![]() |
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1241462)
I don't know if you non-JFK people have seen/heard this, but it is very amusing.
Click here <------------ |
Originally Posted by buzzpat
(Post 1241544)
That's why I bid around that frikkin place!:D
Stewardess... more coffee please. :cool: |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1241462)
I don't know if you non-JFK people have seen/heard this, but it is very amusing.
Click here <------------ [Do controllers ever read this forum? If so, that gives me one "Get Out of Jail FREE" card.] |
http://media.economist.com/sites/def...811_woc764.jpg
This chart probably shows better and more easily the running argument Sailingfun and I have, which has turned ugly as of late. Nothing I've seen suggests anything other than jobs and travel demand track hand in glove. While it is true that reducing capacity has driven up revenue ( just as it did a Northwest ), there is a back side of the power curve where capacity reductions both drive up costs and reduce demand ( just as it did at Northwest ). The same managers are following the same play book. My question has been, and continues to be, where is the bottom? Not that there are not signs of life. Bringing flying back to mainline is a great sign, as is the investment in our mainline fleet. I argue in favor of doing more. It appears to me our yields are slipping compared to competitors who do more of their own flying. The back side of the power curve is dangerous because the resulting yield disadvantage makes it even harder to sustain, or grow. Revenues / Expenses / Profit / Yield (all measured by ASM - cents) Alaska / 15.78 /15.09 / 0.68 / 12.89 - Domestic 16.36 / 15.52 / 0.84 / 13.05 - Latin 10.51 / 11.23 / (0.72) / 11.43 American / 15.91 / 16.17 / (0.27) / 15.21 - Domestic 15.54 16.24 (0.70) 14.91 - Atlantic 13.86 15.57 (1.70) 13.55 - Latin 18.63 16.29 2.34 17.71 - Pacific 13.58 16.30 (2.72) 12.04 Delta 17.95 17.13 0.82 14.70 - Domestic 22.08 19.81 2.27 15.34 - Atlantic 12.23 13.83 (1.59) 13.17 - Latin 12.80 14.19 (1.39) 13.89 - Pacific 14.85 14.27 0.57 14.93 Hawaiian 13.87 13.42 0.45 14.88 - Domestic 14.29 13.98 0.31 14.89 - Pacific 12.88 12.10 0.78 14.86 United 16.40 16.94 (0.54) 14.49 - Domestic 19.15 21.16 (2.01) 13.71 - Atlantic 12.44 12.72 (0.29) 14.69 - Latin 16.08 13.20 2.89 17.27 - Pacific 13.76 12.51 1.26 14.95 US Airways 18.82 18.51 0.32 14.60 - Domestic 19.64 19.10 0.54 14.95 - Atlantic 14.65 15.69 (1.05) 11.87 - Latin 19.06 18.30 0.76 15.35 |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1241604)
http://media.economist.com/sites/def...811_woc764.jpg
This chart probably shows better and more easily the running argument Sailingfun and I have, which has turned ugly as of late. Nothing I've seen suggests anything other than jobs and travel demand track hand in glove. While it is true that reducing capacity has driven up revenue ( just as it did a Northwest ), there is a back side of the power curve where capacity reductions both drive up costs and reduce demand ( just as it did at Northwest ). The same managers are following the same play book. My question has been, and continues to be, where is the bottom? Not that there are not signs of life. Bringing flying back to mainline is a great sign, as is the investment in our mainline fleet. I argue in favor of doing more. A 10% margin is wonderful, but an 8% margin is good. Let us not walk past a good margin by trying to squeeze a historically high margin. Capacity discipline is good, but I disagree fundamentally that capacity reductions are long term leverage. At least over recent times our partner Air France / KLM proves my point. Despite the real mess Europe is in they have continues increasing Capacity AND Revenue according to their numbers released today. Second. Isn't AF/KLM about tojettison somewhere around 5,000 peeps? |
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1241611)
Second. Isn't AF/KLM about tojettison somewhere around 5,000 peeps?
|
Originally Posted by Boomer
(Post 1241542)
What will be the 121 pilot carve-out? 12 hours chronic to cockpit?
Not that I plan on starting, but it's that law of unintended consequences stuff... |
Originally Posted by 20 Mile Final
(Post 1241593)
I'm guessing the visibility was poor and the tower could not actually see the aircraft. If somebody makes a wrong turn or does something that they were not supposed to do, it's pretty hard for the controller to unscrew it once the pilots have screwed it up. It's not always the controller's fault.
[Do controllers ever read this forum? If so, that gives me one "Get Out of Jail FREE" card.] Was good flying with you... and now I've got my glass of courvoisier right here! http://images.allmoviephoto.com/2000...es_man_002.jpg |
Originally Posted by cni187
(Post 1241585)
The most entertaining radio around is listening to the JFK/LGA controllers. Love it when they ball someone out.
|
Originally Posted by buzzpat
(Post 1241631)
I had it out with the tower chick in MSP yesterday morning. What a beeyatch.
Buzz, after she got done screaming at you, did you ask her, "Wasn't I married to you once?" :D |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:23 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands