GogglesPisano
Pawn, in game of life
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2003
- Posts
- 3,939
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
ACA told to close BOS Base?
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
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
zkmayo said:
1. fare...look for ual to match fares.
2. More freq? Thats yet to be seen. the future of ual exp is yet to be determined in iad.
3. better customer service no doubt im sure. however youll have to compete with freq flyer programs and folks who have been with united for years.
--------
indy cant even pitch the IFE as most airplanes in their fleet wont have it.
FlyComAirJets said:
revloutionary? hardly. gutsy, yes. those passengers they have been carrying have been flying ual/dal not aca and didnt buy the ticket b/c aca was flying it. (ok maybe a few). How is this a revolutionary product?????? low fare carrier with crjs and narrowbodys? airtran does that. Im not saying anything against the pilot or management group, they were pushed up against a wall, and rather then whore out, they went on there own. thats not the point im trying to make. my point is i just dont think its going to work.
SaladShooter
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2004
- Posts
- 28
NoName-
Please educate yourself before you open your mouth. Go to the web site download the investor presentation and take a look at it. Crunch the numbers and look at them. After you look at it OBJECTIVELY compare it to the airline models that are now being offered. There is not ONE I repeat ONE other airline that is going to try what we are trying. That is we are going to try run a hub and spoke with the mentality of a point to point operation. We are going to lower our CASM not by getting rid of the smaller aircraft and replacing them with larger ones but by flying the little ones more. If we fly the airplanes more it is more cost effective on the fixed costs. AirTran does not do what we are trying, JetBlue does not do it, SWA does not do it and NONE of the legacy carriers do it.
TM and KS are trying something different because the current way of running an airline is not working. The low utilization of the aircraft and the high fixed costs add up to uncontrollable costs that airlines just cannot handle anymore. We are going to try the WalMart approach, we keep it simple, we keep it eficient and most important we keep it cheap! UAL cannot match our prices out of IAD, why you ask, because the Express carriers are flying them that means not only does UAL have to make money but so do the Express carriers that are flying them. That is two profit margins that have to be accounted for in the ticket prices. UAL is coming out of BNK and cannot afford to lose money as the investors will back out fast. UAL cannot offer the frequency that IAIR will offer also, why you ask, they do not have the gate space nor do they have the assets in place to match IAIR. We are going to be running 8 continous banks a day with an average of 40 flights out at a bank period. UAL's new terminal will not be that big. (By the way the new Express carriers will not have any MX hangers available in IAD as we own the only one. So all MX will have to be performed at an outstation or in the open. So if they break an airplane in IAD they are SOL if it is a big problem unless they fix it in a snow storm or they ferry it out to an outstation.)
Now this is all based on the assumption UAL is going to survive, which we all know is a crap shoot. Even some of the UAL pilots I give rides to say they are having creeping doubts about the survival in the long term. They like to point to the pay cuts they took and the recent anouncement of a new paint scheme as mismangement.
Now will it work?? I do not know but I can tell you this I used to work at Merril Lynch as an analiyst and I have never seen anybody try this or even talk about trying this in the past. If we can get through the first couple of years we will be fine, I am not worried about UAL or USAIR as I believe they will cease to be a factor for us in the future as they will dissolve or shrink so much they are no longer a threat. JetBlue is too new to know if it will be a major competitor as they are still on the MX holiday and because of that the numbers are not complete for a really detailed look at the financial health of the company. SWA is out of BWI, a hell of a drive so they will little to no competition in the short term. AirTran has its sights set on the Midwest US so they should not be a factor for awhile. DAL could be a problem but from what I hear from some friends at ML is SONG is not living up to the hype as of yet. Last I heard a 60% load factor since inception up to November of 03, not a complete analysis but unless it gets better it will not be around for long. ( Though is DAL files BNK and leaves us with the DODO's that would create a whole new problem.) AMR is not really a big player in IAD nor is NWA so I do not see them as problems.
Sorry about the length but please get educated on the issues before you chip in with your 2 cents. Now if you have any educated financial objections to this idea please post them and we can debate them as I am always open to new ideas and even I can overlook something.
I am a financial guy by trade, and so I please excuse any spelling mistakes you might come across.
Please educate yourself before you open your mouth. Go to the web site download the investor presentation and take a look at it. Crunch the numbers and look at them. After you look at it OBJECTIVELY compare it to the airline models that are now being offered. There is not ONE I repeat ONE other airline that is going to try what we are trying. That is we are going to try run a hub and spoke with the mentality of a point to point operation. We are going to lower our CASM not by getting rid of the smaller aircraft and replacing them with larger ones but by flying the little ones more. If we fly the airplanes more it is more cost effective on the fixed costs. AirTran does not do what we are trying, JetBlue does not do it, SWA does not do it and NONE of the legacy carriers do it.
TM and KS are trying something different because the current way of running an airline is not working. The low utilization of the aircraft and the high fixed costs add up to uncontrollable costs that airlines just cannot handle anymore. We are going to try the WalMart approach, we keep it simple, we keep it eficient and most important we keep it cheap! UAL cannot match our prices out of IAD, why you ask, because the Express carriers are flying them that means not only does UAL have to make money but so do the Express carriers that are flying them. That is two profit margins that have to be accounted for in the ticket prices. UAL is coming out of BNK and cannot afford to lose money as the investors will back out fast. UAL cannot offer the frequency that IAIR will offer also, why you ask, they do not have the gate space nor do they have the assets in place to match IAIR. We are going to be running 8 continous banks a day with an average of 40 flights out at a bank period. UAL's new terminal will not be that big. (By the way the new Express carriers will not have any MX hangers available in IAD as we own the only one. So all MX will have to be performed at an outstation or in the open. So if they break an airplane in IAD they are SOL if it is a big problem unless they fix it in a snow storm or they ferry it out to an outstation.)
Now this is all based on the assumption UAL is going to survive, which we all know is a crap shoot. Even some of the UAL pilots I give rides to say they are having creeping doubts about the survival in the long term. They like to point to the pay cuts they took and the recent anouncement of a new paint scheme as mismangement.
Now will it work?? I do not know but I can tell you this I used to work at Merril Lynch as an analiyst and I have never seen anybody try this or even talk about trying this in the past. If we can get through the first couple of years we will be fine, I am not worried about UAL or USAIR as I believe they will cease to be a factor for us in the future as they will dissolve or shrink so much they are no longer a threat. JetBlue is too new to know if it will be a major competitor as they are still on the MX holiday and because of that the numbers are not complete for a really detailed look at the financial health of the company. SWA is out of BWI, a hell of a drive so they will little to no competition in the short term. AirTran has its sights set on the Midwest US so they should not be a factor for awhile. DAL could be a problem but from what I hear from some friends at ML is SONG is not living up to the hype as of yet. Last I heard a 60% load factor since inception up to November of 03, not a complete analysis but unless it gets better it will not be around for long. ( Though is DAL files BNK and leaves us with the DODO's that would create a whole new problem.) AMR is not really a big player in IAD nor is NWA so I do not see them as problems.
Sorry about the length but please get educated on the issues before you chip in with your 2 cents. Now if you have any educated financial objections to this idea please post them and we can debate them as I am always open to new ideas and even I can overlook something.
I am a financial guy by trade, and so I please excuse any spelling mistakes you might come across.
well youve got it all figured out. even down to the part were no one else is going to be a factor. doesnt matter what kind of model you use you have to put passengers in the seat, and thats something that is yet to be seen, and no one can forecast. they are really pouring a mean cup of coolaid over there...
In truth noname there will most likely be a "competitive response" by UAL and our management takes it seriously.
Several things to consider though:
1. UAL will have cash balance and cash flow restrictions placed on them by the ATSB loan process. Look at USAir's current squeeze to see what I'm saying here. They (USAir) have to maintain $1B cash on hand and a positive monthly cash flow. Similar restrictions will limit the severity and duration of UAL's predatory pricing response.
2. Even with UAL's restructuring they will have the ATSB loan to pay on, in addition to pension funding catch-ups to pay, in addition to having just pissed off every airport and vendor they work with. Add this to their legendary customer service and we feel we can do a good job competing in the cities we choose to fly to. We aren't going to go to europe, south america and asia out of IAD, just domestic markets we feel will have a good traffic response to our fares and frequency offerings.
All told, the ACA coolaide tastes a lot better than the UAL hemlock that was on the table earlier.
Several things to consider though:
1. UAL will have cash balance and cash flow restrictions placed on them by the ATSB loan process. Look at USAir's current squeeze to see what I'm saying here. They (USAir) have to maintain $1B cash on hand and a positive monthly cash flow. Similar restrictions will limit the severity and duration of UAL's predatory pricing response.
2. Even with UAL's restructuring they will have the ATSB loan to pay on, in addition to pension funding catch-ups to pay, in addition to having just pissed off every airport and vendor they work with. Add this to their legendary customer service and we feel we can do a good job competing in the cities we choose to fly to. We aren't going to go to europe, south america and asia out of IAD, just domestic markets we feel will have a good traffic response to our fares and frequency offerings.
All told, the ACA coolaide tastes a lot better than the UAL hemlock that was on the table earlier.
Last edited:
Always deferred
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2003
- Posts
- 175
Ok everyone --- obviously NoName is here to:
1. Incite a flame war
2. Is Johnny O still trying desperately to be heard
3. Some jealous MESA guy (judging by crj 700/900)
4. Some other jealous pilot who can only make himself feel better by trying to throw a rainshower on everyone else's hopes
5. Some middle schooler who can't even spell correctly.
6. All of the above
I say there is nothing more frustrating to his type then when people just ignore him. He will continually log on to see what kind of responses he gets, and will be beyond devastated when no one is replying to him or giving him the attention he so desperately craves.
My point : IGNORE HIM
1. Incite a flame war
2. Is Johnny O still trying desperately to be heard
3. Some jealous MESA guy (judging by crj 700/900)
4. Some other jealous pilot who can only make himself feel better by trying to throw a rainshower on everyone else's hopes
5. Some middle schooler who can't even spell correctly.
6. All of the above
I say there is nothing more frustrating to his type then when people just ignore him. He will continually log on to see what kind of responses he gets, and will be beyond devastated when no one is replying to him or giving him the attention he so desperately craves.
My point : IGNORE HIM
OldManPilot
Senior Member
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2003
- Posts
- 459
SaladShooter
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2004
- Posts
- 28
noname-
I had hoped you would have provided me with an intelligent debate about the buisness plan of IAIR. It looks like you did not take my advise and research beofe you posted a response to me. I see it took you a little over 13 minutes to post a reply to my message and I know you could not have reviewed the documents on the ACA website about IAIR in that amount of time. If you would have reviewed the slideshow you would have seen where the passangers for IAIR are going to be coming from. Get educated first then we will debate this topic!
Just using a little bit of logic in this case. If UAL was so sure they can compete against and destroy ACA why are they afraid of letting us go. It was proven in court that UAL was behind the MESA takeover bid from the start. (That is why we got the injunction) If they did not think we would survive why would they have cared?????? They could just pick up the pieces in a year or so and get the whole company for a song of a price, yet they chose the other option.....I wonder why????? The reason is UAL along with the rest of the industry has no idea if this plan can work, if it does it will revolutionize how you manage an airline. It will prove that smart managment can think outside the box and deliver a quality product at a resonable price. Like I said before the current buisness practice of how to run an airline does not work in todays econonmy, the world has changed and it is time to try something different. If it works or not is up to the flying public to decide.
In addition you said you wanted to bring a reality check to Indy Air....over the last year I have seen UAL file Chpt 11, UAL reneg on its 2003 rates for compensation, Bain Consulting telling me I am over paid yet they are racking up 700/hrin fees, ACA managment telling me they do not care if I can pay my mortgage(TM ORD-April 2003) as I am paid too much because MESA just took a pay cut, UAL offereing us a crappy deal with 2-6% rate of return with a sunset clause thrown in for good luck, I AIR announced, UAL, MESA and that sociopath JO trying to take over and pull a CCAIR on us, a injunction against MESA and UAL, Do328's breaking left and right around us, DALPA getting ready to drop the boom on DAL with the scope clause....do I need to go on. I believe I have lived more reality in the last year than I care to ever see again. So walk a mile in our shoes before saying we need a reality check!
I had hoped you would have provided me with an intelligent debate about the buisness plan of IAIR. It looks like you did not take my advise and research beofe you posted a response to me. I see it took you a little over 13 minutes to post a reply to my message and I know you could not have reviewed the documents on the ACA website about IAIR in that amount of time. If you would have reviewed the slideshow you would have seen where the passangers for IAIR are going to be coming from. Get educated first then we will debate this topic!
Just using a little bit of logic in this case. If UAL was so sure they can compete against and destroy ACA why are they afraid of letting us go. It was proven in court that UAL was behind the MESA takeover bid from the start. (That is why we got the injunction) If they did not think we would survive why would they have cared?????? They could just pick up the pieces in a year or so and get the whole company for a song of a price, yet they chose the other option.....I wonder why????? The reason is UAL along with the rest of the industry has no idea if this plan can work, if it does it will revolutionize how you manage an airline. It will prove that smart managment can think outside the box and deliver a quality product at a resonable price. Like I said before the current buisness practice of how to run an airline does not work in todays econonmy, the world has changed and it is time to try something different. If it works or not is up to the flying public to decide.
In addition you said you wanted to bring a reality check to Indy Air....over the last year I have seen UAL file Chpt 11, UAL reneg on its 2003 rates for compensation, Bain Consulting telling me I am over paid yet they are racking up 700/hrin fees, ACA managment telling me they do not care if I can pay my mortgage(TM ORD-April 2003) as I am paid too much because MESA just took a pay cut, UAL offereing us a crappy deal with 2-6% rate of return with a sunset clause thrown in for good luck, I AIR announced, UAL, MESA and that sociopath JO trying to take over and pull a CCAIR on us, a injunction against MESA and UAL, Do328's breaking left and right around us, DALPA getting ready to drop the boom on DAL with the scope clause....do I need to go on. I believe I have lived more reality in the last year than I care to ever see again. So walk a mile in our shoes before saying we need a reality check!
MONKEY
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2002
- Posts
- 150
First let me say, that I am not anti-iair.
I do however see a little bit of faulty logic in the following.
If ACA goes out on their own, even if they fail, their is still a great cost for UAL. They will need to ramp up another uex partner (air whiskey, SKW, and/or Mesa). This alone will come at a great cost.
Next they will have to compete with IAIR. Even if they feel like IAIR will fail, they will still lose a portion of their market to them for the period of time that IAIR is operating. In addition to this, they will most likely have to discount their fairs to compete, further cutting their income.
I am not saying that IAIR will fail, just trying to point out why it is in the best interest of UAL that Mesa would have been able to buy them out.
anyways, I wish you well.
I do however see a little bit of faulty logic in the following.
If ACA goes out on their own, even if they fail, their is still a great cost for UAL. They will need to ramp up another uex partner (air whiskey, SKW, and/or Mesa). This alone will come at a great cost.
Next they will have to compete with IAIR. Even if they feel like IAIR will fail, they will still lose a portion of their market to them for the period of time that IAIR is operating. In addition to this, they will most likely have to discount their fairs to compete, further cutting their income.
I am not saying that IAIR will fail, just trying to point out why it is in the best interest of UAL that Mesa would have been able to buy them out.
anyways, I wish you well.
SaladShooter
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2004
- Posts
- 28
Why I do not totally disagree with you UAL has a nice trump card in the pocket. Under the new revenue sharing model UAL does not have to pay for ramp up costs, this cost is absorbed by the regional partner moving into a new domicle. So UAL will transfer flying to MESA, TSA, SKYWEST, AIR WILLY into IAD and not have to pay ramp up fees as thoses costs are paid for by the regionals per the new agreeement. Now UAL was smart for once and decided to buy the terminal itself that way no other aircline can leave them like this again. This is one of the reasons our managment decided against going with UAL, they can move you around and you will not get a check from them to cover the costs of opening new bases.
Now if they are so sure they can destroy us it would have been cheaper to flood the market with cheap tickets and take the loss of revenue upfront and pick up IAIR on the cheap at a later time. Instead they decided to try a takeover with MESA as the best defense against IAIR.
Now if they are so sure they can destroy us it would have been cheaper to flood the market with cheap tickets and take the loss of revenue upfront and pick up IAIR on the cheap at a later time. Instead they decided to try a takeover with MESA as the best defense against IAIR.
RegionalFA
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2004
- Posts
- 107
NoName said:
just like in theory communism could be the perfect government. unfortunately, humans don't always work the way figures on paper do.
Not that I don't wish you guys the best. I do. I don't neccesarily like all of the arrogance that I hear about some of it... but whatever. I hope it works out for the best.
SaladShooter
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2004
- Posts
- 28
When did I say we had it all figuired out???? When I look at my posting I see that I said-Will it work I do not know?
When is that saying we have it all figuired out? When I was talking about the future competitors of IAIR I am paraphrazing an document from Merril Lynch provided to me by several friends still working there. This document trys to theorize on the future of the airline industry and the possible impacts on the future. Not once did I say we will succeed no matter what. You need to read the posts more carefully in the future as you will not find me stating what you claim. What you have stated that came form me is incorrect and I fully expect you to correct your posts and be diligent in the future about not reading into something that is not really posted.
When is that saying we have it all figuired out? When I was talking about the future competitors of IAIR I am paraphrazing an document from Merril Lynch provided to me by several friends still working there. This document trys to theorize on the future of the airline industry and the possible impacts on the future. Not once did I say we will succeed no matter what. You need to read the posts more carefully in the future as you will not find me stating what you claim. What you have stated that came form me is incorrect and I fully expect you to correct your posts and be diligent in the future about not reading into something that is not really posted.
SaladShooter
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2004
- Posts
- 28
Monkey-
I do not know if you work for UEX carrier but if you do send an email over to your CEO and ask him about some of the details of the revenue sharing contract that they signed. If he answers you might be surprised at what Bain Consulting worked into the contract with UAL.
UAL does not have to pay to replace us, they reassign other carriers that pay for it. They will not release us until the replacement is flying so they wil not lose any associated lift out of IAD. That means UAL can offer matched fares right out of the gate if they wish.
Now the problem they do have though is that over 60% of the outstations are ours, including the ticket counters and jetways/gate spaces. We have long term leases associated with them so UAL has to find other ticket counter space and gate space at those airports. With the ramp service, they are just transferring over to SKYWEST and they have to bear the brunt of the cost, but they are trying to get new gate space in UAL name to prevent this from happening again. None of this is new news and all of it is public knowlege and accesable with the right tools.
This thread has gone way off base and I apologize for this highjacking but I am a pilot with ACA and cannot stand to see the missimformation about this project floating around. Nobody at ACA that I have run into is arrogent about this project, most are happy to be getting away from UAL, and after the last 2 years who could blame us, and may be a little bit over the top. We all realize the risks associated with this project and over 97% voted to go on our own. This is a risky project but it does not present any more risk than staying with UAL mainline as an express carrier.
Once again I apologize for highjacking this thread and I consider the matter finished!
I do not know if you work for UEX carrier but if you do send an email over to your CEO and ask him about some of the details of the revenue sharing contract that they signed. If he answers you might be surprised at what Bain Consulting worked into the contract with UAL.
UAL does not have to pay to replace us, they reassign other carriers that pay for it. They will not release us until the replacement is flying so they wil not lose any associated lift out of IAD. That means UAL can offer matched fares right out of the gate if they wish.
Now the problem they do have though is that over 60% of the outstations are ours, including the ticket counters and jetways/gate spaces. We have long term leases associated with them so UAL has to find other ticket counter space and gate space at those airports. With the ramp service, they are just transferring over to SKYWEST and they have to bear the brunt of the cost, but they are trying to get new gate space in UAL name to prevent this from happening again. None of this is new news and all of it is public knowlege and accesable with the right tools.
This thread has gone way off base and I apologize for this highjacking but I am a pilot with ACA and cannot stand to see the missimformation about this project floating around. Nobody at ACA that I have run into is arrogent about this project, most are happy to be getting away from UAL, and after the last 2 years who could blame us, and may be a little bit over the top. We all realize the risks associated with this project and over 97% voted to go on our own. This is a risky project but it does not present any more risk than staying with UAL mainline as an express carrier.
Once again I apologize for highjacking this thread and I consider the matter finished!
GogglesPisano
Pawn, in game of life
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2003
- Posts
- 3,939
FlyComAirJets
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2002
- Posts
- 323
NoName, you truly exemplify the concept of the bottom feeder. It figures if you are Citizen Ornstein.
Comparing Independance Air to Air Tran is interesting, but off base. Besides, I would say they are doing quite well these days. But they started out small as a low-fare narrow gauge operator in entrenched hubs (ATL and MCO if you consider the original Air Tran) going primarily to leisure destinations. They contract out RJs to Air Whiskey.
Independance Air is not going to work? Not according to a jackal such as you, but in reality, they have as good a chance as any deregulation era carrier ever has. Lets see what they have in their favor: an improving economy, an established route system, near instant critical mass, trained personnel, near new or brand new aircraft, and good capitalization.
I would call that revolutionary.
Comparing Independance Air to Air Tran is interesting, but off base. Besides, I would say they are doing quite well these days. But they started out small as a low-fare narrow gauge operator in entrenched hubs (ATL and MCO if you consider the original Air Tran) going primarily to leisure destinations. They contract out RJs to Air Whiskey.
Independance Air is not going to work? Not according to a jackal such as you, but in reality, they have as good a chance as any deregulation era carrier ever has. Lets see what they have in their favor: an improving economy, an established route system, near instant critical mass, trained personnel, near new or brand new aircraft, and good capitalization.
I would call that revolutionary.
FHTEAGLE
B.S. checklist complete
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2003
- Posts
- 26
Transition...
SaladShooter -
Thanks for bringing some "outside of the cockpit" thinking to this...
Personally, I wouldn't care how much other people underestimate you... will be that much sweeter if it all goes according to plan...
Mind sharing your/ML's thoughts about the transition period starting with UAL exiting Ch11 (June?) and all the aircraft being available solely to IAIR? Sounds to me like some tricky resource allocation problems between covering IAIR's flying and UEX flying as its phased out. I vaguely remember something about options on another 25 CRJs... is that true and can they be exercised pronto?
Also, which of the following scenarios is most likely?
1. UAL exits ch.11 and lets the contract expire completely (allowing ACA to morph into IAIR all at once), then UAL rushes to refill the service a'la the Westair expansion 13 yr ago?
2. UAL/ACA sign a phase-out deal over a period of months? Pros and cons to both sides... ACA Pros: more startup $, able to roll out IAIR aircraft/cities as the rest of the resources will allow. ACA Cons: Allows their competition time to get settled in before the ink is dry on the brand, no "big boom" startup with all 40+ cities at once. UAL Pros: not having to rush-job startup UEX flying at IAD, chances to "test the waters" and see how hard it would be to break IAIR. UAL Cons: being forced to feed $ to your new competition...
3. USAir back into Ch. 11, UAL stays in long enough to get some kind of virtual or real merger, USAir dumps a hub to move to IAD and they harmonize routes... makes sense from a resource/aircraft/route standpoint, but probably not from a "how-to-finance this" standpoint... thoughts?
Or do the people with the dollar-green crystal ball see something else happening?
SaladShooter -
Thanks for bringing some "outside of the cockpit" thinking to this...
Personally, I wouldn't care how much other people underestimate you... will be that much sweeter if it all goes according to plan...
Mind sharing your/ML's thoughts about the transition period starting with UAL exiting Ch11 (June?) and all the aircraft being available solely to IAIR? Sounds to me like some tricky resource allocation problems between covering IAIR's flying and UEX flying as its phased out. I vaguely remember something about options on another 25 CRJs... is that true and can they be exercised pronto?
Also, which of the following scenarios is most likely?
1. UAL exits ch.11 and lets the contract expire completely (allowing ACA to morph into IAIR all at once), then UAL rushes to refill the service a'la the Westair expansion 13 yr ago?
2. UAL/ACA sign a phase-out deal over a period of months? Pros and cons to both sides... ACA Pros: more startup $, able to roll out IAIR aircraft/cities as the rest of the resources will allow. ACA Cons: Allows their competition time to get settled in before the ink is dry on the brand, no "big boom" startup with all 40+ cities at once. UAL Pros: not having to rush-job startup UEX flying at IAD, chances to "test the waters" and see how hard it would be to break IAIR. UAL Cons: being forced to feed $ to your new competition...
3. USAir back into Ch. 11, UAL stays in long enough to get some kind of virtual or real merger, USAir dumps a hub to move to IAD and they harmonize routes... makes sense from a resource/aircraft/route standpoint, but probably not from a "how-to-finance this" standpoint... thoughts?
Or do the people with the dollar-green crystal ball see something else happening?
I think none of us can say with any certainty whether Indy Air will succeed or not.
However, something that concerns me is the amount of kool aid coming from ACA pilots on this board and those that I talk to jumpseating.
With such a risky venture I don't think it would be a bad idea for ACA pilots to have backup plans.
Noam
However, something that concerns me is the amount of kool aid coming from ACA pilots on this board and those that I talk to jumpseating.
With such a risky venture I don't think it would be a bad idea for ACA pilots to have backup plans.
Noam
GogglesPisano
Pawn, in game of life
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2003
- Posts
- 3,939
Your right, it can definately be said for many airlines these days.
However, I've jumpseated on ACA a lot and I think you guys are drinking a bit too much kool aid.
To be certain this thing is going to work, when load factors at LCC's are decreasing, when majors are putting up increasing competition, when ACA is going to fly a lot of expensive RJ's aroud, is a risk that I certaintly wouldn't want to take without having a back up plan.
However, I've jumpseated on ACA a lot and I think you guys are drinking a bit too much kool aid.
To be certain this thing is going to work, when load factors at LCC's are decreasing, when majors are putting up increasing competition, when ACA is going to fly a lot of expensive RJ's aroud, is a risk that I certaintly wouldn't want to take without having a back up plan.
Mmmmmm kool aid tastes good,
Just kidding, each airline is a high risk gamble.
The reason you see such irrational exuberance is because of the last year and a half roller coaster ride. The UAL CH11, bain process, UAL TA(arrrgh), then possible independence squelched by a Mesa hostile takeover, and finally Mesa staved off with lawyers guns & money, it ain't so bad.
RJ's are too expensive at 15.8 cents a seat mile, right? What if you use them on an average stage length of 341nm? Wow small uncomfortable aircraft in the air for an average of less than and hour and with an extra inch of legroom, TV's don't seem as important on quick flights. This means an average cost of $54.00 a seat per departure, not bad. Plus it allows the 319s an average stage length of 1400 nm which gives us the lower CASM on this aircraft than LUV or JBLU.
Are there obstacles, you bet. I believe we will survive the first 5 years easily, provided someone like Northwest doesn't buy us with a stock swap. IMO the Northeast will be a blood bath in 5 years. LUV, AAI, JBLU, Spirit, ATA, ACAI, and Roam will add capacity and compete agressively with the Legacy carriers. Good for customers bad for margins.
What worries me is if DAL goes CH 11. This will allow them to renegotiate leases, pilot contracts, and debt. They will also be able to orient mainline towards a Song type model and DCI towards a model like ours on CRJs. I believe DAL emerging from Ch 11 will be the 800lb gorilla. With a fare structure based on cost instead of some skewed logic they might increase revenue and local traffic from hubs like CVG.
It often cost 2 - 3 times as much to depart from CVG to a destination as it does to leave DAY, SDF, or LEX and connect through CVG to a destination, wasteful.
May DAL never go CH 11.
Just kidding, each airline is a high risk gamble.
The reason you see such irrational exuberance is because of the last year and a half roller coaster ride. The UAL CH11, bain process, UAL TA(arrrgh), then possible independence squelched by a Mesa hostile takeover, and finally Mesa staved off with lawyers guns & money, it ain't so bad.
RJ's are too expensive at 15.8 cents a seat mile, right? What if you use them on an average stage length of 341nm? Wow small uncomfortable aircraft in the air for an average of less than and hour and with an extra inch of legroom, TV's don't seem as important on quick flights. This means an average cost of $54.00 a seat per departure, not bad. Plus it allows the 319s an average stage length of 1400 nm which gives us the lower CASM on this aircraft than LUV or JBLU.
Are there obstacles, you bet. I believe we will survive the first 5 years easily, provided someone like Northwest doesn't buy us with a stock swap. IMO the Northeast will be a blood bath in 5 years. LUV, AAI, JBLU, Spirit, ATA, ACAI, and Roam will add capacity and compete agressively with the Legacy carriers. Good for customers bad for margins.
What worries me is if DAL goes CH 11. This will allow them to renegotiate leases, pilot contracts, and debt. They will also be able to orient mainline towards a Song type model and DCI towards a model like ours on CRJs. I believe DAL emerging from Ch 11 will be the 800lb gorilla. With a fare structure based on cost instead of some skewed logic they might increase revenue and local traffic from hubs like CVG.
It often cost 2 - 3 times as much to depart from CVG to a destination as it does to leave DAY, SDF, or LEX and connect through CVG to a destination, wasteful.
May DAL never go CH 11.
GogglesPisano
Pawn, in game of life
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2003
- Posts
- 3,939
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
