Eagle turns small profit
04-15-2009 | 08:20 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
However...AMR has been trying to sell off eagle for several years. In order to make them a viable acquisition, they need to be setup like a stand-alone regional. Nobody would consider buying AE if they were locked into a contract where they had to pay highly unpredictable fuel costs.
04-16-2009 | 05:49 AM
#12
DisplAAced
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 638
Likes: 0
From: EMB-145 FO
It means that if you can't do at least as well as San Juan you have some real serious problems. Those same airplanes flew without cancellations before going to Dallas (in fact they are the newest in the fleet). The crews writing up BS stuff need to get their heads screwed on straight. Oh yeah and they aren't crashing planes or getting violated in MIA or SJU. In fact most of the ASAPs are coming from ATR DFW.
If they move the planes back to the Caribbean guess where all the junior guys/gals are gonna end up...either on the street or on the Rock.
If they move the planes back to the Caribbean guess where all the junior guys/gals are gonna end up...either on the street or on the Rock.
04-16-2009 | 06:05 AM
#13
On Reserve
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
It means that if you can't do at least as well as San Juan you have some real serious problems. Those same airplanes flew without cancellations before going to Dallas (in fact they are the newest in the fleet). The crews writing up BS stuff need to get their heads screwed on straight. Oh yeah and they aren't crashing planes or getting violated in MIA or SJU. In fact most of the ASAPs are coming from ATR DFW.
If they move the planes back to the Caribbean guess where all the junior guys/gals are gonna end up...either on the street or on the Rock.
If they move the planes back to the Caribbean guess where all the junior guys/gals are gonna end up...either on the street or on the Rock.
Get you head out of your butt.
They are not writing up BS stuff in Dallas. They are just accustomed to following the rules. Down in the Caribbean, you had to reset a circuit breaker every other flight in order to get anywhere. There was no maintenance on most of the remote islands. Something malfunctioned on every other flight. The planes ARE old. Guys just ignored the rules and reset circuit breakers in the Caribbean. They HAD to in order to get anywhere. Flight attendants learned to stay quiet about minor problems until we were on a leg back to San Juan. And ASAP? Are you kidding me? Most of those senior captains in the Caribbean have no idea what an ASAP is. I still liked flying with those captains though.
At this new company, when I suggested resetting a circuit breaker to get a single display to light up, the captain looked at me like I was from another planet. It's just differences in life experiences. That is what is happening in Dallas. They just operate much safer. And that makes me proud.
04-16-2009 | 07:07 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
From: CA
Maybe if DFW Executive can start completing some of their flights things will start to look up staffing-wise. 30% cancellations on ATRs? Pretty sad- why is it that those same airplanes flew out of MIA and SJU for years and years without even a fraction of the problems Dallas seems to be having?
I think alot of guys forgot what business we are in- we dont get paid to write in a book. It's time to start getting people from point A to point B guys. Otherwise there will be alot more furloughs.
I think alot of guys forgot what business we are in- we dont get paid to write in a book. It's time to start getting people from point A to point B guys. Otherwise there will be alot more furloughs.
You just picked up bad habits taught to you when you were new, by guys who said it was ok to reset and pull stuff.
04-16-2009 | 08:22 AM
#15
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
You're right it IS smoke and mirrors.
Funny though, how when Eagle posts a profit, CERTAIN AA pilots say it's "smoke and mirrors", but when Eagle posts a loss, it's no longer smoke and mirrors, but a factual demonstration Eagle is a hopeless loser and must go.
Who paid for AE's fuel ?
Let's add the question, "who charges AE a 100-500% mark up for services ?
You cannot have it both ways, regardless of how desperate you want it to be.
Funny though, how when Eagle posts a profit, CERTAIN AA pilots say it's "smoke and mirrors", but when Eagle posts a loss, it's no longer smoke and mirrors, but a factual demonstration Eagle is a hopeless loser and must go.
Who paid for AE's fuel ?
Let's add the question, "who charges AE a 100-500% mark up for services ?
You cannot have it both ways, regardless of how desperate you want it to be.
04-16-2009 | 08:25 AM
#16
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
Most regionals operate on contracts to provide a certain amount of capacity in exchange for a fixed, contracted fee. Since fuel costs can fluctuate, a regional which pays for it's own fuel would have to pad that cost by a hefty margin to account for large price spikes...they would charge for a worst-case scenario at all times and pocket the extra when fuel costs are low.
Since regional operating margins are usually slim, no regional would want to contract flying with fuel costs "at risk".
For these reasons, regional contracts almost always stipulate that fuel is paid for by the major airline partner. In most cases, excluding these reimbursed fuel costs from financials is obviously correct.
In the case of eagle, they are actually owned by AMR (The AA holding company). Since they are owned by the people they "contract" for, it might makes sense to have them pay for their own fuel to simplify accounting. Ultimately AMR combines the P&L of AA and AE, it doesn't really matter where the fuel cost is tacked on. If they charge AA, eagle makes a profit. If they charge AE, then AE has a loss and AA has slightly better (but still losing) numbers.
However...AMR has been trying to sell off eagle for several years. In order to make them a viable acquisition, they need to be setup like a stand-alone regional. Nobody would consider buying AE if they were locked into a contract where they had to pay highly unpredictable fuel costs.
In the sense that AE is operated financially like a stand-alone regional, they did make a legit profit. So did some other regionals, based on fixed, guaranteed contract income and few variable costs.
Since regional operating margins are usually slim, no regional would want to contract flying with fuel costs "at risk".
For these reasons, regional contracts almost always stipulate that fuel is paid for by the major airline partner. In most cases, excluding these reimbursed fuel costs from financials is obviously correct.
In the case of eagle, they are actually owned by AMR (The AA holding company). Since they are owned by the people they "contract" for, it might makes sense to have them pay for their own fuel to simplify accounting. Ultimately AMR combines the P&L of AA and AE, it doesn't really matter where the fuel cost is tacked on. If they charge AA, eagle makes a profit. If they charge AE, then AE has a loss and AA has slightly better (but still losing) numbers.
However...AMR has been trying to sell off eagle for several years. In order to make them a viable acquisition, they need to be setup like a stand-alone regional. Nobody would consider buying AE if they were locked into a contract where they had to pay highly unpredictable fuel costs.
In the sense that AE is operated financially like a stand-alone regional, they did make a legit profit. So did some other regionals, based on fixed, guaranteed contract income and few variable costs.
The conditions they included and the control they wanted made it unviable for all of them, so they passed. THAT should tell you as much (or more) about the situation than the desire to sell alone does.
It APPEARED as a straight sale, but the details indicate MUCH, MUCH more.
04-16-2009 | 08:30 AM
#17
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
The problem is that Eagle has a fleet consisting of a very large percentage of near obsolete and very high cost per seat mile small RJs. Most small jet providers are guaranteed a profit through fee for departure schemes where the mainline pays for every seat on the airplane regardless of whether it's sold or not. In essence, they are subsidized by the mainline jets. Interesting to note that Southwest, the most healthy of the majors, has no very high-cost per seat mile regional jets.
AA's model REQUIRES a feeder system to function (and remain in business), wheras Southwests does not.
Eliminate feed for AA and it either dies or has to change its model to match Southwests. Too late for that, so AA has no choice but a healthy and competitive feeder system. Strangle that and AA will shrivel to a shadow of its former self, taking at least 50% of their pilots with it (most likely more).
Quite a little problem, no ?
04-16-2009 | 06:23 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,707
Likes: 0
we did. since we have a 4.5% profit agreement with aa and the other have 8+ %. of course we dont get paid for cancellations but the connections do.
but you are correct, smoke and mirrors. they can make anyone look as if they loose money or make money. for ae, it always makes money.
but you are correct, smoke and mirrors. they can make anyone look as if they loose money or make money. for ae, it always makes money.
04-16-2009 | 06:40 PM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,041
Likes: 0
From: GV Captain
Doesn't help much when the mechanics haven't seen the airplane for about 8 years. Are some things that people write up bs? Absolutely. Most are not. If you fly the line on the ATR out of Dallas you should know better. If not give it a shot before you start criticizing the 50 crews that deal with it day in and day out.
04-17-2009 | 12:33 PM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
From: B737 /FO
As a reserve FO in MIA, i have flown quite a bit in SJU, MIA and DFW. DFW definitely has some serious issues with ATR flying right now. Our ATR fleet is not the healthiest, but in MIA the planes' airworthiness is legit. And I do question things.
I get a strong impression that the maintenance problems in DFW have as much to do with the mechanics' issues (either political or just unfamilarity) as it does with crews.
DFW is going to have enough problems as it is with weather delays and cancelations. Something is going to have be done about the maintenance issue to maintain a viable business. On one hand, I applaud the crews there for taking a lot less bull**** (especially from crew scheduling and dispatch). But on the other hand, i don't want to see that operation crumble.
Thankfully the U.S is relaxing travel restrictions to Cuba, as that might end up being a savior for Executive...if Management can take advantage of the opportunity.
I get a strong impression that the maintenance problems in DFW have as much to do with the mechanics' issues (either political or just unfamilarity) as it does with crews.
DFW is going to have enough problems as it is with weather delays and cancelations. Something is going to have be done about the maintenance issue to maintain a viable business. On one hand, I applaud the crews there for taking a lot less bull**** (especially from crew scheduling and dispatch). But on the other hand, i don't want to see that operation crumble.
Thankfully the U.S is relaxing travel restrictions to Cuba, as that might end up being a savior for Executive...if Management can take advantage of the opportunity.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
