I am by no means a Frontier cheerleader, but this math doesn't math. The article appears to be referencing Q1 since it was printed in May and the chart only shows one quarter in 2024. Frontier's operating loss was $31 million, or 3.5%. To lose 11.6% (the number referenced by the article) Frontier would have lost $100 million. So how do we more than triple expenses in the quarter as a result of a new pilot contract? You can't. Looking further, Spirit's total (all employee) salary wage and benefit expense for Q1 was 29% of all expense. Frontier's was 25%. This is all employees, not just the pilots, and this is using's Spirits higher CASM compared to Frontier's CASM. There is simply no way adding 2 or 3 cents per seat mile gets us to -11.6% for Q1. It is impossible math.

Finally, spirit lost more money in Q2 than they did in Q1 and F9 turned a profit (albeit tiny). If CASM was the deciding factor, why didn't Frontier lose more money in Q2? CASM isn't the issue here. Will Frontier's CASM increase when they agree to a new contract, of course, but no amount of raises will generate an operating loss of double digits (assuming all other variables remain equal). All of this mental circus ignores the RASM side, and the article started to go down that road. I think Frontier has a solution to finally impact RASM in a positive manner for the first time in years (decades?). Frontier (or any LCC) has never had a cost problem, they have always had a revenue problem. I think that landscape is changing.