Dizel8
Douglas metal
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2003
- Posts
- 2,817
I think it was Airways or Airliners, the name escapes me. Well, actually it was 1 person, who flew segments on a few of the US LCCs and then wrote the article.
So, not really as laudatory as say if Conde Nast Traveller would do a survey of the LCC's.
Now General, you know I cannot be quiet when you say:"We have a better product". If it is superior to jetblue, why are you selling it for 15-30% less at a time DAL is losing money, altruism? More importantly, what does it say about the DAL mainline product, after all, only "special talent" from mainline is allowed on Song, mainline offers no IFE, no increased legroom etc. I find it farfetched, that Song can support a money losing mainline, after all, having actually seen the jetblue financials and the fares, one could surmise, that even Song is losing money. After all, Song charges less and, more than likely in true numbers, cost more to produce CASM wise.
As for SOX04 and you illusions of candor from the boss. As I have said before, it is possible, not likely but possible, that Song is profitable. It truly depends on what cost are borne by Song and which are paid by mainline, btw an argument I have heard between the wholly owned and DAL pilots. Which entity pays for the airplanes, the gates, the reservations centers, the maintenance, the spare parts, the warehousing of same, the pilots etc. the list is pretty long. Does Song pay its proportional share of those bills?
If the only cost borne by Song is the crews, then yes, Song would be wildly profitable, but when all the other cost are added in, that may indeed not be the case. Based on how Song is accounted for could indeed insulate Grinstein from accusations of wrong doing. We cannot tell, because DAL does not break out numbers for any individual entity. Of course, the bigger issue, is the fact that Song is a division of DAL, which sadly continues to lose money.
Which brings us to a philosophical question, to borrow from a SWA ad:"If we did not exist, would low fares". Before jetblue showed up, DAL customers were enjoying ratty old 73-200 with few amenities between NY and FL, now you are offering them much better. What is the purpose of Song, is it to offer a better product to the customer or is it to try and stop Southwest, Airtran and jetblue? One would hope it is the former and that the powers that be have learned, but I think it is the latter.
So, not really as laudatory as say if Conde Nast Traveller would do a survey of the LCC's.
Now General, you know I cannot be quiet when you say:"We have a better product". If it is superior to jetblue, why are you selling it for 15-30% less at a time DAL is losing money, altruism? More importantly, what does it say about the DAL mainline product, after all, only "special talent" from mainline is allowed on Song, mainline offers no IFE, no increased legroom etc. I find it farfetched, that Song can support a money losing mainline, after all, having actually seen the jetblue financials and the fares, one could surmise, that even Song is losing money. After all, Song charges less and, more than likely in true numbers, cost more to produce CASM wise.
As for SOX04 and you illusions of candor from the boss. As I have said before, it is possible, not likely but possible, that Song is profitable. It truly depends on what cost are borne by Song and which are paid by mainline, btw an argument I have heard between the wholly owned and DAL pilots. Which entity pays for the airplanes, the gates, the reservations centers, the maintenance, the spare parts, the warehousing of same, the pilots etc. the list is pretty long. Does Song pay its proportional share of those bills?
If the only cost borne by Song is the crews, then yes, Song would be wildly profitable, but when all the other cost are added in, that may indeed not be the case. Based on how Song is accounted for could indeed insulate Grinstein from accusations of wrong doing. We cannot tell, because DAL does not break out numbers for any individual entity. Of course, the bigger issue, is the fact that Song is a division of DAL, which sadly continues to lose money.
Which brings us to a philosophical question, to borrow from a SWA ad:"If we did not exist, would low fares". Before jetblue showed up, DAL customers were enjoying ratty old 73-200 with few amenities between NY and FL, now you are offering them much better. What is the purpose of Song, is it to offer a better product to the customer or is it to try and stop Southwest, Airtran and jetblue? One would hope it is the former and that the powers that be have learned, but I think it is the latter.
Last edited:
