Originally Posted by NewGuy01 (Post 3015101)

Ok I’ll try again:

If we have 60 bookings going to Kansas City from Seattle in October who do you think will fly it? Horizon or Alaska?

Why do we have the strategy of developing a market with a 175 and then switching to a 737 when the bookings allow?

It’s cheaper to run a 175 when you don’t have a full aircraft. And the bottom 1/2 of the seniority will suffer for it.

Not that the majority of the pilots in the last 1000 seniority numbers left at AS will care. They didn’t ask for scope and during the last furlough they were picking up premium.

I listened to the guys who were furloughed last time when I flew with them on reserve. It’s every man for himself at AS when times are hard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by OTZeagle1 (Post 3015257)

You cry and ramble a lot. Your understanding of aviation and economics are poor. Hope you find your way!

Originally Posted by NewGuy01 (Post 3015271)

Also please stop pretending you care about the junior pilots. Clearly you don't. You've already been called out for trying to scare everyone junior by other posters. There is no possible way for anyone to know what will happen in October.

Originally Posted by NewGuy01 (Post 3015271)

I just see deflection's here. Am I throwing out acronyms and pretending to be all knowing? No. If you have 60 bookings do you fly a 900 to Kansas City or a 175. It's a really easy question. I'm asking because I don't know but just sending out acronyms doesn't mean you know anything or are answering a question.

Also please stop pretending you care about the junior pilots. Clearly you don't. You've already been called out for trying to scare everyone junior by other posters. There is no possible way for anyone to know what will happen in October.

Originally Posted by OTZeagle1 (Post 3015325)

I can’t believe I am stopping so low. A175 is great at filling holes, limiting loses, and building markets. The economy will return 12-18 mos from now, and then a NB will blow a 175 out of the market.

SEA-MCI
175
10,700 cost to operate
at 85% load factor, expected revenue 10,820

900ER
18,160 cost to operate
at 85% load factor, 25,342

If you go head to head 175’s against SWA NB’s we will be out of business in months.

have you heard of independence air?

Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 3014361)

Yeah, they have to try to lead turn this... plan to staff for where they *think* things will settle out later in the year.

If they cut too many, they might lose market share in a big land grab if DL or SW manages to be prepared to swoop in (DL unlikely, they'll be lucky not to liquidate... SW is a more plausible threat).

Originally Posted by pilotpurgatory (Post 3015333)

LMAO, right Delta will liquidate... that is some serious wishful thinking!!!!!

Originally Posted by pilotpurgatory (Post 3015333)

LMAO, right Delta will liquidate... that is some serious wishful thinking!!!!!

Originally Posted by OTZeagle1 (Post 3015341)

No one would wish for that. The big three are in for a slog, for the next two years. International is going to be a lot slower curve to return. The economist Alaska paid to evaluate all saw DAL, AMR, and UAL around 525-680 aircraft in the next 12 months, with AMR the most likely to file.

Originally Posted by OTZeagle1 (Post 3015325)

I can’t believe I am stopping so low. A175 is great at filling holes, limiting loses, and building markets. The economy will return 12-18 mos from now, and then a NB will blow a 175 out of the market.



SEA-MCI

175

10,700 cost to operate

at 85% load factor, expected revenue 10,820



900ER

18,160 cost to operate

at 85% load factor, 25,342



If you go head to head 175’s against SWA NB’s we will be out of business in months.



have you heard of independence air?