Originally Posted by FlyerJosh
is interesting to say the least. If Mesaba throws out the pilot contract and the pilots walk (resulting in liquidation of Mesaba), there might be legal grounds for MAIR to throw out the scope clause that the Mesaba pilots have that limits fleet type at Big Sky.
I can see 3 ways that Big Sky could get bigger planes-
Whole thing is interesting. Just saw today that Big Sky is pulling out of Great Falls, Kalispell and Spokane. For a Montana based airline, I don't view that as a good thing. Their back yard looks like it is beginning to stink. (They must be under considerable financial strain).
In addition, they only go after EAS (Essential Air Service) contracts. i.e "Handout" contracts from the government, instead of developing business/demand. Recently, they have bid on several contracts. (5) cities in Kansas, (5) in Nebraska (1) in Colorado, (1) in N. Dakota (3) in California and Nevada (1) in Wyoming, and they LOST them all. They lost them to Skywest, Great Lakes, and Mesa. To me, this says they are not aggressive or serious about building their business.
I wouldn't expect bigger planes since they cannot even fill their current 19 seater. EAS or not.
Looking back at the past, they always seem to weather the storm, but . . . they might not be ablle to these days. Just a thought.