L-ASA (ExpressJet CRJ side)
12-17-2017, 07:48 AM
#1071
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 472
Originally Posted by Blackhawk
Air Whisky is a privately held company. As such they don’t have to worry about many economic issues that are concerns for publicly held companies and their subsidiaries.
12-17-2017, 10:36 AM
#1072
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2012
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 279
Originally Posted by N1234
Public or not - that still doesn't allow you to do stupid / unprofitable stuff.
12-17-2017, 10:38 AM
#1073
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,888
Originally Posted by N1234
Public or not - that still doesn't allow you to do stupid / unprofitable stuff.
12-17-2017, 10:41 AM
#1074
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 472
Originally Posted by gatorhater
You can waste all of your own private $$ you want...see Las Vegas as one example. Just because it is stupid doesn’t make it illegal.
The point is that just because a company is privately held doesn't mean that normal economic principles / rationale applies.
In turn it is irrelevant whether they are public or not.
And to the original point - Air Wiskey obviously can generate a return at a smaller scale.
XJT could probably do the same - but not without some very painful re-org.
12-18-2017, 05:57 AM
#1079
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 559
Originally Posted by DirkDiggler
The statement about being unviable below 100 planes is true. It’s because of our expenses. The leases on multiple hangers, equipment, IT infrastructure, levels of management and staff etc. The airline is setup for larger scale operations. Bring the revenue centers (airplanes) to less than 100 with the current setup, and XJT will have issues.
12-18-2017, 06:30 AM
#1080
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: lav dumper
Posts: 707
Originally Posted by da42pilot
This is what United is looking to buy and why CommutAir didn’t work.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
