True statement. But, in investing, the degree to which someone is betting on a certain future can vary a lot. Personally, I don't put any stock (pardon the pun) in market timing, stock picking, technical or fundamental analysis, etc. Buy and hold doesn't work either. The method of investing I use is designed to produce a good, consistent yield over a long period of time, regardless of the future direction of the market or any particular stock price. And since I've been using it (5 years now), it has done that very well for me. Anyway, sorry for the brief diversion from the topic at hand.

I don't have an innate distrust for corporate management in general. I grew up in a family business, my degree is in business, and I ran my family's business for several years. If anything, I tend to see things from a management perspective. Unfortunately, what I have seen in the airline industry in general and at Delta in particular is very poor management that lacks ethics and is untrustworthy. What I have witnessed goes against everything I ever learned about business and proper management.

Now, I really liked what Richard Anderson had to say when he first got here. He still comes across as a good guy and says some really good things. I think his basic concept of running an airline is pretty good... with the exception of the infatuation with outsourcing, which I think is ultimately a disaster for the company (in addition to being bad for us). But where I have a problem with Anderson is credibility. He made a big deal when he first got here about how he was "not here to merge". A lot of comments about what a good business plan we had, etc. Then, all of the sudden, we're merging... and he's getting a huge payoff. Now, I understand that circumstances change, but it seems like he would at least want to address the discrepancy between what he said and what actually happened. So far, he appears to me to be just another "revolving door" CEO who is here to get his payout. I hope I'm wrong.

*Well, it worked. Actually, I don't hate LM but I think his strategy is wrong for us in the long term. Sure, he got us some short term gains. But at what expense? We have basically communicated to all concerned that restoration is off the table. We have acted as if our current situation is appropriate and acceptable. We have established our current compensation as a new baseline from which we would seek traditional improvements, contingent on the economy and financial performance of our company. I don't think this addresses the necessity of restoring our profession to appropriate levels of compensation. But, then again, that doesn't appear to be LM's goal, which is why I don't like him as MEC Chairman.