|
|
Originally Posted by tsquare
(Post 1637969)
I'm not sure I understand that graph... Can you 'splain what I am looking at with say... PDX? TO me it looks like WN has a pretty hefty share of the market in that one
Headline: Alaska firing rounds at Delta; hits Southwest. |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1637974)
Exactly ... who gets shot in the crossfire of low fares without the shield of connecting passengers (ie loyalty)?
Headline: Alaska firing rounds at Delta; hits Southwest. Gotcha. What would be an interesting column is the "average fare" on competitive routes. I am sure DAL's average fare is skewed a little high by the international operation, and AS's by their current monopoly flying to Alaska. |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1637915)
That's the way its always been Ron.
Management has been using the "bad times" argument against us ever since C2K. They used the threat of bankruptcy to get Letter 46 and then actual bankruptcy to slash our pay and benefits roughly in half. Turnabout is fair play. They are making enormous profits right now. A big chunk of those profits are directly attributable to them no longer having to fund Delta pilot pensions. We need to see some of that money now that we've brought this company back from the brink with our huge sacrifices. No other employee group has put in so much and don't even get me started on the executives. From the bonuses to the bankruptcy-proof SERP pensions, those guys have MADE MONEY through all the "hard times". Its time to pay the pilots. ps- I hope Donatelli bought RA a beer at Fenway. And then I hope he warned him what was coming if the pilots don't get to share in this torrent of cash we are generating for his company. Now, I would agree that much of what we gave up through concessions has allowed the company to get where it is today and based on our margins, I think you would have a much stronger "case" in front of the NMB than was possible in C2012. |
Originally Posted by RonRicco
(Post 1638000)
Ok.. We are talking about 2 different things. I was focussing on the "generating tremendous revenue" portion of the argument. For the most part, we are not responsible for how much revenue is or isn't on a flight. (I realize collectively we contribute through safety, customer service etc)
Now, I would agree that much of what we gave up through concessions has allowed the company to get where it is today and based on our margins, I think you would have a much stronger "case" in front of the NMB than was possible in C2012. |
Originally Posted by sailingfun
(Post 1638009)
The problem is you're focused on what we gave up. The NMB has made it clear that their focus and definition of what is reasonable is based on your standing amongst your peer group.
|
New pushback proc coming.
|
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1637957)
Delta is Taking Off from Seattle, $45 stock price achievable
I'm going to sell when it hits $100. :D IMO, the holders of special issue DAL 401K shares should have sold a long time ago and then rebought when it dove down to $6 and came back up a couple years ago in a separate investment account. That is what I did ($7)and as a shareholder, I am happy to take the dividend. As I get older, I realize more and more the benefits of dividends as opposed to appreciation. They are both good, but there's nothing wrong with a dividend. Another observation is that for the short-medium term, any time DAL drops down to the low 30s, it's a buy. It has very clearly shown it upward trending trading band. With that said, for the day trader in me, I should sell now and re-buy on the dip. DYODD |
Originally Posted by capncrunch
(Post 1638021)
We should fight to match our peers like FedEx and UPS.
|
Originally Posted by iceman49
(Post 1638030)
New pushback proc coming.
We can back ourselves up. What could possible go wrong? |
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1638046)
... there's nothing wrong with a dividend.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:10 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands