Does AA liquidate one WO
05-04-2020 | 02:25 AM
#51
Eating A Gruben
Joined: Feb 2020
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
“unless xxx” is exactly what I’m saying. I’m saying if AA needs to cut regional capacity 30% (arbitrary but reasonable guess) that totally ditching 50 seat ex phl/clt might make sense. The employee cuts are devastating to one group but they’re simple and direct and they leave the employee groups you plan to keep more intact. When transatlantic demand to Shannon and Budapest recovers three years later you open an envoy 145 base in Philadelphia to feed that.
Here’s my point: You don’t know anything more about this than the rest of us. There’s been a ton of misinformation in this thread, as well as wild speculation spoken as fact. It’s almost like you guys are signaling that you would support throwing your future coworkers under the bus to keep your job.
05-04-2020 | 02:41 AM
#52
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 0
This is all rank speculation and is intended solely for the intellectual distraction of myself and others. As noted above, AA will do what it wants. The PSA MEC could take out Chik-Fil-A(tm) style billboards saying “Phurlow mor Peedmont” and it wouldn’t make a difference. This isn’t some nefarious shadow influence campaign.
As for Piedmont overhead... it’s the labor costs, not the HQ rent.
Your point about aircraft leases is well taken though. Perhaps folding PSA and dumping the CRJ payments will make more sense.
As for Piedmont overhead... it’s the labor costs, not the HQ rent.
Your point about aircraft leases is well taken though. Perhaps folding PSA and dumping the CRJ payments will make more sense.
05-04-2020 | 03:18 AM
#54
Banned
Joined: Mar 2020
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
I think with social distancing, which the majority of the public agrees with, simply will not want to get into a crowded RJ or 737 where social distancing is impossible and air in the cabin is recirculated. I believe more spacious cabins are the future.(A32x, E175).
Right now is the best time to fly with cabins at 30% occupancy.
People will revolt and never fly again if you bring the loads back up to pre covid levels at this point in time.
Right now is the best time to fly with cabins at 30% occupancy.
People will revolt and never fly again if you bring the loads back up to pre covid levels at this point in time.
05-04-2020 | 04:14 AM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2015
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
I think with social distancing, which the majority of the public agrees with, simply will not want to get into a crowded RJ or 737 where social distancing is impossible and air in the cabin is recirculated. I believe more spacious cabins are the future.(A32x, E175).
Right now is the best time to fly with cabins at 30% occupancy.
People will revolt and never fly again if you bring the loads back up to pre covid levels at this point in time.
Right now is the best time to fly with cabins at 30% occupancy.
People will revolt and never fly again if you bring the loads back up to pre covid levels at this point in time.
05-04-2020 | 04:28 AM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
“unless xxx” is exactly what I’m saying. I’m saying if AA needs to cut regional capacity 30% (arbitrary but reasonable guess) that totally ditching 50 seat ex phl/clt might make sense. The employee cuts are devastating to one group but they’re simple and direct and they leave the employee groups you plan to keep more intact. When transatlantic demand to Shannon and Budapest recovers three years later you open an envoy 145 base in Philadelphia to feed that.
LOL! So you mean to tell me AA is gonna have PSA fly CRJ 900s with 10 pax on PHL-MDT, ABE, AVP and SBY.
Am I missing something here? If anything, they are going to leave the regional flying to the 50 seaters during this period of low loads because well you know.... 50 seater is a lot less cost efficient to fly 10 passengers than a a 76 seater
also not to mention that these 145s are paid off and don’t take many people or cargo to break even and make money. Seems a lot more cost efficient than a brand new CRJ900
05-04-2020 | 04:32 AM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 699
Likes: 0
LOL! So you mean to tell me AA is gonna have PSA fly CRJ 900s with 10 pax on PHL-MDT, ABE, AVP and SBY.
Am I missing something here? If anything, they are going to leave the regional flying to the 50 seaters during this period of low loads because well you know.... 50 seater is a lot less cost efficient to fly 10 passengers than a a 76 seater
also not to mention that these 145s are paid off and don’t take many people or cargo to break even and make money. Seems a lot more cost efficient than a brand new CRJ900
Am I missing something here? If anything, they are going to leave the regional flying to the 50 seaters during this period of low loads because well you know.... 50 seater is a lot less cost efficient to fly 10 passengers than a a 76 seater
also not to mention that these 145s are paid off and don’t take many people or cargo to break even and make money. Seems a lot more cost efficient than a brand new CRJ900
With maintenance costs, CRJ900/E175's are cheaper to operate long term right now than 50 seat jets, even if they only have 10 passengers. With jet fuel at $0.47/gal right now, the fuel savings really aren't there.
05-04-2020 | 04:37 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Strange, because AA has already parked more 50 seaters than larger aircraft.
With maintenance costs, CRJ900/E175's are cheaper to operate long term right now than 50 seat jets, even if they only have 10 passengers. With jet fuel at $0.47/gal right now, the fuel savings really aren't there.
With maintenance costs, CRJ900/E175's are cheaper to operate long term right now than 50 seat jets, even if they only have 10 passengers. With jet fuel at $0.47/gal right now, the fuel savings really aren't there.
05-04-2020 | 04:38 AM
#59
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: May 2017
Posts: 2,012
Likes: 0
Nothing makes any sense to
fly with 10 pax. Current schedules are a fluke of stimulus money and airlines trying to figure things out on the fly. As volumes return and Oct 1 passes, schedules will shrink to meet demand.
the way you ditch 50 seaters is you fly at a frequency that makes 64 seaters profitable and some markets lose service.
as for piedmont (or any regional) playing a “valuable role in the AA system” ... that’s 2019 talking. The system is changing dramatically; what has been true for a decade isn’t anymore. What is true now? IDK. But it’s different
fly with 10 pax. Current schedules are a fluke of stimulus money and airlines trying to figure things out on the fly. As volumes return and Oct 1 passes, schedules will shrink to meet demand.
the way you ditch 50 seaters is you fly at a frequency that makes 64 seaters profitable and some markets lose service.
as for piedmont (or any regional) playing a “valuable role in the AA system” ... that’s 2019 talking. The system is changing dramatically; what has been true for a decade isn’t anymore. What is true now? IDK. But it’s different
05-04-2020 | 04:42 AM
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2020
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Nothing makes any sense to
fly with 10 pax. Current schedules are a fluke of stimulus money and airlines trying to figure things out on the fly. As volumes return and Oct 1 passes, schedules will shrink to meet demand.
the way you ditch 50 seaters is you fly at a frequency that makes 64 seaters profitable and some markets lose service.
fly with 10 pax. Current schedules are a fluke of stimulus money and airlines trying to figure things out on the fly. As volumes return and Oct 1 passes, schedules will shrink to meet demand.
the way you ditch 50 seaters is you fly at a frequency that makes 64 seaters profitable and some markets lose service.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
