Short term maybe not. But good news for the big picture for those of us who want to move onto a mainline job someday. Growing the DCI portfolio while leaving mainline stagnant is not what I want to see. If the DCI portfolio is downsized in the future, who's to say that CHQ and Skywest won't lose out on flying before the WO's.Heavy Set said:
I am familiar with the term, but that is not what it means. Coming out of many cities we don't have enough available seats and have to turn business away. The Company is crying for more 70's to address this problem, but of course they have the arbitrary limit set by ALPA which keeps Connection from bringing even more passengers to ATL to connect with DL flights.Heavy Set said:
"Turn-Away Factor" is synonomous with "Demand Spill." It has to do with more people wanting to fly than seats, not people refusing to fly on small aircraft.Heavy Set said:
What about Grinstein's comment about RJs not flying more than 2 hours since it "abuses" Delta's most loyal customers? Didn't Grinstein actually refer to the CRJ flight between JFK and ATL?~~~^~~~ said:
Yep, I know that.FDJ2 said:
You're kidding, right? First of all, I spent about 20 minutes explaining how ACA's CASM was, in fact, not 22 cents. Secondly, crew costs are a very integral part of total CASMS. You can make any aircraft unprofitable by paying the pilots outlandish amounts...kinda like the DAL payscales. To apply Delta's current MD-80 rates to the 70-seater (take current rates divided by 2, which obviously wouldn't be the case, but once again in my attempt to not skew the numbers in my favor, I'll be conservative) would increase the 70-seater's total CASM by over 20%...and thats conservative!FDJ2 said:
First of all, it is obvious that Delta's current rates are not going to survive. So cut the 88 rate by 30%, then divide by two. Second, even that formula is pure speculation. None of us have any idea what DALPA would fly a 70 for. It could be that we would agree to fly it cheaper than ASA or CMR...ala MAA. It won't happen, but to say a 70 seater would not be profitable at the mainline is nothing more than a guess, until we know what the pilots and F/As would be paid. And given the current situation, if it did happen, that pay would not be much.bvt1151 said:
I guess you had to explain that ACA's CASM wasn't 22 cents, instead of just posting their actual CASM which is, surprise 22 cents. I just didn't realize that the RJs profit margins were so razor thin, that a Delta pilot flying it at, let's say $100/hr (since there is no 70 seat rate we would have to guess) for who knows what work rules, would suddenly make a 70 seat RJ unprofitable. But you can, with all authority claim that it would raise the CASM 20% even though you have no clue what the payrates or work rules would be. That's amazing.bvt1151 said:
My educated guess is that Delta pilots will fly at Connection, using Connection pay scales, but, using second year longevity. This is less than DCI pilots currently earn, since 70 Captains at ASA must have an average longevity somewhere between five and eighteen years.michael707767 said:
Perhaps you're not understanding exactly what one-time fees are. If ACA want's to send a 50-seater on a flight, the cost of that flight will not include the cost of retiring other aircraft. This is the difference in operating and non-operating cost. If you want a true indicator of what an airlines operating expenses are, you don't factor in one-time expenses. If you used one-time fees to indicate an airlines long-term profitability, Delta would be losing 1.4 billion every quarter. I guess you don't include one-time fees when it suits your argument.FDJ2 said:
Denial ain't a river... Difference between a corporate jet and a CRJ/ERJ is that you actually have more room on the corporate jet seats to actually do some work. Most business travelers despise CRJs/ERJs because of their limited room to work, lack of bin space and crowded conditions and clausterphobia after 2+ hours of flying. Sure, the CRJ has more room than a Lear, but you don't have people crammed into a Lear in most cases - you can spread out a bit... Rarely do you find more than 3-4 people sitting in a corporate jet (unless you fly the Wal-Mart Learjet shuttle service)...AFELLOWAVIATOR said:
Oh believe me I understand what one time fees are. It's all part of being an independent carrier. When was the last time ASA/CMR had a one time fee put on their useless DOT numbers? DAL has used them extensively to post losses. Yet despite these one time fees, our CASM is about 10.32, including a onetime fee of $1.65B as opposed to Indy's 22cents and we were opertaionally profitable last quarter. I guess paying these one time fees is the responsibility of the mainline at DAL. We wouldn't want to burden ASA/CMR with the actual costs of doing business. As the former DAL CFO said, CMR only pays for their operational costs, DAL pays everything else.bvt1151 said:
