No way, I would be shocked. I’ve only been with Alaska since they bought us. In the short time it’s become clear that this type of move would be way outside management’s comfort zone.

Could you imagine the mess the outstations would be in South America or beyond?

The company isn’t capable of international operations. It would be a complete gong show.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The chances that those ever are on property at Alaska Airlines are less than zero, we should probably be happy that we aren’t totally shrinking as most of the Airbi are being replaced.....
allegedly

Imagine if we ever merged with jetblue, that would be so many buses to park.

🙄really... yes and then we could fly ANC-HNL😂. This guy is really smart!

I politely point out that the poster probably hasn't seen 900s "flying out of SNA all the time" and you turn it into a Max vs Neo debate. If I say the word "context" does that mean anything to you? 😂

​

My apologies, I am confident you are a great person. The 321 is a more capable aircraft at shorter airfields. Bottom line, the MAX will produce the greatest revenue and the largest profit margins for Alaska. Single fleet was always going to happen. It is done, there is no secret Airbus order. Max9 performance numbers are closer to 800 numbers then 900 numbers.

“the greatest revenue and the largest profit margins for Alaska”.

Important point that OTZ made.
Alaska is truly a boutique investment firm. What OTZ stated is their mission statement.
They are not in the jobs or comfort or transportation or employee business or any of the myriad other
things that people say and want out of their job.
Our CBA is a direct reflection of this mission statement.
We will be flying DC6’s or driving trucks if they bring in more revenue/profit.
To truly benefit from working here (like the SEA millionaires club)you have to align yourself with their principals.
So the max meets the mission...The end

I want to be in a millionaires club. Don’t you?

​​​​​I don't want to live in SEA