ASA and Comair to merge

[FDJ2]

The growth will slow because Delta operates over 300 of the things and eventually there will be no need for more lift with those capacities. That is the same reason you only have 8 triple-sevens and you have no 747's. The Company just doesn't need any more.

Well it's great to hear that a CMR pilot agrees that the growth of RJs at DCI is not affected by scope, but rather by the economics of the aircraft and market saturation. The RJ glut is no secret, it's here to stay. The next large growth segment in the industry will be in the mainline 71- 130 seat market in E-jets, 319s, 737-600/700s, etc.

 

[MedFlyer]

I'll give you an example. When SWA first invaded the Florida market, all the "experts" predicted it would be the end of the RJ in FL. SWA put their 737's and their cut rate fares on several "prime" CMR routes, like MCO-MSY, MCO-BNA (as examples). At the time, Delta didn't own Comair and we were not operating on a "fee for departure" basis, so we didn't have you to subsidize any losses. Guess what? We did not abandon the routes. We just offered a few seats at the low SWA fare (the one's that were empty anyway) and the net result was our load factors actually increased. The competition DID make it harder for SWA to "takeover" and we didn't lose any money. SWA did not run us off those routes.

WN first invaded Florida in 1993. The few RJ's that Comair had were based in CVG, not MCO. Comair was flying props on most of the intra-Florida stuff...as well as some mainline.

The only reason DL kept you on those routes (DL had say where you flew even before they bought you) was to maintain a presence. You might not have lost money, but you lost DL a lot of customers. Because of the small size of RJ's, many people who wanted to fly to MCO and have reasonable fares couldn't do it on DL. They were forced to fly WN. Comair didn't make it harder for WN....you made it far easier.

RJ's have their place and there are some places where they work great. Unfortunately, DL management has gone too far with the RJ strategy. Instead of fixing a broken business model, management is trying to shrink the airline into success. So far, it's not working and it won't work.

Personally, I think merging ASA and CMR would be a good idea, but I don't see DL management going for it especially with the demand for brand scope. Let me ask you surplus, are you in favor of brand scope? If so, isn't that putting artificial restraints on the market? What if DL decides to slowly phase out CMR and replace you with Mesa,CHQ,SKYW,etc? That'll be ok with you, right? It's what the market demands...

 

[sleepy]

"ASA was the only one between you two that saw "the light" and understood that this was a terrible situation, and some "rules" needed to be changed. It is not like anyone over there at ASA was affected---most actually liked the fact that more people were coming in BELOW them."

You are right here General. We have hired furloughed DAL pilots (pilots from other airlines as well) and are about to hire some more. It has not affected any ASA pilots that I am aware of.

 

[rjcap]

What if DL decides to slowly phase out CMR and replace you with Mesa,CHQ,SKYW,etc? That'll be ok with you, right? It's what the market demands...

Why would you phase out your own regional airline that you paid a cool billion for ?

 

[General Lee]

Surplus1,

Medflyer is correct about Comair vs Southwest in the late 90's. Comair and Southwest competed on the MCO-MSY route, and Comair lost that one--between two large cities. Now we use Chataqua, because they are cheaper and Delta realized that we had to have some sort of presence there. But, I just saw something today that I thought was great--Comair will start 70 seater service in April tolate September from CVG to Billings, MT. That is smart, and that is what we should be using RJs for----connecting larger cities or hubs to smaller cities that have value---Billings being a great Summer destination for many passengers. Great move on DCI's part there.


Sleepy,

We really do appreciate ASA's participation with regard to our furloughs. I am sure most really appreciate the job. Yes, I have heard that some have bailed to Hooters Air for example, but most
I am sure would love to have the chance to fly for you guys. We will NOT forget---and I am sure the furloughs will not forget either, and will make sure that some sort of reciprocation happens.


RJCAP,

I don't think Delta would ever get rid of their $1 billion investment---they have too much invested already. They could always sell it and sign a 10 year agreement to provide DCI service---but I don't think they would let it deteriorate into something undesirable. Comair is still a great product--and it serves Delta well. Our management thinks they are a bit expensive, (along with us) and that is where the disagreement is.


Medflyer,

I don't think Surplus1 is wrong wanting brand scope. We have it at mainline, and we are just protecting our own interests. The Comair/ASA merger would be good for the pilots no doubt, and I am sure management does not want it. But, if they want voluntary pay cuts or concessions---they will have to listen.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[FDJ2]

Why would you phase out your own regional airline that you paid a cool billion for ?

Perhaps management doesn't want to throw good money after bad. Besides, if CHQ, Skywest or anyone else can provide the small jet lift for less, than why wouldn't DAL use them. The writing is on the wall.

 

[rjcap]

Our management thinks they are a bit expensive, (along with us) and that is where the disagreement is.

The only group that is too expensive is mainline.

Gen Lee your constant bashing of Comair are getting a bit old. You might want to consider silencing your attacks until you find out what the new Delta CEO has in store for your arrogant group. You may end up needing a few friends.

 

[Anaconda]

VC10


ROFLMAO!!!!

Yeah, lets sell off the only part of DAL that is making money. Then DAL could take that quick cash and buy a TON of heavy iron, triple pilot pay, and drive the airline into the dirt---further into the dirt.

Get REAL......

comair mgt. isn't laughing...

to quote from a recent memo:

"More importantly we have made our position very clear – we are only interested in furthering the growth and security of Comair and Comair pilots. While the issue of control is glossed over by the Association, there is a limit to the authority that this management has to consider solutions outside the corporate entity that is Comair. Even if we did have the power to deal with these considerations there are practical matters that could haunt us in the future. While ASA pilots may be willing brides in this marriage, there is no doubt that they could become a daunting force in a potential divorce if one of these companies is taken public again. Looking out for Comair’s interests, using language that would prevent growth at a non-owned carrier could be devastating if we potentially became a public company again. These things fall in the category of being careful what you ask for."

 

[General Lee]

RJCAP,

What?? What are you saying? I wasn't bashing the Comair group--I said MANAGEMENT wants lower pay---I didn't say I wanted Comair pilots to have less pay.

So, what is managment going to DO TO US? What? Nothing. Our new CEO is "labor friendly", but WE KNOW THIS. He will do what to us? He can't just do anything he wants---nope. What are you smoking? If they will not settle for our proposal---then they will have to wait for negotiations to start next Novemember, and then it WILL take two or more years to hammer out a new contract---one that we BOTH agree on. They can't just do whatever they want---you are dreaming. We have $2.7 BILLION in cash, and the economy is getting better. What can they do again???? Also----the Comair pilots make more than any other regional---yet they have no bargaining power because they have no scope protection. If they do not deal-----they do not get anymore FUTURE growth. Sorry----that is the way it is. For us at mainline---we actually have limits in our contract, and they will REMAIN there until a new one is hammered out. And, if we do get big paycuts eventually (in three years)--there will be MASSIVE retirements because guys will now be flying more in the next three years to keep their retirement high (since it is based off of the BEST three years--not last three). So, when we get paycuts, there will be huge retirements and many will leave, and the rest will move up to larger aircraft and not have to take such a large personal paycut. Get the picture yet? Enjoy!!! What are THEY going to DO TO US again? WRONG. WRONG. WRONG. They either take what we give them, or nothing. And, the company has already taken huge cuts in other areas, so we are pretty competitive---especially in a better economy with higher fares.(and, we only have one union and one contract---which makes our airline more "flexible.") Am I wrong here? Nope.

And, if our only "friends" could be groups like the Comair pilots, I think we'd rather remain friendless. After their huge support for our unfortunate furloughs, I think we would PASS. Good----day.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[sleepy]

Perhaps management doesn't want to throw good money after bad. Besides, if CHQ, Skywest or anyone else can provide the small jet lift for less, than why wouldn't DAL use them. The writing is on the wall.

That sounds like wishful thinking from a bottom feeder. Are you Mesa, Chit, or Skywest?

You like to think that DAL will just get rid of $2 billion in assets (about what they paid for ASA and Comair a few years ago), and give it all to you because you will work for less money and lesser benefits. I always hear Piedmont and other USAir WO's used as an example of an airline shrinking an "expensive" WO in order to replace it with a Chit or Mesa. It is easy for USAir to do that because the USAir WO's were all flying old props that were going to have to be replaced anyway. It is cheaper for them to give that flying to the Mesas and Chits of the world, because you are leasing the aircraft, so it doesn't cost USAir much to replace their turboprops for your jets. Being in bankruptcy made it easy to get out of their leases.

DAL is not in bankruptcy. DAL bought all of our aircraft. We already have over 200 jet aircraft. If DAL did try to give our aircraft to your airline (say while we are on strike), you wouldn't fly them would you?

 

[General Lee]

Sleepy,

I think FDJ2 is "Fly Delta Jets 2", and he may be a furloughed Delta pilot. I think he was just saying that Delta managment (not the Delta pilots or Dalpa) will try to get the lowest bids for the new regional growth. I personally do NOT think that Delta will allow anyone else to fly the jets you have now. As far as new future jets---I think it is safe to say that they (DL management) will base the growth off of cheaper deals with different carriers. Thanks to some carriers selling out for growth (like Skywest), the DL management has nothing to lose by offering more growth to the lowest bidder. I personally would like to see you (ASA) and Comair merge, and then keep the new growth there, but they don't ask me my opinion. (I just give it on this board) Take care.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[FDJ2]

Sleepy,

I think FDJ2 is "Fly Delta Jets 2", and he may be a furloughed Delta pilot.
Bye Bye--General Lee

Hey General, you have it half right. I do fly for Delta, but I'm not furloughed. FDJ2 just stands for "Fly Delta Jets Too". Not too original I know, but there it is. My apologies for any confusion with the original "FlyDeltaJets".

 

[General Lee]

FDJ2,

Sorry about that. I never take it for granted that I am not furloughed, and I hope all of our furloughs come back soon. I feel very lucky to be where I am at. I am glad you are flying too.

Bye Bye--General Lee

 

[surplus1]

Well it's great to hear that a CMR pilot agrees that the growth of RJs at DCI is not affected by scope, but rather by the economics of the aircraft and market saturation.

Check again. I did not say that RJ growth was not affected by Scope. What I said was that it had not yet reached the "limits" of your scope and until it reaches those limits, it is affected only by market forces. If there were no Scope limits, it would still be affected by market forces which seems to support the idea that those artificial scope limits were and are unnecessary.

The most relevant scope limit is the cap on 70-seaters. Were it not for that it would be possible to swap some of the 50's for 70's, as dictated by the market. The "cap" is an artificial limitation now. The percentile limits are also artificial, but have not yet been reached.

The RJ glut is no secret, it's here to stay. The next large growth segment in the industry will be in the mainline 71- 130 seat market in E-jets, 319s, 737-600/700s, etc.

I hope that the next growth segment will indeed be in the 100-seat category. That growth would allow you to recall your furloughed pilots sooner than later, which I would like to see. Though it may surprise you, I have always supported the concept that aircraft with 100 or more seats are in your territory and we should make no claim to them, unless of course you make claim to equipment in our territory.

On the other hand, which I'm sure will raise ire, aircraft in the 70-99 seat range are, in my view, open territory which either one of us might explore. That's not because I want anything that is yours (you haven't flown anything that size for decades) but because I think your infrastructure is too top heavy for that guage equipment. While you have pilots on furlough however, I would not make waves if anything over 70-seats went to you.

 

[surplus1]

RJ's have their place and there are some places where they work great. Unfortunately, DL management has gone too far with the RJ strategy. Instead of fixing a broken business model, management is trying to shrink the airline into success. So far, it's not working and it won't work.

I won't argue the merits of Delta's business model. If it is "broken" there is considerable evidence that RJ strategy is not the culprit. Many would argue that Delta's deployment of RJ has contributed much to its ability to succeed where American and United have failed. It's interesting to note that Continental also isn't doing as poorly as others and they have deployed RJs in much the same way that Delta has. Were it not for those RJs both of you might well be in the full embrace of Chapter 11. Just a matter of opinion.

Personally, I think merging ASA and CMR would be a good idea, but I don't see DL management going for it especially with the demand for brand scope. Let me ask you surplus, are you in favor of brand scope? If so, isn't that putting artificial restraints on the market? What if DL decides to slowly phase out CMR and replace you with Mesa,CHQ,SKYW,etc? That'll be ok with you, right? It's what the market demands...

First, I'm not opposed to a merger of ASA and CMR. I just don't think that can be negotiated with ASA and CMR management, nor do I think it can be "bought" with concessions.

Am I in favor of "brand scope"? Well, the truth is I don't really know what "brand scope" actually means. I know that it is one of Woerth's sound bites, but I've never seen it clearly defined and that fellow has a history of speaking with "forked tongue". I notice that it was quasi included in the DMEC proposal to management, but again, no one but they know what that means, including the Delta rank-and-file. I am unable to embrace that or any other concept in a vacuum and "trusting" folks whose interests are not in common with mine is not something I'm inclined to do. I've had way too much experience dealing with ALPA's assorted RJ strategies to fall for that. So, I'll cross that bridge when I have a clear definition of whatever "brand scope" may be.

Delta may well decide to phase out CMR and replace us with the carriers you mention. No, I would not like that but I also know that I can't prevent it by agreeing to fly for less than Mesa or perhaps better said, I would not want to undebid Mesa in an effort to prevent it. If that is the course that Delta management chooses, there is nothing I can reasonably do to prevent it.

There are a great many things that management can do in which the employees have no say. That applies both to the mainline and to the regional and Song subsidiaries.