Originally Posted by
Timbo
Fixed your post, added option C.
Well. There's that.
The other thing I want to say about PS is I was reviewing the 2012 Q2 transcript and it reminded that as we reduce PS we also reduce non-union PS. And of course PS was what EB added as a way DAL was going to pay for its new pilot contract in there 2012 Q3 transcript: "And, Mary Jane, this is Ed. One additional thing, we also reduced the profit sharing going forward and that’s an important part of helping to fund that cost growth."
So there is a huge incentive to cut PS.
On the other hand, you have the IAM and FAs. You have them touting the PS, and rightfully so, in the lead up to Feb 14 and you have a lot of "we are happy to set aside" "proud" "team" etc.
IDK what they want at DAL. I'm sure they'd love to beat back IAM and then have us cut our own PS in C2015 but who knows.
I know it wouldn't be bad if we talked about what we want. And given the schizophrenic way we fill out surveys, see the results from the trip construction survey, I'm sure we are all over the freaking map.
Here's a question, how much of a profit should be held for shareholders, debt repayment and reinvestment? 80%, 60%, 90%, 50%?