thanks for the positive energy

 

Let him vent, his airline is in the drains. He has to start all over again.
Missery loves company.

 

This right here.. He's just upset with himself and his own airline. Perfectly stated, "Misery loves company"

 

They are already worn down. In the heat of contentious contract negotiations, the main concern of F9 pilots is bots and being robbed of OT. You wouldn't see that sort of prioritizing on the legacy side. In reality, you deserve to be at the bottom where you are the most comfortable.

 

I am by no means a Frontier cheerleader, but this math doesn't math. The article appears to be referencing Q1 since it was printed in May and the chart only shows one quarter in 2024. Frontier's operating loss was $31 million, or 3.5%. To lose 11.6% (the number referenced by the article) Frontier would have lost $100 million. So how do we more than triple expenses in the quarter as a result of a new pilot contract? You can't. Looking further, Spirit's total (all employee) salary wage and benefit expense for Q1 was 29% of all expense. Frontier's was 25%. This is all employees, not just the pilots, and this is using's Spirits higher CASM compared to Frontier's CASM. There is simply no way adding 2 or 3 cents per seat mile gets us to -11.6% for Q1. It is impossible math.

Finally, spirit lost more money in Q2 than they did in Q1 and F9 turned a profit (albeit tiny). If CASM was the deciding factor, why didn't Frontier lose more money in Q2? CASM isn't the issue here. Will Frontier's CASM increase when they agree to a new contract, of course, but no amount of raises will generate an operating loss of double digits (assuming all other variables remain equal). All of this mental circus ignores the RASM side, and the article started to go down that road. I think Frontier has a solution to finally impact RASM in a positive manner for the first time in years (decades?). Frontier (or any LCC) has never had a cost problem, they have always had a revenue problem. I think that landscape is changing.

 

He's not wrong though. The entire sale-leaseback, semi-ponzi scheme that Biffle is doing is the only thing keeping you guys afloat right now. When that well runs dry...

 

Fortunately for us, when that well runs dry, thru will have to place another order for aircraft.

And since all of our planes are leased and will eventually be returned a future order is almost guaranteed.

 

Post #638 does a good job of covering why this is incorrect.

 

SLBs do affect profits, albeit indirectly.

The way F9 treats their SLB's as gains within other OE effectively reduces overall OE. Less OE = higher operating income which flows to net.

Still, I don't discount the overall point of your post.

 

What lending institutions is F9 making lease payments to? Who holds the leases?