Jim,As always, it depends on the other half of the equation.....RASM.
The whole point of my much earlier discussion of our cost vs WN/B6 was because of the comment someone made about "el cheapo" fares that B6 was offering in PIT, the point being that for them those fares weren't money-losing.
Obviously, all we need is revenue greater than expenses to produce a profit. Obtaining, and keeping, that relationship positive is just harder the more places we have truly low cost competition. And we can call ourself "LCC" all we want to but a CASM north of 15 cents (including fuel) isn't anywhere close.
I guess what I'm really saying is that anyone who thinks this carriers fuel hedges running out or that carriers maintenance honeymoon ending will "level the playing field" is in for a long wait. But the playing field doesn't necessarily have to be level for US (or any other legacy carrier) to be "competitive".
Jim
I think the contract employees of Usairways have done more than just wait around for fuel hedges running out and maintenance honeymoons ending.[HUGE concessions].
What I see is the primary difference between WN/B6 and Usairways is obviously that U is a International carrier, while WN/B6 is for the most part only domestic.
Anyone who thinks that U will be able to match WN/B6 CASM numbers, [due mostly to fleet types] is also in for a long wait.
I agree that the playing field does not have to be equal for U to be profitable.
Due to the recent loss at B6, It looks like the maintenance honeymoon IS over. And those cheapo fares offered in PIT by B6 WERE money losing.