Losing Delta and New Opportunities
#1301
The pitch about E190’s to Alaska seems plausible. Can someone poke holes in that? AS doesn’t have a scope clause. On top of it, seems like they aren’t doing much more with OO. OO is growing in the Delta and United side, right? If they got E190’s, where would they come from and what’s a realistic possibility?
I found it interesting on the call the company was rambling, but mentioning expensive changes. Swapping out ALL of our iPads, new cases and mounts? Carrying more RSV buffers than lines out of SEA? Not furloughing anybody yet... I’m not sure if I’m more saddened by the inability to play financially smart, or intrigued that something is around the corner.
Regardless, we won’t have an announcement by new years, and a lot of people have drawn lines in the sand. It’s going to be a big month for attrition IMO.
I found it interesting on the call the company was rambling, but mentioning expensive changes. Swapping out ALL of our iPads, new cases and mounts? Carrying more RSV buffers than lines out of SEA? Not furloughing anybody yet... I’m not sure if I’m more saddened by the inability to play financially smart, or intrigued that something is around the corner.
Regardless, we won’t have an announcement by new years, and a lot of people have drawn lines in the sand. It’s going to be a big month for attrition IMO.
#1302
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,596
Most new long haul routes have been announced from the east coast or DFW. West coast seems stagnant on the profitable long haul connections, so no need to increase regional feed there.
Also, I believe AA sees that the potential new flying for Compass might be a conflict of interest. So I think they are making contingency plans already.
After the Mesa deal, there is no regional flying left for grabs (unless Alaska pulls a rabbit out of the hat), and you can't be initial cadre for anything and keep flying for AA. That would be a huge mess. And operating 200NN to 219NN isn't a viable business plan.
All of this is obviously 100% speculation. It's worth what you paid for it
#1303
Agreed. Although I don't see us being on the west coast being a problem if anyone wanted to acquire us or move us around. For sure, we would not keep operating as an airline with only 20 AA planes, and IF we were to be involved with Moxy, I bet the AA planes would be happily given up early by CPZ to AA if possible.
#1304
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2014
Position: Grp Cpt
Posts: 260
The pitch about E190’s to Alaska seems plausible. Can someone poke holes in that? AS doesn’t have a scope clause. On top of it, seems like they aren’t doing much more with OO. OO is growing in the Delta and United side, right? If they got E190’s, where would they come from and what’s a realistic possibility?
I found it interesting on the call the company was rambling, but mentioning expensive changes. Swapping out ALL of our iPads, new cases and mounts? Carrying more RSV buffers than lines out of SEA? Not furloughing anybody yet... I’m not sure if I’m more saddened by the inability to play financially smart, or intrigued that something is around the corner.
Regardless, we won’t have an announcement by new years, and a lot of people have drawn lines in the sand. It’s going to be a big month for attrition IMO.
I found it interesting on the call the company was rambling, but mentioning expensive changes. Swapping out ALL of our iPads, new cases and mounts? Carrying more RSV buffers than lines out of SEA? Not furloughing anybody yet... I’m not sure if I’m more saddened by the inability to play financially smart, or intrigued that something is around the corner.
Regardless, we won’t have an announcement by new years, and a lot of people have drawn lines in the sand. It’s going to be a big month for attrition IMO.
#1305
On Reserve
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Posts: 24
Whether it's Moxy or not, I believe a bunch of us will interview with them. If we get into the first few months of 2020 and no new information is given, I think those of us who have been waiting will be forced to make a decision. And while risky, Moxy could be a huge win.
Personally, I'm sitting tight and riding this thing out. However, I have a history of sitting at the card table a little too long.
Personally, I'm sitting tight and riding this thing out. However, I have a history of sitting at the card table a little too long.
#1306
In theory at least, that would not stop a regional from having other contracts with other companies that are not scope compliant for the first company. Indeed, that appears to be what Mesa is looking into doing with 737s.
For that matter, the Delta birds we have been flying aren’t scope compliant for a lot of companies that Republic and SkyWest fly for (MTOW 89,000 too high), and never were for AA flying all the years we have been doing it, yet that apparently hasn’t stopped anything.
Anybody got an online reference for the AA scope clause?
#1307
Also they brought on OO simply to remind QX of their place: subcontractor bidding for work. I seriously doubt they have any interest in incurring the management overhead of a third regional when QX could fly 190's if it came to that (OO is scope limited by DL/UA).
I wouldn't hold your breath on that one.
#1308
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2017
Posts: 2,510
I’m not sure that giving up AA flying would even be necessary. I haven’t actually been able to come up with a copy of the AA scope limitation, but from my understanding most major airline scope limitations are specific to THEIR code shared flights, not to individual regionals.
In theory at least, that would not stop a regional from having other contracts with other companies that are not scope compliant for the first company. Indeed, that appears to be what Mesa is looking into doing with 737s.
For that matter, the Delta birds we have been flying aren’t scope compliant for a lot of companies that Republic and SkyWest fly for (MTOW 89,000 too high), and never were for AA flying all the years we have been doing it, yet that apparently hasn’t stopped anything.
Anybody got an online reference for the AA scope clause?
In theory at least, that would not stop a regional from having other contracts with other companies that are not scope compliant for the first company. Indeed, that appears to be what Mesa is looking into doing with 737s.
For that matter, the Delta birds we have been flying aren’t scope compliant for a lot of companies that Republic and SkyWest fly for (MTOW 89,000 too high), and never were for AA flying all the years we have been doing it, yet that apparently hasn’t stopped anything.
Anybody got an online reference for the AA scope clause?
#1309
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2014
Posts: 845
I’m not sure that giving up AA flying would even be necessary. I haven’t actually been able to come up with a copy of the AA scope limitation, but from my understanding most major airline scope limitations are specific to THEIR code shared flights, not to individual regionals.
In theory at least, that would not stop a regional from having other contracts with other companies that are not scope compliant for the first company. Indeed, that appears to be what Mesa is looking into doing with 737s.
For that matter, the Delta birds we have been flying aren’t scope compliant for a lot of companies that Republic and SkyWest fly for (MTOW 89,000 too high), and never were for AA flying all the years we have been doing it, yet that apparently hasn’t stopped anything.
Anybody got an online reference for the AA scope clause?
In theory at least, that would not stop a regional from having other contracts with other companies that are not scope compliant for the first company. Indeed, that appears to be what Mesa is looking into doing with 737s.
For that matter, the Delta birds we have been flying aren’t scope compliant for a lot of companies that Republic and SkyWest fly for (MTOW 89,000 too high), and never were for AA flying all the years we have been doing it, yet that apparently hasn’t stopped anything.
Anybody got an online reference for the AA scope clause?
As far as Mesa and 737’s go, I doubt that they will affect scope at all as they will be cargo aircraft that do not affect Delta as long as staffing isn’t an issue.
#1310
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2016
Position: B-737
Posts: 433
I think it's going to be really interesting to see how Jan/Feb. plays out. Every single day I'm meeting more and more people with opportunities lined up.
Furthermore, if what RT said about the announcement not being connected is true, then if our "go-forward plan" has anything to do with UAX, I highly doubt it deals with the 175. Perhaps the plan has nothing to do with United at all (where are my Moxy fans). Based on what they've said since the DAL announcement, I highly doubt it would be AA that's involved in the go forward plan? Also, it's really interesting that Mesa is getting more UAX flying but yet also adding 737's???
Furthermore, if what RT said about the announcement not being connected is true, then if our "go-forward plan" has anything to do with UAX, I highly doubt it deals with the 175. Perhaps the plan has nothing to do with United at all (where are my Moxy fans). Based on what they've said since the DAL announcement, I highly doubt it would be AA that's involved in the go forward plan? Also, it's really interesting that Mesa is getting more UAX flying but yet also adding 737's???