"Industry Leading Scope"
 

Stop saying this.

1. I believe SWA is the clear scope leader.

2. If we merge with AA, DL, UAL or ***ALASKA*** that RJ scope might just as well be written on toilet paper.

Just saying.

Have you read the full language, yet?

So we are dropping Emarates, Aer Lingus, Azul, Cape Air, Jetsuite, etc...?

Because we would have to do that just to MATCH the scope SWA has. It is NOT industry leading. I can tell you that without looking at it.

If there are “limitations,” that indicates there are some provisions in place to allow for some of each. Otherwise it would have said
-no code sharing or joint ventures
-no C91 flying

Does SWA have any of the above? If not, regardless of the language, how could it possibly be industry leading if there is an airline that has none of the above allowed?

Also, the bullet points don’t claim anywhere that this AIP has industry leading scope. While I agree that reading the full language is required to assess the full value of this AIP, and to fully understand each section and expand on the bullet points, some conclusions can be drawn that that don’t necessarily need full language. And having second best scope has value...not arguing that.

Ok, I'll bite, put your money where your mouth is.

$100 real money bet that our new scope does not claw back all the international codesharing we do with big airplanes to the same extent as SWA?

You in?

Or you just wanna play the "you don't know for SURE" game for a few more weeks?

I guess I don't know "for SURE" that my wife isn't going to ride home tonight on a unicorn two-up with Kate Beckinsale and take turns mouthing me while I grill a ribeye and drink a beer.... Could happen, but I think the chances are about equal between the unicorn thing and us clawing back all our international codesharing...

Second best scope definitely has lots of value. Just sick of hearing"industry leading" when that clearly is not the case.

And just as Continental's "nothing bigger than 50 seats" scope magically disappeared after the United merger I would bet our "no RJ" scope vanishes after a merger with the big 3 or ***ALASKA***.

I prefer to at least understand where we are vulnerable rather than think we have won a permanent RJ victory.

Ok so second best Scope section? I’ll take it over what the legacies have. Hard to say without the full language.

Scope isn’t a problem with this AIP.

Probably true, and good. Unless we merge with someone...

SWA scope allows for codeshares based on certain stipulations and only with union approval. Ex: Cannot codeshare from Mexico or Canada ever but Europe/Asia is ok until the pax number reaches a certain amount and then the route must be flown by SWA pilots.

Saying anything without looking is a guess.
Ill ask the same question to you; How much do you believe we will gain by voting no and how long are you willing to wait?
And do the gains of waiting outweigh the immediate improvements?
I honestly dont know- Do you? Maybe gambling is what we should do-Im open to all ideas, but so should you hard NO voters.