|
Originally Posted by More Bacon
(Post 1202926)
Which industry?
The non sched freight industry. |
|
|
Originally Posted by JungleBus
(Post 1202737)
There would probably be less angst if the cutout specifically exempted the E190s & A320s that Republic is currently operating for/at Frontier, rather than the entire holding company in perpetuity with any airframes they might acquire. Considering that Republic has C-series on order and their CEO has publicly voiced a desire to fly them directly for Skyteam, I don't think the angst is entirely misplaced.
|
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 1202757)
How many 88s? 117 right?
How many 717s? 88. How man mkre 90s? 7. So park 81 88s as the 717s come in. If ASMs don't matter too much. You won't need any more pilots. DCI goes to DCI 450/325 and with a tweak or two you're 1.56 compliant. If ASMs matter, given the 739s 1:1 replacement of 81 757s, 8 763s and 7 320s, well you a slight ASM problem. Getting back to ASM neutral is greaty aided by 70 new 76 seaters though. Keep 45 88s could help too. Total pilots required? None if you change the work rules. If ASMs are to stay neutral. If not, DCI 450 is around 1.2M or so block hours, we're at 1.9M or so you get your ratio. Btw, going off memory from my spreadsheet, got pulled away. We're being played. |
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1202961)
In addition to that, since we clearly live in an era of further consolidation, and furthermore since DL very likely will participate in said consolidation, all these fancy ratios and block hour thingamajigs will all have to be renegotiated if (when) we merge again. But 255 becoming 325 means we will start at 325 instead of 255. Guaranteed. So if we merge, its back to the drawing board trying to figure all this out, but the 70 growth jets in the 70-90 seat segment of the DCI whipsaw get to stay for all eternity.
We're being played. |
Really you get two options here on how you want to see the 717 deal.
Option 1, it's pure growth. We hire almost 900 pilots (or take on 900 FL pilots) and we create DCI 450/325. The MBH : DBH ratios go from near 1.17 to 1.78 and we go from 53.9% of the consolidated flying to 64% of it. Option 2, no such thing as pure growth at DAL. Option 1 would create an increase in domestic ASMs, not a decrease. We decreased last year 1% from 2010, our fleet is 6% smaller than it was in 2008 at the merger. So why increase? I'll show my math in a moment.So if you believe in status quo and see this TA as nothing but status quo, well DCI 450/325 is not going to decrease. So we need to do it at mainline. But by how much? If we decreases 1% from 2010 to 2011 on ASMs, is that the trend or would the company say 2% or 3% or higher is okay as we go to DCI 450/325? I don't know. But if we decrease off this TA it will probably come from the 88 since the 739 will be taking out the 757, 767 and 320 on a 1:1 basis anyways. The 717/CRJ900 tag team on mainline aircraft is not as clear cut though as the 739's. But all we need to do to be ratio and nearly ASM compliant is park 82 MD88s instead of all of the MD88s. The 717s won't make up for the missing seats but 32 CRJ-900s will. Use the other 38 for DCI replacement I guess. |
Here's what I mean, short story, just look at Net Additional Airplanes, Lost Jobs and Pay Difference. Option B is 717s as pure growth and Option C says not so fast, 717s/CRJ-900s replace MD88s.
http://i938.photobucket.com/albums/a...Bid/temp13.png I hid a bunch of the other options for clarity. FWIW, the 739s are in there as a 1:1 replacement with the 100 oldest 320s, 763s and 757s and so it takes into account the hits with ASMs there and parking the CRJ-200s. |
So can you park mainline jets even with DCI 450/325 and stay above the ratio? Yes.
1.56 helps some, but not a lot. What about ASMs? That's the x factor but my bet more likely to decrease at 1% then grow any. We decreased 1% from 2010 to 2011 according to the 10-k. If they discard ASMs they didn't want anyways and a 2% reduction is acceptable, then 88 717s and 32 CRJ-900s can take out most of the 88 fleet. In fact, 229 CRJ-900s take out the entire MD88 fleet vs 350 CRJ-200s. They could aways ask for relief on the 1.56 or ask to swap 102 seaters for 68 76 seaters and nail the 88's coffin. I'm sure we wouldn't allow them to change the 233, 325 or 450 caps now would we? Where would be the precedence in that? |
FTB, you're the wizard with the spreadsheets, and I think you've essentially nailed the dissonance between those who see this as a scope win and those who think there isn't enough protection. Some guys are inclined to think Option B is the plan and Delta hires and upgrades a bunch. It's certainly possible, if DL is really looking to spring ahead of the competition and not shrink in perpetuity. Others see Option C as a distinct possibility and can envision a world where 717s are replacement only, stagnation continues, and management gets a bunch more mainline-replacement jets they've been wanting a while anyways - all within the supposed protections of the TA. Also possible, in that it fits the trend of the last several years and RA's religion of capacity discipline.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:54 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands