Originally Posted by
USN(Ret)
There's no need for the wise crack answers. You only reinforce why I often spend hours on the interstate to find the closest 737.
Let's take a look again at a few of the answers....
Originally Posted by
myoface
Depends on the price the pax pay for each ticket.
Originally Posted by
Golden Bear
For a majority of CRJs, those that operate under Fee For Departure agreements with mainline carriers, the BELF is 0. The regional airline gets paid the same either way.
I've had a roundtrip that was empty both ways and called Dispatch to see if we could cancel it, saving fuel expense for mainline and wear and tear for us. After being put on hold for a while the answer came back: We had to go since we got paid for completions.
Crazy industry!
Originally Posted by
FlyJSH
Originally Posted by
rickair7777
It varies widely with many factors, but a good ballpark estimate would be 40-65 pax.
Yes, I know it only seats 50...that's why there are so many of them in the desert.
Originally Posted by
saab2000
Is this a joke? Honest...
There are so many factors that it's not a real question. Very often the passenger buys a ticket from, say, RIC-PHL (an example of a roughly 300 mile trip on the airline I fly with) but that passenger is probably not staying in PHL. That passenger is flying RIC-PHL-FRA or RIC-PHL-DTW or RIC-PHL-LAX. So there is no way of knowing what, or if, there is a break even point.
It is all how the airline decides the break it down. The passenger doesn't pay the ticket on a per-leg basis.
This is why it is not quite so cut and dry as to whether or not the 50-seat so-called "RJ" is profitable or not. Nothing is as simple as it looks, including the economics of the CRJ-200.
Finally, pilots are not accountants or business folks for the most part. We all
are pretty sure we could run the business better, but really, probably we couldn't. So I doubt there is anyone here who can really answer your question. Why don't you go to
www.airlinemanagementforums.com and I am sure they will have the answer.
USN, you may not like the format or tone of the replies, but there are several good points and all valid.
The original poster submitted a question that was so broad, a bit like asking "how big is Big?" We who answered were grabbing at straws trying to guess what he was getting at.
His later question asking why a crj would be used to replace a Saab (which presumably was not profitable). While still a broad question, gave me a bit more idea what he was seeking.
Here are a couple of my theories:
1. People don't like those scary little prop planes.
2. People think getting a jet is getting a mainline plane.
3. The Saab operator may have required a higher return than they could get on said line. When the line came up for renewal, the Saab operator may have bid high to either get more out of the mainline or ditch a low profit line.
4. Maybe the route is "out in the sticks" for the Saab operator but is in the CRJs "backyard".