Originally Posted by AK26

I have no idea who MM is or what QL is..



I've been short Frontier stock for over a year and have made a lot of money on that short position.

I'm on here because there is occasionally useful information on here. I started posting (when I'm bored) because I saw some posts about Frontier's financials that made no sense, and figured maybe I could help some pilots better understand their company's results...in my opinion if you work for a public company, especially in a sector as volatile as aviation, you don't have to be an expert, but should understand the financials to a level where you can make smart career decisions based on them. Never intended to come on here and "brow beat" pilots, but its silly to see some of you dreaming up conspiracies and acting like Indigo is printing money while you are struggling when in reality its the other way around. Instead of coming on here with crazy ideas, maybe talk to your union reps to understand why they are making the decisions they are; I promise you they aren't taking it easy on management for fun--I've never seen a union that doesn't like to bully their company and help boost their members' salaries.

No idea what you are talking about on the last point--the sentence doesn't even make sense.

It seems that many of you would prefer non-commercial pilots like myself not to comment on here, so I will not post any more. Hope things work out for you Frontier folks.

Originally Posted by AK26

1. I am an investor, I don't work for F9, the F9 union, or anywhere in aviation.
2. I'm not going to respond one by one to your points, but nothing you said about Frontier/Indigo's financials is true, and the conclusions (of fraud) that you are drawing from the internal dysfunction are off base. Like with most things, there is no conspiracy here, and the simplest answer is the correct one.

Originally Posted by BusDriver2000

This ^
any logical person will understand this. A company not making money will never be able to afford to pay its employees more. Especially when there is no indication that the company is going to become profitable again. The only people who don’t understand are the few stubborn employees that think they deserve legacy pay rates because they fly the same equipment. Our company is LOSING money. We are closer to bankruptcy concessions than a new CBA in my opinion. Sure let’s press management for a new CBA then furlough 500 pilots because they can’t afford it 2 years from now.

Originally Posted by Stayontarget

You do know management are currently offering us a raise right? Not enough in our opinion but a raise nonetheless.

Originally Posted by spooldup

Are they though? Because last I checked, it was a net loss for most people.

Originally Posted by Stayontarget

You do know management are currently offering us a raise right? Not enough in our opinion but a raise nonetheless.

Originally Posted by spooldup

Are they though? Because last I checked, it was a net loss for most people.

Originally Posted by ginntonic

That's correct and detailed in Negotiators Newsletter #51.

The company also sought to cut costs by lowering ALV in conjunction with that "raise".

Originally Posted by BusDriver2000

im completely fine waiting for true profitability in order to get a proper CBA. No reason to vote on some crap while we are losing money and getting stuck with it. For now fly cost index and single engine taxi, do your part.

Originally Posted by nycporsche911

One concern seemingly floating to the top is the "gains" being offered heavily weigh towards those with 5 years or less seniority which I believe consists of over 50% of the pilots on the current seniority list. As such, pilots with 6 years or more will have the lowest "gains" over the life of "increases". I don't think it's unreasonable to consider the majority of junior people would consider voting in favor of 10% for a short-term gain while they wait for a class date at a legacy, essentially, short-changing the guys more senior. I would like to believe MM will not consider presenting the pilot group a grossly imbalanced TA. Another consideration is allegedly there are several hundred PRIA requests in the queue for those with a CJO, who in theory have nothing to lose and all to gain by agreeing to 10%. While I acknowledge management is offering "raises", it appears they are throwing quite a bit of pork fat in their proposal to the detriment of those who have invested 6+ years at F9.

What is the downside of agreeing to an immediate 10% with snap-up to respectable pay rates, including retro once F9 achieves mutually agreed upon financial positions within a defined period of time?