Originally Posted by gloopy (Post 1122246)

That is way higher than I would have guessed and I just can't believe it. If its true though, and 600 are hired in 2013, permanant hiring will be the result (not including economic pulldowns which are very possible going forward) because 2014 starts the retirement waterfall that rapidly starts to build after that. Bring it on, but I still can't see 750 from the rest rules but we'll see.

That's still below SWA in rates but like many others have mentioned, the difference can be made up for in work rule improvements and I'm more concerned with scope at all 3 levels anyway. 20% even with positive work rules is a giant NO vote from me without at least some gains in all areas of scope (RJs, AS code share abuse and current and more importantly future JV's). Show me the scope.

Um, buy airplanes maybe? I mean its not like we're one of the largest airlines in the history of the world or anything. Did these 320s cycle out by suprise or something? What's next, we'll need to buy jet-A and pay landing fees? Who could have forcasted such unreasonable, unmanageable, rogue expenditures? As an airline if we need airplanes we need to buy or lease the airplanes we need.

If, after 80 years, this is suddenly become some unmanageable act of freakonomics then we need new managers who know how to buy or lease airplanes for an airline. I'm not against used planes, and would love to get the 71's that SWA is dumping anyway as well as the 20 or so in the desert, provided the terms are right. Other than those, I don't see very many used planes we would want.

A merger just to get the metal is some of the lamest stratedgy I've ever heard of. Yeah we get the metal, but we also get the current capacity its flying. Capacity we have to essentially pay to get along with the metal, and if we dump the capacity the LCC's and start ups will add every single seat we dump and we still have the costs of buying or leasing their planes anyway. If we merge with AA, in whole or in part, we get a ton of old metal that needs replacing anyway so back to square one and then some. Either way we need new planes and any manager or executive that pretends this is some crisis point is incompetent in this industry.

I don't see the point about a 2 year bridge deal regarding the new FTDT because the rules are what they are and there is very little relief we could give the company to help offset them even if we were in the mood to give up work rules. The only place I see is the 9 hour block unaugmented stuff, but if it remains true that time is a hard non waiveable 9 hours from throttle up of each segment like we're told it is, relief of our current 8 hour limit wouldn't amount to very much of anything and certainly not enough to warrant 2 years to think about it. IOW what is the incentive for the company for the bridge deal WRT the new FTDT's?

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1122501)

Stock got the jump they needed to use it as collateral.

Originally Posted by forgot to bid (Post 1122515)

wait, are we going to talk about rumors concerning where Delta might go or where Tsquares Peyton Manning might go? ;)

Football is great tv, but talking about football is riveting.

I love the question though, is there anywhere you'd do organic growth!?

Originally Posted by acl65pilot (Post 1122501)

Just remember our cooperation should be worth a lot of money for our pilots.

Originally Posted by Elvis90 (Post 1120869)

.

There were 5,500 qualified applicants when I interviewed in the summer of 2010.