Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   Pinnacle/Colgan = the next Big Sky/Mesaba? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/26103-pinnacle-colgan-next-big-sky-mesaba.html)

PinnacleFO 05-06-2008 08:50 AM

Pinnacle/Colgan = the next Big Sky/Mesaba?
 
Mesaba guys know this all to well, your company is making money but the other half of your Holding company is losing money, therefore the "parent company" (Mair holdings) declares bankruptcy and gets to impose a contract on the company that was making money (mesaba). They then sell that company and the cycle starts all over again.
Big Sky did it to Mesaba and due to the fact that all Colgan seems to do is lose money, it seems that Pinnacle could be headed in the same direction. Pinnacle Airlines Inc. is a profitable company but if Colgan continues to lose 4 to 5 million a quarter, whos to say that Pinnacle Corp (the holding company for both) doesnt declare bankruptcy in a year or two, and then we go through the same crap that mesaba went through. That is why the arbitrators decision to force the company to meet with our union to merge colgan and pinnacle together is so important.

Any thoughts on this?

Disclaimer: this is not a rumour, no one at pinnacle has ever mentioned this ever happening, just something I believe could happen.

Mesabah 05-06-2008 09:06 AM

Big Sky was used against the mesaba pilots back during the 2004 contract negotiations. The 2005 bankruptcy of XJ was not caused by big sky. Also MAIR did not go bankrupt during XJ's bankruptcy. Instead NWA chose to reject leases on half of our aircraft as well as miss payments prior to the bankruptcy filing at NWA.

skidmark 05-06-2008 09:56 AM

I in no way defend Colgan, however Colgan has been profitable for all the years BEFORE Pinnacle bought Colgan.

wolf 05-06-2008 10:36 AM


Originally Posted by skidmark (Post 380152)
I in no way defend Colgan, however Colgan has been profitable for all the years BEFORE Pinnacle bought Colgan.

Yeah but oil wasn't where it is now. The geniuses over on Nonconnah decided to buy an airline (Colgan) where they had to pay for fuel although we already had an airline (Pinnacle) that was efficient, making money and had somebody else paying for fuel (NWA).

If the operation goes belly up, I hope Trenary and gang get sued by the PNCL shareholders...

DMEarc 05-06-2008 10:59 AM


Originally Posted by PinnacleFO (Post 380116)
Mesaba guys know this all to well, your company is making money but the other half of your Holding company is losing money, therefore the "parent company" (Mair holdings) declares bankruptcy and gets to impose a contract on the company that was making money (mesaba). They then sell that company and the cycle starts all over again.
Big Sky did it to Mesaba and due to the fact that all Colgan seems to do is lose money, it seems that Pinnacle could be headed in the same direction. Pinnacle Airlines Inc. is a profitable company but if Colgan continues to lose 4 to 5 million a quarter, whos to say that Pinnacle Corp (the holding company for both) doesnt declare bankruptcy in a year or two, and then we go through the same crap that mesaba went through. That is why the arbitrators decision to force the company to meet with our union to merge colgan and pinnacle together is so important.

Any thoughts on this?

Disclaimer: this is not a rumour, no one at pinnacle has ever mentioned this ever happening, just something I believe could happen.

Great points.

I think you're about to see some SERIOUS changes over at Colgan in the next year.

All of Colgan's SAAB codeshare operating agreements are Pro-Rate. Which means Colgan burdens fuel, MX, landing fees, gate space, ticketing systems. They don't have a "CONTRACT" with any majors, just a pro-rate agreement. Breaking this down further Colgan gets all the 1 way passenger fares (SYR-LGA) however if a PAX was connecting SYR-LGA-CLT-MCO they would only get a small portion of the connection passengers fare. Same on the United Express and Conti Connex side of the SAAB operation.

Trenary hates pro rate. You're too vulernable to the crazy industry. He wants out of these contracts and wants all Capacity Purchase Agreements- (Q400).

The US Airways Agreement is up in Oct 2008. Expect that contract to either be completely eliminated or cutback A LOT.

The United Agreement is up in Dec 2008, expect that one to be trimmed substantially.

The Houston Continental Connection Agreement is up in 2010, however that side of the operation is one of their stronger ones, so I expect that to be renewed, or become a Capacity Purchase Agreement.

Colgan owns 25 or so SAABs, the rest are leased. I expect many SAABs to go back to Sweden.

When you cut SAABs you then have unused flight crews- expect those crews to be transitioned to the Q400. Which is why I think they have stopped hiring into the Q and SAAB. The Q400 will grow. I personally think they picked up the options without a codeshare agreement just to get their hands on them before Skywest or Horizon can get any more.

The Beeches will be gone by Oct- if not sooner.

But either way, things are rumbling over there. On a bright note, their Q400 operation is starting to pick up steam as they get used to the airplane. But from what I heard that thing is a MX nightmare.

saabguy493 05-06-2008 11:38 AM

New Airplane = MX Nightmare

PinnacleFO 05-06-2008 11:55 AM


Originally Posted by Mesabah (Post 380124)
Big Sky was used against the mesaba pilots back during the 2004 contract negotiations. The 2005 bankruptcy of XJ was not caused by big sky. Also MAIR did not go bankrupt during XJ's bankruptcy. Instead NWA chose to reject leases on half of our aircraft as well as miss payments prior to the bankruptcy filing at NWA.

my mistake, I thought that is what happened.

muushin 05-06-2008 12:18 PM


Originally Posted by wolf (Post 380180)
Yeah but oil wasn't where it is now. The geniuses over on Nonconnah decided to buy an airline (Colgan) where they had to pay for fuel although we already had an airline (Pinnacle) that was efficient, making money and had somebody else paying for fuel (NWA).

If the operation goes belly up, I hope Trenary and gang get sued by the PNCL shareholders...


Maybe, If Chuck cut back on the pancakes a bit, the company would save some money, unfortunately, the way he eats, Waffle House would then suffer a loss...

OntheMissed 05-06-2008 12:22 PM

Big sky didn't do anything to Mesaba. Mair holdings screwed both airlines

Avroman 05-06-2008 01:44 PM


Originally Posted by OntheMissed (Post 380250)
Big sky didn't do anything to Mesaba. Mair holdings screwed both airlines


Absolutely... It was far worse ultimately for Big Sky than it was for Mesaba.
If it weren't for Mair, Big Sky would still be a small happy EAS airline and we'd still have the Avros.... well ok maybe not.

Killer51883 05-06-2008 08:05 PM


Originally Posted by muushin (Post 380242)
Maybe, If Chuck cut back on the pancakes a bit, the company would save some money, unfortunately, the way he eats, Waffle House would then suffer a loss...


ha ha ha!!! that made my day


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:16 AM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands