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

Xjt News

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

hotwing

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 1, 2002
Posts
370
June 11, 2006, 2:21AM

Have jets, will bargin

Dispute over costs with Continental leaves a partner looking for business

By BILL HENSEL JR.
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle
ExpressJet Airlines will be flying in some dramatically different directions soon.
To be exact, it has 69 regional jets seeking new routes — a quarter of the Houston company's fleet — because starting next year those jets no longer will be hauling passengers for Continental Airlines.
"It's obviously a difficult time that we've got to kind of work through," Jim Ream, ExpressJet's chief executive officer, told analysts recently.
The change was forced by a falling-out between ExpressJet and its former corporate parent after an acrimonious round of negotiations. Those talks ended with the two sides many millions of dollars apart over how much Continental should pay ExpressJet, which does business as Continental Express, to fly routes using those jets.
That break was announced about six months ago. Since then, ExpressJet's leaders have been seeking new ventures that could decide the fate of the airline, which employs about 6,800.
They had to choose between surrendering the planes and operating on a much smaller basis, or keeping them and finding paying customers to cover the higher cost of leasing the planes .
To Ream, giving up that many jets looked like the worst of the options.
"It's just difficult to think about shrinking 25 percent of what you do for a living just because another company decides that you should do so," said Ream, a former Continental executive, during the conference call with analysts.
Not keeping the aircraft also could have led to a corporate death spiral from a competitive standpoint, he said.
The plunge in the company's stock after Continental made the announcement on Dec. 28, showed the gravity of the situation from Wall Street's perspective.
ExpressJet shares, which had been trading at $10.63 the day before the announcement, fell to $8.32 the day after the news. They closed Friday at $5.32.
Continental said it withdrew the 69 aircraft because it believed the rates ExpressJet charged were far above the market. It showed the divide that's developed since Continental spun off the carrier in 2002.
Continental awarded the business to Chautauqua Airlines, a subsidiary of Republic Airways. But that deal assumed ExpressJet would be releasing the aircraft. Since it did not turn over the planes, Chautauqua is out of the picture.
When asked what Continental's plans are, a spokeswoman essentially said it is leaving its options open.
"We believe there are ample regional jets and other aircraft to replace this capacity at lower costs," Continental spokeswoman Julie King said. "We have the time and flexibility to pursue a number of options for our future regional flying needs."

New Year's goal

By Jan. 1, ExpressJet, which has a fleet of 270, expects to have found some ways to redeploy the 69 planes that it had been flying for Continental.
But reaching this goal is complicated by the fact that at the moment there is an oversupply of the small jets — allowing major airlines to drive hard bargains.
Ream isn't ready to reveal specifics of any deals in the works, but he noted the carrier is focused on several areas.
One possibility Ream cited would be approaching other big carriers with an offer to supplement their service. He said the majority of the airplanes are longer-range and indicated ExpressJet has had positive conversations with potential clients.
Another possibility would be flying some aircraft in another country. Networks in many countries are still developing, so there are opportunities, he said.
ExpressJet also is discussing using the planes for corporate charters.
Still another possibility is offering connecting air service between smaller communities that lack good service options.
"It is very fluid," Ream said. "There is not one solution that is going to take all 69 aircraft."

Different names, places

For ExpressJet, this marks a risky break from the past. The 69 aircraft in question will have to operate under a different name out of different airports.
The aircraft in question are made by Embraer and are 50-seaters. Twenty-five of the aircraft are the ERJ-145LR, which have a range of nearly 1,800 miles. The other 44 are the ERJ-145XR model, which is longer-range, able to fly about 2,300 miles.
Aviation consultant Michael Boyd of the Boyd Group says recent history hasn't been kind to regional carriers that try to make a go on their own.
"These entities can't make money on their own. It's been tried," Boyd said. "They are attached to American or Continental, feeding them traffic."
Airline analyst Ray Neidl of Calyon Securities said of the four scenarios the carrier laid out, some are less attractive than others.
"I think he kind of admitted the company faces major challenges going forward," Neidl said.
On the other hand, ExpressJet has had good cash flow and large cash reserves, the analyst noted.
Any new lines of business will need to bring in enough revenue to cover sky-high jet fuel prices.
Each of the possible businesses under consideration at ExpressJet come with their own challenges.
For example, operating as a foreign carrier elsewhere would mean it would have to meet all the criteria for operating in that country.
"It is very complex from a regulatory standpoint," Ream acknowledged, noting that the carrier already has employees with expertise in such areas. ExpressJet also would bring in outside experts, he added.
ExpressJet already flies to cities in Mexico, but it does so as a U.S. carrier.
ExpressJet already had been diversifying, investing in businesses like Wing Aviation. ExpressJet bought 49 percent of that full-service aviation company for $16 million in June of 2005. Wing specializes in aircraft charter and management, as well as major airplane maintenance.
Calyon noted in a March report that that ExpressJet made acquisitions last year that will offer it new business opportunities "that we believe represent attractive growth areas."
Ream said he is optimistic that ExpressJet will be able to deploy the aircraft successfully.
"We feel that there's a reasonable chance that we can come out as a stronger organization as a result of Continental's decision," Ream said.
[email protected]
 
Also continental told us that we are keeping the newest XRs and the newest LR's. News is bound to come out soon about what are plans are.
 
Not really a lot of new info in that... I was hoping for a little insight on where those airplanes will be going.
 
Superpilot92 said:
Also continental told us that we are keeping the newest XRs and the newest LR's. News is bound to come out soon about what are plans are.


In other words, the best aircraft will be pulled out of CAL service. CAL will get stuck with all the old and weight restricted 145ER's as well as the 135's. CAL obviously thought ExpressJet would turn the aircraft over to CHQ.
 
"These entities can't make money on their own. It's been tried," Boyd said. "They are attached to American or Continental, feeding them traffic."
Airline analyst Ray Neidl of Calyon Securities said of the four scenarios the carrier laid out, some are less attractive than others.

Already name dropping a second carrier's name ???!!!??? Interesting
 
Hypoxik said:
"These entities can't make money on their own. It's been tried," Boyd said. "They are attached to American or Continental, feeding them traffic."
Airline analyst Ray Neidl of Calyon Securities said of the four scenarios the carrier laid out, some are less attractive than others.

Already name dropping a second carrier's name ???!!!??? Interesting

Boyd is an idiot.
 
Continental awarded the business to Chautauqua Airlines, a subsidiary of Republic Airways. But that deal assumed ExpressJet would be releasing the aircraft. Since it did not turn over the planes, Chautauqua is out of the picture.

Muuaaa Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! :laugh:
 
a buddy of mine in upgrade class said a certain someone with the intials G.S. came in and talked about a possible 4th base and that Independence's ground equipment has been bought and being repainted to go towards this new flying. anyone else hear this?
 
Wow, this article makes it clear that they really have no idea what they're actually going to do with 69 ERJ's. We could do this, or we could do that, or maybe this, or maybe that....or maybe we could outfit them with photon torpedoes and use them to fend off the romulans in the netrual zone. I'm sure the Federation would reward Expressjet handsomely for that.
 
Alchemy said:
Wow, this article makes it clear that they really have no idea what they're actually going to do with 69 ERJ's. We could do this, or we could do that, or maybe this, or maybe that....or maybe we could outfit them with photon torpedoes and use them to fend off the romulans in the netrual zone. I'm sure the Federation would reward Expressjet handsomely for that.

Yes it seemed like a whole lot of noise about nothing. No insights. I guess it's just more of the same. We'll be the last to know.
 
Nah, not by the end of the year, but maybe by mid 07. More likely to be Q400's than E170's though. CAL has plenty of 735's to cover that.

.
 
Last edited:
Alchemy said:
Nah, not by the end of the year, but maybe by mid 06. More likely to be Q400's than E170's though. CAL has plenty of 735's to cover that.

.

I think this is an accurate statement. If they want a change in the fleet type, they're more than likely going back to props because of fuel efficiency.

The thing that bothers me about this is, isn't there some clause that calls for no new prop flying into EWR?
 
How hard to you think CAL would have to lobby the port authority to get that revoked? I'm sure a few benjamins to Tony Soprano would do the trick.
 
dardar said:
The thing that bothers me about this is, isn't there some clause that calls for no new prop flying into EWR?

Props aren't allowed in EWR because they clog up the allready overstressed airspace. No kidding.
 
Hey, maybe y'all can underbid ASA and take the rest of our flying so we can just go out of business!
 
79%N1 said:
Hey, maybe y'all can underbid ASA and take the rest of our flying so we can just go out of business!

I thought Brandon Coxton already had the market cornered on that opportunity? You mean I too, could join the pink shirt crew? Sign me up!
 
Alchemy said:
Wow, this article makes it clear that they really have no idea what they're actually going to do with 69 ERJ's. We could do this, or we could do that, or maybe this, or maybe that....or maybe we could outfit them with photon torpedoes and use them to fend off the romulans in the netrual zone. I'm sure the Federation would reward Expressjet handsomely for that.

Yea because the media always knows what going on.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom