![]() |
TC is out at Spirit
Per company email, TC is stepping down from his role as President and CEO and from the Board.
|
Originally Posted by otter1
(Post 3901647)
Per company email, TC is stepping down from his role as President and CEO and from the Board.
Wish you the absolute worst Ted. |
Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo
(Post 3901659)
Horrible leader, horrible manager, and wish this happened years earlier.
Wish you the absolute worst Ted. |
Unfortunately took years too long to get rid of TC and MK. The damage is done. Normal to see a c-suite change, but Im guessing project bravo numbers arent looking good and now with the incoming and growing economic turmoil, why give TC another shot at that? He trashed the company during the last one.
|
Originally Posted by loudclouds
(Post 3901662)
I understand your disdain, but this guy was never hired to run an airline. He was hired to sell it. He would have successfully done this had the idiot shareholders not voted for B6 AGAINST his recommendation. Spirit was already losing money prior to him becoming CEO. They wanted to sell. TC did the only thing he knew how to do when the merger fell through, bankruptcy. Executives have specializations and his was never to be innovative. He was hired to do exactly what he did.
|
Originally Posted by otter1
(Post 3901647)
Per company email, TC is stepping down from his role as President and CEO and from the Board.
|
Originally Posted by JulesWinfield
(Post 3901682)
He was hired to bankrupt the company and take a bonus on his way out? Where do I sign up for that job.
|
Originally Posted by loudclouds
(Post 3901662)
I understand your disdain, but this guy was never hired to run an airline. He was hired to sell it. He would have successfully done this had the idiot shareholders not voted for B6 AGAINST his recommendation. Spirit was already losing money prior to him becoming CEO. They wanted to sell. TC did the only thing he knew how to do when the merger fell through, bankruptcy. Executives have specializations and his was never to be innovative. He was hired to do exactly what he did.
Time for CEO #4.... |
Originally Posted by Tranquility
(Post 3901689)
Slight correction, we were profitable in 2019 (Ted's first year). But, he took a efficiently running airline coming off our best performance in 2018 (granted, not our most profitable, but still profitable) and ran it into the ground...
Time for CEO #4.... |
Originally Posted by otter1
(Post 3901647)
Per company email, TC is stepping down from his role as President and CEO and from the Board.
|
Since Elon Musk is stepping down from DOGE soon maybe he can be the new CEO of Spirit.
|
Originally Posted by Halon1211
(Post 3901722)
Since Elon Musk is stepping down from DOGE soon maybe he can be the new CEO of Spirit.
You fill out your apps yet? |
Originally Posted by loudclouds
(Post 3901662)
I understand your disdain, but this guy was never hired to run an airline. He was hired to sell it. He would have successfully done this had the idiot shareholders not voted for B6 AGAINST his recommendation. Spirit was already losing money prior to him becoming CEO. They wanted to sell. TC did the only thing he knew how to do when the merger fell through, bankruptcy. Executives have specializations and his was never to be innovative. He was hired to do exactly what he did.
The JetBlue offer was the better offer and had the same chance of approval as the frontier deal no matter what Ted said to the shareholders. It was Teds ludicrous testimony at the trial that scuttled the entire thing. He lied under oath saying we had a viable strategy as a stand-alone company. |
Originally Posted by Alexjones
(Post 3901720)
Word is, the board dumped Ted for his over his pilot staffing, botching furloughs, and failing to predict or track attrition. Now by Q3/Q4 2025, Spirit’s looking at an extra $3 million a month to hire replacements. He shed too many critical pilots, leaving shortages from the training department to first officers
who are you?…Halon? lol |
Originally Posted by Noisecanceller
(Post 3901825)
The JetBlue offer was the better offer and had the same chance of approval as the frontier deal no matter what Ted said to the shareholders. It was Teds ludicrous testimony at the trial that scuttled the entire thing. He lied under oath saying we had a viable strategy as a stand-alone company.
|
Originally Posted by Halon1211
(Post 3901842)
Haha…shedding critical pilots?
who are you?…Halon? lol |
Originally Posted by CatPilot1
(Post 3901846)
From what I understand restructuring via chapter 11 is legally considered a viable strategy. Chapter 7 isn’t. He isn’t required to disclose that the only viable strategy is chapter 11, only that a viable strategy is available. So no, he didn’t lie under oath.
|
Originally Posted by Tranquility
(Post 3901689)
Slight correction, we were profitable in 2019 (Ted's first year). But, he took a efficiently running airline coming off our best performance in 2018 (granted, not our most profitable, but still profitable) and ran it into the ground...
Time for CEO #4.... |
Originally Posted by ImSoSuss
(Post 3902016)
Yep, his grandiose expansion plans were foolish and reckless. He ran the company right into the ground. He missed the week his Economics 101 class went over "The Diseconomies of scale". You cannot rapidly expand a low cost company when your margins are so thin.
|
Originally Posted by SlimBob
(Post 3902067)
And those above the pilots in management can't for a second think that we could help save money. They'd rather just start a "new initiative" for us to be our best selves or whatever. All these managers bonused on cost savings but yet we can't be a part of that same structure. I could save a lot of cost if I had an financial incentive to do it.
|
Originally Posted by fw90
(Post 3902083)
no it’s not our job to save money. Our job is to operate the aircraft safely within the standards set by the FAA, aircraft manufacture and company procedures. If they truly cared about saving money we wouldn't constantly be sitting waiting for a gate, or rampers, or jet bridge drivers, or sucky air at the gate so we use the app or no brake fans or you name it. We have such little control over costs. Flying cost index and Single engine taxi is really all we can do and have direct control over. I try to be proactive and it makes such little difference most of the time.
Pilots saving money wont help save Spirit if they are going to fail, but to say its not our jobs to help save money is really a clueless statement. |
Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo
(Post 3902127)
Clueless. I would say its all the multiple misteps by management and the Fed Gov helped put NK in this posiiton, and the company wastes a ton of money with many of the items you listed, but to say its not a pilots job to save money when they can is akin to cutting off that nose to spite your face. Pilots have huge control over costs every day with those 2 large levers between the two pilots.
Pilots saving money wont help save Spirit if they are going to fail, but to say its not our jobs to help save money is really a clueless statement. |
Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo
(Post 3902127)
Clueless. I would say its all the multiple misteps by management and the Fed Gov helped put NK in this posiiton, and the company wastes a ton of money with many of the items you listed, but to say its not a pilots job to save money when they can is akin to cutting off that nose to spite your face. Pilots have huge control over costs every day with those 2 large levers between the two pilots.
Pilots saving money wont help save Spirit if they are going to fail, but to say its not our jobs to help save money is really a clueless statement.
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3902141)
Show me in our contract where it mentions profit sharing. Then I'll care about "saving the company money".
With that said, the reality is that the company does need to provide short-term financial incentives for operational performance metrics such as fuel use, if they want a large majority to comply. Just human nature. |
Company is so far in the hole that single engine taxi isn’t going to make a difference at this point. Revenue problem not cost problem.
|
Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo
(Post 3902127)
Clueless. I would say its all the multiple misteps by management and the Fed Gov helped put NK in this posiiton, and the company wastes a ton of money with many of the items you listed, but to say its not a pilots job to save money when they can is akin to cutting off that nose to spite your face. Pilots have huge control over costs every day with those 2 large levers between the two pilots.
Pilots saving money wont help save Spirit if they are going to fail, but to say its not our jobs to help save money is really a clueless statement. Because I am a firm believer in IYANPOTSYAPOTP, I will always do more, but I am not sure if we have enough control. Worked overseas were 4 stripes meant direct relationship with deity, and it did help. But apparently plenty of us are happy to do the required minimum. |
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3902141)
Show me in our contract where it mentions profit sharing. Then I'll care about "saving the company money".
|
Originally Posted by Noisecanceller
(Post 3902621)
How about just keeping the paychecks coming in and on time? We cannot control the live or die of this company but at least try to pull in the right direction there pal.
|
Originally Posted by Noisecanceller
(Post 3902621)
How about just keeping the paychecks coming in and on time? We cannot control the live or die of this company but at least try to pull in the right direction there pal.
You must not be a pilot. I can think of several ways a pilot’s actions could directly kill spirit as a company. Don’t let anyone from management hear your opinions on how unimportant pilots are to the success of a company. One pilot, one mistake, one dead airline. As simple as that. |
Originally Posted by afterburn81
(Post 3902691)
You must not be a pilot. I can think of several ways a pilot’s actions could directly kill spirit as a company. Don’t let anyone from management hear your opinions on how unimportant pilots are to the success of a company. One pilot, one mistake, one dead airline. As simple as that.
|
Originally Posted by PineappleXpres
(Post 3902774)
Yes. But one bolt (contractor or mech), one cg miscalculation, one DG miscue (loader), etc. one dead airline.
Swiss cheese model kicks in here. Pilots can make one hole that results in catastrophe. You are the single most important cog in the rail. |
Originally Posted by afterburn81
(Post 3902870)
Swiss cheese model kicks in here. Pilots can make one hole that results in catastrophe. You are the single most important cog in the rail.
|
Originally Posted by afterburn81
(Post 3902870)
Swiss cheese model kicks in here. Pilots can make one hole that results in catastrophe. You are the single most important cog in the rail.
And while it's possible to load a regional turboprop aircraft in a manner which might make it marginally controllable, that would actually be hard to do with a pax NB or WB, unless you had a lot of pallets completely full of gold bars. The one situation that I pay extra careful attention to is heavy aircraft TO on a short runway... it will be fine at max blast but if you get an erroneously large flex/AT number you could end up in the EMAS (or the ditch off the end, whichever). I pay careful attention to the numbers in that situation, and you should feel the accel in the seat of your pants... if not, firewall it or reject. Gentle accel is fine on SFO 28L with 20kts west wind, but not everywhere. Cargo aircraft are a different story, especially if you're hauling odd cargo like mil tactical vehicles. |
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3902674)
Nah I'm good. As long as I continue to make below industry standard and no profit sharing I could care less. Our CASM is already HALF that of the legacies. But if you think single engine taxi for 3 minuets will save the company then have at it there... pal.
|
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3902141)
Show me in our contract where it mentions profit sharing. Then I'll care about "saving the company money".
|
Originally Posted by Alexjones
(Post 3903191)
This type of attitude, Is the persoanlty type i really dislike flying with.
|
Originally Posted by Noisecanceller
(Post 3903155)
Listen chief I know the facts but I still try to do the right thing and we all should
|
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3903549)
Kind of like how the company "does the right thing" such as paying us industry standard, following our CBA rescheduling language and not giving out corporate bonuses? ... exactly. If you think taxiing single engine for 3 minuets will save this company while the c suite rakes in bonuses I got bad news for you my friend.
Just because they choose to operate in a way that is not in our best interests in many cases doesn’t mean I have to as well. |
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3902141)
Show me in our contract where it mentions profit sharing. Then I'll care about "saving the company money".
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3902674)
Nah I'm good. As long as I continue to make below industry standard and no profit sharing I could care less. Our CASM is already HALF that of the legacies. But if you think single engine taxi for 3 minuets will save the company then have at it there... pal.
Originally Posted by Noisecanceller
(Post 3903155)
Listen chief I know the facts but I still try to do the right thing and we all should
Originally Posted by Alexjones
(Post 3903191)
This type of attitude, Is the persoanlty type i really dislike flying with.
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3903547)
Cry some more mr "better than my regional, I'm just happy to be here guy".
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3903549)
Kind of like how the company "does the right thing" such as paying us industry standard, following our CBA rescheduling language and not giving out corporate bonuses? ... exactly. If you think taxiing single engine for 3 minuets will save this company while the c suite rakes in bonuses I got bad news for you my friend.
Originally Posted by Noisecanceller
(Post 3903552)
Just because they choose to operate in a way that is not in our best interests in many cases doesn’t mean I have to as well.
|
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 3903547)
Cry some more mr "better than my regional, I'm just happy to be here guy".
|
Originally Posted by Noisecanceller
(Post 3903552)
Just because they choose to operate in a way that is not in our best interests in many cases doesn’t mean I have to as well.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:29 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands