwest. Integration of reservations systems, frequent flier programs and so on will undoubtedly present huge challenges. We fully anticipate passenger disruptions, also following the pattern of the other mega-mergers.
One of the things we expect to see is an employee contest for a new livery to replace the one adopted by Tom Horton. The tail logo is just awful, though the fuselage and stylized eagle are fine. When America West and US Airways merger, Parker held an employee contest and the winner is what’s painted on the US Airways planes today. It was a good was to involve employees. Then legacy paint jobs of the predecessor airlines were added to the fleet. We have no doubt this will happen at the New American. There are plenty of aviation geek ideas for an American livery. Some may be found here. From this link, you can click through to various other sites for some pretty creative ideas. We like several of the renderings at this website. The last two are what Horton should have adopted.
Audacity and hypocrisy: the Boeing 777X RFP
We received an email from a Reader, who works for Boeing, about the details that emerged last week of Boeing’s Request for Proposals for the site location for the 777X:
I went to your site today to see what you had on the leaked RFI, and I have to say the whining by your crowd of Airbus fanboys is just astounding. Given all of the support given to Airbus for the A380, with Hamburg filling in a protected wildlife sanctuary, giving billions of euros of infrastructure. Changing laws so they could snatch land for Airbus. The hypocrisy just makes me puke. Not one of your posters, nor you, even bother to look at what the over guys got. Nope, just bad, evil Boeing. You could do better, you know.
We replied to this Reader that shortly after the details emerged and we posted links to the newspapers that had them, our power went down for the next 16 hours. When it was restored, we had moved on to other things. The email prompted us to go back, look at the comments and ponder the Reader’s premise. Here is what we came up with:
Airbus, engine OEMs make the case for A340 future
Airbus held a summit December 4 for stakeholders in the A340 to explain how there continues to be life after production ended and despite being a four-engined airplane in a two-engine world.
Key to the future of this out-of-production airliner is increasing the capacity of the A340-600 to an exit-limited 475 seats and for Rolls-Royce to alter its Total Care engine maintenance Power-by-the-Hour terms and conditions to reduce costs.
Airlines, financiers, appraisers and the engine makers were invited by John Leahy, chief operating officer-Customers of Airbus. Engine providers CFM International, Rolls-Royce, Lufthansa Airlines and Hi Fly, a small European airline, made presentations in addition to Airbus.
Airbus produced 246 A340-200/300s and 131 A340-500/600s; 227 and 131 respectively are in operation or parked.
|
Status |
A340-200 |
A340-300 |
A340-500 |
A340-600 |
|
In Service |
19 |
175 |
20 |
90 |
|
Stored |
6 |
27 |
14 |
7 |
Airbus guaranteed the residual value on an unknown number, and has strong motivation to see these airplanes continue in service, according to one person familiar with the situation.
Details from Boeing RFP obtained by St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Charlotte Observer
The St. Louis Post Dispatch just posted a story detailing some of the information from the Request for Proposals from Boeing for the 777X assembly site.
The Charlotte Observer–which obtained the RFP before the Post-Dispatch–has this story.
1pm PST: The Seattle Times now has a copy of the RFP, and here is its story.
Could Boeing face new NLRB complaint over 777X site search?
Could Boeing face a new complaint with the National Labor Relations Board, this time over where the 777X assembly site will be placed? A Cornell University labor professor thinks it possible.
The union-backed publication In These Times wrote on November 25 that Boeing’s shopping the assembly site around following the rejection of a contract offer by IAM 751 November 13 is reminiscent of the 2009 decision to locate the second 787 assembly line in South Carolina in the aftermath of a 57-day751 strike in 2008. The 751 District filed a complaint with the NLRB that that decision was an illegal retaliation and the staff agreed, filing a formal complaint against Boeing and demanding that the assembly line be relocated to Everett (WA). The complaint was dismissed in 2011 when 751 and Boeing agreed to locate the 737 MAX line in Renton (WA) in exchange for a four year extension of the 2008 contract. The secret negotiations took place a year before the 2008 contract was to expire.
Odds and Ends: 787 software; Hazy on 777X; 787 reliability; A340 lemon; 777X won’t be built in WA: MO politician; Chinese war games
787 software: Aviation Week reports that continuing software issues bedevil the Boeing 787.
AvWeek also takes a closer look at Japan Airlines’ decision to take the 787 off certain routes due to the icing issues of the GEnx engines. Most incidents occurred on the 747-8 but one happened on the 787. The 747-8 also uses the GEnx engine.
Hazy on 777X: Steve Udvar-Hazy, CEO of Air Lease Corp and one of the most influential people in commercial aviation, offered his assessment of the 777X specifications in an interview with Aviation Week. He also commented on the future of the A350-800 and the prospect of an A350-1100.
787 reliability: Aviation Week also reports about Boeing’s efforts to improve the reliability of the 787.
A340 Lemon: Bloomberg News, tipped by our select e-newletter distribution yesterday, wrote this story about an Airbus summit to discuss the future of the A340 family in the secondary market. We’ll publish our e-newsletter for general readership with an expanded version next Monday in this column.
Boeing will nix WA for 777X: So says a Missouri politician. KOMO TV (ABC Seattle) ran a piece yesterday in which a Missouri politician said all indications they’ve had from Boeing is that the 777X won’t be built in Washington State. The clip is not on the KOMO website, however, but we saw it while watching the news.
Pacific War Games: “War is Boring,” a blog, ran a war game involving the current Chinese action declaring a defense identification zone in airspace between China and Japan. We’ve no clue over the quality of this blogger or the war game, but we were reminded that the Pentagon had war game scenarios that were important in the KC-X competition. This was one reason the Northrop Grumman-EADS KC-330 MRTT won the competition (later overturned)–because of the vast distances involved in the Pacific and the assumption that China may be successful in a conflict of what’s called Anti-Access, Access Denied (A2AD) that would have isolated US bases in Guam and Japan. The USAF concluded the EADS KC-330’s longer range vs Boeing’s KC-767, greater loiter time and greater refueling capacity was important to the selection.
Airbus, Boeing production backlogs stretch to late this decade, early next decade
Airbus and Boeing production backlogs stretch to late this decade and into the beginning of next decade for most of their commercial aircraft, based on today’s production rates.
We previously wrote about the waning sales of the 777 Classic and the A330. Some mainstream media subsequently examined 777 Classic sales but not the A330 sales.
Both OEMs will be challenged to meet intended production timelines for select currently in-production models.
- Airbus and Boeing officials each said they plan to build the A320ceo and 737NG families two years into the entry-into-service of the A320neo and 737 MAX families. Airbus’ ceo backlog appears to meet this desire, but the 737NG currently has a backlog that only matches the 2017 EIS of the 737 MAX.
- Airbus says it plans to produce the A330 into the 2020 decade (most statements suggest until about 2022).
- Boeing has a 2020 EIS for the new 777X program, but the backlog of the 777 Classic currently extends only to 2017.
- The USAF wants replacements for its 747-200 presidential fleet in 2021 but Boeing’s backlog for the 747-8 only extends to 2017.
The following chart is based on current backlogs reported by Airbus and Boeing in respective data charts; and it is based on the current production rates of each program. For the new airplane programs, the chart assumes the current production rate and does not take into account the stepped ramp-up for the A320neo, the 737 MAX, the A350 XWB or the 777X. For the latter two, production rates are assumed at the A350’s announce plan of 10/mo and the 777 Classic rate of 8.3/mo. The 787 rate is assumed at 10/mo, although the rate is not quite there yet.
Does 777X assembly site matter to airlines? Yes, up to a point; and a retrospective to 2009
As Boeing awaits responses to its Requests for Proposals from 15 sites around the US and possibly Japan, Washington State officials, company employees and other stakeholders fret that Boeing will choose someplace other than Everett (WA).
Everett has all the logical advantages: the 777 Classic is assembled here. There are vast, mature facilities here. There is an experienced workforce here. As we note in our previous post today, there are a lot of points to ponder when it comes to choosing a site.
But what about the airlines? Do they care where the airplane is assembled?
This isn’t entirely clear. Emirates Airlines and Qatar Airways said at the Dubai Air Show they want the airplane built at one location, in the US, not outsourced to a bunch of countries and industrial partners in the fashion of the Boeing 787–an industrial model that proved disastrous for Boeing and the customers.
But do they care whether the 777X is built at Everett, Boeing South Carolina or some other site? Emirates and Qatar didn’t say, at least publicly. Etihad Airlines, another launch customer for the 777X, hasn’t said anything publicly. The first customer for the X told us that what’s important to it is an accessible location for inspections–in other words, a location with good air service, which could be one-stop connecting service.
This would rule in any of the cities that have been mentioned publicly in Boeing’s RFP search. It would rule out a city like Moses Lake (WA), which has ambitions of becoming an aerospace cluster but which has no airline service. The closest major airport is Spokane (WA), a 90 minute drive. Sea-Tac International Airport is a three hour drive. Lufthansa seems unconcerned whether Everett or another site is the choice.
Lufthansa is also not a 787 customer, but officials are well aware of the issues and delays involved in the program. It seriously considered ordering the 787-10 but for route system operational requirements chose instead the Airbus A350-900. But for some 787 customers, assembly location does matter. We understand from our sources that some customers want their Dreamliners assembled in Everett, not Boeing South Carolina, where by most accounts slow production rates and quality control issues remain a challenge.
Retrospective to 2009
As we sort through the events surrounding the IAM 751, Boeing and the 777X, we went back and re-read some of the coverage from 2009 when Boeing put 787 Line 2 in Charleston. There are some similarities–notably Sen. Patty Murray’s involvement then and now–and a lot of differences. Here are links to our posts; be sure to click through to the links of newspaper coverage contained within our posts. Reading the stories linked have amazing relevance to recent events.
Boeing talks a sham: This story, in The Everett Herald, paints a much different picture than:
How South Carolina won the deal. Also: The click-through to The Everett Herald story from this link has a familiar ring to our “loyalty” post of November 21.
Back to today:
Stan Sorscher of SPEEA, the Boeing engineers’ union, has a guest column in The Huffington Post, taking Boeing to task (not a particular surprise) over the current site search and efforts to cut benefits with the IAM 751 “because they can.”
Danny Westneat, a columnist for The Seattle Times, wrote Sunday that perhaps Washington State should look beyond Boeing for aerospace. This isn’t new. We advocated this in October 2009 (just days before Boeing announced it would put the 787 Line 2 assembly in Charleston) at the Governor’s Aerospace Summit conference in Spokane (WA). Be sure to click on the link to the PPT presentation, too.