Eagle whipping APA into shape?

[siucavflight]

And again, they can't do this if Eagle were to codeshare with American. Anyone that codeshares with American is subject to the APA scope language. It really is that simple.

Again, if Eagle is its own airline they can do whatever they want to do. The investors will get the profits, and that is all there is too it. APA has no say what other airlines do.

 

[PCL_128]

Again, if Eagle is its own airline they can do whatever they want to do. The investors will get the profits, and that is all there is too it. APA has no say what other airlines do.

APA has a say in what other airlines do if they codeshare with American. If AMR wants customers to be able to call American reservations and book a flight on Eagle or a flight that connects from Eagle to AMR or vice-versa, then they have to comply with APA scope language. You claim to have read the APA Section 1 language, but you're making that very hard to believe.

 

[catIIIc]

How would the stand alone Eagle get money to fly these routes with no reservations and no gates, everything is tied to AMR and as soon as the AA code is added those new Eagle flights so AMR can make money APA's scope comes into play. THis not what AMR is trying to do with Eagle,if I am wrong I will be the first to admit it but AMR just wants cheaper feed.

 

[siucavflight]

Time will tell, and I hope you are right. But like it or not, Eagle is being used to leverage the APA into accecpting a lower contract offer then they want to.
Eagle will never be divested, this is all a threat, that is what I am getting at. AMR floats this, the APA gets nervous. No one can really replace Eagle as AAs feed, and AMR knows this, all the other regionals can not even staff themselves to fly the contracts that they know.
Again I am not cheering this on, I dont want to see it happen, but this is what AMR is doing.

 

[chignutsak]

Damn man I'd like to whipsaw those two hotties...

 

[siucavflight]

Yes that would be fun.

 

[flyer172r]

Again, if Eagle is its own airline they can do whatever they want to do. The investors will get the profits, and that is all there is too it. APA has no say what other airlines do.

When Chautauqua first started flying 170s for United and Delta they had to pay a huge fine to American because it violated their scope clause. It didn't matter that none of the 170s were flown for American. Because Chautauqua codeshared with American they technically weren't allowed to fly 70 seaters for anyone else. That's also why (among other reasons) TSA started Gojet; they needed a separate certificate to fly 700s for United because of TSA's American codeshare.

 

[siucavflight]

I dont think that anyone understands what I am getting at, if Eagle was divested from AMR, they would not be flying feed for American, rather they would be their own airline flying their own routes, it would just so happen that many of the AMR stock holders would also own Eagle stock.

 

[PCL_128]

The AMR shareholders wouldn't care that they own the shares of the "new" Eagle, because the value of their shares is based on the American brand. Since it would be against APA scope, Eagle wouldn't be able to operate as the American brand, so the value of the Eagle shares would be nil. Sorry, but your theory just doesn't hold water.

 

[siucavflight]

Yes, your opinion may vary from mine, but a new airline flying AAs old routes domestically while paying the employees half what they were paying mainline means a very lucrative new company for the share holders.

 

[eaglefly]

I dont think that anyone understands what I am getting at, if Eagle was divested from AMR, they would not be flying feed for American, rather they would be their own airline flying their own routes, it would just so happen that many of the AMR stock holders would also own Eagle stock.

That's not quite true.

IF Eagle is divested (most likely thru a spinoff to the shareholders), AMR has repeatedly said Eagle will maintain a relationship feeding AA and that is a certainty. However, as a seprate company not owned by AMR, it could purchase another certificate and fly whatever they want as a stand-alone carrier under THAT certificate. It didn't work for ACA becasue they relied on money losing 50-seaters and were on their own without a hidden interest from a deep pockets corporation. Express Jet has some of the same problems.

In effect, the new Eagle Holdings, Inc. (EHI) would own two airlines, one feeding AA under scope restrictions and one COMPETING WITH or flying former AA routes PURCHASED from AA. AMR would then likely get a second feeder elsewhere to take over some of the current Eagle routes flown by former Eagle aircraft in order reenact the whipsaw strategy of the past.

AA would shrink to flying long range domestic and International being fed by two "Commuter air carriers" within scope restrictions and shareholders would own and cash in on a new short/medium range high frequency low-cost domestic operation using cheaply flown 100-seaters.

That way AA's high labor costs would be contained in more profitable operations, a new carrier owned by the current shareholders would cash-in on the profitable new carrier and the regional feed to AA would be whipsawable with much cheaper labor with staggered contracts and associated threats every few years.

In this scenario the only losers are the employees of AA and Eagle, with the possible exception of the more senior Eagle pilots who would be flying 100 seaters for what they now fly 50.

Perhaps this scenario is what the APA fears.

 

[siucavflight]

In either scenario it would lead to AMR getting around the scope.

 

[siucavflight]

Damn man I'd like to whipsaw those two hotties...

Sorry, one of the moderators felt that it was out of line. Guess he would of been happy with some pic of a dude in tight pants.
What a tally whacker.

 

[Metro752]

How can they make one seniority list with so many pilots still furloughed from mainline?

 

[siucavflight]

How can they make one seniority list with so many pilots still furloughed from mainline?

How can my avatar been deemed inappropriate and yours is ok?

 

[airspeedsalive]

siucavflight,

Way back before code shares, there was something call "joint fares". Commuters were in Sabre under there own code, and pax would simply conntect to a main line flight.

If I remember correctly, code shares came about as a way to dupe the public into thinking they were flying main line for the entire route. Instead of being on a commuter flight and then main line.

Is this the kind of thing you are getting at? I wonder if that would get around a scope clause?

 

[CoATP]

I think "joint fares" was something from CAB days (B4 deregulation) [Also in those days it referred to the cost of rolling papers,etc.]

With the onset of commuter carrier feed they went away and the public had the great opportunity to get on a "little plane" and not figure out it would happen until they had to duck to get in the door.

XJT is now flying independently and I do not believe they have any "joint fares" with any mainline to handle feed traffic. That's what you are proposing and that business model doesn't exist any more.

 

[airspeedsalive]

True enough...I just wondered if that kind of thing was what this guy was getting at.

You know, Eagle LLC and AMR get together on schedules, and a way to pay for both legs at one time as two independent carriers.