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

AMR to say "Buh Bye" to Eagle?

  • Thread starter Thread starter WW24dude
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 21

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
Everyone always bashes the Boyd Group, but didn't he call some of this (IF it happens..)
---------------------------------------
http://www.aviationplanning.com/DenverConference/conf2004fin.htm

"Small Jet Providers. Here's a forecast point missed by other conferences, and one that's miles over the head of the FAA: there is no longer a "regional airline" industry. It's gone. These operators are now SJP's - small jet providers. Today, with a few exceptions, such as EAS markets, operators such as Mesaba, Mesa, and Skywest don't have their own route systems. That's because they're not in the airline business anymore. They are in the far more demanding role of selling lift to mega-carriers - specifically, they provide small jet lift (and for the moment, some turboprop lift) to mega-carriers, operated at the direction of each mega-carrier buying the lift. The enormous ramifications of this - including the future spin-offs of SJPs now owned by mega-carriers - were covered at the conference. "

"Excess Capacity - "Regional" Jets.
Not To Mention the SJPs That Operate Them

The poorly-researched media stories on the "growth of regional jets" notwithstanding, the fact is that even today there is hardly a shortage of small jets. Along the lines of the Atlantic Coast Airlines situation, it's becoming clear that there is an emerging excess of both small jet providers and the small jets they operate. (We recognize this runs counter to the herd thinking, but that's why our conference attendees run ahead of the herd.)

As our fleet forecasts have indicated (and expressed at our conferences) for the past three years, the "RJ" demand curve would peter out in the early part of the decade, and the applications of small jets would begin to decline in the 2005 - 2007 time frame. That's what's already taking place, and, give or take a spike or two, that trend will become more pronounced in the next five years.

The ACA/United relationship is only one indication. The reduction in American operations at STL is also pointing toward some small jets looking for a home. And, interestingly, almost on cue two days after the conference, Northwest was reported to have reduced the number of jets it allows Mesaba to operate, and may entirely cancel that SJP's contract to operate jets for Northwest.

Going forward, plan on a shake-out in SJPs. The ones which can provide excellence in service at the lowest cost will survive. Those that can't will end up with fleets of RJs sitting expensively idle."
 
I have always thought the term "regional jet" was ironic. It was the "regional jet" that launched the regionals into distant, non-regional markets. What 'region' is it if you fly DFW-GRR, DFW-GSO, IAH-ORF, etc etc?
SJP is a much better term but that is one step toward recognition and better treatment.
 
FDJ2 said:
Spinning off Eagle and losing Eagle feed are not one in the same. AMR can spin off Eagle in a public offering to raise $$$ and still retain Eagle small jet lift. CAL successfully did it with CoEx, it is not beyond the realm of possibilities to see other airlines do the same thing with their regional affiliates.
True! Why don't they sell mainline and keep the profitable part, Eagle? :)
 
It is a symbiotic relationship with contribution margins that effect both companies.

It is however why I said during the sale potential of Executive Airlines that you would never see any merger of lists, etc. for Eagle. It is separate so it can be disposed of.
 
You really need to look at the 10-K, and then tell me who is draining who?

But I guess you will tell me next that those numbers are lies?

The problem here is you repeat things to many times you believe them.


Can't speak for Comair or ASA, but Eagle cost AMR money last year and this year.

While you submit your "are lower costs" speach, what are actually speaking of?

The CASMs of the RJ? or Eagle pilot costs? or Eagle as a labor group costs?, or the BILLIONS that AMR is paying for your jets.

You are right, let's spin AA off, and we can keep feeding you!;)

AA

Arpey does mention what a great money maker it is, but I guess if you are trying to dress up a pig anything goes.
 
I hate to admitt it but for us Express Jet guys this was a good thing. Except for the fact that we lost the Flow Through Agreement, we now have the ability to stay profitable. Had we still been owned by CAL we wouldn't have seen any increases in wages and benefits. Now that we are separate Express jet can't cry poverty and say they can't pay us.


Plus CAL has been able to milk 450 million bucks and still hold on to the service we provide. And they now have the ability to whipsaw us against any other regional who's willing to fly for sh11t wages (thank you MESA/CHQ). It sucks for the pilots but as far as being a buisness decission it is a sound one.
 
I.P. Freley said:
Keeping in mind that I don't follow the stock market... So pardon my ignorance.

How did Continental achieve "success" or "make a nice profit" on the CoEx sale? I just checked the stock price and it's hovering around $11. The IPO was for $16, wasn't it?

I believe Continental is still in possession of 40-50% of the stock, and I'd think with a 33% drop in the stock price as compared to the IPO would be a LOSS.

Someone help me out here....
unfortuantly you are wrong...Cal owns approx 30% and the sale added to CALs bottom line...They now have a better balance sheet because the losses are no longer off setting the gains by continental express when they were both the same company. They can now use losses for tax breaks and whine about things...
 
Last edited:
601Pilot said:
True! Why don't they sell mainline and keep the profitable part, Eagle? :)
They certainly could do that I suppose, but management hasn't floated that idea, but they have floated selling Eagle. Here's a question for you, how "profitable" would Eagle be without AA to feed? I suspect an overwhelming percent of passengers on Eagle connect on to a mainline jet, whereas most AA passengers never step foot on Eagle.:)
 
Hey Skootertrash,

I love the following line in your post, it really hits the nail on the head. You said, "I hate to admitt it but for us Express Jet guys this was a good thing. Except for the fact that we lost the Flow Through Agreement, we now have the ability to stay profitable."

You have no idea how bad us guys at eagle really want to get rid of our flow through agreement. From our point of view, there would be no bad part of losing the flow through!

tk
 
tk855 said:
Hey Skootertrash,

I love the following line in your post, it really hits the nail on the head. You said, "I hate to admitt it but for us Express Jet guys this was a good thing. Except for the fact that we lost the Flow Through Agreement, we now have the ability to stay profitable."

You have no idea how bad us guys at eagle really want to get rid of our flow through agreement. From our point of view, there would be no bad part of losing the flow through!

tk
Easy there cowboy...If Beagle gets sold, that 16year POS goes along with it.
Letter 3 goes with it as well.... Sucks major!
 
Who needs who? Who cares?

FDJ2 said:
They certainly could do that I suppose, but management hasn't floated that idea, but they have floated selling Eagle. Here's a question for you, how "profitable" would Eagle be without AA to feed? I suspect an overwhelming percent of passengers on Eagle connect on to a mainline jet, whereas most AA passengers never step foot on Eagle.:)
In LAX, at least half of the passengers on Eagle don't set foot on an American Airlines jet. They go to Delta, Continental, Alaska, Hawaiian, Northwest, Qantas, Japan, ATA, or any one of the code-share partners they have in Los Angeles. I imagine that if Eagle were to be sold, they would make many more of these agreements.

Quabbleing over who would be better off is useless. AA/Eagle is a symbiotic relationship. If AMR could make money without the investment it takes to operate Eagle, they would, in a heartbeat.

AMR has shown it's loyalty toward Eagle pilots. It's not an impressive show. When was the last time Arpey mentioned Eagle? When was the last time Arpey spoke to an Eagle union leader?

There's your answer.
 
Well, somebody just nailed one of the reasons. If AMR/Eagle has "flow-through", then don't they have "flow-back"?

They just said they are going to furlough/release 450 AA pilots. Don't AA pilot's have first rights to Eagle slots (by flow-back)?

Just like at Continental - suddenly everybody in your house is in the training department. Huge costs. But if Eagle is gone (sold) before the furloughs, then both companies stay in a status quo with the only losers being the 450 at the end of AA's seniority list.

If I'm management and I see 900 training events. 450 AA guys retrained to Eagle and 450 Eagle CA's probably displaced to FO. I'm thinking at $18-25K per training event, that a lot of money can be saved. 900 x 20K per is $18M just in retraining costs that ain't being covered by excess revenue on seat miles.

US Airways is balking at Seniority (and they want to flush pilots with retiring aircraft). ACA/Indy just "tweaked" their contract to get Indy off the ground without having the entire pilot list in training - lose two aircraft (J41 and DoJet's) and add the Airbus with only the CRJ guys stuck in the middle.

Ladies and gentlemen, training is expensive. The airlines know this. They are trying to get around it anyway they can. Our seniority system creates a lot of training events for every seat move depending on the structure of the company. I've found that THIS is our Achilles Heel. When an airline gets down to line items - fuel, salaries and training events are expensive little tickets.
 
Contribute the equity to its pension plan, thereby reducing the underfunding...



Dr.Hwang said:
What!!?? Why would AMR sell Eagle? That makes no sense. They have so much invested in them, they provide feeder service from all over to AA's hubs. What a loss that would. I don't get it.
 
amr will "sell" eagle to get rid of the APA's scope. Look for the "new" eagle
operating the emb's170-190. in the near future...
 
Food for thought.....


I was just looking in the latest issue of "American Way" magazine the other day......NO mention of Eagle at all. No plane specs, no press whatsoever. HMMMMMMMMMMMM
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom