Originally Posted by HTBH

Agreed on the 88 flying a different route. But the overall downgrading in the arguemnet is a valid point.

I think the 88 goes and flies a route that used to be flown by a 737.

That 737 goes and flies a route that used to be flown by a 757.

That 757 goes and flies a route that used to be flown by a 767.

The 767 is retired.

The 330 that "replaced the 767" goes and flies a route that used to flown by a 747.

The 747 is retired.

We bump a couple pax off for a few bucks but fly fully loaded jets.

We should not be viewing this as a "replacement" for the 88. We should view this (as management I think does) as a cheaper, lower paying aircraft that can move delta pax on routes that network selects for the aircraft based on the need and flexibility of the fleet. Just as in the wide body side they swap between the 767 and 330 on route and in the domestic side they swap between the 320 and 737 and 757 depending on time of year loads (SLC to DCA is a good example)...there are plenty of options to move pax. willing to bet that those options are going to include a lot of E190/ C Series and 321s / 737-900s domestically, and 330s internationally.

And when they do retire the 88s the load they used to carry is just absorbed between the 190/Cs and the 321/737 depending on the route.

Just one opinion....