|
Originally Posted by NuGuy
(Post 670388)
Heyas,
It's painfully obvious what the "100 seat plan" that management and "our" MEC has in store for us. Not only that, but if the AS codeshare is any indication, it's a warm up for what the 125 and 148 seat plan is as well. It's all part of the "outsource everything below the 757" plan that some on the MEC has embraced. What these wannabe "Clipper Skippers" forget is that this plan didn't work for pre-Republic NWA or Pan Am or any of the other outfits that have tried to be an "international, widebody only" airline. Weren't you a chemistry guy? What type of reaction are you expecting when you pour your acid? Seems there are quite a few of you that like to bleet of unity, yet don't like to use the conversational (typing) skills to achieve it. What is your goal anyway? Clipper Skippers? The senior have some nice names for the entitlement generation you represent as well... Name some names, Nu. Please. Or withdraw your divisive bile. |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 670406)
Then you don't have a firm grasp on reality.:rolleyes:
If Moak endorsed such a thing, why don't we have 200 79 seat jets and no restrictions on the rest of DCI. That's what management wanted in 1113. Every individual that posts tripe like this makes management's day. |
Originally Posted by slowplay
(Post 670410)
Yeah, that AK codeshare that came from the former NWA contract, where NWA used 20,000 coded segments per month. I guess you don't like your SEA base much, nor the ability to fly out of PDX.
Weren't you a chemistry guy? What type of reaction are you expecting when you pour your acid? Seems there are quite a few of you that like to bleet of unity, yet don't like to use the conversational (typing) skills to achieve it. What is your goal anyway? Clipper Skippers? The senior have some nice names for the entitlement generation you represent as well... Name some names, Nu. Please. Or withdraw your divisive bile. |
+1 I don't usually agree with the Capn, but he's right on here. Slow, you're out of line.
|
Originally Posted by capncrunch
(Post 670424)
Easy on the tone SP.
Sure glad to have him in our leadership! |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 670394)
Please produce one name of someone on the MEC who has endorsed outsourcing everything below the 757.
I hope you get over that deer in the headlights looks quick enough to get out of the road when the real NERD management show their colors. Ah shuck's, y'all will probably think it's a flashlight and it's the friendly farmer offering you a salt lick...... Northwest Executives Running Delta |
Originally Posted by Hawaii50
(Post 670323)
Alaska is happily adding flights to our destinations while we cut frequency or eliminate service (LAX-KOA, SEA-ATL, OGG-SEA). The continuation of the NW codeshare deal with AS to feed LAX was sold as a great deal. Looks like a great deal for AS employees, a S-sandwich for DL employees. Don't make the mistake of thinking these guys are our friends. They'll take our flying and undercut us anywhere they can. West Coast was the one area we could have organically grown to smooth out the changes from the merger. The AS codeshare was the main reason for my no vote. What was going to happen seemed pretty obvious at the time but the guys who'd "seen the plan" were quick to shoot down any concerns.
The problem with the west coast and DL is we blew our opportunity after the Western merger. We gave up so many of those routes and now other carriers (mostly AS and WN) dominate. I really wish that wasn't the case - I'm a west coast guy and would love to have more flying out here - but that ship has sailed and it would be a loosing proposition for us to try jump back into that market as a competitor. What we do need, however, is a good source of west coast feed if we want our Pacific operations to have any chance of growing. As much as I hate to say it, this AS code share gives us that. And if you're going to use the AS feed, you might as well use the AS feed - including feed from their VERY well established Mexico to LAX routes. Though I understand the advantage of this code share, I would prefer that it be more of a short term solution. I would love to see us slowly recapture this market in the future. Or, better yet, we could quickly recapture it with an AS merger! |
Not a new idea
Originally Posted by Fly4hire
(Post 670448)
Richard Anderson has been overheard before when he was still at NWA as advocating the outsourcing of everything below the 757.
|
I for one would hate to go through another round of negotiations and merger. However, I would welcome a merger with AS. They coud fence that end of the operation off for all I care.
|
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 670203)
I have no idea where people get the concept that Delta has lower costs then SWA. We are not even in their ballpark. If you break out our CASM by fleet types it gets even worse since in general the CASM at Delta runs from the largest to the smallest aircraft getting higher as the aircraft gets smaller. For years our lowest CASM aircraft was the 767-400 in the domestic configuration. Here is a link with the 2008 numbers. Very sobering!
http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2...e%20(CASM).htm The domestic 767-400 had the most seats and fewest pilots. It would almost have to have the lowest CASM. But like Alfa said the system total CASM is not a fair representation of Southwest to Delta. For the 12 months ending DEC 2008 the Southwest 737-700 CASM is 5.7 cent, Airtran is 6.8 cents, Delta's 737-800 CASM is 6.7 cents the 767-300 is 7.0 cents and the 777 is 7.6 cents. How do those numbers fit with your theory. The problem is these are just not good comparisons between different companies. It's also interesting to read in the second quarter 2009 results what our system CASM was excluding special items and fuel related expenses. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:29 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands