wiggy

No, dude. Did you look at the total value of the shares when they first went in to your 401k last spring? Mine have more than doubled, actually +112% as of a few minutes ago @$9.07/share....ACL you mentioned something about reaching the IRS limits..isn't that based on the initial share value?..for the most senior guys that was approx. $20k @ $4.26/share.

Sink r8

I also doubt much of this is about more flying: the objective is more profits. Or at least, less losses. In the short haul, I think that means reducing overlap. In the medium to long-term, it could mean capturing additional markets.

Also, you have to look at it a) in the context of an open-skies agreement and the Haneda issue, and b) you have to see the defensive play for us as well. We shouldn't be arrogant enough to think that it's only AMR and OneWorld being pushed into a defensive stance. Our own Asia network, as I think you agree, is not immune. In fact, if the purpose is to link small US cities with Asian destinations in one stop, our network doesn't do that. It seems to me that we have a hub on the wrong side of the Pacific. In my mind, Asian carriers would pick customers from obscure Asian cities, and take them to our big cities, while we would take our customers from obscure cities to their well-known destinations.

A JV would allow the best shot at link two obscure cities on their respective continents. That probably entails two stops, but at least you're controlling the entire trip, and setting joint pricing, for best results. From our (pilot) viewpoint, it would mean (at best) tepid growth, split 50-50 as it is with AF-KLM. It might also mean a network that actually works, and a goose that puts out a little more gold. We've had enough guano...

The takeway: anyone who thinks we'll take flying from JAL is probably dellusional, but anyone who thinks our Asian network is just fine is equally lost. The company must be fully engaged in this, and the pilot group must be fully engaged to make sure we don't get a poor JV that doesnn't protect only the JAL pilots. And, if we have a say in granting such a JV, then there are a few odds-and-ends I'd like to see cleaned up in the contract. Nothing specacular, but I'm tired of granting just about anything the company needs, just to make it sronger. My balance sheet needs some strengthening as well.

KC10 FATboy

Here is a very stupid question, but where do we go to see our shares?

acl65pilot

Correct. What I was saying is that with the 4.26 a share they went in at a really low value. Along with the other company contributions, it is going to be unlikely that anyone except the most senior, highest credit guys will even come close to the max. Point was that with the shares being so low, you can put a ton of your money in there this year and not even have to worry about hitting the limit. It the shares were at 15-20 a share, it would have been a different story.
I was quite happy I got the shares and not the money!

acl65pilot

Not sure if it is still up, but you can check them via the ALPA site. It is in the one of the JEDC memo. You being relatively junior got about 3400 shares and then a few more here recently.

You can also go to your retirement acct, and just check and see how many shares you have.

acl65pilot

Good points, even though some are to the point.

From what JAL is currently doing with their cutbacks, it does appear that they are cutting cities. How this results in our own flying will be determined, 1) if the deal is done and 2) how things play out going forward.

I agree that no matter what the deal is, it would make more sense from a corporate perspective to have JAL do the hub flying out of Japan. It does not mean that it will go that way, but in the end it frees up our assets to go elsewhere.
From a pilot perspective, we do not want to see anyone perform flying that we do or did. It just gives us a gut ache.
Many look at this and depending on the terms, and amount of ownership DAL takes, there could be some significant opportunities for Delta pilots. It just depends on what the details of the deal, if any, there are.

DAL4EVER

Go to Fidelity and go to "Delta Pilots Plan" then click on the "Pilots ER Stock Fund".

Nosmo King

[Begin Sarcasm]

This is because there is no O&D traffic in Tokyo. Obviously Tokyo has the same lack of international travelers, population base and economic base as Keflavik. This is what makes it an apples to apples comparison. We should just drop out of Japan altogether and do nothing but overfly. Nobody in Asia wants to fly to Japan and nobody in the US wants to fly to Japan, and the Japanese hate to travel, so its all an illusion.

[End Sarcasm]

Narita may have been useless to DAL before it had fifth freedom rights for passenger and cargo. It may be useless AFTER a new bilateral, but in the present it is FAR from useless.

johnso29

Clearly I did not!

Bucking Bar

Sink and ACL65,

We agree. Just a couple of angles to add perspective:

The United States has Department of Homeland Security has rules in place which make connecting through the United States unfeasible. To walk from gate E15 to E14 requires at "Transit Visa" which costs money and can be anywhere from "hard to get" to "impossible." The result is that many Asians avoid buying tickets on NWA/Delta. It might not make sense to buy an Air Canada ticket to go from Manila to Cabo San Lucas, but Air Canada can get an additional $1,000 per economy ticket because for most passengers between countries, transiting the United States is simply not permitted.

Asia has massive population centers and I've never met an Asian who does not want to get out and see the World the second they can afford to do so. The way to tap the discretionary travel market there is to go cheap, and again on a scale we can scarcely imagine. The only limit will be crash worthiness and Certification issues.

Having a hub outside of the Department of Homeland Security's domain is an important strategic asset for Delta. The rub is, management can satisfy both of these needs without "Delta" as we know it. In fact, if I were in their shoes I'd go about it exactly as they are.

It is much tougher to insert yourself into an illogical labor situation as a union. If we had a track record of insisting on inclusive mergers when we do one of these "virtual mergers" that would be one thing. Instead our history is to scope it and limit it. In this case, I don't see how that really works to our long term benefit.

Also consider most of South Asia is Muslim. Muslim's hate freedom, perspective and education. As a prominent American brand providing the freedom to travel, learn and see the World, we will be a target. There are some parts of the World that scare me and Bin Ladin's brothers (literally) in South Asia are a frightening prospect for a commercial operator.

This Cranky Flier guy did not intend to provide a labor analysis, but they are spot on. We might shore up our point to point from the US, but with this as a Joint Venture there really is no reason for Delta pilots to actually perform the flying obtained under our 5th freedom rights.