Michael Leskinen, the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of United Airlines, may have dropped the biggest hint yet about United’s intention of scooping of JetBlue, though he left plenty of plausible deniability…
JetBlue Merger? United Airlines CFO Says “This Industry Would Benefit From Some” M&A
Speaking at the the Barclays 43rd Annual Industrial Select Conference on February 18, 2026, Leskinen was interviewed by Brandon Oglenski, a Senior Equity Analyst at Barclays. Several parts of the interview were of interest, but perhaps most fascinating was when the discussion turned to mergers and acquisitions.
Oglesnksi: In your opinion, what should United do with excess cash, bolt-on M&A, larger M&A, share repurchases, dividends, debt paydown or internal investment?
Leskinen: That’s a good question.
Oglesnksi: Well, M&A has been a topic at this conference, not specific to airlines, but how do you feel about the environment right now, especially as you’re talking about low-margin airlines having to face economic gravity.
Leskinen: Well, this is a brilliant audience. That’s about how I feel about it, too. I think it’s a unique environment that …where M&A is possible. We’ll see how that plays out. But I do think that this industry would benefit from some.
Read what you want into that exchange. It could be he was talking about Spirt and Frontier not being able to go it alone. But as I read it, it was another subtle but strong hint that United seriously is looking at acquiring JetBlue.
Furthermore, as the Trump administration advances through its second term, I would think that “striking while the iron is hot” is critical. It still isn’t clear if even the Trump administration would bless such a merger rather than oppose it, but should a Democrat be elected in 2028, any hopes of a merger or even a much closer commercial relationship akin to the JetBlue’s Northeast Alliance with American Airlines will be dashed.
It may just be an inkling, but I’m feeling like United is going to make a move for JetBlue…if for no other reason than to ensure that Alaska Airlines (a far better partner for JetBlue in my mind) or American Airlines cannot do it.
Other topics were discussed as well in the wide-ranging discussion.
On International Growth
Leskinen confirmed that Pratt & Whitney powered 777s would be grounded this year, offsetting new aircraft delivery:
Some of the international growth, just to address that head on, since you reminded me, we did say that. We do have a few 777s that are Pratt powered, where I do not have parts for those engines. And so those aircraft are going to be grounded in the summer. And so it’s putting a little bit of pressure on our international ambitions in the short term. That will be resolved in 2027.
United may be able to scavenge much-need spare parts from P&W 777s recently retired in Japan and South Korea.
On the 737 MAX 10
As United takes delivery of more 737 and 787 aircrafts, will aircraft retirement increase? How important is the uncertified 737 MAX 10 for United’s growth plans versus sticking to the 737 MAX 9?
Oglenski: Okay. So should we assume that there’s going to be maybe some accelerated retirements to older aircraft?
Leskinen: We’ll see.
Oglenski: Okay. And as we think about cost performance and the MAX 10 and upgauging, how important is the MAX 10 to your long-term unit cost?
Leskinen: The MAX 9 is a great aircraft. The MAX 10 is incrementally better for us. But we’re going to have a good path forward with either. I am excited about the prospects of the MAX 10. And I think it’s really…it’s built for the United network in a lot of ways. So I think it’s going to be powerful. But our path to double-digit margins is not predicated on it.
On AA In Chicago
Leskinen, like the rest of United’s C-Suite could not help but throw some shade at American Airlines. When asked about the battle for Chicago O’Hare, Leskinen said of AA:
“Temporarily, they have a hub.”
Ouch…
CONCLUSION
As budget carriers struggle and Untied and Delta pull ahead in terms of profitability, we find ourselves in a unique time in the U.S. aviation industry. I can’t shake the feeling that United senses this is a unique opportunity for growth and will at least try to merge with JetBlue at some point in the next year and half. Many details have yet to be worked out and there’s full plausible deniability at this point, but Leskinen’s statements today strike me as very much a hint of what is to come.
Do you think a JetBlue-United merger is likely?
> Read More:
- United And JetBlue Expand Partnership, But Only One Side Earns Elite Status Credit
- DOT Approves United And JetBlue Blue Sky Partnership, Clearing Way For Loyalty Reciprocity
I have a hard time believing that even under Trump it would be approved. But who knows…Kirby just gives him a Gold Trophy and he might foster its approval. The very fact that they would have a stranglehold on the NYC market is an understatement and won’t go unnoticed. And if required to make concessions at JFK I wonder what the point would be for United.
Alaska is a MUCH better fit and would easily be approved. I’m sure UA will make sure though that they pay too much. But the reality is that they would create a viable Number Four Carrier that could challenge everyone. That is if they FINALLY change their name and get out of the provincial branding game with Bob Marley on their tail.
Yeah, I have wondered how Southwest manages with regional branding. But Alaska’s uber-regional branding takes all if it to a new level.
It gives them a presence in Florida which they need.
I doubt that Florida is the draw here. UA could gradually build up there easily without JetBlue if it was so important. It’s the New York market that is the prize given slot controls (JFK) and congestion (EWR). Not just that, but it’s a market that generates significant premium fares for Transcon and Europe. This is all about New York. The rest of the B6 network will probably be scaled back if UA takes them over.
Bingo.
Bend the knee. Pay the bribe. Done. Anything is possible, if you’re willing to pay and don’t care about bad karma. Any pardon is for sale, too. Merge away! We are now post-Soviet Russia. Watch out for open windows…
Wow, the Biden DOJ pooped all over the silly Jet Blue/Spirit merger and now United may feel the can effect a merger with substantial NYC implications. The pendulum has swung.
If Jet Blue is really for sale, AA would be a far superior buyer and it would provide AA an opportunity to course correct in the Northeast.
I fully agree that AA would be a better partner than UA.
It seems the groundwork for a future merger has already been laid. For now, it’s just a partnership. The ultimate goal is a merger. UNITED wants something that JetBlue very dearly holds: a strong presence at JFK…
As usual, UA thinks big and plays big… More to come.
I both want it and don’t. My 2 favorite blue airlines? Yes, but I would rather see JetBlue merge with Hawaiian and become the dominant American airline. But that’ll never happen. I hope that if there is a merger, JetBlue will continue just as it has been, but under United’s thumb, or something like that. Like the AS-HA merger.
United doesn’t NEED Jetblue, but it’s a strategic anti-competitive move that gets UA significant access at JFK and BOS, as well as essentially creating a Florida business for them.
But the big opportunity is blocking AS or AA from getting their hands on Jetblue and a merger has seemed pretty inevitable to me since the first signs that there were even backchannel discussions.
UA talks alot and delivers a whole lot less.
There is no planet on which UA is allowed to acquire B6 as it currently exists. None.
and, if that does occur, DL will top it all with an acquisition of Southwest. There is far less overlap between DL and WN than there is between B6 and UA.
and they failed in that diatribe about AA to point out that UA has a $1 billion/year labor cost advantage that will end when UA employees decide that sacrificing their own personal and family finances is not worth it to help UA.
“As budget carriers struggle and Untied and Delta pull ahead in terms of profitability…”
With comparable labor costs to AA, DL and WN, Untied’s profits will be closer to AA than DL
yes, Untied
Even if your number is correct, if UA made $3.8 BN and labor will be an extra billion, how does that put them closer to AA ($111 MN) than Delta?
AA is estimating closer to $1.8 billion for 2026; they may or may not be correct on that, Matthew, but UA is not paying market rates.
UA seems deathly afraid that AA can actually figure out how to dig itself out of the mess that it has been in for years and be able to sustain even some level of subsidy for ORD = nowhere near $500 million/year let alone the $1 billion that UA thinks AA will lose.
and specific to B6, it is ironic that AA and B6 are both significantly underperforming at JFK; UA might succeed in being able to convince the DOJ which is a whole lot less political than alot of people think – but AA and B6 are both unlikely to suddenly become profitable at JFK. There are alot of slots at JFK that have to be used profitably.
the bottom line is that UA seems to think that it can engage in a dozen initiatives across its network to knock off competitors but it is highly unlikely it can do that and obtain profits even close to DL’s – which is far less focused on market share and far more about profitability.
I strongly predict that UA will strategically be no better off by 2030 than they are now or will be a much less profitable airline if they succeed at pushing forward w/ all of these initiatives that try to fix their domestic strategic failures over the past 50 years.
Tim when your talking points against any post on any platform take more words to defend than the original post, you aren’t coming from a position of strength.
ok, then.
the first sentence contains the facts that matter.
AA is expecting to see higher revenue; UA’s cost advantage will shrink its profits.
none of which changes that the notion that UA could buy B6 in its entirety is a dream that has little chance of reality and it has nothing to do with politics.
UA can’t succeed because B6 can’t make its operation work even at B6 costs; UA’s are higher.
UA can’t make a niche spoke operation work in a DL hub and if it can, then it invalidates the entire point that UA is making against AA at ORD.
DL will either crush UA at JFK or AA will succeed at ORD. Both cannot be true.
That doesn’t make any sense. Jetbue is tiny compared to United, while southwest and delta carry almost the same number of passengers.
While we are saying outlandish things… maybe United and AA will merge. That way United can for sure win the battle at ohare
Tim is a clown who goes around to every airline blog and spouts his Delta affinity. No one really takes him seriously.
Tim Dunn says, “There is no planet on which UA is allowed to acquire B6 as it currently exists. None….and, if that does occur…”
Hilarious.
Since when did grounding airplanes mean retiring them?
We will see, won’t we?
Derek says, “Since when did grounding airplanes mean retiring them?”
Exactly. Just making stuff up.
Only when UAL has renewed a contract with flight attendants, then UAL would be in a better position to initiate a merger talk with Jetblue.
Or private equity investors would force Jetblue to divide into pieces and sold to different airlines.
United taking over JetBlue would be disastrous for airline passengers in the NYC area, where United already exercises far too much control. Accordingly, this administration will cheerfully agree to such a merger. I can live with Kirby’s petulant slights; United and Delta having a duopoly controlling the NYC market is a different story.
If AA got a lot of gates, I could see this being okay…but I’m 100% against it. I’m not sure JetBlue can go it alone, but if it merges it should be with Alaska.
Concur completely. Forming a viable competitor from JB and Alaska would be great for passengers and the domestic market.
Jetblue and Alaska combined would have zero presence in the middle of the country. Could they compete just flying to the coasts?
I think so…maybe we will see one day!
United Airlines doesn’t give a rip about Florida, other than to maximize flights from existing hubs. Why on earth would UA put resources into a seasonal, leisure market when they could put those aircraft into fleshing out DEN and markets where they dominate?
UA still has routes they haven’t fully restored since 9/11 and have way too many routes still served by RJ’s.
The only value JetBlue would bring is slots and gates at JFK and an instant larger presence in BOS. The fleet is a mishmash of planes and UA has made it clear it doesn’t want or need them.
But moreover, JetBlue’s “hub operation” at JFK ended ages ago. They are basically a point-to-point carrier in a large origin-and-destination market. UA would never actually flesh out a genuine hub operation at JFK in competition with EWR so they don’t need as many gates as JetBlue has. UA has no interest in buying JetBlue so they can fly something like JFK-RDU in competition with itself EWR-RDU and they aren’t going to build a parallel transatlantic operation, even if JetBlue’s gates could accommodate widebodies.
But even more fundamental, JetBlue has massive debt and has been taking operating, let alone net, losses for years. Given its stock price, UA could have bought JetBlue years ago with just the loose change in the couch cushions in the pilot lounge in ORD if it wanted to.
When you’re taking operating losses year after year, the first order of business is “stop doing that.” Until JetBlue, or somebody else, comes up with a plan to stop doing that, nobody is even going to think about buying them.
I agree. It is more likely the UA CFO is daring another airline to make the mistake of acquiring JBLU. Makes for good click bait though.
kinda like B6 daring to acquire B6 so DL could then propose to acquire WN so that NOTHING is allowed involving the big 4 in any way?
The difference is that DL doesn’t NEED to acquire anyone.
It has organically built more of its network in other airline strength markets than any other airline in the history of US aviation.
UA has repeatedly said how much it NEEDS to be in JFK – because of the dumb decision of leaving almost a decade ago.
DL could easily pull UA and B6′ bluff and propose a merger with WN or AA, both of which have far less overlap than UA has with B6 just to prove that none of the big 4 should ever be allowed to merge with anyone else.
If UA can’t figure out how to serve all of NYC with the assets it has, then they just might have to live with their mistakes.
US consumers should not pay the price for UA’s strategic ineptitude.
I think you’re not taking into account that while FL may be a leisure-heavy market, it also has a huge Latin diaspora. UA arguably has the weakest position on Caribbean/Central/South America service from east of the Mississippi compared to DL & especially AA. I live in South Florida, and I can assure you that nobody really likes AA; we take it because it has a hub at MIA. A B6 acquisition would give UA an instant launching pad to grow Central/South American service organically. NK is circling the drain, and when it finally goes under, there’ll be plenty of space to grow at FLL (not to mention a rather large hole in south-of-the-border service created).
Obviously, as well, if a merger is proposed, UA is almost inevitably going to have to give significant ground at JFK, EWR, or perhaps even both in order to pass federal hoops.
Yeah, that’ll be interesting, but UA won’t try to serve Latin America or the Caribbean from Florida. It would be silly to duke it out with American in a market in which they will still be #2. This is still a low yield market and UA would be better served with deploying the assets elsewhere.
“Why on earth would UA put when they could put those aircraft into fleshing out DEN and markets where they dominate?”
probably because UA has a TON of new narrowbodies on order with not many places to put them. It’s a fun thought exercise to say “put them in DEN” but DEN is quickly running into a gate constraint issue as is most every other United hub.
United ordered a ton of planes and good for them, but they have to put them somewhere.
UA doesn’t have as many narrow bodies on order as it might appear. They have just under 100 MAX 9’s yet to be delivered. The company has made it clear that in the future they will have fewer flights with bigger planes. To that end, UA has not indicated an interest in replacing its A319’s and 737-700’s, which currently number just over 100. The company has already started phasing out its A320’s which number 65 or so.
UA has said that it will “trickle down” larger narrow bodies to replace smaller ones as they come available, so new MAX 10’s will replace MAX 9’s, which will then replace MAX 8’s and A320’s, with then MAX 8’s replacing A319’s and 737-700’s.
The company seems to be indicating its perfectly happy with nothing smaller than MAX 8’s and then United Express 76-seaters.
When you look at it that way, the company doesn’t really have as many narrow bodies on a net basis as it first appears. About 1/3 of the 165-odd MAX 10’s coming are set to have lie-flat first class which suggests their use on transcon (which have been neglected for lack of appropriate fleet) and near-Europe and Latin America.
That’s still 100 net MAX’s which is nothing to sneeze at and that doesn’t even count the A321’s coming. But when you look at all the markets that were served by mainline flights before 9/11, the Huntsvilles and the Milwaukees and the Richmonds that now have all or nearly all, UAX service that UA has indicated that will gradually go away, it’s clear UA’s fleet plan does not allow for taking on a whole new operation like JetBlue’s.
UA has said it is already bumping up against physical limits as to how many pilots it can train because of things you would never think of like hotel rooms in Denver.
Setting aside the financial realities of JetBlue, company whose stock price is so low UA could have bought them with pocket change, and nearly $10 BILLION in debt and long term lease obligations, it doesn’t seem logical that UA would have an interest, strictly on an operational basis, of taking on a operation that is heavily weighted towards a season leisure market that is expensive to serve.
Can’t wait to see the look on Michael Leskinen’s face after Pam Bondi says it’s OK to merge with JetBlue to take over even more slots and flight timings at east coast airports, then Attorneys General from New York (Letitia James) Connecticut (William Tong) and Massachusetts (Andrea Joy Campbell) charge right back into court to sue. Popcorn is ready.
So, just positing an operational question: JetBlue struggles every time there is rough weather in the East and isn’t know for its history of quick recovery or customer service addressing these periodic break-downs. Why in the world would UA saddle itself with the many challenges that would come with a JetBlue merger? United has worked hard to build the brand into something respectable through improved service, catering, hard product and crew development. Why risk all that effort?
United needs to take care of its flight attendant before considering emerging anything. They can’t even take care of what they have in house now.
Maybe the AFA also needs to take care of its FAs?
Buying Jet Blue would enhance the eastern seaboard (and Chicago) for United. (helping fend of AA) United has been trying to compete with AA to the Caribbean and South America and JetBlue would open the door immediately.
Chess pieces.