Via Air
#431
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,403
Plenty of ways to go bankrupt flying too small planes that are full.
#432
By your definition we should be flying A380’s into Presque Isle Maine because the CASM is less.....
It’s not CASM..... it’s RASM. You have to have the revenue to support the airframe. In the markets they’re serving the E145 makes money, the E175’s don’t. Can’t fill enough seats yet. Which brings us back to nobody has ever gone bankrupt flying too small a plane that was always full. Don’t believe me, ask Bob Crandall, it’s a quote from him, and I’d venture to say he knows more about it that all of us.
This might help too
http://www.oliverwyman.de/content/da...c_Analysis.pdf
Last edited by Cujo665; 04-25-2018 at 04:07 PM.
#434
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2014
Posts: 846
Supply and demand. Even if there is demand for 76 seats, with no competition on the route a full 50 seater can possibly make more money than a full 76 seater by driving the yield/RASM up, unless the carrier is using standard rates for ticket prices.
#435
If they routinely sell an average of 45 seats on any given route, which plane makes money now? The 50 seater or the 76 seater? The smaller plane ends up with a higher RASM and it’s revenue that runs the show, not empty capacity. If CASM ran the show, every route would have an A380 on it.
Also remember that Via is not a FFD carrier; they’re more like an Allegiant or Sun country using smaller equipment on thinner routes. Smart actually.
#436
Please cite an airline that went out of business for flying a small plane that was always full. CASM is only 1/2 the equation, and is only a valid comparison with equal percentage of seats full.... ie, RASM.
If they routinely sell an average of 45 seats on any given route, which plane makes money now? The 50 seater or the 76 seater? The smaller plane ends up with a higher RASM and it’s revenue that runs the show, not empty capacity. If CASM ran the show, every route would have an A380 on it.
Also remember that Via is not a FFD carrier; they’re more like an Allegiant or Sun country using smaller equipment on thinner routes. Smart actually.
If they routinely sell an average of 45 seats on any given route, which plane makes money now? The 50 seater or the 76 seater? The smaller plane ends up with a higher RASM and it’s revenue that runs the show, not empty capacity. If CASM ran the show, every route would have an A380 on it.
Also remember that Via is not a FFD carrier; they’re more like an Allegiant or Sun country using smaller equipment on thinner routes. Smart actually.
#437
I don't know if Via does this or not, but Allegiant makes a large percentage of it's profit on ancillary fees and services such as hotels, car rentals and other "vacation" package products. You can kind of look as the actual ticket as almost a loss leader to get you in the door.
It’s a young airline, no real debt, and is slowly growing organically. I think they’ll do well.
#438
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2014
Posts: 44
50 seater future
Been in the industry for five yrs and flying for a major now, I don't see any future for 50 seaters any more. Yes they might make some money for the time being, but the future of regional carriers is not too rosey, even with the 76 seaters. Eas routes are just another way to make few bucks but we all know what happens to Eas feeders. Examples Silver, great lakes etc. Via is just another example of something that will be temporary and has no future. Especially with the chief and assistant chief pilot who they have, who are pure arrogant jokers and think were some sort of legacy carrier and the next big thing. Will be surprised if they even stay in business by next year.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post