Frontier/Republic for Idiots... What am I mis
06-19-2011 | 09:39 AM
#111
Doing One Pilot's Job
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,883
Likes: 119
Your ignorance is appalling. Pilots, mechanics and others have done exactly this over many decades. Eastern Airlines is an example of pilots and mechanics who DID NOT cave in to Frank Lorenzo even though they knew it would probably be the end of the airline. Those folks saw Frank for what he was and would not help him, nor hurt the profession.
Try learning a little about the history of airline pilots before you post such ignorance based on your own "me first" attitude.
Carl
Try learning a little about the history of airline pilots before you post such ignorance based on your own "me first" attitude.
Carl
Reading comprehension, Carl...reading comprehension.
I specifically wrote LAST TWO DECADES. You know, the post-Eastern Air Lines era when, despite numerous scope & bankruptcy concession opportunities to do so, not a single pilot group sacrificed themselves and their careers for the 'betterment' of the airline pilot profession and shut their company down.
Not US Airways
Not Delta
Not Northwest
Not United
And not Frontier.
Hell, NWA Mechanics showed more stones than any pilot group the last 10 years standing up to management demands and look what that got them...
06-19-2011 | 01:55 PM
#112
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
The increase in fuel costs is the same for everyone. Industry revenue is up huge. The strongest revenue environment since pre 9-11. This is the environment in which Frontier pilots accepted concessions.
You've seen the business plan eh? Did BB tell you that the competitor he uses as his excuse (SWA) is no longer a low cost carrier but very often has some of the highest fares around? Competing with SWA is no longer a bad thing. SWA's high fares are helping to create the very strong revenue environment that we're all seeing. The same environment in which Frontier pilots negotiated concessions.
Your excuses for weakness are an easily provable FAIL.
Carl
You've seen the business plan eh? Did BB tell you that the competitor he uses as his excuse (SWA) is no longer a low cost carrier but very often has some of the highest fares around? Competing with SWA is no longer a bad thing. SWA's high fares are helping to create the very strong revenue environment that we're all seeing. The same environment in which Frontier pilots negotiated concessions.
Your excuses for weakness are an easily provable FAIL.
Carl
Do you really believe some of this insanity that you just posted?
"revenue" is the most important metric? I can't tell if you are actually trying to refer to "earnings" (or more importantly, EPS) or if you actually believe "revenue" is the most important.
Do publicly owned companies set quarterly "revenue" targets, or do the set "earnings per share" targets?
Taking your misguided point further, you may have been halfway correct if you referred to "revenue growth", but you did not.
You also failed to address the one week old analysis I referred to that confirms "revenue" is falling off the table, worldwide. Europe and Asia (specifically china) are not feeling the effect as much as we are here in North America.
Global profit margins have slipped to less than 1%. Domestic profit margins have fallen into negative territory.
I realize that you might actually believe this is the "strongest revenue environment since 9/11", but typing it 100 times on APC doesn't make it true.
Revenue as a stand alone metric is meaningless. Revenue growth AND EPS are the foundation of technical analysis.
Finally, if you apply your ludicrous "revenue" theory to the airline we are discussing you might see how wrong you really are.
Frontier revenue was up 13.9% in 2011 Q1. In your tiny upside down world, this is where the analysis ends and you apparently would go out and buy all the RJET stock you could find.
Unfortunately, if you spend 3 or 4 more seconds reading the balance sheet you will find EPS were -.46 and the airline lost $55 million dollars (on top of the $70 million they lost during the same three months last year, and the $20 million they are projected to lose in 2011 Q2).
Revenue up double digits, as I mentioned before, yet we have lost almost $200 million dollars in 20 months after you factor in the dilution of shares.
06-19-2011 | 03:51 PM
#113
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 879
Likes: 0
We voted concessions while oil was higher than it's been for all but 11 months in the last 5000 years. When UA, etc, voted their concessions, it was 1/3 the current price, so they are a bunch of losers with no balls.
Or how about this:
Back in 2003 when the other pilots were giving huge concessions, the airlines were operating a lot of older airplanes that burnt more fuel. Thus, they had high costs anyway, and the pilots shouldn't have caved to company pressure - they should have said "just get more fuel efficient airplanes instead of asking us for cuts". Thus, they are spineless and the shame of the industry.
I specifically wrote LAST TWO DECADES. You know, the post-Eastern Air Lines era when, despite numerous scope & bankruptcy concession opportunities to do so, not a single pilot group sacrificed themselves and their careers for the 'betterment' of the airline pilot profession and shut their company down.
Once again, pay attention before responding. DEN and MKE have some of the lowest fares in the country. You are playing flame bait, aren't you? No pilot could have this loose of a grasp of logic.
Last edited by FAULTPUSH; 06-19-2011 at 04:34 PM.
06-19-2011 | 05:27 PM
#114
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
Carl, are you instructordude on flightinfo as well. These posts HAVE to be flame bait, right?
Do you really believe some of this insanity that you just posted?
"revenue" is the most important metric? I can't tell if you are actually trying to refer to "earnings" (or more importantly, EPS) or if you actually believe "revenue" is the most important.
Do publicly owned companies set quarterly "revenue" targets, or do the set "earnings per share" targets?
Taking your misguided point further, you may have been halfway correct if you referred to "revenue growth", but you did not.
You also failed to address the one week old analysis I referred to that confirms "revenue" is falling off the table, worldwide. Europe and Asia (specifically china) are not feeling the effect as much as we are here in North America.
Global profit margins have slipped to less than 1%. Domestic profit margins have fallen into negative territory.
I realize that you might actually believe this is the "strongest revenue environment since 9/11", but typing it 100 times on APC doesn't make it true.
Revenue as a stand alone metric is meaningless. Revenue growth AND EPS are the foundation of technical analysis.
Finally, if you apply your ludicrous "revenue" theory to the airline we are discussing you might see how wrong you really are.
Frontier revenue was up 13.9% in 2011 Q1. In your tiny upside down world, this is where the analysis ends and you apparently would go out and buy all the RJET stock you could find.
Unfortunately, if you spend 3 or 4 more seconds reading the balance sheet you will find EPS were -.46 and the airline lost $55 million dollars (on top of the $70 million they lost during the same three months last year, and the $20 million they are projected to lose in 2011 Q2).
Revenue up double digits, as I mentioned before, yet we have lost almost $200 million dollars in 20 months after you factor in the dilution of shares.
Do you really believe some of this insanity that you just posted?
"revenue" is the most important metric? I can't tell if you are actually trying to refer to "earnings" (or more importantly, EPS) or if you actually believe "revenue" is the most important.
Do publicly owned companies set quarterly "revenue" targets, or do the set "earnings per share" targets?
Taking your misguided point further, you may have been halfway correct if you referred to "revenue growth", but you did not.
You also failed to address the one week old analysis I referred to that confirms "revenue" is falling off the table, worldwide. Europe and Asia (specifically china) are not feeling the effect as much as we are here in North America.
Global profit margins have slipped to less than 1%. Domestic profit margins have fallen into negative territory.
I realize that you might actually believe this is the "strongest revenue environment since 9/11", but typing it 100 times on APC doesn't make it true.
Revenue as a stand alone metric is meaningless. Revenue growth AND EPS are the foundation of technical analysis.
Finally, if you apply your ludicrous "revenue" theory to the airline we are discussing you might see how wrong you really are.
Frontier revenue was up 13.9% in 2011 Q1. In your tiny upside down world, this is where the analysis ends and you apparently would go out and buy all the RJET stock you could find.
Unfortunately, if you spend 3 or 4 more seconds reading the balance sheet you will find EPS were -.46 and the airline lost $55 million dollars (on top of the $70 million they lost during the same three months last year, and the $20 million they are projected to lose in 2011 Q2).
Revenue up double digits, as I mentioned before, yet we have lost almost $200 million dollars in 20 months after you factor in the dilution of shares.
Carl
06-19-2011 | 05:31 PM
#115
Back on TDY
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,487
Likes: 0
From: 747-400 Captain
I'm going to go against the current of reason and assume you're serious (and not just trying to stir the pot). Thus, I'll do the same thing you are (choosing random metrics to justify my position):
We voted concessions while oil was higher than it's been for all but 11 months in the last 5000 years. When UA, etc, voted their concessions, it was 1/3 the current price, so they are a bunch of losers with no balls.
Or how about this:
Back in 2003 when the other pilots were giving huge concessions, the airlines were operating a lot of older airplanes that burnt more fuel. Thus, they had high costs anyway, and the pilots shouldn't have caved to company pressure - they should have said "just get more fuel efficient airplanes instead of asking us for cuts". Thus, they are spineless and the shame of the industry.
I'm sooooo scared.
Actually, the Westair pilots did, bless their hearts. Didn't you notice the way regional pilot pay spiked afterwards?
No, I missed it. Show me (...I asked, expecting no response).
Not likely. Only an idiot would think that interviews have no value.
Once again, pay attention before responding. DEN and MKE have some of the lowest fares in the country. You are playing flame bait, aren't you? No pilot could have this loose of a grasp of logic.
We voted concessions while oil was higher than it's been for all but 11 months in the last 5000 years. When UA, etc, voted their concessions, it was 1/3 the current price, so they are a bunch of losers with no balls.
Or how about this:
Back in 2003 when the other pilots were giving huge concessions, the airlines were operating a lot of older airplanes that burnt more fuel. Thus, they had high costs anyway, and the pilots shouldn't have caved to company pressure - they should have said "just get more fuel efficient airplanes instead of asking us for cuts". Thus, they are spineless and the shame of the industry.
I'm sooooo scared.
Actually, the Westair pilots did, bless their hearts. Didn't you notice the way regional pilot pay spiked afterwards?
No, I missed it. Show me (...I asked, expecting no response).
Not likely. Only an idiot would think that interviews have no value.
Once again, pay attention before responding. DEN and MKE have some of the lowest fares in the country. You are playing flame bait, aren't you? No pilot could have this loose of a grasp of logic.
Carl
06-19-2011 | 08:22 PM
#118
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 879
Likes: 0
When you can't attack the message....or defend your statements...
06-19-2011 | 08:38 PM
#119
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
I have a couple of quick questions. From your profile (747 Captain) and other posts (Delta related) I have assumed that you are previous Northwest. Is that correct or not?
Did not the Northwest pilots and mechanics negotiate a pay and benefits package reduction in exchange for NWA stock in 1993/94 as part of a NWA restructuring to prevent bankruptcy at that time?
"1993 JULY: The Air Line Pilots Association's Master Executive Council averts a NWA Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing by voting 24-1 on behalf of its members to accept concessions totaling $365 million the first year. The other unions, lenders, and vendors must agree to the restructuring by August 1. Concessions over three years total $886 million. In exchange for their concessions, employees get three seats on the board of directors and up to 37.5 percent ownership of the company."
As a wide body captain, I presume you were employed at NWA during that timeframe. Is this a correct statement?
Last edited by ColdWhiskey; 06-19-2011 at 08:54 PM.
06-19-2011 | 09:26 PM
#120
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Juvenille attacks like this notwithstanding, Frontier pilots are certainly entitled to do what they did. But understand what you did...which was to further weaken the profession by agreeing to concessions in the strongest revenue environment we've seen in a long time.
When Frontier fails, please don't expect any sympathy from me or from many others of us. To take concessions in this environment means you are ONLY concerned for yourself. That's your choice. But many of us will not forget.
Carl
When Frontier fails, please don't expect any sympathy from me or from many others of us. To take concessions in this environment means you are ONLY concerned for yourself. That's your choice. But many of us will not forget.
Carl
You have been logged onto APC for some time now and have not answered my questions. Are you previous NWA? Were you only concerned about YOURSELF in 1993? Why did not you fall on your daggar in 1993 for the betterment of the profession?
You do know don't you, that many will not forget?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
