FWAAA said:
On owning the regional feed, I think the jury is still out on the outsourced FPD arrangements. In profitable times, outsourcing the feed and keeping all the upside is very attractive. But in losing times, when cash generation (and cash conservation) is of paramount importance, owning the feed looks like the better choice to me.
[edited for length]
Mesa and Republic keep reporting profits while many of their mainline partners are suffering.
As you pointed out, the "losing times" advantage of direct ownership is that you pay for the feed at cost, rather than cost plus. Are Mesa and Republic reporting profits as profitably-run companies, or are the profits the result of fee-for-departure arrangements that guarantee a profit regardless of the number of passengers delivered to the network?
This same question can be modified to the value of the W/Os in a potential sale. Yes, investors see the regionals making money. I don't think they are so dumb that they don't realize that the money is coming from FFD contract arrangements. In buying a Comair or ASA or AE, don't you think that the investor would want some similar arrangement? The much-touted higher CASM of the RJs makes them less attractive if you can only be paid for fannies in the seats--see also, almost anyone's results for January this year.
In the early 90's, Texaco jumped on the "let's make every department a profit center--including obvious service departments like IT (where I worked) or Accounting (which I supported)" bandwagon. It is a ridiculous concept. We all started talking in terms of "green dollars" vs "Texaco dollars." Green dollars came from the outside--Producing, refining, and marketing transactions that resulted in actual countable revenue in the bank. Texaco dollars were accounting sleights-of-hand that said that Accounting (which generated no revenue for the company) paid IT x dollars for IT services. They were able to "pay" this bill from IT because they charged Producing for the bookkeeping services provided. Of course, not one actual piece of U.S. currency ever passed between Producing and Accounting, but Accounting and IT could, by god, show a "profit", or at least, "break even", at the end of the year. (Oh, and did mention that IT paid Accounting to keep track of all this "revenue" that IT was generating?) All it did was swell the staffing of the Accounting department trying to keep all this straight.
The same Accounting "advantages" actually make some financial sense with W/O's. The fact that AA and AE are both wholly-owned by AMR means that profits at AE can be offset by expenses at AA, and it's all "AMR dollars." If you sell off the regionals (even if you manage to avoid a fee-for-departure contract), you start paying green dollars for the bodies delivered.
I'm not saying that I know the answer to this one. I would like for someone who understands it better to enlighten me.
FWAAA said:
Even after the downsizing of STL, AA may still have too much hub capacity.
In "classic" hub-and-spoke theory, having both STL and ORD as hubs is, prima facie, ridiculous. However, if the FAA ever truly gets serious about the traffic-induced delays at ORD, where does AA put the "banned" flights? There are a lot of connections made at ORD, that are made for no other reason than the inbound and outbound flights go through ORD. As far as the connecting passenger is concerned, I would imagine that they would prefer to connect at STL where all the flights are on one concourse. (of course, they would lose access to the grilled salmon sandwich at the Prairie Tap.
🙁 )
Other than STL, what other hubs would you close? RDU is not really a hub, per se, and that daily flight to London is wildly profitable from what I hear. Or, are you proposing downsizing all/some hubs and doing more point-to-point flying?
FWAAA said:
The secret to survival for the full-service legacy airlines is to get smaller as the pool of passengers shrinks; let go of the bottom 10% to 25% of the passengers - they can go fly WN or B6 or FL or they can take the bus.
You are proposing major psychiatric treatment for the airline management? Asking an airline to let go of even a money-losing passenger is like asking a Texan to give up his pickup truck!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/362ab/362abad46b766ff547247dea806c82a39a09e5d0" alt="lol :lol: :lol:"