I don't.featheroleather said:
I have, several times. You can look through my post history if you'd like.
The short answer for CO is to rearchitect the airline as one truly focused on the business passenger. In order to do that, the value proposition must rise, meaning that you need to provide more than the LCCs do, but not at ten times the fare.
Furlough, I can understand. If you have marginal routes, they may be unprofitable without the concessions, but profitable with them. You cut those routes if you can't get the concessions. Of course, there are second-order effects to cutting those routes, namely the network effect in reverse. That is, cutting a few marginal routes might make some otherwise profitable routes become marginal routes, and so on, in a vicious cycle. This is the explanation behind the oft-repeated belief that an airline cannot shrink to profitability.
Can they get new planes for new routes? Sure they can, as long as they can issue corporate paper tied to the new service. If the company as a whole is marginal, then the cost of the debt may be too high. But we're talking about leasing, not buying, aircraft, so this shouldn't really be an issue. No, the issue with the 753/738s is a choice between moving existing metal around and adding new metal.
Maybe you can check out the "Why can't the airlines just raise fares?" thread, starting around page 10 or so. That covers a lot of the foundation of where I'm coming from. There are a few threads in the US section on CASM that will also tell a lot. BoeingBoy contribues a great deal there as well.
