Originally Posted by
Tranquility
I think there's a reason Dal & Ual aren't being as aggressive; they've both been down this road before (Ted, Song) and they know that low price/higher cost doesn't work in the long run. American never really dipped their feet in that pool, they'll learn, or burn through their $10 billion in cash while ****ing off investors... Either way, what they're doing is not sustainable. History has proven that.
Why do you say that it is not sustainable? We are sustainable. Ryan is sustainable and so is Easy Jet. Flying CRJs is sustainable as well as it seems and has been for almost 20 years. It is not the pilot salary that makes Spirit sustainable.
It is sustainable. They have tried it out of desperation back when Delta and UAL was still weak. I don't remember how many seats Song had. I doubt it was 30% more. I don't think they had ancillary revenue either. A lot has changed since 2006 when Song got shut down. The big guys are strong again. AA is flying a few 321s with like a 100 seats. They are definitely experimenting. If you can put 50 good people onto a CRJ 200, have them board through the ramp in the rain, throw their bags off due to fuel, and then fly them for 2+ hours into CVG, and still call that Delta Airlines and charge accordingly. Yes. You can also put them onto a 320 with 30% more seats and unbundle the ticket price.
Originally Posted by
Tranquility
Uhhhh, lots more than just Seattle (which is a modest population growth city).
IND, BNA, RDU, CLT to name a few large growing metropolitan areas we don't serve...
STL & MEM might have shrinking populations, but they seem to have our customer base...
Connect those dots with our core market.
True that. But where do you connect them into? ORD? DFW? Where? I don't think so.