UPS Lacking Long Term Fleet Vision?
11-08-2006, 11:37 AM
#1
MD-11 first officer
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: MD-11 slug
Posts: 201
UPS Lacking Long Term Fleet Vision?
This question is for my UPS brothers and sisters.
With such an excellent balance sheet, why hasn't UPS been more proactive/aggressive in seeking out B747-400, 747-8, or 777 freighters? The available Md-11's are few, and hardly any -400 passengers will be converted what with the A380 delay.
The A380 delay had to have hurt your long term ability to move pallets out of Asia, and I don't think your 8 or 10 -400's coming will be enough.
So...just what is UPS's long term fleet vision?
With such an excellent balance sheet, why hasn't UPS been more proactive/aggressive in seeking out B747-400, 747-8, or 777 freighters? The available Md-11's are few, and hardly any -400 passengers will be converted what with the A380 delay.
The A380 delay had to have hurt your long term ability to move pallets out of Asia, and I don't think your 8 or 10 -400's coming will be enough.
So...just what is UPS's long term fleet vision?
11-08-2006, 12:32 PM
#3
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
They are going to start taking delivery of new 747-400s in 2007 and have a total of 8-12 on order with more to follow. Still getting MD-11s converted and will end up with about 30.
My guess is they will dump the Airbus 380 and say they are getting more 747s and or 777s within a short time.
My guess is they will dump the Airbus 380 and say they are getting more 747s and or 777s within a short time.
11-08-2006, 02:28 PM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: DC-8 756/767
Posts: 1,144
Well, that is the way UPS has and probably always will do business. Just look at their hiring. Run the airline behind the hiring curve without proper staffing, then sign a new contract and fall even more behind in hiring. Now they say they will go balls to the wall in hiring for the next year. And that hiring will hardly cover retirements and new aircraft. Long term future planning is not one of their strong points.
11-08-2006, 02:32 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: FO - 757/767
Posts: 1,228
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
This question is for my UPS brothers and sisters.
With such an excellent balance sheet, why hasn't UPS been more proactive/aggressive in seeking out B747-400, 747-8, or 777 freighters? The available Md-11's are few, and hardly any -400 passengers will be converted what with the A380 delay.
The A380 delay had to have hurt your long term ability to move pallets out of Asia, and I don't think your 8 or 10 -400's coming will be enough.
So...just what is UPS's long term fleet vision?
With such an excellent balance sheet, why hasn't UPS been more proactive/aggressive in seeking out B747-400, 747-8, or 777 freighters? The available Md-11's are few, and hardly any -400 passengers will be converted what with the A380 delay.
The A380 delay had to have hurt your long term ability to move pallets out of Asia, and I don't think your 8 or 10 -400's coming will be enough.
So...just what is UPS's long term fleet vision?
11-08-2006, 02:36 PM
#6
MD-11 first officer
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: MD-11 slug
Posts: 201
Originally Posted by UPSFO4LIFE
Well, that is the way UPS has and probably always will do business. Just look at their hiring. Run the airline behind the hiring curve without proper staffing, then sign a new contract and fall even more behind in hiring. Now they say they will go balls to the wall in hiring for the next year. And that hiring will hardly cover retirements and new aircraft. Long term future planning is not one of their strong points.
UPS hiring is fractured as well. From what I hear in Anchorage from my Brown friends, you guys are 200 to 400 pilots short right now. How will you staff what you currently have, plus the new airframes coming next year?
Not trying to pick a fight with my questions, I'm just trying to understand your company a little bit better.
Sasquatch
11-09-2006, 04:56 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 519
Originally Posted by HotMamaPilot
Just a note: We buy all of our planes with cash, so i've been told. Does that make a difference? i.e. maybe boeing doesn't give certain incentives without leases. Just a thought
UPS's Fleet vision?? Why would they need more lift with plans to furlough
11-09-2006, 08:09 AM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 767 captain
Posts: 2,696
They are convinced that not buying bilions of dollars of airplanes is what keeps that balance sheet so healthy.
The lack of hiring was to teach us some sort of a lesson during negotiations and it looks like that dam is bursting now. What lesson we learned is beyond me.
They've never been known for their forward thinking, but somehow they muccle through despite themselves
The lack of hiring was to teach us some sort of a lesson during negotiations and it looks like that dam is bursting now. What lesson we learned is beyond me.
They've never been known for their forward thinking, but somehow they muccle through despite themselves
11-09-2006, 01:26 PM
#9
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 38
I've been at UPS for about 2 years now and still can't quite figure out the strategery. Maybe it's too much diversity happy talk infecting their brains. The more diverse the fleet the better! UPS...you can't spell stupid without it.
Maybe they're going to pick up the A380s Fed Ex cancelled in a shrewd bid to chisel Airbus on their ailing program for some cheap lift.
Maybe they're going to pick up the A380s Fed Ex cancelled in a shrewd bid to chisel Airbus on their ailing program for some cheap lift.
11-09-2006, 03:10 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 230
As long as we're guessing and speculating...there are now only 15 remaining freighter orders. Ten from UPS and five from International Finance Lease Corp.
I'm no CFO but if I were building an airplane that needed 420 units to break-even (up from the original estimate of 270) and I only had 142 orders on the books remaining (down from 159), I don't know if I'd want to commit my company to the additional expenditure of tooling up for 15 units of another type (the freighter) of what is already a loss generating product.
Tipsy
I'm no CFO but if I were building an airplane that needed 420 units to break-even (up from the original estimate of 270) and I only had 142 orders on the books remaining (down from 159), I don't know if I'd want to commit my company to the additional expenditure of tooling up for 15 units of another type (the freighter) of what is already a loss generating product.
Tipsy
Last edited by TipsyMcStagger; 11-09-2006 at 03:32 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
