ThreeStripe

Well, Delta reduced their widebody order. Maybe that is the thing to do this year

CaptCoolHand

Does this suck from our standpoint. Absolutely 100%. Any reductions in perceived growth hurts fwd progression. Especially since we lack any retirement movement.

I think this is a smart move. Here's why and you can flame away. The NEOs are not performing now and this buys us time to watch and see how that pans out. This "fleet review" is actually probably good for us. Whether it brings us new planes less planes is anyones guess at this point, but it may just simply reshuffle how we use them. It is good to look at to see if you're using your assets efficiently.

The last point I have is probably the most eye opening for me. We seem to have reached another growth point of critical mass. This happened to us back in 07 too. We have planes coming assume we have places in the system to fly them, but our current infrastructure is cracking on the weight of 1000+ flights a day. God forbid you throw a wrench into the mix...

Our support structure simply wasn't designed to handle the mass and it fails due to staffing issues throughout MX and CS and the lack of automations that we're desperately attempting to put into place. We don't want to grow too fast again and step our our dicks and end up days away from financial nuclear winter like we did in 08'. Taking a step back isn't necessarily all bad. At the risk of being a juicebox, we are still taking about a plane every month and paying for many in cash.

so... "what got us here won't get us there" well DB was right about that. I think the new admin in the crystal palace has taken note of our shortfalls and is setting up the motion to move us up to the next level. Everything takes time and we have to see how it pans out.

Take stock, wait and see or heat up your apps and run for the hills. Bottom line for me is I need this place to be successful for another 27 years and I can only hope that they're making the right decisions. I don't know what goes on behind the curtain even though I've solved all the company and countries problems between BOS and FLL...

That's my .02 Ill know if i was right in 2044.

BeatNavy

Well maybe if we invested in people, equipment, and a good domestic route structure, our critical mass would be at a higher point. We have plenty of room to grow, and could do it at a blistering pace, if we paid the piper and put money into it. Instead, Bonnie is busy squandering our money. We can't grow if we don't grow all of our systems that work together to make the operation run (mx, dispatch, cust svc, crew services, etc.). But if you make wholesale cuts and run thin, as JB has stated they like to do, you have to expect the operation to suffer. Short term profit margins vs longer term investment into the airline. We all know Wall Street likes the former, and management has said it as much with their cost cutting measures. So I don't buy the argument that we've hit a critical msss. We may have hit a self imposed critical mass, but every other airline is growing. Passenger demand is there, people like our product, and if you aren't growing in this industry right now, you are falling behind.

Bluedriver

Correct me if I'm wrong but it appears they deferred some CEO deliveries as well. They are also touting to Wall Street how this reduced capex is good for the company and stock holders. That seems to negate the argument that this is a NEO thing. Especially since these deferrals are 2-3 years out. They did swap some deliveries from NEO to CEO and that is probably good. But the deferrals specifically are 2-3 years out and some of them are CEO models. And if you are bragging to Wall Street that you are saving all this capex, it would seem a hard sell to announce 330s 3 months later for 2019-2020 deliveries. Aren't the analysts going to say hey I just bought the stock because you were touting capex restraint 3 months ago and now you are betting the company with a 330 order?

As for pausing growth for infrastructure improvements, do you not agree things are trending the wrong direction lately with respect to infrastructure spending? They seem to be slashing budgets, not investing in improvements.

What am I missing?

CaptCoolHand

I agree.

I understood that just like we convert 320-321 the CEO's would be NEO, just add $X to the bottom line and add motors. Regardless of what's on the delivery sheet, we just deferred 13 321NEOs. IMO.

I agree especially on the mx side of things the trend is downward. However they're in the midst of a major overhaul in how we operate mx. It's bordering on insanity how much is manually tracked and worked from an administrative standpoint. CS has much of the same issues. the program is in development but we're still using age old tech. I can't recall the name of the new program that's supposed to come out in late 18' or 19'... but it is there and should do away with the crewtrac/flica as we know it.

I think the lack of upgrades was also tied to the "fleet review". Once complete and they set the 3 yr plan in motion (which I wasn't given) we'll see things start to happen...

FWIW, the DO says wide bodies are coming, and in the same 24hr period our CFO says not gonna happen. Lip service likely. I know they can't divulge such info until it's inked and filed.

At some point running hot will burn us bad. On all fronts, not just the pilots. currently there's not even a 190 spare. We're hanging on by a thread. again JMO

Bluedriver

Ok, not directed at you, but I will be "anxiously"-"optimistic" when something is in writing and not just lip service. In my nearly 6 years here the only thing that has been any more than lip service is near industry worst compensation and benefits, as well as aircraft deferrals, they were in writing.

CaptCoolHand

I'm with ya man. 100%

Flyby1206

Our last CEOs will be delivered in 2018, none beyond that (as of today). Our first NEOs will be 2019.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...dateq12017.htm

Also, from the annual report:

atrdriver

You make some good points in that post.

I will say yes, anyone can see the (lagging) payrates and the (depressing) retirement numbers and the (deferred) airplane orders.

But what a prospective applicant can't find out from the APC airline profile and from the documents out in the public domain is the day-to-day reality of this place. The 10-hour 3-days. The numerous day sleeps in crappy hotels. The crappy hotels in general (I know of one particular regional that has better hotels/locations across the board), staying across from the BUF airport for 30 hours (unpaid) with nothing but a McDonalds within walking distance. The realities of reserve here. The impossibility of getting awarded a summer vacation week until your 10th(?) year on property. The fact that the company doesn't actually give you 13% in your 401(k) due to the profit sharing cliff. Etc etc etc. The list goes on.

This is stuff you don't find out until you're on line even if you do your due diligence (as I did). So forgive me for banging on these items because I wish I had been aware of the "gotchas" before I came here.

atrdriver

You also make some good points.

However, I don't see the gutting of Tech Ops recently and increased pilot pushing and flying with multiple deferrals as being congruent with your theory. In fact, the opposite. I won't make any suppositions.... I just don't like what I'm seeing in maintenance or the delivery book.

It's incredibly frustrating and demoralizing to see the company pulling back while others are expanding into markets we should be beating them to. Sadly, I fear we will be late to the party in many markets and will miss the boat on some great growth opportunities.

I guess we can always add another flight to Port-au-Prince or Santiago.