hahahahahaha!

Yes, that is considered relaxing scope. No thanks.

I do not understand where you see the humor. Yes, there’s a lot of chaff and vitriol on there, but most of that comes from a select few. If you have a legitimate concern or issue, you will get a very intelligent response. Even SK and NS will stand shoulder to shoulder when it comes to some issues.

No scabs allowed on that forum which is a good thing.

👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

Wow 6 posts total and you made it onto my ignore list congrats.:rolleyes:

Like the other poster said... this is a horrible idea. The 50 seaters are going away by themselves. Perhaps they won't go away 100%, but they are pretty much just like the 76 seat turboprops that were allowed in the CAL contract. They are only flying them because they don't have any other option. There currently isn't any threat from a new 50 seat aircraft. Could that change? Of course it could change, but it would require a leap in technology. If someone comes up with a electric RJ, that would change the game. Until then, the 50 seat RJ is all but dead.

The problem with United and why our competition is crushing us is due to outsourcing. We can't control our product, thus the product is crap. The frequent flyers know this, which is why the elite business travelers have gone to AA and DL.

DL has made a concerted effort to replace RJs with mainline and last quarter they made more than a billion dollars in profit over what UAL made. That's a large gap to fill, and it's not going to be filled by replacing 50 seaters with 76 seaters.

Don’t I see those CR9 in DL Connection operation? Are you willing to allow an aircraft of that scale if you want DL profits? Also, doesn’t AA have a much more liberal 70 seater scope than UA?

I used to believe that PK (pre-Kirby). But my new sense is that the AMR Guys/Gals’ warning is coming fully to fruition. We just added 60 more 50 seaters, and it sounds like more on the way. Sure, sure we technically didn’t “add” them, but they were going to be leaving the fleet and now they are reborn with Air Willy. I think we ignore the 50 seater at our peril.

While UAL has a great network on paper, it is an expensive one to operate. On top of that, the competition is often strong at secondary airports with lower costs (MDW, HOU). UAL lacks a powerhouse hub that it dominates the way DAL does in ATL. ATL has very low costs and there is no secondary airport nearby competing with it. While revenues are good in EWR where UAL dominates, the cost of operating there coupled with competition from JFK and LGA make it nowhere near as profitable as ATL.

https://dwuconsulting.com/airport-fi...aned-passenger

This^^^^^ Im not sure how we catch up to the others because of the above fact. If we do then they are either screwing up or we found the golden goose.