Originally Posted by
Karnak
You don't get it, or you don't agree with it?
Maybe the business sense is the goal of strengthening key revenue sources, and lowering the cost of capital. The "to do" list at Delta has several items. The prioritization of those items might be different to us as pilots than it is to others who're accountable for all items on the list.
If you believe the corporation's primary purpose is to make shareholders happy, then describe how the company's current prioritization of the "to do" list doesn't serve that purpose. Show your math.
It's some of each. Perhaps you could explain how long it will take to earn back $4B dumped into LGA. In addition, you'd have to subtract any profit we'd have earned leaving things as-is and just use the added revenues when calculating how long it takes to earn back that $4B. I have no math to show you since I don't know what a typical flight in LGA earns us and how many years is suitable for a company like Delta to see a profit on a $4B investment. Meanwhile, I saw a single day's worth of storms hit the bottom line for $150M. I saw a power outage cause similar havoc. Then there's the passengers who will never fly DAL again because of these mishaps, how much more is that?
In regards to stock buybacks, seeing how these guys run IT I only hope they're better at managing business. I have no idea if they have any clue what they're doing or if management is lining their own pockets. Reference the financial meltdown of 2007, proof positive that all these Harvard MBAs really know how to do is line their own pockets without any regard for the country or their employees. If left to their own devices they'd do it again.
My analogy wasn't supposed to be a direct comparison of situations but a mindset. In both cases, both Bubba and Delta have far more important spending priorities but instead chase something shiny.