GoJets? Whats the deal?

[100LL... Again!]

100LL Again:

nice jab...I do understand economics.... So your point..If they could ,they would...sounds so simple.... has nothing to do with economics, but everything to do with pricing strategy and identifying your market and your competition.

Why do you think Delta has 757 painted in lime green, UAL A320 with TED on 'em

Jetblue with their entire design, blue shirt and tvs on seats... it's called marketing..... you don't picked up the wrong textbook.....

in the trucking industry, the owners pass all of the cost of fuel back to customers.
they've also refused to add capacity. ..... The banks are too eager to lend money to shoddy outfits. How else do explain a stupid business plan like ACAs and their blueprint 30/barrel oil assumption.


I don't care if it's collusion or not,,, the gov't needs to reject underfunded pensions and liquidate any company not properly funding their pension obligations. if it means rasing prices do it...right now loads are at an all time high....now is the time to do it...

Please don't think that I think that airline management (anywhere) is especially intelligent.

I am simply saying that pricing is a more complicated issue than simple refusal to raise prices.

One argument is that if the airlines were not adding so much capacity, then others would not need to follow suit, therefore keeping capacity in check.

However, we will not be able to get the toothpaste back in the tube at this point.

If you meant that any of these ther factors is why pricing is too low, then you probably do understand economics.

I've just grown weary of those who think that one brave CEO standing up and setting prices at a profitable level will accomplish anything other that finishing off that carrier.

 

[climbhappy]

100LL...Again:
that's why i asked an expert in another filed hit hard by fuel costs and pragmatic common sense prevails. No, One CEO can't save the industry, but Gordon Behtune darn sure tried. he made money and knew business.

the creditors don't help either, it's an industry that keeps on giving second chances.

This USA today article on FLYi said it best. "Low cost carrier drives fares even lower. (the fine print went on to say thet 100 in the 1st quarter.)

What's so great about that. Could you go to the country club and hit the tees with the buddies producing those numbers and feel good about yourself.

The answer, " yeah, I know, if the guy just robbed the coffers with a golden parachute and could retire, then yes"

 

[jarhead]

100LL Again:


in the trucking industry, the owners pass all of the cost of fuel back to customers.

Actually, this statement is not quite true. I know, as in another life I contracted with trucking companies and had them bidding for my company’s freight business. Often contracts were made that prevented any hike in price for a specified time frame….6 months to a year. Also, even though there were tariffs that spelled out the freight rate per thousand lbs of a given commodity for a given destination from our plant, major discounts from that tariff was the norm, not the exception.

Also, even when there were no contracts in effect with a trucker or contracts with them were in negotiation, all they could do was attempt to take some of the discount away, or attempt to add a fuel surcharge. We would always fight that with the threat to give our business to another competing trucking company. Sometimes they would back down for fear of losing a major customer to a leaner more cost effective competitor. Sometimes they would say fine, take your business to XYZ, as they saw no reason to operate at a loss. Its all based on competition, and the P & L.

There were also instances when we chose not to do business with the cheapest freight cost carrier. If an outfit would continually lose freight, damage the freight, or show up with it at an irate customers dock three days late, no matter how “cheap” it was, it was not worth it to us, and we would find a carrier who did a better job, even if it cost us more to ship.

 

[100LL... Again!]

It is also very easy to look at a five-year period as a long time.

Economic forces vary in speed and momentum. In the big picture, a lot of what you are seeing is just a blip on the whole plot of prices.

Many bad decisions were made by a lot of people. I think that we are (at this particular moment) all tied together and plummeting off a cliff in an industry-wide economic free-fall.

In other words, gravity is at work here, we can all argue over who jumped off the cliff and who dragged who along for the fall, but there is little to do but wait for impact.

This short time before the real reckoning occurs might be most profitably spent trying to at least be on top the pile as at hits the canyon floor Wile E. Coyote style.

If anyone thinks they know how this could be turned around, please post your ideas so that we might scoff at it.