There's a lot of talk about other carriers having better QOL and better money over the long term. I suspect that many are guilty of making the mistake of thinking that past performance is a mirror of future earnings.

I'm not knocking the other carriers, but let's consider the current climate. The current oil price spikes have already added over a billion in costs to the likes of UAL/CAL, American, FDX and others...including AirTran. How do they recover costs? Increase prices and add fuel surcharges. They can and likely will cut capacity...meaning furloughs, which may well happen soon if the prices don't come down hard and fast...don't bet on that.

The Atlas model is based on customers paying fuel costs. Always has been. And given the way that management has dampened out the feast and famine curve of a deathly slow first quarter that ramps up to a max effort in the fourth...by diversifying the model to always have a steady revenue stream...I would maintain that the long term is much more stable and will also end up being pretty good in terms of income.

Yes, the flexibility enjoyed by customers is a pain in the ass sometimes...maybe all the time. That said, contrast that to a passenger industry that refuses to change their business model and a freight business (FDX and UPS) that has business model that still counts on lightweight overnight envelopes of documents that 20 years ago HAD to go by air. As technology evolves, that need lessens when you can hit the "send" key and electronically transmit those secure documents for free.

So now you're down to boxes and the bulk space problem. Yes, there will always be a market for that. Many will ship by truck. At that point they have to diversify or consolidate operations. Into markets where others...like Atlas...will already have a well established presence and the cost of entry will be tremendously high.

As for the young lady (and others) who pimped Atlas for the type rating and then left?

Karma can be an ugly thing.