Airline Pilot Central Forums - Frontier gets another 40Mil from RAH

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)

- - Frontier gets another 40Mil from RAH (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/37793-frontier-gets-another-40mil-rah.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by forumname (Post 573669)

I'm just curious, but what would you consider to be "extremely good" that would cause the pilot group at a legacy to relax scope to the 70 seat level?

We all know how well that worked out in the industry, particularly for UAL when the 777's were coming on board.

forumname I have no idea. I'm not promoting it at all. I'd like to see CHQ gain additional 50 seat flying for them but that's the limit of it. I have no idea what it'd take but it would have to be ridiculous. My statement was more along the lines of "everything has a price". I applaud the group for being so fiercely against it especially considering how all the other majors are already doing so. Kudos to those guys.

As far as RAH goes this deal, as it appears, was pushed for getting F9 to agree to the $150million bill they owed RAH and this now makes RAH the largest Debtor in possession for them. This gives F9 more leeway to emerge successfully and positions/protects RAH in the event of BK. RAH will also see an interest return on this money. Considering the market and lack of places to put money BB saw this as a good investment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToiletDuck (Post 573674)

forumname I have no idea. I'm not promoting it at all. I'd like to see CHQ gain additional 50 seat flying for them but that's the limit of it.

Would you like to see it at the expense of another pilot group?

I know, it's just business, but I'm curious as to your thoughts since somebody else in this thread has NO PROBLEM with it.

For Those Defending More 70+seat Flying at the expense of Major Carriers Hope you like your current pay and rules cause you are going to be there for a VERY LONG TIME....

Quote:

Originally Posted by forumname (Post 573502)

To be clear, or rather more FACTUAL, Eagle didn't "take" anything from American.

On a broader scale, "regional" airlines don't "take", or my favorite "steal" flying from anybody.

The flying belongs to the major/legacy/whomever management/holding company, not the pilots, and it gets allocated as they see fit. And of course we could go down the severely over beaten horse of scope and scope erosion, that's not the point.

We as pilots don't like it, but that's the FACT of what goes on.

Forumname,
What you said is my point exactly. (I stated my case using a counter-argument)

Everyone can beat their favorite punching bag all they want (MESA if you are a Regional PIlot, Eagle if you work for AA, or American if you (used to) work for TWA).
I was merely pointing out the obvious paradigm shift in aviation in response to the petty RAH=cancer comment that sparked this whole thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blkflyer (Post 573680)

For Those Defending More 70+seat Flying at the expense of Major Carriers Hope you like your current pay and rules cause you are going to be there for a VERY LONG TIME....

Education and mentoring has failed miserably among the younger generations, I hate to say it, but if it's shinny and it looks like a mini 73, there are guys that will do it for anything.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwings (Post 573681)

Apologies for not catching it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bond (Post 573667)

I spoke too soon.

Branded met all targets set by the company

Quote:

XJT is currently operating a total of 214 aircraft for CAL (10 more than the CPA) to cover the CRJ flying.

The 10 aircraft were there as part of your contract. That contract was agreed to prior to the CRJs leaving. When the CRJs were obtained for their two year lease it was agreed with CAL how they would be taken out of service and replaced by CHQ 145s. With the shrinking of the markets CAL has simply decided to cut back regional flying as well. The CRJs leaving made this very easy for CAL. CHQ recently pulled 5 aircraft from CAL and sold them to a Mexican airline. Those 5 aircraft along with the flying left over from the CRJs leaving is being replaced by CHQ ERJs coming from our United and US Airways sides when those contracts end later this year.

Quote:

You did state in multiple cases that we would be in bankruptcy if we operated branded.

I said branded in the form XJT was flying did not appear to be feasible and after looking at the massive losses the company was taking it was only a matter of time before XJT either closed it or went BK. Considering XJT is basically a staffing company that meant they'd have to close branded. Had they declared BK they would have been in jeopardy of paying call the lease rates on the planes. CAL would have most likely moved the aircraft to SKYW and CHQ which have stronger financials.

I never said I wanted the thread closed at all I just said I wanted you to PM me. You said you would so lets have it. If not I guess it's time the penny dropped and we find out how full of it you've really been from the start. Sorry your feelings have been hurt but that's no reason to make things up in some lame attempt to character assassinate someone. I've never shown you that disrespect and don't expect it in return. Maybe I expect to much.

Oh my dear lord, this is yet another RAH vs. XJT thread? :D

TD, you don't know a thing about what went down. Just stop.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToiletDuck (Post 573692)

No it didn't. The huge loss taken with branded is what lowered the value of XJT to the point where CAL was pushing for it to be sold so it wouldn't go bk and be unable to fulfill it's contractual agreements.

The 10 aircraft were there as part of your contract. That contract was agreed to prior to the CRJs leaving. When the CRJs were obtained for their two year lease it was agreed with CAL how they would be taken out of service and replaced by CHQ 145s. With the shrinking of the markets CAL has simply decided to cut back regional flying as well. The CRJs leaving made this very easy for CAL. CHQ recently pulled 5 aircraft from CAL and sold them to a Mexican airline. Those 5 aircraft along with the flying left over from the CRJs leaving is being replaced by CHQ ERJs coming from our United and US Airways sides when those contracts end later this year.

I said branded in the form XJT was flying did not appear to be feasible and after looking at the massive losses the company was taking it was only a matter of time before XJT either closed it or went BK. Considering XJT is basically a staffing company that meant they'd have to close branded. Had they declared BK they would have been in jeopardy of paying call the lease rates on the planes. CAL would have most likely moved the aircraft to SKYW and CHQ which have stronger financials.

I never said I wanted the thread closed at all I just said I wanted you to PM me. You said you would so lets have it. If not I guess it's time the penny dropped and we find out how full of it you've really been from the start. Sorry your feelings have been hurt but that's no reason to make things up in some lame attempt to character assassinate someone. I've never shown you that disrespect and don't expect it in return. Maybe I expect to much.

My gosh, you just don't know when to quit!

The CPA is for 204 aircraft, with the option for CAL of dropping that to 190 by the summer. Now working here, I think I know a little more seeing as we get the memos and you don't. The extra 10 aircraft were kept in place to cover the gap being left behind by the CRJ's as they (CAL) has determined they needed the feed after all, hence those are operating outside our CPA as per our quarterly report totaling 214 aircraft for CAL.

Targets were set by accounting for Branded, and all of them were met, look at the annual report (2008), what caused the loss just as it did for all other stand alone carriers was the fuel factor....you know that.

Whether or not you implied that you wanted us gone is besides the point. I'm too lazy to look up the threads, but you did say that branded would cause us to go into bankruptcy....it didn't.

There, happy now? Can we get back on topic now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by forumname (Post 573676)

Would you like to see it at the expense of another pilot group?

I know, it's just business, but I'm curious as to your thoughts since somebody else in this thread has NO PROBLEM with it.

I wouldn't say that people have NO PROBLEM with it. However there are still a hierarchy of things. When everyone's growing everyone is happy. When everyone's shrinking it's obviously the opposite. I wouldn't like to see it at the expense of another pilot group but if a pilot is going to be on the streets either way then there's no reason I'd hope it was one of ours. If CAL decided to all the sudden give CHQ more flying so that our 100 guys/gals came off the street then I'd be very happy about that. I woudn't want it to come at the expense of those at XJT but if it did then that's life. I'd never like to see it at the expense of their pilot group but considering how they keep acting here I won't lose any sleep over it. There's no reason I'm obligated to show remorse for such degrading and immature individuals that do nothing but make false statements and take cheap shots. It's almost impossible to have a decent conversation here. Mention RAH and count to ten and here come the drama queens. They make statements how they're the classiest and compare us all them when in reality their lack of professionalism has set the bar so low most of us just step over it.