Position: "...that's right, ma'am: not a 'pilot', just a 'co-pilot'..."
Posts: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riddler
I'm sure that Tilton views the expansion as "providing more feed for our regional carriers."
I was going to ask if this is Aer Lingus or Lufthansa, but I'm with the UAL guys on the topic of outsourcing. It's not like we don't have the same problem ourselves, with AF doing 8 out of 8 JFK-CDG daily flights.
I was going to ask if this is Aer Lingus or Lufthansa, but I'm with the UAL guys on the topic of outsourcing. It's not like we don't have the same problem ourselves, with AF doing 8 out of 8 JFK-CDG daily flights.
Apparently UAL doesn't have the assets(airplanes /pilots) to fly to Madrid and make a profit but we can find them to fly to these 3 new destinations.????
Position: "...that's right, ma'am: not a 'pilot', just a 'co-pilot'..."
Posts: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Nelson
Apparently UAL doesn't have the assets(airplanes /pilots) to fly to Madrid and make a profit but we can find them to fly to these 3 new destinations.????
Exactly.
Except, technically, these assets are probably not going to be used to make a profit. The DAL strategy to the Africa routes was to pick destinations that could support one, but not two, carriers. You'll have to compete.
Interestingly enough, DAL was foced to upgrade LOS to a 777 by the Nigerian government, because a 767 was deemed unacceptable. I wonder if this attempt by UAL will work. If not, then it's down to Accra, for a good old fashion nut-kicking contest with DAL.
Except, technically, these assets are probably not going to be used to make a profit. The DAL strategy to the Africa routes was to pick destinations that could support one, but not two, carriers. You'll have to compete.
Interestingly enough, DAL was foced to upgrade LOS to a 777 by the Nigerian government, because a 767 was deemed unacceptable. I wonder if this attempt by UAL will work. If not, then it's down to Accra, for a good old fashion nut-kicking contest with DAL.
We'll go first.
Hopefully Glen T. isn't getting into these markets to lose money. Doesn't he already have enough leverage in contract negotiations??
Apparently UAL doesn't have the assets(airplanes /pilots) to fly to Madrid and make a profit but we can find them to fly to these 3 new destinations.????
No there was never a discussion of whether or not UA had the airplanes/pilots to fly Madrid. What was the discussion was could it be done profitably with UA metal. If you remember we did serve MAD at one time and pulled out due to losses. That was followed by Spanair flying IAD-MAD, then IBERIA (the spanish flag carrier by the way) flying IAD-MAD. The common link to those two carriers was that service was stopped due to not enough demand for a daily IAD-MAD service.
You guys go on and on about one flight codeshare and yet we have LH flying IAD-FRA, ORD-FRA, LAX-FRA, SFO-FRA. We have hundreds of RJ's flying OUR routes and yet you focus on ONE codeshare flight.
Position: "...that's right, ma'am: not a 'pilot', just a 'co-pilot'..."
Posts: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony Nelson
Hopefully Glen T. isn't getting into these markets to lose money. Doesn't he already have enough leverage in contract negotiations??
I don't know how to run an airline (then again, neither does Tilton), but I think some moves are more punitive than others. No move is made in this industry that isn't competitive, but some seem designed with the naive hope of making money, some with the sadistic (and more realistic) aim of hurting the competition too.
I find it hard to imagine UAL really hopes to win these routes, but it'll be very easy for this move to dilute our yields, and make both of us marginally unprofitable, whereas these routes are currently said to be some of our best money-makers.
Similar Threads
UAL Seeks Mosquitoes, Oil, Better Beer
????
Linear Mode
