New B6/AS/AA partnership announced
#52
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2020
Posts: 93
Looks like you ranked everything based on debt/EBITDA. Which seems misleading right now since everyone is lacking the E, earnings. JBLU looks comparable to ALK based on debt and cash. The majors, with very large debt and cash flow will probably suffer worst.
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Posts: 384
B6 lags ALK significantly on unencumbered assets also.
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 531
It’s not a question of current assets and debt: It’s about cash burn rate in a zero revenue environment through Q4/2020. The analyst I was referring to compared the Airlines based on cash burn, assuming zero revenue through Q4/2020. Gotta find the chart, but someone else posted on a United thread I think. Vertical Research Partners.
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2018
Posts: 1,176
It would be Christmas for some at our company. I have heard it could end up being something like 5 to 50 aircraft worth of flying to Alaska depending. That’s an honest to god unicorn for many. I guess we will see what happens overs the weekend with the “CARES“ act though.
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 358
serious question: What about Alaska would ever give you the idea they have or would ever desire to compete against the Big Four other than from a defensive posture they’re forced into (ala JetBlue west coast, Delta-SEA)?
If I’m wrong correct me but it would appear history shows Alaska’s MO is either low hanging fruit (abandoned Aloha routes) and trying to retain/grow their regional footprint.... not national, not bi-coastal, not international.
If I’m wrong correct me but it would appear history shows Alaska’s MO is either low hanging fruit (abandoned Aloha routes) and trying to retain/grow their regional footprint.... not national, not bi-coastal, not international.
I’m not suggesting that Alaska wants to compete with the Big 3 outside of the PNW, but I think you mischaracterize their growth. The VX merger forced them into competing with the big 3 on transcon routes out of LAX and SFO. They tried and failed on many new routes out of SFO since the merger and all Alaska pilots wish they had succeeded and not withdrawn.
Additionally, not only is their Hawaii flying much greater than the void left by Aloha, but over the past 5-10 years they have grown focus cities in SJC and SAN. Not to suggest that all of the routes they started out of those two cities have been a success, but as an example off the top of my head, they have added mainline flights to, Hawaii, SJD, GDL, PVR, BWI, EWR, JFK, MCO, BOS, AUS.
But you are correct, most of their focus has been growth in their fortress hub in SEA, with many new addition midcon and transcon. Perhaps the newish transcon routes out of SAN and SJC are the low hanging fruit you were referring to.
All I know is that Alaska mainline has been growing steadily over the past 10 years. Pilots just don’t recognize it or acknowledge it, because pilots focus on any regional growth, Alaska doesn’t have mass retirements, nor do they have new glamorous routes/planes, such as 787s flying SFO-PPT or LAX-AKL.
#59
Accusing me of hyperbole? That’s rich. Ratings downgrades and lowered price targets do not equate to “skeptical of their viability.” If B6 is not viable then you can be damned sure ALK is in the same boat so please climb down from your pedestal.
#60
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2018
Posts: 91
A little longevity? Think again. How about take the 600+ at AS, then start dropping your most senior VX folks below them and so on. The most senior Legacy VX guys and gals got hammered on that one. I suspect in an AS merger with B6, AS will use the same "Alaska pilot superior career expectation" argument again and win over the arbitrators.
When it comes to bringing two or more pilot groups seniority together and subsequent SLI, the gloves come off.
When it comes to bringing two or more pilot groups seniority together and subsequent SLI, the gloves come off.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post