Gojet preparing for CRJ 900's
07-04-2012, 08:32 PM
#41
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Position: AN124 FE
Posts: 1,226
Hmmm.....sounds like what I used to hear from my buds at Comair 6 years ago. It went something like "Delta spent 1.8 BILLION on us so there is no way they would want to lose their investment......"
73 million is chump change when you look at a long term contract for these 900s. They will take the loss, send the contract to somebody cheaper, and tell all those surplus pilots to go apply there if it makes more money for mother Delta.
73 million is chump change when you look at a long term contract for these 900s. They will take the loss, send the contract to somebody cheaper, and tell all those surplus pilots to go apply there if it makes more money for mother Delta.
07-04-2012, 08:52 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2011
Position: Taco Rocket Operator
Posts: 2,485
73 million is the cost of 1 new 737 MAX. I do not consider that an investment. It is an investment to prevent a giant gaping hole in your system, which would happen if the carrier you contract 1/3 of your flying out goes Tango Uniform. Which 9E would have done without its DIP financing.
07-04-2012, 08:55 PM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2011
Position: Taco Rocket Operator
Posts: 2,485
07-04-2012, 08:57 PM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2011
Position: Taco Rocket Operator
Posts: 2,485
Not only that but Delta did the DIP financing for pinnacle. The other debtors filed suit against delta to stop them from providing the financing to pinnacle because it gave them an unfair advantage. They had a meeting with the other debtors and they withdrew their objections which allowed delta to provide that financing with out further court costs or delays. What were they told that caused them to withdraw?
Once again, its all about the moohlah.
07-05-2012, 02:17 AM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 596
they aren't the highest, but they're there. there's nothing to fight for, or even discuss until the cba expires.
07-05-2012, 04:22 AM
#47
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Posts: 42
Dude, you make it a shinier RJ! A new coat of wax to see your blonde highlights! Imagine that picture of you next to a HUGE jet, holding up deuces on your Facebook page! That fat girl you knew from high school that you've wanted to get IN since spanish class will be all like "Damn, dude flies a shiny jet! Haven't seen him since BEFORE he left for Daytona Beach! I've gotta jump on that before THE other women and LOCK that down before some other chick does! "
Thing is, trying to figure out what Delta will do is like trying to nail jello to a wall. It doesn't make sense and it will never work the way you were hoping. Delta can and will do whatever they want to do. They hold the cards. Delta has wanted to be rid of 9E since 2008. Since they couldn't get out of the ASA when they tried to, and 9E kept *barely* meeting the performance metrics, they forced them into BK. Given the near total change in management (and not for the better, I hear), there are bound to be operational issues that will ultimately affect the longevity of the ASA. If DL gives 9E any of the 900s at all, it will be under their firm control and at such a low rate you won't want it anyway. I think this train has sailed, ladies and gentleman.
07-05-2012, 05:29 AM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2011
Position: Taco Rocket Operator
Posts: 2,485
Underrated post. IN case you forgot, BEFORE you do that, you'll have to flash THE big shiny watch you bought. Then you'll have it on LOCK down.
Thing is, trying to figure out what Delta will do is like trying to nail jello to a wall. It doesn't make sense and it will never work the way you were hoping. Delta can and will do whatever they want to do. They hold the cards. Delta has wanted to be rid of 9E since 2008. Since they couldn't get out of the ASA when they tried to, and 9E kept *barely* meeting the performance metrics, they forced them into BK. Given the near total change in management (and not for the better, I hear), there are bound to be operational issues that will ultimately affect the longevity of the ASA. If DL gives 9E any of the 900s at all, it will be under their firm control and at such a low rate you won't want it anyway. I think this train has sailed, ladies and gentleman.
Thing is, trying to figure out what Delta will do is like trying to nail jello to a wall. It doesn't make sense and it will never work the way you were hoping. Delta can and will do whatever they want to do. They hold the cards. Delta has wanted to be rid of 9E since 2008. Since they couldn't get out of the ASA when they tried to, and 9E kept *barely* meeting the performance metrics, they forced them into BK. Given the near total change in management (and not for the better, I hear), there are bound to be operational issues that will ultimately affect the longevity of the ASA. If DL gives 9E any of the 900s at all, it will be under their firm control and at such a low rate you won't want it anyway. I think this train has sailed, ladies and gentleman.
07-05-2012, 06:37 AM
#50
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,648
Really??? Delta has had most of this planned out since before the gave Mesaba to Pinnacle. This bankruptcy is planned. It's the quickest and most efficient way to achieve the cost metrics they are after. Now it's up to Spangers, and the bankruptcy system to finalize everything. I believe it has everything to do with future flying. If Pinnacle is successful, and I believe they will be, in once again lowering the bar, the whipsaw leverage it will provide in the future will be huge
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
