Article on ASA Profitablity

[Ganja60Heavy]

Do you really think all of that is real money losses, or some paper losses? If you look at Cash on hand, it is actually INCREASING. We actually increased our cash on hand by $100 million. Everything else is an opinion. Sure, we are losing money, but then again we somehow are adding to cash on hand. Creative accounting indeed. How did United lose $12 billion in one quarter? How much per day loss would that be? Does that sound plausible? So, is that debate, or deny and deflect? Can you debate the $12 billion United loss? Compare and contrast please.

Thanks for the warning. Editing is fun.

Bye Bye--General Lee

GL:

Why are you such a dique?

 

[WWEfan]

I demand an investigation!

A 13.1% profit margin is egregious. That is way more than even Big Oil is making. I think we need a congressional investigation to determine whether or not ASA is raping its passengers and contractors.

 

[WhatRUSmokinGL?]

Do you really think all of that is real money losses, or some paper losses?

Creative accounting indeed.


Bye Bye--General Lee

Dear Richard Cranium,

Pure Denial on your part. But, back to the point....

Why are you so quick to point out that CMR lost 140 million like it is the reason for DAL's woes, but when DAL has a 500 million loss in two months it's all paper....

Are you gonna bring up some other airlines again (like Eastern or Pan Am) now to deflect the argument because you are looking like a stink stirring malcontent?

And, no I won't tell you what malcontent means. You can use google or a mirror to see the definition.


As always you Deflect, Deny and Insult.
Weak.

 

[~~~^~~~]

Sure, we are losing money, but then again we somehow are adding to cash on hand. Creative accounting indeed.

Bye Bye--General Lee

General: Lets use a little Peacthree City Fairy Tale to help you understand the situation. You sell your house and rent it back from the buyer - you increase your cash on hand. Now you drive your SUV to the corner gas station, you get gas, food and a 12 pack of long necks then drive off without paying for it, again you have increased cash on hand.

Your accountant, who follow Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, dutifully notes that you have increased your cash, gas, food and beer, but your obligations have increased resulting in a loss. It is not "creative." When you take in cash, wiggle out of your bills in bankruptcy and leave your business partners (and employees) holding the bag it is pretty easy to increase your cash position while still losing money.

Also, Delta has the flow through on fuel costs because it allows them to operate the RJ's cheaper. Fuel is less if Delta buys it directly than if SkyWest marks it up and sells it to Delta.

Delta draws up these contracts and writes them in such a way that is favorable to Delta. If Delta is taking the hit anywhere, it is the cost of Delta Management performing all the marketing, ticket sales, scheduling, revenue management and other factors that are part of the operational control of your small jet lift.

Delta has been operationally profitable for a while. The problem has been in the G.O.

~~~^~~~

 

[Ganja60Heavy]

General: Lets use a little Peacthree City Fairy Tale to help you understand the situation. You sell your house and rent it back from the buyer - you increase your cash on hand. Now you drive your SUV to the corner gas station, you get gas, food and a 12 pack of long necks then drive off without paying for it, again you have increased cash on hand.

Your accountant, who follow Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, dutifully notes that you have increased your cash, gas, food and beer, but your obligations have increased resulting in a loss. It is not "creative." When you take in cash, wiggle out of your bills in bankruptcy and leave your business partners (and employees) holding the bag it is pretty easy to increase your cash position while still losing money.

Also, Delta has the flow through on fuel costs because it allows them to operate the RJ's cheaper. Fuel is less if Delta buys it directly than if SkyWest marks it up and sells it to Delta.

Delta draws up these contracts and writes them in such a way that is favorable to Delta. If Delta is taking the hit anywhere, it is the cost of Delta Management performing all the marketing, ticket sales, scheduling, revenue management and other factors that are part of the operational control of your small jet lift.

Delta has been operationally profitable for a while. The problem has been in the G.O.

~~~^~~~

Funny as schit! My only suggestion would be to change "12 pack of long necks" to "4-pack of wine coolers"....something General Lee's panzy-azz can relate to.

Take care

 

[WhatRUSmokinGL?]

Yeah, lots of people here like to hear Mr Richard Cranium bloviate.

I find it interesting that there is such a number of people pointing out his arrogance. Nice.

 

[Ganja60Heavy]

Why are you so quick to point out that CMR lost 140 million like it is the reason for DAL's woes, but when DAL has a 500 million loss in two months it's all paper....

Another excellent point....well-said, and nicely shows typical flawed GL reasoning.

If it were anybody smart we were contesting, I'd suggest we were all champion debaters......

But it's just GL. Like taking candy from a baby......

 

[General Lee]

The Comair loss of $140 million last year is a good point worth bringing up, which clearly points out that we should never OWN our own RJs. That doesn't take away from the fact that we are losing boat loads of money, (or maybe not as much if it were paper losses), and we also have more RJs than any other airline. Correlation? Maybe. Ron Reber, the SkyWest CFO and now President, went out of his way in that intra company newsletter to point out that their fuel "insulation" was helping their bottom line, and I guess that would probably mean it was hurting someone elses. Someone has to pay for the increase in fuel, and I think that would be DL. So, with higher fuel and fewer seats to spread out the costs (compared to an Airtran 737-700 or 717), I would say that would add to our losses. Please refute that, anyone.

And Ganja, you bring nothing to the table. (WhatrusmokinGL, was that a deflect, deny, or debate?)


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[SSDD]

Doesn't think that DL should own any RJ's, yet wants to fly anything bigger than 76 seats...RJ's regardless of what you call them.

BTW Reber made that statement over a year ago, a lot has changed since then. You need to come up with a different line.

 

[General Lee]

Doesn't think that DL should own any RJ's, yet wants to fly anything bigger than 76 seats...RJ's regardless of what you call them.

BTW Reber made that statement over a year ago, a lot has changed since then. You need to come up with a different line.

What has changed? Fuel is still high, and we pay the difference. Has that changed at all?

As far as the RJs go, it is apparent now that we can get cheaper feed by NOT owning the product. If you own the product, you are subject to strike and your own losses. By not owning it, you can avoid most of those problems, except a possible disruption in the case of a strike, but can be cleared up by offering an RFP for new service. Look at Expressjet. They have a plan for their 69 50 seat RJs, and nobody but them knows about it. They could offer those planes for feed, or do something on their own. The regional airline industry is in flux, and we need to stop taking it in the shorts at the Majors. Continental is getting rid of a sole feed provider, and trying to get another one in there to compete for contracts. Things are changing.

As far as flying everything larger than 76 or 70 seats, YES, I would like that. Do I think now that the line will be bumped up to 76 seats? Probably. Will it go higher at DCI? Not necessarily. If this TA passes there is still a line drawn (non force mejuerable to raise number of seats) and there is also a weight limit (86,000lbs). That number was agreed upon a couple LOA's ago, and that did not change this time. The E190 and larger will be flown by mainline at USAir and Jetblue, so it is doubtful they would ever see anything like that at DCI. Right now those 76 seat jets are jets that would have been here anyway due to the weight limit, but now may have 6 more first class seats that will be taken away if mainline furloughs. That is the new reality I guess. We shall see.


Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[CFIT]

What has changed? Fuel is still high, and we pay the difference. Has that changed at all?

As far as the RJs go, it is apparent now that we can get cheaper feed by NOT owning the product.

Bye Bye--General Lee

To answer your question, no.

Skywest Inc. is coveted by your management, they make the contracts, you obviously lack the intelligence to understand. The contracts extend for a very long time and they were quickly approved by the judge during proceedings, this maybe something you will have to get used to.

Or you could continue to nag like a girl over and over about this, make a choice.

 

[John Pennekamp]

As far as flying everything larger than 76 or 70 seats, YES, I would like that. Do I think now that the line will be bumped up to 76 seats? Probably. Will it go higher at DCI? Not necessarily. If this TA passes there is still a line drawn (non force mejuerable to raise number of seats) and there is also a weight limit (86,000lbs). That number was agreed upon a couple LOA's ago, and that did not change this time. The E190 and larger will be flown by mainline at USAir and Jetblue, so it is doubtful they would ever see anything like that at DCI. Right now those 76 seat jets are jets that would have been here anyway due to the weight limit, but now may have 6 more first class seats that will be taken away if mainline furloughs. That is the new reality I guess. We shall see.


Bye Bye--General Lee

You're starting to sound pretty gung ho about a TA you swore would never pass. You swore that any scope lift would result in the death of Delta. It's funny how your keyboard has a short memory.

 

[blueridge71]

The E190 and larger will be flown by mainline at USAir and Jetblue, so it is doubtful they would ever see anything like that at DCI.

I'm not sure that I buy that.

Look at these E190 rates from airlinepilotcentral:

USA JB CHQ
YR CA FO CA FO CA FO
1 79 41 71 37 62 22
2 80 44 72 40 66 30
3 82 46 74 42 70 34
4 84 49 76 44 72 35*
5 86 51 77 46 74 35*

*Note that CHQ has a single jet FO rate that tops out after 5 Years [Napolean Dynamite voice] Idiots!!! [Napoleon]

Even ignoring that no one at USAirways is on the one year pay scale, they are much more expensive than JetBlue, which is much more expensive that Chittytaco. In this nickel and dime, step over your mother to save a dollar, industry, why would E190s not go to the DCI if management can get them there, whether by hook or by crook?

BTW my personal conviction is that the airlines will be saved, not by cost cutting, by enhancing customer service. Cost cutting = angry employees = poor customer service.

 

[WhatRUSmokinGL?]

Someone has to pay for the increase in fuel, and I think that would be DL. So, with higher fuel and fewer seats to spread out the costs (compared to an Airtran 737-700 or 717), I would say that would add to our losses. Please refute that, anyone.




Bye Bye--General Lee

OK I'll bite on your fantasy:

Air Tran has to buy fuel for 111 jets
Delta has to buy fuel for ~530 jets (Plus ASA, CHQ, CMR, Freedum, Shuttle America, SKW)
Please add in to your fantasy the bulk discounts DAL gets to use while 'spreading' the costs over fleet. RJ's are not the end of airlines, find another scape goat to blame your lack of fulfillment.

 

[WhatRUSmokinGL?]

The regional airline industry is in flux....


...Continental is getting rid of a sole feed provider, and trying to get another one in there to compete for contracts. Things are changing.

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!
Now really,
Where The Fu(# have you been?

USAir - Mesa, Colgan, AWAC
Delta - ASA, CMR, CHQ, SKW, MESA
United- SKW, Mesa

 

[wmuflyguy]

This is why i'm glad we do not have a FlightInfo air-to-air Frequency!

 

[Crash Pad]

I have a dumb question. I was under the understanding that capacity is the problem.
My question for the General. Wouldn't Delta switching to 70-76 seat jets and parking the MD's solve the capacity problem?

Say Delta flys from ATL to MDW. Say that flight has 120 people who want to go. Say the tickets are $100 dollars (120*100=12000)

I think an economist would tell you the first thing you should do is make sure a 128 seat aircraft doesn't do the flight. A 70 seat airplane could charge double or tripple the ticket price (70*200=14000). The 70 seat aircraft also costs less to operate so now you are bringing in even more money.

My question for GL is doesn't it make more sense to get mainline planes out of the mix to reduce capacity? Could RJ's be the answer to all your problems?