![]() |
|
Originally Posted by Scoop
(Post 1190907)
But big $$$$$$$$ in baggage fees. FDX may have been on to something. Maybe we should look at carrying envelopes too.
Scoop :) |
Originally Posted by georgetg
(Post 1190905)
based on wall street reaction to ED's presentation:
There's no money in...capacity constraint. I bet the tactical benefit of capacity constraint has run it's course. The newly announced cuts most likely are strategic. Cheers George It could be part of the TA vote, perhaps to paint a less than flattering picture. We could always come in say this fall that we decided to reverse the decision to make the capacity cuts. I'm 50/50 on this idea. I do think that the global economy, as whole, is still very questionable. I like to think are capacity restraint/discipline is more in a response to that as opposed to a strategic move to squeeze more revenue out of a depressed market. I think the election this fall is also a big variable that could swing either way. |
Check,
Thought they were going all weekend. Certainly they aren't taking trip drops to attend the Atlanta Block Party :) |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1190895)
|
Originally Posted by DeadHead
(Post 1190912)
I wonder how much truth there is to this announcement.
It could be part of the TA vote, perhaps to paint a less than flattering picture. We could always come in say this fall that we decided to reverse the decision to make the capacity cuts. I'm 50/50 on this idea. I do think that the global economy, as whole, is still very questionable. I like to think are capacity restraint/discipline is more in a response to that as opposed to a strategic move to squeeze more revenue out of a depressed market. I think the election this fall is also a big variable that could swing either way. Germany is in the middle of Europe, financing the majority of the bailouts of other EU states, and is enjoying a very robust economy with near record low unemployment. Why would the US be affected more from the Euro crisis than the country at the center of Europe? I don't think the election or what pilots happen to think has any bearing on the big moves DAL is planning. The capacity pull down this winter is strategic and Ed admitted as much. More to do with long term goals, that short term financials. Lots of consolidation is still coming in this industry. It will take certain criteria to gain regulator approval, in particular anti-trust considerations. With all the regulatory bodies involved, you can't be the king of the hill and expect to grow. The only influence presidential elections might have is by making it easier to gain approval of anything that is even obliquely related to creating jobs... Cheers George |
Originally Posted by georgetg
(Post 1190905)
based on wall street reaction to ED's presentation:
There's no money in...capacity constraint. I bet the tactical benefit of capacity constraint has run it's course. The newly announced cuts most likely are strategic. Cheers George I took that differently. I took it as DAL has been right with every other cut, and they are cutting with no indications. Time to dump airlines. :eek: |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1190916)
Check,
Thought they were going all weekend. Certainly they aren't taking trip drops to attend the Atlanta Block Party :) Its Black Smoke, not White. :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 1190923)
I took that differently. I took it as DAL has been right with every other cut, and they are cutting with no indications. Time to dump airlines. :eek:
I was actually expecting an aircraft acquisition, other than a bunch of Next Gen CRJ900's. Something to prime the pump. Instead we heard talk like the contract was a foregone conclusion which reduces unit costs and increases productivity. With a bunch of CRJ900's we will not need to acquire a 100 to 120 seat jet at mainline, or anything of the sort. |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1190910)
ha ha! good one.
I listene to wsj today and I've got to say there seems to be a lot of uneasiness about Mr Zuckenburger (sp?). They said the GM pull of adds was spiteful in its timing. I guess from what the said the various holders of others wealth don't want to fork over twice what a company is worth when the CEO walks in with an attitude and a hoodie. FB is no G00gle, who needs ads if you can get people to voluntarily put up your ads for free? Cheers George |
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1190799)
Can you put a trigger (and enforce it) in a contract that say that if on January 1st, 2015, a new contract is not reached then something beneficial happens to us, surely a tradeoff with them, but something that would want neither continuing status quo? Or maybe just us continuing status quo?
The problem is the RLA specifically spells out the current scheme. It would be very difficult to gain something beyond the contract window without extending the contract window itself. Cheers George |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:26 AM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands