Johnny Ringo was just wound too tight.

 

PIREP: No pole dancing conventions in Livonia.

I'll get some sleep tonight!

 

Go get some Spicy Garlic Wings. Yummo!

 

Check.

Cheap beer from Bridget. Check.

 

I feel the same way. I hope in 3 years, we sign another quick contract with real "industry leading" rates and we are hiring like crazy. I hope our pilot group is back up to 12,500 pilots and then some. I personally do not think that will happen. I also thought our raises with this TA would be a lot higher than they are and we would lower our large rj cap as the contracts expire. I was wrong on both of those accounts. Let's just hope I continue being wrong.

 

Waves, not slanting. Reading.

Here is a question, what happens to the amount of seat inventory (just a flat out seat count) DAL has now and once this refleeting is finished if we just add 717s as all growth, count the current DC9s out, 739s come in as 1:1 replacements with say all the 763s and remaining 752s, and we get the MD90s to 65 and DCI goes 450/325?

I get a good increase, almost 14% over 2012 numbers and I carried that out to 2018. So 2.3% increase YOY on average?

So let's say that's right (and let's hope it is if this thing passes) do you think DAL really will want to grow say 2% average YOY or continue with shrinking a little like 1% average YOY?

Because if you do a B717 1:1 replacement, you can get that inventory (this time in ASMs) to be -1% YOY on average.

What's more likely? Now again, we hope we grow, but say we don't. What do we get in this TA for increasing the 76 seaters? A ratio that allows the 717s to be replacement instead of forcing them to grow us like the PWA?

Doesn't seem like a good deal even if you're okay with moving the 255 cap to 325. And I don't think the caps are negotiable, at least for 3 years, then we can move 325 up again for all the same reasons we just moved it this time.

BTW, if Bill wants an A seat, and if he can't currently hold an A seat, he needs to send this back and demand that guarantee growth be put back into the contract.

If we never got the 717s, with the way this TA is written, fine by me. When I was first told of the 717s in 2010 I specifically told the Board wanted all the 90s and 717s. I'm not sure the Board said, we want 717s if we can get out of the 50 seaters which requires purchasing 76 seaters that are on discount probably double the cost of those 717s.

 

I understand your no vote. In some ways I even applaud it, but unlike many here, I do not beleive we have the economic strength at this time to make many additional gains. Otherwise I would be in the trenches with you my compadre.

 

How Buzz met his wife:



I didn't sleep through English class. I just didn't get why bother?

but now i know something about capitalization:

 

For me we can rationalize the gains, but the quids are what made my decision hard. Pay is temporary, but work rules and scope are difficult to fix once gone.

 

Hey ACL, I can't find anything that mentions a 1.76-1, but I think the math actually works out to 3% from the 1.56. I think.

So for the accumulator, if we are talking about parking airplanes, is roughly 17 narrow body aircraft for our current fleet today? Or the block hour equivalent of that? Or 20 airplanes if we get the 90's and 717's?