Originally Posted by
ToiletDuck
Rick I'm not trying to rain on your parade when I post these so don't bite my head off. I'm literally praying you're correct. But being Devil's advocate I'd make the case that this could mean UAL is simply losing an incredible amount of money and is doing any and everything to keep the place afloat. UAL was the first to initiate bag fees because of how bad a pinch they are in. Regional feeders aren't always cheaper. If cutting domestic frequency of flights is the route they want to go then it could make sense to cut the regional flights and do fewer, but fuller, mainline flights. Obviously I'm hoping your correct as it's jobs for all of us but lets not kid ourselves and be unprepared for could come.
Personally I'd rather the jobs and airplanes stay at mainline, so it's not really my parade...what I think is going to happen and what I would like to happen are two seperate things, and unlike some people, I can keep the two straight.
If a 120-seat 737 is flying with 80 pax...it is losing it's ***.
Downsize it to a 50/70 seat RJ, then not all 80 pax get to fly...this drives prices up which MIGHT make a full 50/70-seater profitable. Maybe.
If they are going to replace each 737 with two RJ's, then they are stupid of course.