Mesaba getting 15 more CRJ's out of ATL

[777forever]

The planes that ASA was holding out hope ARE going to Mesaba FOR NOW. There were some emotional people in the GO when the word was passed down. Delta doesn't have to honor the 80% number right now since we did not meet the second lowest cost for the three year mark. Word is that ASA will likely meet the goal for the five year mark. Then there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth when these other guys lose their planes to SkyWest Inc.

Do you work in the GO? If the 80% is indeed out the window then we're in trouble. I have not heard anything besides your post that the 80% is no longer valid.

 

[Tarzan]

Tarzan,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the 80% was a hard number? There were rumors that SkyWest Inc. was giving Delta relief on that 80%, but if what you're saying is true, then Delta allocated those aircraft based on the DCI agreement not being met? Does that make sense?

Trojan

The 80% number is based on second lowest cost. We did get the growth aircraft as the purchase contract specified but the majority went to SkyWest Airlines. I asked Brad about the relief as well. He wouldn't comment about it. ASA needs some relief for some of those provisions since we have a senior pilot group, higher MX costs, less AC to spread the cost over, and AC leaving without a backfill.

If SkyWest Inc has granted some relief, there must be something in it for SW. However, I have it on good authority that when the 900's going to Mesaba were announced, there were some emotional folks as in very angry.

 

[Tarzan]

Do you work in the GO? If the 80% is indeed out the window then we're in trouble. I have not heard anything besides your post that the 80% is no longer valid.

No, I don't don't but I've done enough stuff around there to somewhat understand the in's and out's of the contract with DL. My understanding of it is there are two marks ASA must met for the 80% number to be maintained. One happened on the three year mark, the other happens at the five year mark. Our metrics were pretty out of whack compared to other companies. Unless DL gave some relief, they do not have to abide by the 80% number unless we are the second lowest cost carrier at these marks. SH seems to believe we are on our way to making it for the five year mark. SH is not a liar regarless what guys here like to spout but he is an overly optimistic guy.

My prediction: Post contract guys may be gone. Concessions or PBS will be offerred.

 

[79%N1]

So the question begs again.....If ASA was to have to trade 2 50's for 1 90 (and declined), does Mesaba have to make the same deal? If not, why?

 

[777forever]

So the question begs again.....If ASA was to have to trade 2 50's for 1 90 (and declined), does Mesaba have to make the same deal? If not, why?

No, because their operating costs are less. The only way to get ASA to have the same 900 operating cost as Mesaba would be to get rid of 2 50s for every 900.

 

[callowayhd]

i heard pinnacle is buying mesaba

 

[blesko]

No, because their operating costs are less. The only way to get ASA to have the same 900 operating cost as Mesaba would be to get rid of 2 50s for every 900.

Isnt mesaba scoped out at the number of 90's they use?

 

[McNugent]

No, because their operating costs are less. The only way to get ASA to have the same 900 operating cost as Mesaba would be to get rid of 2 50s for every 900.

Shrinkage raises your costs. I don't know how having a net decrease in airplanes makes us more cost effective.

Hang on, this will get interesting. I'm getting my winter jacket ready, because I think we might get spread around the Delta/NWA system once the dust settles. MSP anyone?

 

[SiuDude]

Shrinkage raises your costs. I don't know how having a net decrease in airplanes makes us more cost effective.

Hang on, this will get interesting. I'm getting my winter jacket ready, because I think we might get spread around the Delta/NWA system once the dust settles. MSP anyone?

I knew where that link was taking me before I ever clicked on it, not that there's anything wrong with it.

 

[79%N1]

No, because their operating costs are less. The only way to get ASA to have the same 900 operating cost as Mesaba would be to get rid of 2 50s for every 900.

I don't buy that at all. Either Delta wants to eliminate 50's or they don't. If they were trading out 50's for 90's at ASA to reduce the number of 50's, then Mesaba should have had to accept the same deal. Me thinks ASA will be losing the 50's anyway, while not receiving any 90's at all. Like I said......Comair and ASA out......Pinnacle and Mesaba in.