Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Intelligent comments from Chautauqua CEO

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Indy319FA said:
Exactly. Because most of those airports are in BFE, the big guys could care less about competing with them. If you decide to compete with legacy carriers in larger markets, they will come after you with a vengeance, just to kill you off before you get successful enough to pose a serious threat. Like I said, good luck to you guys, but if you're swallowing all these happy pills your management is feeding you, be careful one doesn't get stuck in your throat.......

Our management hasn't even disclosed to us what it is we will be doing yet, let alone given us "happy pills".
 
Ive never wanted to post anything on here before, but I read on this site occasionally what people write about. I felt like this was an appropriate thread to post for.

Honestly, I think BB has a right to say whatever it is that he wants to his empoyees about COMPANY news. However, I think he should not have included anything about the past and current condition of the AIRLINE INDUSTRY. Chastising another company for a business decision that it made after careful consideration is bad bad business in itself. In our current airline industry and economy cash is king and assets are a burden. I can understand why BB would upset over a deal that would have provided 69 aircraft with no ownership costs. I hope that BB will be able to use CHQ balance sheet of 1.4 billion in debt to leverage a loan for more RJ's. After all, he is worried about the state of the airline industry.
 
BluDevAv8r said:
None of the above...unless you count being on probation at another airline a "personal problem." :D
-Neal

Ahh yes. Indeed I would call it a "personal problem". Achieving "the dream" always ultimately interferes with "representing the pilots".

What one defines as "the dream" changes from time to time and person to person, but the end result is ultimately the same. The ME always defeats the WE.

That is the ALPA. (It is also the history of "regional" representation). I see that not much has changed.

Best wishes in your new endeavor.
 
boxjockey said:
KngArthur,

You and EMB skillz are the two biggest morons on this board, and I wouldn't be surprised if you were the same person. I suppose that would be giving you too much credit. Our management team did not keep those aircraft on an "emotional whim" just so CHQ couldn't have them. I don't think the "I'll keep my toys and go home" approach would be tried by any airline CEO, including your own. Our management has plans for these aircraft, or they wouldn't have made an announcement like this, especially this early. We haven't burned any bridges with CAL, we have bent in every direction to accomadate them, and this is just one more example of that. As far as comparing us to ACA, that is apples and oranges. They had to take a leap of faith, with no other revenue stream to support their endeavor. We still retain 75% of our GUARANTEED operating profit in order to get these other projects off the ground. We have a quarter BILLION in the bank and a very strong balance sheet. We have multiple outside revenue streams, and will probably continue to diversify further. I have confidence in our management, that was one of my chief motivators for coming to ExpressJet. Perhaps I'm the eternal optimist, and am looking through rose colored glasses, but I have a feeling we have good things ahead of us. I officially relinquish the soap box.....

box :beer:

What is "GUARANTEED" In life anyway? Especially in Aviation!?
 
surplus1 said:
Ahh yes. Indeed I would call it a "personal problem". Achieving "the dream" always ultimately interferes with "representing the pilots".

What one defines as "the dream" changes from time to time and person to person, but the end result is ultimately the same. The ME always defeats the WE.

That is the ALPA. (It is also the history of "regional" representation). I see that not much has changed.

Best wishes in your new endeavor.

You are relentless Surplus. :D

I'm not sure I've achieved my "dream" job (that involved me putting on a flight suit and strapping on a pointy nosed jet) but I did get hired by a company that will ultimately pay more, provide a better quality of life, and have more long term job security than my previous employer.

You just can't post without bringing in the politics can you? :)

-Neal
 
BluDevAv8r said:
You are relentless Surplus. :D

Some call it pig-headed; affectionately of course. :blush:

I'm not sure I've achieved my "dream" job (that involved me putting on a flight suit and strapping on a pointy nosed jet) but I did get hired by a company that will ultimately pay more, provide a better quality of life, and have more long term job security than my previous employer.

I don't fault you. "Self-preservation is nature's first law." Again, I wish you the best and hope is goes as you planned. I'm just sorry your pilot group had to lose a good guy.

You just can't post without bringing in the politics can you? :)

Not in a political thread at any rate. The politics of the ALPA and the politics of business are joined at the hip. ALPA after all, is a business.

With luck it may become a labor union some day. ;)
 
surplus1 said:
I don't fault you. "Self-preservation is nature's first law." Again, I wish you the best and hope is goes as you planned. I'm just sorry your pilot group had to lose a good guy.

Thank you for the very kind words Surplus...they are greatly appreciated.

-Neal
 

Latest resources

Back
Top