ExperimentalAB

You are calling a SkyWest acquisition a bullet?? It may not have been a match made in heaven, but give us a break...

JoeyMeatballs

we are, just everyone wait until next week

G-Dog

Ok, first off, again, nobody was promised 70 seaters here at RAH for CAL. Does Bedford want it? Of course, that is his business plan, to get out the 50 seat market. He never promised us, the pilot group, that we are getting 170s for CAL flying.

Has CAL's contract become amendable yet? This would be the only way to get scope relief. If it has not, then there is no point in discussing this.

tpersuit

no matter how you play it, I wouldn't want to be in the 70-seat market right now. Any market that was turning into a 70-seat market has shrunk back into a 50-seat market. Until you invent a 70-seat jet that burns the same gas as our 50-seat ERJ's we aren't going any where.

dojetdriver

I NEVER made it personal in this thread, as far as talking about SkyWest pilots. I have referenced SkyWest's managment, on PURPOSE. To keep any peeing contest out of this thread that is not necessary. So if YOU took it that way, you are reading something into that is not there.

It's been beat to death in the multiple threads, but you DO know what could have happened to XJT, and WE the pilots of XJT, don't you? Would you consider that a good thing for you if you were in our position?

It's OK, you don't have to give me some lip service answer what you THINK you would do.

meritflyer

Nice analysis.

Unfortunately, too many Jetlinkers are over looking the issues at hand - Mother CAL.

The dish CAL is about to serve XJT could be a real party spoiler.

ToiletDuck

It's not just my assessment. It's the assessment of those from Wall Street to CNN money to the large investment groups that own sizable amounts of the company. BOD isn't the end all. Once again the shareholders are. Take a look at what's happened with Yahoo!. If the stock dives enough, which it has, no one is safe. Call your CEO and tell him that. He seems to agree and has stated many times over that he hasn't gotten along with CAL.

Wrong type of growth, hence why i disregarded it. Financially speaking shareholders could care less how much more of the product a company is offering if it offers no return on investment. Not trying to be rude but that's an exact example of a mistake of his. Analyst disagree all over from the Boyd group to those in the finance sector. Once again you're looking at "growth" from the physical/pilot standpoint. Investors, who own the company, could care less how many airframes or employees have. They want profit. They didn't want CAL to pull the 69 planes but they hated the idea of branded. Once again read letter on the link. XJT should have given the planes back, stayed profitable, AND restructured to negotiate a new deal with CAL. If they got any of the planes back then they could rehire. They gave up a sure thing.

There's nothing naive about it. There's a reason the CEO has to give a quarterly report. There's a reason he has to answer to the shareholders and that's because he works for them. He's just management and management only. Selected by the owners. Economics don't care who you are. It's like lightning and finds the easiest course. I know exactly what your management promised it would do. The same thing all managements promise. To make money. They haven't. They're hemorrhaging it and it's purely because of the decisions they've made. They went branded and shouldn't have. There's no argument that can be made against that as history has 20/20 vision. They took a gamble and it didn't pay off. Had they given the planes to CAL the company would have never posted a loss. They would have continued to gain value.

Yes people would have been let go but how is that different from now? The only difference is there's a little mud on the face, the investors are upset, CAL wants to work with XJT even less, and their cash is being depleted very quickly. If XJT had followed CALs "orders" they could be sitting where SKYW is currently, buying a regional for their contracts thus leading the way to new expansion. I'm not trying to upset you or anyone else but it's time a few people get real and understand that the "naive mentality of an investor" is the ONLY one that matters. They own the company and what they say goes. Any person in power, ie Ream, is only there by the vote of the investors and there's nothing that can keep them from pulling him out tomorrow(figure of speech I know it takes a little time). It's like establishing a government except with no employment guarantees.

There's a reason we always say things like "I just fly them" when we talk about companies. We aren't part of management and are basically just a number. We have no dog in the fights regardless which is why no one should take ill to anything be said. We're talking management level mistakes, not pilot, that are ruining the company financially. There's nothing personal here unless you are in fact Jim Ream.

meritflyer

To who ever said Jim Real and Larry Kellner haven't had serious personality conflicts,

WAKE UP!!!

Ream has acknowledged it SEVERAL times.

ToiletDuck

Just because the company loses less money doesn't mean it's a good thing. Sooner or later there needs to be a profit and $22million in the red to anything the black is one massive gap for a regional to cover. If XJT's restructuring doesn't bring that number into the black then there's no point to this question. Increase in fuel cost can overrun any increase in load factors. Put them at 100% and if fuel is high enough they still will lose out. I know XJT hedged but only for a few more months then what? It's already June.

50 seater's aren't going to go away in their entirety no. However the rest of your statement is very very very far out there and goes against just about everything everyone says about aviation. Cost per ASM declines when there are more seats to spread the cost over. Where is the 70 seat market declining? There seems to be only an increase in their need.

Bond

Spoken like a true bean counter. Man I've known you wanted to work for Larry, but never to this degree. First things first, don't ever quote the Boyd group when attempting to conduct an educated debate, it takes away your credibility (Michael Boyd actually called J.O.'s approach on labor groups genius).

Second, the board just re-elected Ream for another round, no offence, but they know a little better than a 1 year f/o working for a company that has nothing to do with this.

Moving on, anytime you launch a new airline there are cost associated with it and everyone was on board with it, including the majority of the board. It's all business, keeping the aircraft was a business decision, driven by a company culture you're unfamiliar with because you work for RAH. (You could've worked here, but you blew the interview, sorry pal, but everyone should know why you have such bad blood for XJT).

Duck, you and your speculation, saying how CAL does and doesn't want to work with us, where do you get your official word from brother? Even better, post the source of it all. My friend all you've done is speculate, like the investment brokers in wall street when they panic, like the boyd group two months after the facts come out, like the hedge fund guys that are in it for the short term.

My friend you come on here as if you knew the inner workings of our company, you don't, all you know is what you read on the internet. Get educated and form your own opinion, instead of trying to feed us the day to day yahoo finance forums.