Airline Pilot Central Forums - Sean Menke's Official Approval Rating

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

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

- - Sean Menke's Official Approval Rating (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/64927-sean-menkes-official-approval-rating.html)

Quote:

Point 2.
Colgan and the Qs-
I am guessing here but I think the SAABs days are numbered. PNCL has already lost about 60 of them. We only have a handful left with orders for more Qs; so I do not think Colgan will bring PNCL down. As Sean said we underbid the Qs but why do you think we will just end the fleet type? UAL loves the Q and it seems that they are getting more of them. Would it be easier for UAL to up the rate on the Q to PNCL or find someone else that will start a new fleet type for less money and go through this again at a later date? While we are in bankruptcy it will be easy for UAL to adjust the rate. Personally I don’t think we will be parking them but who knows… Oh, btw the Q is paid as a CPA.

Some guys that work at Skywest told me UAL came to them about the Q, and Skywest would not do it for the amount UAL wanted. That is the key and I don't think Menke is stupid enough to ask for something that UAL cannot do. Also if we convert the Saabs to Qs, the overall operating cost of the Q comes down per aircraft due to economies of scale. If UAL takes the Qs from us, then they will have to find someone else to operate them. Also wouldn't be surprised to see some Qs headed to AA if UAL won't give us what we need to operate them profitably. The whipsaw can work both ways.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dingo222 (Post 1124092)

id say that we would know if we ran outnof cash if the paychecks didnt show up, but that happens every month lol.

They're the corporate equivalent of the first year FO!

In my mind, the future of the Q, hinges on how confident UALCAL is about breaking scope. Notice that really no other airlines want the Q. Cal got it to circumvent scope and get some contracted 70 plus seat lift. the Q probably isn't the money maker, due to reliability and mx costs, that Bombardier claims in its "turbo profits" marketing campaign. Especially the way CJC has been running it. Plus lets face it, the pax do not like it over a crj700 or emb170.

If smisek and gang are confident that they can defeat cal's scope they will let the q 400 die, if not, they will keep it around.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gonyon (Post 1124169)

Mesa, GoJet, Shuttle America and Skywest all operate 50+ seat aircraft for United. What is your point?

Bottom line is, United and ALPA will go to arbitration on the 50+ seat scope. Every single one of their competitors has 50+ seat JETS operating on behalf of them. That is reason enough for the arbitrator will rule in favor of United. I don't want to believe it myself, but that is the environment we are going into.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DMEarc (Post 1124315)

my point is that if they find a way to fly 50+ seat jets on cal routes they will lose the Q