|
Originally Posted by skywatch
(Post 800127)
Carrier X has higher labor costs, and it costs them $1500 to operate the flight, so Delta pays Carrier X $1500 plus $150 margin or $1650 to operate the flight. Overall, Delta loses $150 to operate that flight. Carrier Y, however, is a "bottom feeder" and Delta only has to pay their costs of $1200 plus $120 margin or a total of $1320 to operate the flight. Now Delta makes $180 to operate the flight.
It is that simple. Either make $180 or lose $120 to operate the flight is a no-brainer. That is why the "keep it in the family" argument does not work. |
Originally Posted by Captain Tony
(Post 801194)
Really? Can a non union airline go on strike?
ASA was sold to Skywest. ASA is still an ALPA pilot group. A sale will not make a WO a non-union carrier. |
Originally Posted by WAVIT Inbound
(Post 801221)
Thats not what we are hearing here at SkyWest. There is even a certain WO being named an awful lot. Not saying its true Im just saying I am hearing an awful lot about it.
And you'll probably continue to hear about it, as well as other pilot fabricated rumors. We gossip worse then moms at PTA meetings. |
Originally Posted by Captain Tony
(Post 801194)
Really? Can a non union airline go on strike?
|
Originally Posted by slant alpha
(Post 801264)
OMG! OMG! No Way! Who is it!??? :rolleyes:
|
Originally Posted by Boomer
(Post 801299)
You are trying to argue "owned vs contract", but you're using "higher pay vs bottom feeder" numbers to prove it. Are you saying contract regionals are bottom feeders and wholly-owned regionals are not?
If you need to have your lawn cut, and your brother will do it for $50 or you can pay a stranger to cut it for $20, which makes the most sense financially? If you are truly focused on getting your lawn cut for the least amount of cash, it is a no brainer. |
Originally Posted by skywatch
(Post 802116)
Nope. Sorry if I gave that impression. Just trying to illustrate why wholly owned or not, it makes fiscal sense for the Major to use the cheaper carrier. There is no "it makes more sense to use the wholly owned because the money stays in the family" argument and when people use that, it drives me crazy.
If you need to have your lawn cut, and your brother will do it for $50 or you can pay a stranger to cut it for $20, which makes the most sense financially? If you are truly focused on getting your lawn cut for the least amount of cash, it is a no brainer. |
Originally Posted by STINKY
(Post 802134)
Hey thats $50 bucks that your brother gonna buy beer with for you to drink. Thats the no brainer
|
Originally Posted by skywatch
(Post 802116)
Nope. Sorry if I gave that impression. Just trying to illustrate why wholly owned or not, it makes fiscal sense for the Major to use the cheaper carrier. There is no "it makes more sense to use the wholly owned because the money stays in the family" argument and when people use that, it drives me crazy.
If you need to have your lawn cut, and your brother will do it for $50 or you can pay a stranger to cut it for $20, which makes the most sense financially? If you are truly focused on getting your lawn cut for the least amount of cash, it is a no brainer. That 10% margin has to go somewhere. |
Originally Posted by skywatch
(Post 800127)
Lots and lots of misinformation on how the agreements with the regionals work. Here are the facts.
All of the regionals (WO and contract) work under a cost plus arrangement. They get reimbursed for the costs of operating the flight, plus a set margin, assuming they hit the pre-determined performance targets. Period. As long as regional airline X hits the completion/A14 numbers, regional X makes money. Period. Compass does not show porfits or losses as a company. We only show up as a line on delta's finacial reports. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:32 PM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands