Originally Posted by
ChrisJT6
Growing a standalone airline's WB fleet 200% and trimming 95% of an airline's NB fleet via redundancy from a merger are two completely different animals. One is a pipe dream and the other is a nightmare reality from a common practice for companies seeking cost savings in mergers.
In summarizing: we are looking at a well know practice of merger redundancy versus your pipe dream that CAL was planning to somehow buy up a bunch of not for sale international WB routes and increase WB fleet 200%....ridiculous but obviously a weak SLI strategy.
CAL was and is still growing. No pipe dream there. Isn't that why most lual pilots voted yes? Narrowing your purchases to narrowbody aircraft to facilitate the redundancy you speak of....plausible and a reality. Look at how many narrowbody aircraft we have vs widebody. The fleet count speaks volumes.
The dream you speak and ridiculous argument you speak of is one of the worlds top three airlines supposedly shedding an entire fleet of aircraft, not for the the known and exorbitant cost of fuel or passenger demand, but to magically set up a merger more than two years down the road.
Who's smoking the unicorn horn now?