Imagine if the bottom had been 1% of normal loads and then recovered to 2%. All the headlines would read that passenger counts doubled! The recovery is in full force!

Wouldn't that be great if it doubled, going from 1% to 2% of normal in the span of a weeks time? I know your statement was designed to be sarcastic, and it'd be hard to be excited about that on it's own, but this is a perfect example of why the rate of growth is what smart business analysis and management is watching right now and not the actual screening counts. Using your scenario :

Week 1: 1% of normal.
Week 2: 2% of normal.
Week 3: 4% of normal.
Week 4: 8% of normal.
Week 5: 16% of normal.
Week 6: 32% of normal.
Week 7: 64% of normal.
Week 8: 128% of normal.

No-one is suggesting that this is the actual growth rate (well, aside from your hypothetical example) but it does demonstrate why growth rate is much more important than the actual screening count is at this point in time. This kind of data, and not actual numbers, is what management is using to plan their actions for the rest of 2020.

I'll save an analysis of what the actual pax screen count growth rate is for another post.

This is pointless until all states lift stay at home orders and let business reopen. Once this is done, we will see who is really interested in flying again.

Does anyone know if these numbers include KCM check in. If they are included, the paying passengers at the lowest point would have been close to 40,000 per day because half of the people in airports were crew.