Originally Posted by
Han Solo
Perhaps you could explain how long it will take to earn back $4B dumped into LGA.
I can't explain it. That's why I never suggested it was a misguided business decision. If I was criticizing it, I'd provide some facts to support my claims. I'd use reasonable analogies, or cite analysis from others with more expertise in large-scale capital expenditures.
Originally Posted by
Han Solo
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.
There are a lot of variables. Maybe the best place to start is how much of that $4B will come from Delta. My guess is not all of it. Then we'll have to figure out how to measure any competitive advantage it gives us over the other airlines serving LGA. When we get a range of numbers representing the value, let's see if we can estimate the cost of not addressing the problems with the 3 terminals there.
Originally Posted by
Han Solo
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?
No clue. Maybe they'll go to United, which has never had a storm- or IT-induced problem. Or American. No disruptions there.
Maybe the number of "avoid Delta" passengers who missed flights due to our current terminal layout is similar. Maybe the number of passengers coming to us because they've vowed to never fly on "_____" again is a wash. Do you have any of that data?
There's a bit of irony in criticizing Delta for investing money in making something slicker and more efficient for our customers, while asking them to invest money in a slicker and more efficient suite of IT functions for us.
Don't get me wrong, I think investment in IT should be a very high priority, but I don't presume to think my ranking or relative emphasis should drive the decision.
Originally Posted by
Han Solo
In regards to stock buybacks, seeing how these guys run IT I only hope they're better at managing business.
Maybe a good place to start could be profitability and performance relative to peers?
Originally Posted by
Han Solo
I have no idea if they have any clue what they're doing or if management is lining their own pockets.
I hope to heck they're lining their pockets! I'm here to line mine! I'm not a hypocrite who thinks we should be the highest paid pilots, but our CEO shouldn't be at the top.
Originally Posted by
Han Solo
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.
I'm not well versed in the involvement of our executives in bundled mortgage debt packages or credit default swaps back then. Any connection you can provide would be appreciated.
Originally Posted by
Han Solo
My analogy wasn't supposed to be a direct comparison of situations but a mindset.
Good to know! Your analogy started with Bubba owing more than he earned. That made it the exact
opposite of Delta's situation.
Originally Posted by
Han Solo
In both cases, both Bubba and Delta have far more important spending priorities but instead chase something shiny.
Change "
far more important" to "
many" and I'll agree. Here's hoping they can get us a shiny new IT system!