What United Has To Do To Increase Profits
#11
How in the world is United planning on competing domestically? Seems like they are grasping at straws. Spirit and Southwest kill them in CASM. Are they going to hemmorage cash in a fare war they can't win to prove a point? Wonder if we reaching the point in the UAL cycle where they "hire until it's time to furlough."
#14
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Posts: 9
Honestly brand new to these chat boards, so I'm not sure what you are referring to. I find it interesting you don't have any answers to what my question is. If the likes of SWA and Spirit have significantly
lower costs, what is the plan here? To start a fare war you can't win?
lower costs, what is the plan here? To start a fare war you can't win?
#15
Honestly brand new to these chat boards, so I'm not sure what you are referring to. I find it interesting you don't have any answers to what my question is. If the likes of SWA and Spirit have significantly
lower costs, what is the plan here? To start a fare war you can't win?
lower costs, what is the plan here? To start a fare war you can't win?
And if you really are new read all of the really good post before you destroyed the thread. All of your questions will be answered.
#16
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Posts: 9
I'm new and don't know your insider code. Just pointing out how this seems to be a fools errand. Good luck. Looks like the stock market tends to agree with me and you guys are sticking your heads in the sand. I literally don't have a dog in this fight, but it I owned UAL stock or was junior there, I would be concerned. Just seems dumb...
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Position: Airbus 320 Captain
Posts: 481
Honestly brand new to these chat boards, so I'm not sure what you are referring to. I find it interesting you don't have any answers to what my question is. If the likes of SWA and Spirit have significantly
lower costs, what is the plan here? To start a fare war you can't win?
lower costs, what is the plan here? To start a fare war you can't win?
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Posts: 859
It's a simple argument. Short term it pays to shrink. Long-term someone will see that your markets are under served and enter. The market wants the status quo.
RE: RJs. More 50 seaters is not bad for us because it opens up more smaller markets with less competition and provides more customers. If applied correctly it works out for us and doesn't erode job protections for us as we will never bring a 737 into a market that can only support 100 pax a day.
Where RJs will hurt us is up-gauging smaller markets where there IS demand and they want to bring in 6 E-175s OR 4 E-190s instead of 2-3 737s. This is what Kirby wants, especially if he can get the C-Series or E-190E2 into SkyWest or Republic's hands instead of ours.
RE: RJs. More 50 seaters is not bad for us because it opens up more smaller markets with less competition and provides more customers. If applied correctly it works out for us and doesn't erode job protections for us as we will never bring a 737 into a market that can only support 100 pax a day.
Where RJs will hurt us is up-gauging smaller markets where there IS demand and they want to bring in 6 E-175s OR 4 E-190s instead of 2-3 737s. This is what Kirby wants, especially if he can get the C-Series or E-190E2 into SkyWest or Republic's hands instead of ours.
#20
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Posts: 9
I'm new and don't know your insider code. Just pointing out how this seems to be a fools errand. Good luck. Looks like the stock market tends to agree with me and you guys are sticking your heads in the sand. I literally don't have a dog in this fight, but it I owned UAL stock or was junior there, I would be concerned. Just seems dumb...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post