waveflyer
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2005
- Posts
- 10,005
They certainly do and since you have no vote, I won't bother with you anymore-
The numbers are this: 255 fuel efficient, large RJs (70 & 76 seaters) currently allowed, vs 325 after this TA.
The FIRST carrier to allow outsourced -900's while NOT under duress of bk. = legal precedent.
The only big 3 network carrier to allow it at all- at a time when the other two are fighting to keep scope at 70 seats and lower.
The increase in -900's is almost equal ( 70 vs 76) to usair's entire fleet of -900's & 175's.
So dalpa, do what you think is best. But don't EVER tell another soul that if you had a do-over, you'd have never let a jet be outsourced in the first place. Pass this, and that's a flat out lie. revisionist history.
Pass this and you're exactly what we thought you were. Sellouts. All mgmt has to do is muddy the waters a bit, throw some money at you and you'll keep on boiling the scope frog.
The numbers are this: 255 fuel efficient, large RJs (70 & 76 seaters) currently allowed, vs 325 after this TA.
The FIRST carrier to allow outsourced -900's while NOT under duress of bk. = legal precedent.
The only big 3 network carrier to allow it at all- at a time when the other two are fighting to keep scope at 70 seats and lower.
The increase in -900's is almost equal ( 70 vs 76) to usair's entire fleet of -900's & 175's.
So dalpa, do what you think is best. But don't EVER tell another soul that if you had a do-over, you'd have never let a jet be outsourced in the first place. Pass this, and that's a flat out lie. revisionist history.
Pass this and you're exactly what we thought you were. Sellouts. All mgmt has to do is muddy the waters a bit, throw some money at you and you'll keep on boiling the scope frog.