|
Originally Posted by auflyer06
(Post 862924)
Again, outside looking in, but that idea seems better. More competition is better in my book.
There is no lack of competition. The good thing is the market, outside of SWA's influence on the DOJ/DOT, has been allowed to sort itself out with competition, oil, labor and credit. The end result is chapter 7s, 11s, and a whole lot of M&A for survival, which is also just as natural as pricing. There are a couple of things at work here, its not simple stuff. Legacy carriers are in debt and focused on debt, credit is tight, capacity constraint is being exercised by just about everybody because everyone appreciates the consequences, legacy operators are merging, mainline pilots are moving towards scope before pay, manufacturers are having a hard time finding buyers, mainline operators just got an eye opener with RAH and no longer want to fund their competition, 50 seaters are too expensive and getting worse, bad publicity from outsourcing flying (Colgan and Comair crash), regional contracts will not be PPD anymore, regional airline staffing is becoming more and more expensive as average longevity increases, the economy is in a long recession or headed towards a double dip but oil is still up there which is ominous sign of things to come, the SWA business model is hitting a wall, and if you don’t have a good international alliance you’re sunk. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if in 10 years all of Delta's fleet is silver and you hear pilots saying "Welcome aboard Skyteam Airlines, by Delta Air Lines." :eek: |
Originally Posted by TonyWilliams
(Post 862941)
I don't think many are concerned about the bottom of the mainline seniority list. It's the top half that, to them, may think they have nothing to gain.
Hence, the importance of the U/CAL announcement. |
Originally Posted by dosbo
(Post 862891)
With the attitude you're displaying here I bet you really give United customers quality service. That is another reason the outsourcing should stop.
But I do agree, the outsourcing and ALL the collateral effects it has needs to stop.
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 862945)
|
Originally Posted by forgot to bid
(Post 862945)
It's too bad it didn't work out, the flying was a blast. |
Originally Posted by HercDriver130
(Post 862885)
Someone above said that all regional pilots owed there jobs to lost mainline jobs. I am not so that is entirely true. I first flew for AE in 1992... there were FIVE AE companies at the time... with well over 2000 pilots between them.. hell we had 1000 at "Flagship Airlines ala Nashville Eagle".... and there are what 2700 AE pilots today..... I bet the difference could be measured in hundreds not thousands as the difference in AE numbers then and now. WHAT is different is what they fly..... out of RDU the Saabs, Shorts, and J31's flew to all the little towns of NC, VA, SC .....now those pilots are flying longer routes in jets instead of those TPs....... AA/AE maybe the exception rather than the rule... It would be interesting to see if the numbers were available how many pilots flew for each legacy carrier back then and how many pilots flew for feeder carriers support that carrier back then ... and contrast that with the numbers of today.....
|
Originally Posted by gettinbumped
(Post 862972)
I don't have the exact numbers here, but using your date of 1992, the percentage of regional flying in UALs domestic market was a very VERY small number. It's now over 50%. UAL is half the size it was 10 years ago, and our regional flying has increased about 10 fold. It's not every regional job that was born as a mainline replacement, but at UAL it's a very very large number
|
Don't be surprised of a 100 seat order after the merger is finalized/approved. DAL has 76 seaters but the 100 seaters will be a better match/market competition for those 76 seaters....and 100 seaters flown by United pilots.
|
Lord, I'd love it if U-CAL orders 100 seaters for mainline. If we can just get AMR to do it then it'll make for interesting situation at DAL. Although as previously mentioned, why buy a $30M 100-seater when you can have a fleet of 160 seat MD90s for $8M/ea or maybe even 717s. Debt and rent costs are just as important as anything else around here.
|
Originally Posted by gettinbumped
(Post 862972)
I don't have the exact numbers here, but using your date of 1992, the percentage of regional flying in UALs domestic market was a very VERY small number. It's now over 50%. UAL is half the size it was 10 years ago, and our regional flying has increased about 10 fold. It's not every regional job that was born as a mainline replacement, but at UAL it's a very very large number
Airline Analysis If I am reading it right when it comes to UAL, the % of revenue and % of expense that the regionals have for UAL when combined with UAL revenue and costs is around 18%. They make up about 13% of the total UAL available seat miles but make up 44% of the total fleet. They do make more than they cost, about $0.1704 RASM and $0.1635 CASM. Interesting stuff. Its all about RASM-CASM. I mean if someone wants to pay $1,000 a ticket for a 45 minute flight then the RASM-CASM is fantastic. Not usually great on a market with a lot of competition. |
Originally Posted by IADBLRJ41
(Post 861943)
Express Jet, Air Wis, and Trans States have tried to not worsen with not flying more than 50 seaters.
1. TSA survives contract negotiations (which is looking grim), 2. Mitsubishi actually meets their deadline, 3. TSH finds flying for those aircraft. That's my two pennies. On topic: Hopefully CAL/UAL will succeed. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:57 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands