US Air Plans to “Merge” with Delta
Odd choice of word – merger – to describe an otherwise hostile takeover.
Since most mergers fail, wouldn’t it seem that anything deemed to be hostile might be a bad bet from the start?
On the surface it sounds good. Greater reach with more routes. It could be great. But if you play the odds, you’ll see that some seventy percent fail. In other words, the owners are worse off than before the merger.
I wrote an article a few years ago titled: Why Half of All Mergers End http://www.beyondresistance.com/htm/popups/half_mergers.html  where I explain this in more detail.
Rick
November 15th, 2006 at 8:33 pm
Most mergers are intended to make someone (ownership, stakeholders, shareholders) money, usually in the short-term without proper consideration of how the merged entities can work together to produce something of long-term value.