XJet taking 9E flying?
03-06-2012, 07:42 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Position: AN124 FE
Posts: 1,226
03-06-2012, 08:07 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Position: I'm Buying
Posts: 416
There wasn't a lot of detail but xjet does have the resources, especially if they get say through the end of April, to cover the flying short term till they implement a Q400 training program. I rarely buy rumors but it kinda fits. They already have a presence in IAH / EWR and apparently Jerry Atkin has been spending time with our boy SM.
03-07-2012, 03:50 AM
#14
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 50
What I heard from the training center in last 2 weeks is that we have about another 25 135's parked in kingman. The company put in a bid and they are waiting on United to sign off on paying the additional training cost for new hires ect.....then they will pull them out. But it's never true until they are parked at the gate so I just take it as rumor.
03-07-2012, 03:58 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Position: CRJ FO
Posts: 405
There wasn't a lot of detail but xjet does have the resources, especially if they get say through the end of April, to cover the flying short term till they implement a Q400 training program. I rarely buy rumors but it kinda fits. They already have a presence in IAH / EWR and apparently Jerry Atkin has been spending time with our boy SM.
Do you think Menke is dumb enough to help out the competition of they were getting flying we could renegotiate for?!
03-07-2012, 04:07 AM
#16
Underpaid...
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Position: French-Canadian
Posts: 2,101
ha ha, I was just thinking the same thing, Let me get this straight, Pinnacle CEO hangs out with the competition, and is going to help them take over the flying that Colgan is doing for UCal, the flying that Colgan is supposedly doing at a loss, and now is going to be picked up by someone who will likely pick it up at profitable rates. Don't forget the little detail that it will cost a lot of money to start a new fleet that happens to be owned by Colgan! Sometimes WoW is what comes to mind reading some of the stuff people put on here,
03-07-2012, 05:56 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2011
Position: Taco Rocket Operator
Posts: 2,485
ha ha, I was just thinking the same thing, Let me get this straight, Pinnacle CEO hangs out with the competition, and is going to help them take over the flying that Colgan is doing for UCal, the flying that Colgan is supposedly doing at a loss, and now is going to be picked up by someone who will likely pick it up at profitable rates. Don't forget the little detail that it will cost a lot of money to start a new fleet that happens to be owned by Colgan! Sometimes WoW is what comes to mind reading some of the stuff people put on here,
Not saying I buy this either, but I don't see Skywest just buying the Q operation. The cost of buying the Q operation would be more than just starting it yourself. Plus you would have to deal with ALPA. What does make sense, however, is buying out a competitor cheap and getting more control of mainline lift which gives you more leverage when negotiating contracts with the major airlines.
03-07-2012, 07:50 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Posts: 519
I suppose this all pivots on whether or not United wants to play ball and renegotiate the terms of the contract. They'd be setting a bad business precedent and open themselves up to the possibility of other carriers coming forward asking to renegotiate the terms of their contracts. United's not in business to make other carrier's money.
03-07-2012, 08:37 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Position: Right Seat Spouse
Posts: 452
Sounds like he'd be taking a page out of Lorenzo's book.
True...but the Q operation is up and running right now. It'd divert a lot of manpower and company resources for skywest to start a Q operation from the ground up.
I suppose this all pivots on whether or not United wants to play ball and renegotiate the terms of the contract. They'd be setting a bad business precedent and open themselves up to the possibility of other carriers coming forward asking to renegotiate the terms of their contracts. United's not in business to make other carrier's money.
True...but the Q operation is up and running right now. It'd divert a lot of manpower and company resources for skywest to start a Q operation from the ground up.
I suppose this all pivots on whether or not United wants to play ball and renegotiate the terms of the contract. They'd be setting a bad business precedent and open themselves up to the possibility of other carriers coming forward asking to renegotiate the terms of their contracts. United's not in business to make other carrier's money.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
