Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1200731)

WOW. All the Starbucks in the Atlanta airport are going away.

?!?!

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1200728)

True.

Its funny when you think about how we view things and how management does. We talk airplanes and they talk seat inventory. They dont measure by airplanes anymore than Best Buy measures by store numbers. Its all seat related, thats what they make, thats what they sell, thats what they grade on.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1200731)

WOW. All the Starbucks in the Atlanta airport are going away.

?!?!

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1200709)

Maybe, maybe not. How much are we hedged for the current quarter and at what price?

Originally Posted by 10000 (Post 1200741)

Must be enough Alaska mainline to haul Seattle's Best Coffee between SEA-ATL now.

Originally Posted by Mem9guy (Post 1200739)

We were told yesterday in the ATL crew room by ALPA folks that the AT Mec would be putting something out in writing before the vote saying that no pilots will be coming with the aircraft.

Originally Posted by vprMatrix (Post 1200431)

First, I think we are being wrongfully sold on the idea that we (the pilots) have any control here. The one thing we can control is passing the TA which would limit the number of 76 jets to a number less than 255 but we are grandfathering in 102 other aircraft that are about the same size so the math for most of us is coming out that we are allowing 325 vs 255 >50 seat aircraft.

The 50 seaters are not in our control. Delta will still have to negotiate the departure of these aircraft and if we don't pass the TA Delta will still find a way to get the fleet to where they want it. Delta has successfully destroyed
several of their regional carriers already.

You claim that voting no will ensure that we will have more 76 seaters than this TA would allow and this is not true. It is an assumption that you are making that Delta would use a pump and dump scenario to do this which would cost a huge amount to Delta thanks to the grievance settlement from a few years ago requiring airplanes needing to be on the property to be counted.

Delta already said that the 717 deal is dependent on this TA so without it there are no 717s to take us over 767 mainline aircraft, therefore the 76 seaters stay at 153 and Delta keeps working at parking 50 seats at every possible opportunity. If this is just a bluff by Delta they could by the 717s anyway but they must take delivery of every one of them with out parking any mainline aircraft for the time it take to get all of the 70 seat aircraft traded/sold and new 76 seat aircraft bought. This means that Delta would have one huge surplus of aircraft including DC9s they really want to park if they really did intend to "pump and dump." It makes no financial sense for Delta to do this as it would require several years of a huge surplus in the fleet.

Originally Posted by Columbia (Post 1200749)

I'd say Jamie Baker knows what the hedges are. Here's his profit outlook, even with hedges...
I think people are going to be shocked at 2Q profits as well as 2012 forecasts (which are announced 2 weeks after the TA implementation date).

The Associated Press: Airlines catch a break on fuel, shares rising.

Airlines catch a break on fuel, shares rising
(AP) – 5 days ago*
NEW YORK (AP) — Airline stocks rose on Thursday after a J.P. Morgan analyst raised his estimates of the companies' future profits because of the recent drop in jet fuel prices.
The Amex airlines index rose 2.3 percent in midday trading. Many individual airline stocks rose even more sharply, led by a nearly 10 percent gain for US Airways Group Inc.
The Gulf Coast spot market price for a gallon of jet fuel has fallen about 12 percent in the past three weeks to $2.88 per gallon, according to government figures. It was more than $3.30 per gallon in February.
J.P. Morgan analyst Jamie Baker estimated that the pullback of about 40 cents per gallon would create an annual "windfall" of $5.5 billion for the airlines, a savings that had not been factored into most forecasts of airline profits. Meanwhile air travel demand, which affects the carriers' revenue, appeared to be holding up, he said.
Baker raised his estimates of 2012 profit and issued 2013 forecasts above the consensus view of other analysts for six airlines: United, Delta, US Airways, Alaska Air and discounters Southwest and JetBlue. The increase in his 2012 projections ranged from 33 percent for US Airways to 2 percent for Alaska Air.
The analyst said airlines are better prepared to handle oil price shocks than in the past because there are fewer airlines, they're making money from extra fees, and management is focused more on profit than gaining market share.