DOCSLIB.ORG

Master's Thesis Mergers and Acquisitions in the U.S. Airline Industry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Master's Thesis Mergers and Acquisitions in the U.S. Airline Industry Master’s Thesis MSc in Finance and Investments Mergers and acquisitions in the U.S. airline industry An event study of stock data observations from the last three decades May 15, 2017 Author: Lars Christian Hjorth-Johansen Supervisor: Björn Preuß Consisting of 165,841 characters including spaces - equivalent to 79 pages. ABSTRACT After the Deregulation Act of 1978 changed the U.S. airline industry from being government controlled to a liberalized market, a merger wave struck the industry where consolidation among a great proportion of airlines created the legacy carriers of today. Three decades later, the industry have seen a new wave, only this time with a completely different underlying motivation. From previously consolidating in order to grow geographically and improve operational performance, the new millennium have seen U.S. airlines merge in order to survive as bankruptcies and financial distress have challenged the existence of the majority of U.S. airlines. Where there exists evidence of collusive pricing as a result of the mergers in the post- deregulation time period, there are not any recent research including mergers of the 21st century. With a foundation based on previous studies, this thesis aims to answer two hypotheses. The first hypothesis asks whether there are positive abnormal returns for bidder and target airlines involved in an airline merger at the time of announcement. The second hypothesis looks at the existence of collusion among rivals through the market power hypothesis, which suggests that rivals benefit from competitors’ mergers as collaboration limits output and increase prices. The hypotheses are tested through an event study where all available stock data from U.S. airlines between 1985 and 2016 is included, thus only including data from a liberalized industry. Through measuring the normal performance of the stocks, abnormal returns are calculated and analyzed. The data have been divided into smaller samples to better explain the economic performance of the merging airlines and their rivals through the three-decade horizon, and in addition looked at collectively to yield an overall conclusion. From the available data, there are evidence of both bidder and target airlines achieving positive abnormal returns upon an M&A announcement, in line with previous research. While the data initially indicates the existence of market power through collusive pricing, the inclusion of new data makes this study decline the market power hypothesis for the dataset as a whole, indicating that rivals experience slight disadvantages from their competitors’ mergers rather than benefits. II Table of Contents ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................ II 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 1.1 MOTIVATION 2 1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT 3 1.3 STRUCTURE 4 1.4 ACADEMIC RELEVANCE 6 2 THEORY .............................................................................................................. 8 2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW 8 2.1.1 DEFINITIONS OF M&As ..................................................................................................... 9 2.1.2 M&A EFFECT ON STOCK PERFORMANCE .................................................................... 9 2.1.3 M&As IN THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY ............................................................................... 11 2.1.4 EFFICIENCY AND THE MARKET POWER HYPOTHESIS ........................................... 13 2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 15 2.2.1 THE EFFICIENT MARKET HYPOTHESIS ...................................................................... 16 3 M&AS IN THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY .......................................................... 18 3.1 OVERVIEW OF THE U.S. AIRLINE INDUSTRY 18 3.1.1 THE EVENTS THAT CHANGED THE AIRLINE INDUSTRY ....................................... 19 3.1.2 MODERN AIRLINE CONSOLIDATION .......................................................................... 20 3.2 MOTIVATION FOR AIRLINE M&As 21 3.2.1 OPERATIONAL MOTIVATION ........................................................................................ 22 3.2.2 STRATEGIC MOTIVATION ............................................................................................. 23 3.2.3 RESTRICTING ENFORCEMENT ...................................................................................... 24 3.3 THE CASE OF THE AMERICAN – US AIRWAYS MERGER 25 3.3.1 MAJOR ISSUES PRE-MERGER ........................................................................................ 25 3.3.2 POST-MERGER EFFECTS ................................................................................................. 26 3.4 HYPOTHESES AND AREAS OF FOCUS 27 III 4 STATISTICAL FRAMEWORK ..................................................................... 28 4.1 RESEARCH DESIGN 28 4.2 THE EVENT STUDY FRAMEWORK 29 4.2.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE MODEL .................................................................................. 29 4.2.2 DAILY DATA ..................................................................................................................... 30 4.2.3 EVENT WINDOW .............................................................................................................. 31 4.2.4 MEASURING NORMAL PERFORMANCE...................................................................... 32 4.2.4.1 CONSTANT MEAN RETURN MODEL ................................................................... 32 4.2.4.2 MARKET MODEL ..................................................................................................... 33 4.2.4.3 ECONOMIC MODELS .............................................................................................. 33 4.2.5 SELECTION OF MODEL ................................................................................................... 33 4.2.6 ESTIMATION WINDOW ................................................................................................... 34 4.2.7 MEASURING ABNORMAL RETURNS ........................................................................... 35 4.2.8 THE JOINT TEST ............................................................................................................... 37 4.2.9 WILCOXON NON-PARAMETRIC SIGN TEST ............................................................... 39 5 DATA AND PROCESSING ............................................................................. 41 5.1 DATA COLLECTION 41 5.2 TYPES OF AIRLINES 42 5.3 DELIMITATIONS 43 5.4 CROSS-CORRELATION AND SKEWNESS 45 6 RESULTS ........................................................................................................... 46 6.1 DESCRIPTIVE DATA 46 6.2 MERGING AIRLINES 49 6.2.1 BIDDER AIRLINES ............................................................................................................ 50 6.2.2 TARGET AIRLINES ........................................................................................................... 51 6.2.3 ALL MERGING AIRLINES ............................................................................................... 54 6.3 RIVAL AIRLINES 56 6.3.1 COHERENCE WITH KNAPP STUDY .............................................................................. 57 6.3.2 COHERENCE WITH SINGAL STUDY ............................................................................ 58 6.3.3 ACCESS TO NEW DATA .................................................................................................. 60 IV 6.3.4 COMBINING ALL RIVALS ............................................................................................... 62 6.3.5 CONSOLIDATED RESULTS ............................................................................................. 65 6.3.5.1 MERGING AIRLINES ............................................................................................... 65 6.3.5.2 RIVAL AIRLINES ...................................................................................................... 66 7 DISCUSSION ..................................................................................................... 69 7.1 CONCLUSION 69 7.2 WEAKNESSES 70 7.3 FUTURE EXPECTATIONS 71 7.4 FUTURE RESEARCH 72 8 BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................................. 74 APPENDICES ......................................................................................................... VII V List of figures Figure 1: Structure of the thesis ................................................................................................ 6 Figure 2: : Timeline of an event study .................................................................................... 30 Figure 3: The timeline of this event study .............................................................................. 35 Figure 4: Total number of yearly merger announcement in the United States ....................... 47 Figure 5: Available data of airlines involved in mergers in the United States ........................ 48 Figure 6: Number of mergers used in rival analysis and average number of rivals ................ 49 Figure 7: Abnormal returns of target airlines split into takeovers and consolidations ............ 54 Figure 8: Abnormal returns of target airlines .......................................................................... 56 Figure 9: Abnormal returns of rival’s data from Knapp (1990) and Singal (1996) ................ 60 Figure 10: Abnormal returns of rival airlines
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Living the World: a New Look at the Disabled in the Law of Torts
    Catholic University Law Review Volume 48 Issue 2 Winter 1999 Article 3 1999 Living the World: A New Look at the Disabled in the Law of Torts Adam A. Milani Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Adam A. Milani, Living the World: A New Look at the Disabled in the Law of Torts, 48 Cath. U. L. Rev. 323 (1999). Available at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol48/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Catholic University Law Review by an authorized editor of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLES LIVING IN THE WORLD: A NEW LOOK AT THE DISABLED IN THE LAW OF TORTS Adam A. Milani* Table of Contents 1. DISABILITY LEGISLATION: SOLVING A MEDICAL PROBLEM OR GUARANTEEING CIVIL RIGHTS? ........................ .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 328 A. "Medical Model" Statutes: People Should Overcome Their D isabilities to Rejoin Society ............................................... 329 B. "Civil Rights Model" Statutes and Case Law: Society Should Adapt to People with Disabilities ........................................ 331 II. THE DISABLED IN THE LAW OF TORTS ....................................... 339 A. Liability for Unprotected Hazards on Streets and Sidewalks .................................................................................................3 4 1 1. Pre-Civil Rights Movement Common Law: Landowners' Duty to Foresee Pedestrians with Disabilities vs. Blind Pedestrians are Contributory Negligent Per Se if They Fail to Use Assistive D evices ........................................ 341 2. Post-Civil Rights Movement Common Law: Blind Pedes- trians are Contributorily Negligent Per Se if They Fail to U se Assistive D evices ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Airlines Codes
    Airlines codes Sorted by Airlines Sorted by Code Airline Code Airline Code Aces VX Deutsche Bahn AG 2A Action Airlines XQ Aerocondor Trans Aereos 2B Acvilla Air WZ Denim Air 2D ADA Air ZY Ireland Airways 2E Adria Airways JP Frontier Flying Service 2F Aea International Pte 7X Debonair Airways 2G AER Lingus Limited EI European Airlines 2H Aero Asia International E4 Air Burkina 2J Aero California JR Kitty Hawk Airlines Inc 2K Aero Continente N6 Karlog Air 2L Aero Costa Rica Acori ML Moldavian Airlines 2M Aero Lineas Sosa P4 Haiti Aviation 2N Aero Lloyd Flugreisen YP Air Philippines Corp 2P Aero Service 5R Millenium Air Corp 2Q Aero Services Executive W4 Island Express 2S Aero Zambia Z9 Canada Three Thousand 2T Aerocaribe QA Western Pacific Air 2U Aerocondor Trans Aereos 2B Amtrak 2V Aeroejecutivo SA de CV SX Pacific Midland Airlines 2W Aeroflot Russian SU Helenair Corporation Ltd 2Y Aeroleasing SA FP Changan Airlines 2Z Aeroline Gmbh 7E Mafira Air 3A Aerolineas Argentinas AR Avior 3B Aerolineas Dominicanas YU Corporate Express Airline 3C Aerolineas Internacional N2 Palair Macedonian Air 3D Aerolineas Paraguayas A8 Northwestern Air Lease 3E Aerolineas Santo Domingo EX Air Inuit Ltd 3H Aeromar Airlines VW Air Alliance 3J Aeromexico AM Tatonduk Flying Service 3K Aeromexpress QO Gulfstream International 3M Aeronautica de Cancun RE Air Urga 3N Aeroperlas WL Georgian Airlines 3P Aeroperu PL China Yunnan Airlines 3Q Aeropostal Alas VH Avia Air Nv 3R Aerorepublica P5 Shuswap Air 3S Aerosanta Airlines UJ Turan Air Airline Company 3T Aeroservicios
    [Show full text]
  • Low-Cost Carriers and Low Fares: Competition and Concentration in the U.S
    Low-Cost Carriers and Low Fares: Competition and Concentration in the U.S. Airline Industry May 2003 Charles Najda Abstract This analysis will examine the current structure of the domestic airline market to determine the amount of market power incumbent carriers wield, the market dynamics that exist in short haul and long haul routes, and the impact of a new breed of air carrier, the low-cost carrier, on the distribution of airfares. The analysis seeks to determine if a low-cost carrier’s presence on a route significantly impacts airfares. This paper argues that previous analyses may overestimate the effect of route concentration, hubs, and other route specific characteristics on the distribution of market prices. The emerging significance of the low-cost carrier may indicate a shift in the structure of the airline market away from hub-and-spoke networks and towards point-to-point networks. The significance of low-cost carriers suggests that government policies that enforce antitrust laws at hub airports may be ineffective; moreover, encouraging low-cost entry, through equal access to infrastructure, compacts the fare distribution and lowers the median fare. 1. Introduction This paper analyzes the current state of the airline market to determine the impact of a new breed of air carrier, the low-cost carrier, on airfares, the market dynamics that exist in short haul and long haul routes, and by what degree previous analyses overstate the importance of hubs and concentration. Although, financial turmoil surrounds the airline industry today, the evolution of the domestic airline market, in the United States, continues.
    [Show full text]
  • In-Flight Icing Encounter and Loss of Control, Simmons Airlines, D.B.A
    F PB96-91040I NTSB/AAR-96/01 DCA95MA001 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT IN-FLIGHT ICING ENCOUNTER AND LOSS OF CONTROL SIMMONS AIRLINES, d.b.a. AMERICAN EAGLE FLIGHT 4184 AVIONS de TRANSPORT REGIONAL (ATR) MODEL 72-212, N401AM ROSELAWN, INDIANA OCTOBER 31,1994 VOLUME 1: SAFETY BOARD REPORT 6486C The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency dedicated to promoting aviation, railroad, highway, marine, pipeline, and hazardous materials safety. Established in 1967, the agency is mandated by Congress through the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 to investigate transportation accidents, determine the probable causes of the accidents, issue safety recommendations, study transportation safety issues, and evaluate the safety effectiveness of government agencies involved in transportation. The Safety Board makes public its actions and decisions through accident reports, safety studies, special investigation reports, safety recommendations, and statistical reviews. Information about available publications may be obtained by contacting: National Transportation Safety Board Public Inquiries Section, RE-51 490 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20594 (202)382-6735 (800)877-6799 Safety Board publications may be purchased, by individual copy or by subscription, from: National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161 (703)487-4600 NTSB/AAR-96/01 PB96-910401 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT IN-FLIGHT ICING ENCOUNTER AND LOSS OF CONTROL SIMMONS AIRLINES, d.b.a. AMERICAN EAGLE FLIGHT 4184 AVIONS de TRANSPORT REGIONAL (ATR) MODEL 72-212, N401AM ROSELAWN, INDIANA OCTOBER 31, 1994 Adopted: July 9, 1996 Notation 6486C Abstract: Volume I of this report explains the crash of American Eagle flight 4184, an ATR 72 airplane during a rapid descent after an uncommanded roll excursion.
    [Show full text]
  • Mcdonnell Douglas MD-80/-90 Sorting: Line Nr
    McDonnell Douglas MD-80/-90 Sorting: Line Nr. 29.08.2021 Ser.Nr. Li.Nr. Type F/F Status Immatr. Operator Last Operator in service Engines Owner Rem. @airlinefleet.info M/Y until 48000 909 MD-81 1979 broken up N560MD none Producer/Prototype 08-1990 PW JT8D-210 broken up 1994 48001 917 MD-81 1979 accidented N1002G none Producer/Prototype 06-1980 PW JT8D-210 accidented on test flight Yuma 19.06.1980 48015 924 MD-81 1980 broken up N810NK none Spirit Airlines 11-2005 PW JT8D-210 broken up by 11-2005 48002 938 MD-81 1980 perm_wfu HK-4265 none AeroRepublica 11-2007 PW JT8D-210 48016 941 MD-81 1980 broken up 9Q-CJB none CAA Cie Africaine Aviation 02-2008 PW JT8D-210 48003 944 MD-81 1980 perm_wfu SE-DMT none Air Sweden 04-2011 PW JT8D-210 48034 946 MD-81 1980 broken up N800US none US Airways 04-2002 PW JT8D-210 broken up by 08-2007 48024 948 MD-81 1980 broken up LV-WPY none Austral Lineas Aereas 01-2007 PW JT8D-210 broken up by 05-2008, parts used for 48025 48004 950 MD-81 1980 perm_wfu HK-4255 none AeroRepublica 10-2007 PW JT8D-210 48025 952 MD-81 1980 perm_wfu LV-WFN none Austral Lineas Aereas 03-2012 PW JT8D-210 preserved at Morón Nat. Aeronautics Museum 48029 953 MD-81 1980 broken up N803ME none Midwest Airlines 02-2009 PW JT8D-210 bought by Allegiant Air for spares 48035 955 MD-81 1980 broken up N803US none US Airways 11-2001 PW JT8D-210 broken up by 02-2009 48005 957 MD-81 1981 perm_wfu HK-4259 none AeroRepublica 11-2007 PW JT8D-210 48017 958 MD-81 1981 broken up N811NK none Spirit Airlines 08-2006 PW JT8D-210 48026 960 MD-81 1980 broken
    [Show full text]
  • Proximity and Investment: Evidence from Plant-Level Data
    Proximity and Investment: Evidence from Plant-Level Data The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Giroud, X. “Proximity and Investment: Evidence from Plant-Level Data.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 128, no. 2 (May 1, 2013): 861–915. As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjs073 Publisher Oxford University Press Version Author's final manuscript Citable link http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/87688 Terms of Use Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike Detailed Terms http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Proximity and Investment: Evidence from Plant-Level Data∗ Xavier Giroud† September 2011 Abstract Proximity to plants makes it easier for headquarters to monitor and acquire information about plants. In this paper, I estimate the effects of headquarters’ proximity to plants on plant investment and productivity. Using the introduction of new airline routes as a source of exogenous variation in proximity, I find that new airline routes that reduce the travel time between headquarters and plants lead to an increase in plant investment of 8% to 9% and to an increase in plants’ total factor productivity of 1.3% to 1.4%. The results are robust to controlling for local and firm-level shocks that could potentially cause the introduction of new airlines routes, they are robust when I consider only new airline routes that are the outcome of a merger between two airlines or the opening of a new hub, and they are robust when I consider only indirect flights where either the last leg of the flight (involving the plant’s home base airport) or the first leg of the flight (involving headquarters’ home base airport) remains unchanged.
    [Show full text]
  • Uncontrolled Descent and Collision with Terrain, Usair Flight 427, Boeing 737-300, N513AU, Near Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, September 8, 1994
    Uncontrolled Descent and Collision with Terrain, USAir Flight 427, Boeing 737-300, N513AU, Near Aliquippa, Pennsylvania, September 8, 1994 Micro-summary: This Boeing 737 experienced an in-flight upset and crashed, destroying the airplane. Event Date: 1994-09-08 at 1903:23 EDT Investigative Body: National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), USA Investigative Body's Web Site: http://www.ntsb.gov/ Cautions: 1. Accident reports can be and sometimes are revised. Be sure to consult the investigative agency for the latest version before basing anything significant on content (e.g., thesis, research, etc). 2. Readers are advised that each report is a glimpse of events at specific points in time. While broad themes permeate the causal events leading up to crashes, and we can learn from those, the specific regulatory and technological environments can and do change. Your company's flight operations manual is the final authority as to the safe operation of your aircraft! 3. Reports may or may not represent reality. Many many non-scientific factors go into an investigation, including the magnitude of the event, the experience of the investigator, the political climate, relationship with the regulatory authority, technological and recovery capabilities, etc. It is recommended that the reader review all reports analytically. Even a "bad" report can be a very useful launching point for learning. 4. Contact us before reproducing or redistributing a report from this anthology. Individual countries have very differing views on copyright! We can advise you on the steps to follow. Aircraft Accident Reports on DVD, Copyright © 2006 by Flight Simulation Systems, LLC All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • The State of the Art Knowledge for Icing Accidents for General Aviation Aircraft, 65 J
    Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 65 | Issue 4 Article 4 2000 The tS ate of the Art Knowledge for Icing Accidents for General Aviation Aircraft William L. Maynard Wayne R. Sand Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation William L. Maynard et al., The State of the Art Knowledge for Icing Accidents for General Aviation Aircraft, 65 J. Air L. & Com. 719 (2000) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol65/iss4/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. THE STATE OF THE ART KNOWLEDGE FOR ICING ACCIDENTS FOR GENERAL AVIATION AIRCRAFT WILLIAM L. MAYNARD* WAYNE R. SAND** I. INTRODUCTION A MONG THE investigation reports listed on the National Transportation Safety Board's ("NTSB") web site' since Jan- uary 1995 involving fatalities, 49 mention icing as a factor. * William L. Maynard has specialized in handling aviation litigation for the past 20 years. During this time period, Mr. Maynard has successfully represented numerous product manufacturers, airlines, and repair stations in complex, multi- party, wrongful death litigation in state and federal courts across the country, with an emphasis on Texas litigation. Most recently, Mr. Maynard represented one of the defendants in the litigation arising out of the Mitsubishi MU-2 accident near Malad City, Idaho, discussed herein. He is a founding partner of one of the largest litigation specialty firms in Texas-Beirne, Maynard & Parsons, L.L.P.-Houston, Texas.
    [Show full text]
  • NATIONAL Transportatl.ON SAFETY a BOARD
    PB87-910402 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATl.ON SAFETY a BOARD ASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT SIMMONS AIRLINES, FLIGHT 1746 EMBRAER BANDEIRANTE EMB-IlOh, Nl356P I- NEAFi ALPENA, MICHIGAN ’ MARCH 13, 1986 J-?a&so: .: NTSB/AAR-87/02 orlr,, /5%7/p I3 Y-3 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT TECHNICAL'REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE 1 .Report No. 2.Government Accession No. 3.Recipient’s Catalog No. NT /l-l!? PB87-910402 4 . TwlJbtitle Aircraft S.Rewrt Date Simmons Airlines, Flight 1746, anembraer Bandeirante February 18,1987 EMB-llOP1, N1356P, Near Alpena,%ichigan, March 13,1986 6.Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8.Performing Organization Report No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address lO.Work Unit No. 4387C 11 .Contract or Grant No. El~~~~~~~~~~~~s~~~~~~~d Washington, D.C. 20594 13.Type of Report and Period Covered 12.Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Aircraft Accident Report March 13, 1986 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, D. C. 20594 14.Sponsqring Agency Code lS.Supplementary Notes .4_ 16.Abstract tAbout 2050 on March 13, 1986, Simmons Airlines flight 1746, an&mb~~r Bandeirante,w-i operating as a regularly scheduled flight, departed the Detroit Metropolitan Airport en route to Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, with a stop in Alpena, Michigan. The en route portion of the flight to Alpena was uneventful. However, due to the prevailing instrument meteorological conditions, the crew was unab3 to complete the instrument landing system (ILS) approach and land and they declared a missed approach at 2142. At 2153, the flight was cleared for a second ILS approach to Alpena. At 2156, the crew acknowledged that radar services were being terminated.’ This was the last transmission from the airplane.
    [Show full text]
  • Regular Meeting of 'Pre Board of Port Commissioners of the City of Oakland
    REGULAR MEETING OF 'PRE BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY OF OAKLAND The meeting was held on Tuesday, January 3, 1984, at the hour of 4:00 p.m. in the office of the Board, Room 376, 66 Jack London Square, Oakland, California, President Pineda presiding, due written notice having been given to members of the Board. Commissioners present: Creque, Eng, Goodroe, Higgins, Smith, and President Pineda - 6 Commissioners absent: Hunter - 1 Also present were the Executive Director; Deputy Executive Director; Director of Administrative Services; Chief Engineer; Assistant Chief Engineer; Director of Aviation; Airport Manager; Manager, General Aviation; Director of Fiscal Affairs; Director of Properties; Commercial Representative John Ablan; General Manager, Marine Terminals; Director of Public Affairs; and Secretary of the Board. Approval to Dispense with Bids for Purchase of Concrete Riprap Material for Emergency Stockpile, Oakland Airport was the subject of a memo to the Board from Port Principal Engineer Thomas H. Daniels, notifying the Board that the Ports emergency stockpile of riprap was used during the recent storm which damaged the dike at the Airport. Inquiries were made to acquire immediate replacement fill for emergency purposes. It was recommended that the Board find it to be in the best interests of the Port to dispense with formal bids and authorize the Chief Engineer to purchase 10,000 cubic yards of concrete riprap at a unit price not to exceed $4.00 per cubic yard. The recommendation was approved on passage of Resolution No. 28208. BOARF. OF PORT COMMISSIONERS MEETING OF JAN 1 7 1985( APPROVED ?is ED A RD.
    [Show full text]
  • Refguide 10 Ds Final 19Uhr09
    RefGuide_2010_Umschlag_Ref.Guide_Umschlag 29.03.10 12:36 Seite 1 ™ REFERENCE GUIDE STAR ALLIANCE ™ MEMBERS AND LEGEND KEY Star Alliance welcomes Aegean Airlines and TAM STAR ALLIANCE STAR Spanair Future Members www.staralliance.com 14th Edition, May, 2010 May, 14th Edition, REFERENCE GUIDE For Employees of Star Alliance Members Carriers RefGuide_2010_Umschlag_Ref.Guide_Umschlag 29.03.10 12:36 Seite 2 Star Alliance Members WELCOME 2010 Adria Aegean Air Canada Air China Airways Airlines AC CA JP A3 APRIL MAY JUNE OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Air New Air New ANA Asiana Welcome to the 14th edition of the Star Alliance Reference Guide. Zealand Zealand NH Airlines SMTWT F S SMTWT F S SMTWT F S SMTWT F S SMTWT F S SMTWT F S NZ NZ OZ 1 23 1 1234 5 1 2 1 23456 1234 Austrian Blue1 bmi Brussels OS KF BD Airlines 456 7 8 9 10 2345678 678 9 1011 12 3456 7 89 789 10 11 12 13 5678910 11 SN 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 14 15 16 1718 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 2010 marks another year of growth for the Alliance. This edition includes baggage, airport and frequent Continental Croatia EGYPTAIR LOT Polish 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 20 21 22 23 24 2625 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CO Airlines MS Airlines flyer information for both TAM and Aegean Airlines (to join second quarter).
    [Show full text]
  • The Decade That Terrorists Attacked Not Only the United States on American Soil, but Pilots’ Careers and Livelihoods
    The decade that terrorists attacked not only the United States on American soil, but pilots’ careers and livelihoods. To commemorate ALPA’s 80th anniversary, Air Line Pilot features the following special section, which illustrates the challenges, opportunities, and trends of one of the most turbulent decades in the industry’s history. By chronicling moments that forever changed the aviation industry and its pilots, this Decade in Review—while not all-encompassing—reflects on where the Association and the industry are today while reiterating that ALPA’s strength and resilience will serve its members and the profession well in the years to come. June/July 2011 Air Line Pilot 13 The Decade— By the Numbers by John Perkinson, Staff Writer lthough the start of the millennium began with optimism, 2001 and the decade that followed has been infamously called by some “The Lost Decade.” And statistics don’t lie. ALPA’s Economic A and Financial Analysis (E&FA) Department dissected, by the numbers, the last 10 years of the airline industry, putting together a compelling story of inflation, consolidation, and even growth. Putting It in Perspective During the last decade, the average cost of a dozen large Grade A eggs jumped from 91 cents to $1.66, an increase of 82.4 percent. Yet the Air Transport Association (ATA) reports that the average domestic round-trip ticket cost just $1.81 more in 2010 than at the turn of the decade—$316.27 as compared to $314.46 in 2001 (excluding taxes). That’s an increase of just 0.6 percent more.
    [Show full text]