Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
MW44 said:You would think they would have a team of executives working around the clock on fuel prices.
Somebody tell me if I'm reading this wrong but the article states that a 1 cent change in fuel affects UAL's bottom line by 22 million dollars. So if United paid a 1 dollar more per barrel than say SWA then they would be saddled with an additional 2.2 billion dollars in cost?? That seems outrageous.
I believe that is per gallon. They keep telling us at QX that a 1 cent increase in fuel per gallon changes our bottom line by $500,00
MW44 said:Somebody tell me if I'm reading this wrong but the article states that a 1 cent change in fuel affects UAL's bottom line by 22 million dollars. So if United paid a 1 dollar more per barrel than say SWA then they would be saddled with an additional 2.2 billion dollars in cost?? That seems outrageous.
Even more alarming if the article is correct Ual will pay around $10 more per barrel than SWA due to fuel hedging. Does that mean Ual's fuel bill will be 22 BILLION dollars higher than SWA. That is astronomical. Why do they even waste their time worrying about concessions when fuel has such a dramatic effect on the bottom line. You would think they would have a team of executives working around the clock on fuel prices.
C77MD80 said:As an oil industry insider it would behoove him to keep oil prices high thus making more $$. Too long though and no second term.
Another question. With Bush being cozy with the oil industry wouldn't you think he would be doing everything he could to keep these legacy carriers in business? They are obvously an enormous cash cow for the oil companies.