Tinpusher007

Yes, I do keep up....and I know a number of people who work for XJT. The corporate announcement hardly guarantees success, but it is a start. I was not aware of the "south of the border operation". My point is, things were good the way they were and if these new ventures don't work out, it could potentially , be problematic down the road. And as far as Im concerned, the guys and gals ar Comair did what needed to be done, even if only in principle.

Sanchez

Again everyone is entitled to their opinions, and we can agree to disagree. The point is that no one hired this year will be furlough...could it get stagnant if the worse case scenario happens? Sure! But I'll put my money that it doesn't.

freezingflyboy

To be fair, its not like Jim Ream and the boys were pulled off the street yesterday. There is a lot of airline experience and some really smart guys in those executive offices. Heres a link if you are interested:
http://investor.expressjet.com/phoen...rol-governance

Tinpusher007

Very true. Another good thing going for XJT is that it appears to be run by very intelligent individuals. The same can be said for CAL. And don't get me wrong, Im not saying XJT is doomed to fail. But the role of regionals jets works best in the mainline feed/codeshare arrangement. Going it alone, A LA Independence Air...we all know how that story ends.

duvie

How do you know that your new ventures will generate "income"? I think what you mean is revenue. Income implies that your operating expenses and other costs will not exceed your revenues. Just because you plan to operate somewhere doesn't guarantee revenue, and often in the first couple years in a new market/operation expenses combined with one time expendictures and other unforseen costs will exceed revenues. It seems like a lot of young guys out there assume that whenever a business operates it "makes money." Any operation can generate revenue, but to truely be financially benificial to a company is something completely different.

Sanchez

Thanks for the young comment! I'm sure you can do basic math, 216 aircraft generating a profit per the CPA vs 53 aircraft (very unlikely) not generating any income whatsoever. I say 216, because the 10 going to the charter will generate profit. See here's how it works chief, prior to any of this 69 aircraft nosense popping in the horizon, we were already doing charters for college teams and others. They were booked through CAL and we ran them with the newest of the newest. Well, let's see in the announcement made at the launch of the Charter it was said that we already had clients for the business. Again you do the math. 216 making money vs 53 (very unlikely!) not making money. hmmmmmm

johnso29

[quote=duvie;76038]How do you know that your new ventures will generate "income"? I think what you mean is revenue.

I think its pretty clear that leasing airplanes that you already own will make you money. And the paint shop is a pretty safe bet since its already passed all the inspections with flying colors. I'm sure they know what they will be paying the employees, and they already have customers lined out the door. The charter ops may or may not make money. We already have customers and I think the company probably factored the pilot expenses into the picture before the presented to TA to the union. Now, I don't know if they will find a way to not fly empty airplanes around to pick people up, or if that might be something they're not planning on. But, we already have people lined up. So I'd say its safe to say that at least two of the three will make us profit or income.

Ziggy

I don't think you guy's understand the charter industry. It's a totally different animal than airline ops. Unlike airline, charter's don't fly everyday, and have a fairly low utilization rate. This is why most jets for charter have an owner. The owner is responsible for the owning and operating costs of the aircraft. Charter companies will market these aircraft for a price and offer the owner a percentage of the rate charged. This in no way covers all the costs of the aircraft. So if your jets don't have charter customers everyday, their probably not turning a profit.

duvie

I didn't mean to belittle you or other young guys with the young comment, in fact I was born in the 80s so most people would consider me young as well. I just meant to say that many younger pilots don't have a good understanding of the financial workings of an airline, you seem to proof of this.

For clarification, are you saying that you think If the majority of XJT A/C turn profits and the minority lose money, then majority wins and you will be profitable?

Sanchez

I didn't take it as an insult, I'm about ten years older than you, and I like to believe I'm still young.

Are you familiar with our capacity purchase agreement with CAL for the 206 aircraft? If you are it will answer all your questions, if you're not I'll be more than happy to elaborate on the basics of it. Either way, the margin of losses on the 53 aircraft would have to exceed the margin of profit on the 206 aircraft (which by the way is guaranteed per our agreement) for XJT to see red on the books.

So, again state your knowledge of the financial workings in relation to our situation...young man.