Guess we will agree to disagree.
I have a bunch the old Vacancy Bids and the Min/Max's are a pretty good target of planned flying for the future.
While I get that a Displacement Bid Min/Max is basically going the opposite way, there still has to be a rhyme or reason for their numbers.
Are they planing 5 LHR flights in March or are they planing 7? Are we going to be flying into MCO? RSW? MIA or not?
The frustrating thing is that it seems the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.
We are parking (Short term and Long term) the 757 fleet, the 767 fleet.. not flying in May.
A few days later.. CCS msg that there will be flying in May (LOL).
Almost every day I get Open Pairing Alerts for EWR756 flying!

Keep in mind, just last week on an investor call a comment was made about removing 6 seats out of the 76 RJ's to comply with scope/furlough provisions. Yet then on another interview we hear about United putting bigger aircraft on routes to better social distance AND that we are (for the time being) aiming for a load of 70%.
So which is it.. we are taking a small aircraft and making it more dense and uneconomical or we are up gauging our routes?

IF the Min/Max's are useless, then why publish them?
If they are being published to abide by the contract, shouldn't they have useful information in them?

I do agree with your statement about the next DB. I expect the number of displacement will be less than the current 4148. Hell, 36 pilots are suppose to retire in July. There is also word that a small number of LCAL pilots have also put their paperwork in to retire due to the Continental frozen A Plan.
I'm hoping to see a displacement number somewhere in the mid to high 3000's. Hopefully.

Always
Motch