Gambling on XJT and their future
09-16-2008, 03:35 AM
#221
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,803
Originally Posted by Nevets
Just to set the record straight, it wasn't CAL who named the price. It was SKW who named the price and XJT was forced to accept it or lose all the CAL flying.
09-16-2008, 06:43 AM
#222
Che Guevara
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
Originally Posted by Bond
Once again, you're not seeing the forest from the trees! CAL does not control our executive structure or compensation, CAL does not control our labor cost, and they certainly do not control their ability to fly anything over 50 seat jets which directly affects their CASM. They indirectly affect all of the above by means of the CPA. If they owned us, they would have direct control over all of the above.
It's very obvious, and you're very transparent in the fact that you don't want this deal to happen because of your desire to go to CAL. It's a shame really, it would be a great thing for the profession and for both companies.
It's very obvious, and you're very transparent in the fact that you don't want this deal to happen because of your desire to go to CAL. It's a shame really, it would be a great thing for the profession and for both companies.
It's very obvious I don't want this deal to happen? Don't start pouting I don't even understand how wanting to CAL has anything to do with XJT.
09-16-2008, 10:22 AM
#223
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: EMB 145 CPT
Posts: 2,934
Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB
...we have similar enough labor costs...
Last edited by Nevets; 09-16-2008 at 10:28 AM.
09-16-2008, 03:27 PM
#224
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
Originally Posted by Nevets
Just to set the record straight, it wasn't CAL who named the price. It was SKW who named the price and XJT was forced to accept it or lose all the CAL flying.
I'm curious if that was what the CPA's cost was based on, not the SKW thing.
09-16-2008, 03:59 PM
#225
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,803
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
I wonder, if it was XJT that set the price. You know, when the 69 airplanes were pulled and XJT submitted a cost structure below CHQ's.
I'm curious if that was what the CPA's cost was based on, not the SKW thing.
I'm curious if that was what the CPA's cost was based on, not the SKW thing.
09-16-2008, 04:56 PM
#226
Gets Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: On Top
Posts: 742
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
I wonder, if it was XJT that set the price. You know, when the 69 airplanes were pulled and XJT submitted a cost structure below CHQ's.
I'm curious if that was what the CPA's cost was based on, not the SKW thing.
I'm curious if that was what the CPA's cost was based on, not the SKW thing.
09-16-2008, 05:06 PM
#227
Gets Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: On Top
Posts: 742
Originally Posted by ToiletDuck
You're right CAL doesn't have a say in XJT's structure directly. However since XJT depends on CAL who hold's who's fate?
It's very obvious I don't want this deal to happen? Don't start pouting I don't even understand how wanting to CAL has anything to do with XJT.
It's very obvious I don't want this deal to happen? Don't start pouting I don't even understand how wanting to CAL has anything to do with XJT.
You don't want this to happen, it would mean you don't get to CAL for about 10 years, that's assuming that they would hire you with your attitude.
09-16-2008, 07:37 PM
#228
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: DD->DH->RU/XE soon to be EV
Posts: 3,732
Originally Posted by Bond
Not to down play the CPA itself, but according to Ream (from the road shows), it was the price we paid for getting released from the AFN clause, which will in his words "might help open other doors later"; and for financial pressure relieve on the remaining 30 (non-coex) aircraft.
Yeah, I remember the MFN going away, one of the FEW things that is good for XJT in the new CPA.
Too bad there's not anybody looking for a new 50 seat provider any time soon.
LAX/DelCon.....R.I.P.
09-16-2008, 07:40 PM
#229
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,803
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
Yeah, I remember the MFN going away, one of the FEW things that is good for XJT in the new CPA.
Too bad there's not anybody looking for a new 50 seat provider any time soon.
LAX/DelCon.....R.I.P.
Too bad there's not anybody looking for a new 50 seat provider any time soon.
LAX/DelCon.....R.I.P.
09-16-2008, 07:43 PM
#230
Gets Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: On Top
Posts: 742
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
Yeah, I remember the MFN going away, one of the FEW things that is good for XJT in the new CPA.
Too bad there's not anybody looking for a new 50 seat provider any time soon.
LAX/DelCon.....R.I.P.
Too bad there's not anybody looking for a new 50 seat provider any time soon.
LAX/DelCon.....R.I.P.
You never know, I know I'm being optimistic again, but we left in good terms with Delta. Maybe after the water settles with the merger, they may need our services again.
