Originally Posted by
NuGuy
Heyas,
Interesting to note that the current guidance is no new aircraft. A few used MD-90s. Dust off a few birds from the desert.
How many pilot seats did we lose after the merger?
No new metal = no new pilots seats = Hiring for attrition only. Since we have parked a net 60 aircraft, plus a smidge of retirements, plus a smattering of "new" or reactivated airplanes, I wouldn't be surprised to see the number of around 11,000 pilots as the figure we'll see as the new "normal"
With the large RJs effectively owning our small narrowbody lift, and Alaska in growth mode for the west coast, I'd say that stagnation will be here to stay, at least for the next couple years.
And not one peep about this or scope issues or contract recovery from any of the people who want to lead us into 2012.
Nu
What do you want them to tell you about stagnation, exactly? You merge two airlines that ued to compete, and were trying to grow networks organically. Now you have a network, complemented by alliances. You've got the owners of the company telling the company, in no uncertain terms, that we will not grow faster than GDP, and that we will pay down debt. You've got "analysts" making sure they tow the line.
I was thinking about this last night: the prupose of the merger is to make money. Period. The people that held our debt, and NW debt, wanted to be paid as well as possible out of bankruptcy. Anderson is their man for that job. The silver lining is that he understands the business. Other than than that, any growth will be purely incidental to the process of making the owners more money.
The focus right now of buying leased airplanes is not simply to reduce debt and operating expenses. It is (as Anderson said on the call) to give us the
flexibility to remove then ad aircraft to match demand, with incurring lease/debt payments while they're parked.
So I think you're right: stagnation could be the new normal. The only thing that could change that picture would be economic growth in general, and perhaps a competitive response to uCAL or another merger that would let us grow somewhat faster than GDP.
If Sailing is correct, above, about our 777's deliveries being deferred on account of keeping 747's, and with the deferral of 787's, we're seeing former visions of growth evaporating in front of our eyes, positive APC forums notwithstanding.
I don't know how we can
cause more growth. Every attempt to capture growth aircraft has been a new experiment in S&M and self-prostitution. And while I want to talk about things like a NSL, or a SL that gets us the RJ flying back, or anything that ensures any growth is properly turned into Delta pilots flying, I don't want to hear b.s. about future growth, since that is not something we can control. So basically, it comes down eyeing this profitable company, and having the most effective way to tap into our fair share of the compensation. That's when we need smart and effective people, and -dare I dream?- an active membership.