Originally Posted by
Skyw
You must be the blind one! United is adding 50 seat flying! AirWisconsin? Duh!! ExpressJet is adding more 50 seat jets as well! United passengers absolutely hate the entire United product! 50 seat jets are much more comfortable rather than being trapped in a middle seat (no legroom) mainline flight. Passengers would rather have the E175 vs the E145. I hope you don't expand the E175 flying, but prepare to lose more market share. United is the best short out of all the airlines. $$$
You should probably read this, its a transcript from yesterdays call. Take special notice of what Kirby says about the your beloved 50 seaters.
Hunter Keay
It’s Hunter Keay at Wolfe Research. Appreciate the multi-year CASM guidance and you said it includes all labor deals going forward, you're kind of up against the sort of max that you're allowed on your scope right now, Scott and I'm wondering how you can be so confident on that cost guide, when you're probably going to need some give back and scope from your pilots to achieve some of this regional feeds you’re trying to do. So how do you put a dollar amount on the amount that you're going to have to pay for likely scope relaxation? Unless you reject the premise of the question that you don't need scope relaxation?
Scott Kirby
Look, I start with -- I completely understand why our employees and our pilots in particular are worried about scope, because they have seen us take, as I said in the presentation, take airplanes out of a place like Rochester to Chicago and put it in Newark Atlanta. And they know that was stupid and they were right. We should not have done that. But we're now doing it the right way. We're not just asking them to believe us, we’re making commitments, where actions speak louder than words.
We're up-gauging back in markets where we should be up-gauging and we're putting the regional jets in the right market. But our plan is predicated on having -- it's a critical element, having that high yield flow come through our hubs and we shouldn’t have been finding regional jets in a market like Newark, Atlanta but we're going to have to fly regional jets in places like Rochester, Minnesota or Elmira, New York or Columbia, Missouri. We're going to have to fly regional jets because that's the size of the market and we can't grow the mainline if we don't have that high yield flow coming through hubs.
And so there is a win-win. The reality is, we will grow the main – the reason pilots want scope and don't want us growing is because they're worried about jobs. But we're going to create more pilot jobs by having the right kind of aircraft flying, having the right kind of regional jets flying, which then gets to the next point. In the past, we could fly 50 seaters and
we've got a temporary surge in 50 seaters in 2018 because we don't have a choice today. But in the long run, we can't be flying in a market like Rochester, Minnesota with a 50-seater if our two competitors are flying two class regional jets.
We will have an uncompetitive product, just like we had an uncompetitive product in Newark to Atlanta for the local market, we will have an uncompetitive product for Rochester to the world and we won’t stay in that market. And that's bad for the mainline, because if we can't feed that high yield revenue into the hub, then we can't make it work. And I’d believe our pilots understand that.
Because they've been burned in the past, they're going to want some kind of commitment from us, but I think the deal winds up being, we don't need more airplanes, but we can wind up turning 50-seaters into larger regional jets, but we make some kind of commitment to them, whether it's a growth commitment or jobs or some kind of commitment that says, we're not just asking you to trust us that we're going to do the right thing, but it's not about buying scope relief. It's about addressing the issue and the issue is about jobs for them. And they've seen their jobs get outsourced and we do that.
That is a win-win-win for all of us, because it’s something we need to do anyway as we talked about extensively in the network deck and that's a win for our pilots and that's really what they want. The protection, they're not trying to protect themselves against Rochester, Minnesota. They're trying to protect themselves against us doing that Dallas to Chicago and we shouldn't be doing it in a market like Dallas to Chicago. And so, we are talking to them and I think we're going to wind up with a win-win-win that fits within our CASM guidance. So, we wouldn’t have given that CASM guidance today.