Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Jetblue Looking To Buy VA?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
VA is a dog w/ fleas; their average margin is negative 50%+ despite their high load factor. Out of SFO they are getting killed in every one of their routes. JB has no interest in flying VA's current routes or wanting their planes. It's always been JB's plan to let SW run VA out of town. Even with its two additional large cash infusions, VA's burn rate is unsustainable with its current cash on hand and negative margin. Unless they secure new investors and window dress the citizen issue, their future looks really bad.
 
JetBlue still hasn't answered the question on why it needs to almost double the stock float, and what the heck is it going to do with the GIANT wad of cash that would generate.

Make no mistake folks... I think we are getting ready to go shopping.

VA has 319 that would be great for our transcon markets, they've got gate space we could use, and they have an internet solution ready to rock and roll.

Whether we go shopping before or after.... thats the $10 mil question.
 
We expect to meet our obligations as they become due through available cash, investment securities and internally generated funds, supplemented as necessary by debt and/or equity financings.

We have noncancelable contractual obligations amounting to 1.2, 1.2 and 1.6 billion in 2010, 2011 and 2012 respectfully.

I don't think we are buying anyone.
 
B6 wont be buying anybody.

Our mgmt will do what theyve been saying theyd do for the last couple years--be competitive, be opportunistic, and buy key assets when the competitive landscape changes. Ala when Indy went chap 7, we bought much of their equipment not to mentioned hired a ton of their employees.

I do think B6 will open a LAX base to be co-based with LGB and BUR. Both airplane types. We'll also expand a bit in LAX.
 
zkmayo said:
B6 wont be buying anybody.

Our mgmt will do what theyve been saying theyd do for the last couple years--be competitive, be opportunistic, and buy key assets when the competitive landscape changes. Ala when Indy went chap 7, we bought much of their equipment not to mentioned hired a ton of their employees.

I do think B6 will open a LAX base to be co-based with LGB and BUR. Both airplane types. We'll also expand a bit in LAX.
Click to expand...

Talk to the WRC and see how popular LAX co-dom is with the JFK mafia on the committee.

Not going to happen.
 
Splert said:
Talk to the WRC and see how popular LAX co-dom is with the JFK mafia on the committee.

Not going to happen.
Click to expand...


Our pairings are horrible right now, prob wouldnt help. hey, what's the thoughts on any co-dom w/lax, bur,lgb for any lgb pilots?
 
Splert said:
Talk to the WRC and see how popular LAX co-dom is with the JFK mafia on the committee.

Not going to happen.
Click to expand...

Screw the morons on the committee, ask the west coasters what they think. Almost all of them would give their left testicle for more flying (quantity and variety) and flights out of an airport that you can commute to. There is no future in LGB and the airports are too close to justify separate bases. But you are right, those JFKers on the committee will probably ruin it for everyone. =(
 
WateryGrave said:
Screw the morons on the committee, ask the west coasters what they think. Almost all of them would give their left testicle for more flying (quantity and variety) and flights out of an airport that you can commute to. There is no future in LGB and the airports are too close to justify separate bases. But you are right, those JFKers on the committee will probably ruin it for everyone. =(
Click to expand...

Will CONTINUE to ruin it....
 
Joblu said:
Maybe for asset sale or assumption of 319's. Doubt any kind of merger would be in play.

Who told you that rumor?
Click to expand...


Why would we want something in between what we already have? 130 people coast to coast w/no tech stop? If anything I would think that the logical
(I know...) thing to do would be to buy up something bigger. We steal a 190 from embrear every delivery it's here to stay. A319 doesn't make much sense.
 
BeachBummer said:
Why would we want something in between what we already have? 130 people coast to coast w/no tech stop?
Click to expand...

You could probably fill 130 seats, carry less weight, burn less fuel, and have the load factors consistently closer to 100% on transcons. There's potentially a big market gap and economic gap between 100 and 150 seats, and that could possibly drive a decision to operate something like the 319.

Haven't heard anything about us buying VA, but operating a 319, regardless of where it comes from, seems at least worthy of consideration.
 
I like the A319 idea. Since we started getting away from transcons due to fuel price concerns I think there's room to exploit a market niche there. As long as we're paid A320 rates to operate it I have no problems with it. There is no way I'm going to subsidize a higher CASM by giving up pay, though.
 
319s are a possibility...yes

319s to replace the 190...Never gonna happen.

319s paid at 320 rates...a MUST.

And IF we ever do aquire 319s. I doubt it would be very many. We'd only need a handful to just jump back and forth between coasts and maybe some other long haul thin routes.
 
319 is not going to be paid at 320 rates. You make think so but the future 320 "raises" will be adjusted for this. Lower over all pay based on percentage of 319's to enter fleet. So yes all one pay but lower.

319's will not be used for transcons. Deep Latin America is where they are going to be used.
 
That would depend in large part on how the peer set is interpreted. Even then, I don't know too many pilots who would buy off on watering down everyone's pay to bring in A319's. What's the motivation for getting anyone to sign off on that? All you'd have to do to avoid getting a "deep south" A319 trip is refuse to sign the contract. What a scheduling nightmare that would be. A significant boycott by MCO A320 captains alone would sink that idea. If half, all mega senior, refuse to sign then the A319 trips can't be covered and the planes don't fly until you train up enough non-boycotters from other bases in LA procedures. Talk about sending a message.
 
Blue Dude said:
That would depend in large part on how the peer set is interpreted. Even then, I don't know too many pilots who would buy off on watering down everyone's pay to bring in A319's. What's the motivation for getting anyone to sign off on that? All you'd have to do to avoid getting a "deep south" A319 trip is refuse to sign the contract. What a scheduling nightmare that would be. A significant boycott by MCO A320 captains alone would sink that idea. If half, all mega senior, refuse to sign then the A319 trips can't be covered and the planes don't fly until you train up enough non-boycotters from other bases in LA procedures. Talk about sending a message.
Click to expand...

Who are you kidding? All they have to do is say sign the contract or we will let you go. You'll sign.
 
They would have to let me go for cause. NOT signing an amendment is not cause for termination. The current contract, with no A319 rates, remains in force until I decide to accept any amendment. Period.
 
Last edited:
Blue Dude said:
They would have to let me go for cause. NOT signing an amendment is not cause for termination. The current contract, with no A319 rates, remains in force until I decide to accept any amendment. Period.
Click to expand...
The next contract will not be aircraft specific. It will be small narrow body, narrow body and large narrow body with aircraft types listed for each category.
 
That may be true, but that's not in the *current* contract. Without signing another one, I am unable to be assigned to an aircraft without a pay scale. The current contract doesn't have one. I can't be forced to do work that isn't in the contract. Flying an A319 isn't in there. We cannot be forced to accept a pay scale on a new aircraft. We have to sign off on it, personally.

We have unique leverage here if we have the wit to use it.
 
Blue Dude said:
That may be true, but that's not in the *current* contract. Without signing another one, I am unable to be assigned to an aircraft without a pay scale. The current contract doesn't have one. I can't be forced to do work that isn't in the contract. Flying an A319 isn't in there. We cannot be forced to accept a pay scale on a new aircraft. We have to sign off on it, personally.

We have unique leverage here if we have the wit to use it.
Click to expand...
Agreed!
 
I am too well aware of it. However, the original premise was that we'll be handed a pay degradation and be forced to sign it. Not only do I think that even the Blue Juiciest pilot here will balk at that, I also point out that as few as 25 or so pilots can refuse to sign it and the whole concept will be derailed.
 
So back to VA. Do they have to/have they already reported 1Q earnings?
 
Fins Up said:
So back to VA. Do they have to/have they already reported 1Q earnings?
Click to expand...


Yea they reported a 100m dollar proffit Q1. 100% load factor too... oooh yea but the TPS reports reveal that Branson bought all the tickets!?!? They have a new business model too, park the planes and pretend to fly!

Seriously I have no idea....:laugh:
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom