![]() |
Originally Posted by mkitrn
(Post 3177987)
Stephen Wolf will come out of retirement with hedge fund and government loans to purchase AA and rename to USair east 4 life. Congress will amend 401k statute to allow corporations to raid them and wolf will sure up airline with all the employees 401k.
|
Originally Posted by Trowserchilli
(Post 3178580)
They could be offered the same package they offered the TWA guys. Pretty simple.
|
Originally Posted by TransWorld
(Post 3178607)
That staple was in the belly button of our centerfold before belly button piercings were a thing.
|
Originally Posted by FlyyGuyy
(Post 3178653)
Please don't punish the new people. The staple was bull. But I was in highschool...
I bet the TWA guys would find it the most funny. |
This thread is yet another example, but yet one of many, why airline pilots make horrible airline CEOs. Incoherent babble. You all should invent a monopoly based airline board game. Let’s call it “Blue Star, We’re Going After The Majors”.
|
A board game would be great!
Start with a pile of cash and first to zero wins! Then at periodic times throughout the game we have new players join with fresh piles of cash or even live black swans to kick over the board. |
Originally Posted by Tom Bradys Cat
(Post 3178969)
A board game would be great!
Start with a pile of cash and first to zero wins! Then at periodic times throughout the game we have new players join with fresh piles of cash or even live black swans to kick over the board. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon...._AC_SX425_.jpg |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3178093)
The premise of the article was that the fed will in fact allow (and possibly fund) mergers under dire economic circumstances, which would not fly otherwise. It gave some examples from '08.
I don't really see mergers between the big four, but I do agree that the trust-busters would might take a pass under the circumstance of catastrophic industry disruption. During the banking crisis (2008), Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, urged Bank of America to purchase Merrill Lynch to avoid a global meltdown. Are we there? That's left to interpretation by those with a higher pay grade. |
Originally Posted by WhaleSurfing
(Post 3178964)
This thread is yet another example, but yet one of many, why airline pilots make horrible airline CEOs. Incoherent babble. You all should invent a monopoly based airline board game. Let’s call it “Blue Star, We’re Going After The Majors”.
“Welcome abroad, this is your TWA President speaking. I will be flying you out of Kansas City this morning to our next stop. Assisting me to today is Paul Richter, your TWA Executive Vice President, and fellow Captain. Should we need an extra hand, our owner, Howard Hughes, is on board and stands ready to assist.” They were credited with turning TWA into a World Class Airline. |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3179018)
|
Originally Posted by pangolin
(Post 3179061)
It’s close enough I think someone with skills could photoshop that image into flipping the bird. It would be epic.
|
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3179079)
I've been wondering what load and shot size would work best on black swans.
|
Just think ... if the coup had been successful we could have ended up with one ‘state airline’. ;)
|
Originally Posted by Tom Bradys Cat
(Post 3178969)
A board game would be great!
Start with a pile of cash and first to zero wins! Then at periodic times throughout the game we have new players join with fresh piles of cash or even live black swans to kick over the board. |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3179079)
I've been wondering what load and shot size would work best on black swans.
|
Originally Posted by ElCaribe
(Post 3179171)
“Uh oh, you drew the economic downturn card. All players must give 30% of their money and go back 3 spaces. The player who drew the card must forfeit the game.”
Then the ‘Job Action’ card Could end up on a ‘Court Injunction’ space |
Originally Posted by WhaleSurfing
(Post 3178964)
This thread is yet another example, but yet one of many, why airline pilots make horrible airline CEOs. Incoherent babble. You all should invent a monopoly based airline board game. Let’s call it “Blue Star, We’re Going After The Majors”.
|
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3178232)
I wouldn't even have bothered, except it was Reuters and they strive to report facts or reasonable opinions.
|
Originally Posted by sobo
(Post 3178503)
?????
Allegiant through Q3 2020 has lost $155.3M, and has $709m in cash/cash equivalents. I love Allegiant’s business model but the numbers don’t lie. FWIW AA’s market cap is over $9b.
Originally Posted by pangolin
(Post 3179061)
It’s close enough I think someone with skills could photoshop that image into flipping the bird. It would be epic.
|
Originally Posted by usernamehere
(Post 3179656)
hahahaha! That’s hilarious.
Honest question. I always like asking people what they think the most fair, trusted news source is |
I wouldn't trust any news source alone. They all have bias.
An educated person who has the time should sample news across different platforms and make an attempt to distill the truth. |
Originally Posted by GogglesPisano
(Post 3180591)
I wouldn't trust any news source alone. They all have bias.
An educated person who has the time should sample news across different platforms and make an attempt to distill the truth. https://i.ibb.co/j8m1tG2/8-A71-DFC3-...F461563925.jpg and the man WAS IN the newspaper business. |
Originally Posted by Aero1900
(Post 3180576)
Dare I ask what you believe us the most trusted news source?
Honest question. I always like asking people what they think the most fair, trusted news source is |
The Economist seems to be the most clear-headed and sane.
|
Originally Posted by GogglesPisano
(Post 3180591)
I wouldn't trust any news source alone. They all have bias.
Originally Posted by GogglesPisano
(Post 3180591)
An educated person who has the time should sample news across different platforms and make an attempt to distill the truth.
|
Originally Posted by CAirBear
(Post 3180610)
I listen to NPR All Things Considered. BBC isn’t bad since they (most of the time) have no dog in the fight.
Both of which are publicly funded. |
Originally Posted by Aero1900
(Post 3180576)
Dare I ask what you believe us the most trusted news source?
Honest question. I always like asking people what they think the most fair, trusted news source is |
Originally Posted by Aero1900
(Post 3180576)
Dare I ask what you believe us the most trusted news source?
Honest question. I always like asking people what they think the most fair, trusted news source is Ive stopped reading a lot of mainstream because they twist, or downplay facts or just leave them out to shape their narrative. But if I do and am motivated I’ll try to go somewhere with other bias and try to get the facts the mainstream left out of the story. As an example this year a big story was “record number of cases in FL!” Death destruction etc. Instant spidey tingle and I figured FL probably just did way more tests on that particular day. So I went to covidtracking project and saw that on that particular day FL did a testing blitz to the amount of 2 or three times the number of tests it was doing at the time and the reality was that the rate of infected people actually went down slightly, but it didn’t stop the headline or the story with the narrative that FL was failing miserably because “they have a record number of cases in a single day don’t you know!?”. And I don’t think anyone other than right wing sites like dailywire. Theblaze, or dailycaller even mentioned the fact the number of tests had been increased by such a large extent. There is only the narrative when it comes to mainstream media. https://jonathanturley.org/wp-conten...ne-Fiery-2.jpgHowever, it does seem with financial, non politic related things, there is less bias but there is clickbait. idk, just trying to figure it out like everyone else. |
Reuters
Originally Posted by usernamehere
(Post 3180869)
I don’t have any trusted news source. Everywhere has bias but I tend to frequent the blaze, daily caller, and daily wire. But they tend to focus more on politics and they are 100% biased. (But at least they say so) I also like “the new paper” - sends a de sensationalized newspaper via email with about a paragraph per story every weekday. Basically, what the nightly news used to be except shorter. And they provide links for additional context often times the actual data or letter or government report involved in the story.
Ive stopped reading a lot of mainstream because they twist, or downplay facts or just leave them out to shape their narrative. But if I do and am motivated I’ll try to go somewhere with other bias and try to get the facts the mainstream left out of the story. As an example this year a big story was “record number of cases in FL!” Death destruction etc. Instant spidey tingle and I figured FL probably just did way more tests on that particular day. So I went to covidtracking project and saw that on that particular day FL did a testing blitz to the amount of 2 or three times the number of tests it was doing at the time and the reality was that the rate of infected people actually went down slightly, but it didn’t stop the headline or the story with the narrative that FL was failing miserably because “they have a record number of cases in a single day don’t you know!?”. And I don’t think anyone other than right wing sites like dailywire. Theblaze, or dailycaller even mentioned the fact the number of tests had been increased by such a large extent. There is only the narrative when it comes to mainstream media. https://jonathanturley.org/wp-conten...ne-Fiery-2.jpgHowever, it does seem with financial, non politic related things, there is less bias but there is clickbait. idk, just trying to figure it out like everyone else. Having said that, I do think Reuters is one of the best out there. BBC used to have a rule when publishing something: have two independent sources, or REUTERS. While you can make an argument that they are left leaning, their journalists have pretty strict guidelines that they must follow. It’s often why their stories seem so boring and pointing out the obvious :-) It’s worth noting, however, that this stories comes from their breakingVIEWS side, where their journalists are allowed to make predictions, and have more journalistic license, if that’s a thing. |
Originally Posted by FXLAX
(Post 3180743)
Both of which are publicly funded.
Fascinating. |
Reuters Predicts Big 4 Consolidation
Originally Posted by CAirBear
(Post 3180976)
🥱
Fascinating. Just pointing out that, like other news companies, they have their revenue sources they must protect. In other words, they are not immune to bias. |
Originally Posted by CAirBear
(Post 3180610)
I listen to NPR All Things Considered. BBC isn’t bad since they (most of the time) have no dog in the fight.
Ive been overseas a few times with high profile events happened back here and the locals asking me what the hell is going, with most of their info coming from BBC. When I tuned local U.S. outlets it was much more detailed and in-depth, etc. |
I look at the source video of the politician speaking or the event. Or I read the document itself. Typically what is reported in the media bears little resemblance to the facts.
|
Originally Posted by GogglesPisano
(Post 3180616)
The Economist seems to be the most clear-headed and sane.
|
Originally Posted by TYYLR
(Post 3180885)
I usually look at each side of the same headline and the headline itself to see how each side wants me to see it and then do some digging for myself. It’s sad what the news has become.
Having said that, I do think Reuters is one of the best out there. BBC used to have a rule when publishing something: have two independent sources, or REUTERS. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...-idUSKCN24D0HE So start with the headline. Why is the story new case record in the first place? Why compare it to “most countries?” Why isn’t it “record testing leads to record cases discovered?” So my first issue is the headline itself and the story itself are meant to come down on FL for being open and because it’s being run by a republican. first paragraph: calls the protests anti-mask protests. I’m pretty sure they were anti-lockdown protests but I could be wrong. But I doubt it. then it talks about how bad it is compared to other countries, no mention of actual tests performed. The media throughout this event has just assumed China was honest when it stopped reporting cases. I don’t have time to go dig for other countries testing numbers but the New York comparison is easy. Covidtracking.com. On the day they compare to New York, New York was doing around 50,000 tests per day which they leave out of the story. You don’t know that Florida in this case did 143,000 tests in one day until the very last paragraph (it’s given an obligatory sentence with no context). So math wise Florida was about 10-11% infection rate and New York on the record setting day was around 23-25% infection rate. More than twice that of FL. Yet the story is basically implying that FL is worse off than New York was. Narrative. |
Originally Posted by usernamehere
(Post 3181308)
I would agree that Reuters is one of the best. But they still have an agenda. Here’s the story from the example I mentioned above.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-h...-idUSKCN24D0HE So start with the headline. Why is the story new case record in the first place? Why compare it to “most countries?” Why isn’t it “record testing leads to record cases discovered?” So my first issue is the headline itself and the story itself are meant to come down on FL for being open and because it’s being run by a republican. first paragraph: calls the protests anti-mask protests. I’m pretty sure they were anti-lockdown protests but I could be wrong. But I doubt it. then it talks about how bad it is compared to other countries, no mention of actual tests performed. The media throughout this event has just assumed China was honest when it stopped reporting cases. I don’t have time to go dig for other countries testing numbers but the New York comparison is easy. Covidtracking.com. On the day they compare to New York, New York was doing around 50,000 tests per day which they leave out of the story. You don’t know that Florida in this case did 143,000 tests in one day until the very last paragraph (it’s given an obligatory sentence with no context). So math wise Florida was about 10-11% infection rate and New York on the record setting day was around 23-25% infection rate. More than twice that of FL. Yet the story is basically implying that FL is worse off than New York was. Narrative. |
Reuters Predicts Big 4 Consolidation
Originally Posted by CAirBear
(Post 3180976)
🥱
Fascinating. Just by coincidence, this just came out about the other government funded (paid for by tax payers) organization’s principle counsel. https://youtu.be/t1r2rdmWsPE |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3178057)
Until business travel turns around JetBlue is in trouble,
|
Originally Posted by Bluetruth
(Post 3182523)
JetBlue is about VFR and leisure. Its the big 3 that have the lions share of the now non existent business travel.
Now this: https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-halts-four-cities-mid-2021/ |
Originally Posted by Trowserchilli
(Post 3182593)
Actually excargo dog is spot on. Most carriers attempting to be hybrids don’t survive in the long run. Your CASM continues to climb with no demand. Your no longer a low cost carrier. Now ego driven your hell bent on going to Europe. Just a few weeks ago you guys were going to grow everywhere.
Now this: https://thepointsguy.com/news/jetblue-halts-four-cities-mid-2021/. This must have been big news in your house at 2am, you’ve posted the link in every thread of the past 3 weeks which mentioned JetBlue. Wouldn’t call suspending routes like BWI-BOS as reading the tea leaves. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:36 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands