usairways expects 1st q loss.

[Art at ISP]

Careful,

You're right, that is my tag line....but let me explain it a little. If you recall, I do NOT advocate for LOW or artificially depressed fares. I advocate for FAIR fares. Fares are lower today adjusted for inflation than they were 20-25 years ago, and I am sorry, but there is no reason why fares can't keep up with TRUE costs....it's time for the flying public to pay their share....

As I stated in another thread, there is no reason for $99 transcon fares any more. That ship has sailed. Those who offer it are looking to attract itinerant travelers who might not be able to afford higher fares...my question is why? The business traveler will no longer subsidize these outrageously low fares...no more $979 PHL-BOS, or $1200 ALB-BUF. We will not tolerate that just so Ma and Pa Kettle can go to California for $99.....

The airline business is the only one I know of which does not price according to cost of goods plus markup. RATIONAL fares would lift yields and represent a better value to ALL customers.....

I hope this helps you a little.....

My BEST to you ALL.

 

[NoMoreKoolAid]

Change is on the horizon.

What do you have a crystal ball UWCatus?
I really dont see The Tempe team will stay put too much longer.
Thats why they all got their golden parachutes last year.

 

[wench1]

**kisses and blows away*** The profit Sharing for 09!
Dont look for it gang.

 

[wopr21]

**kisses and blows away*** The profit Sharing for 09!
Dont look for it gang.

The Profit sharing check is based on a percentage of the profits for the whole year. If we don't make a profit for one quarter it doesn't matter.

wopr21

 

[The Bagfather]

Careful,

You're right, that is my tag line....but let me explain it a little. If you recall, I do NOT advocate for LOW or artificially depressed fares. I advocate for FAIR fares. Fares are lower today adjusted for inflation than they were 20-25 years ago, and I am sorry, but there is no reason why fares can't keep up with TRUE costs....it's time for the flying public to pay their share....

As I stated in another thread, there is no reason for $99 transcon fares any more. That ship has sailed. Those who offer it are looking to attract itinerant travelers who might not be able to afford higher fares...my question is why? The business traveler will no longer subsidize these outrageously low fares...no more $979 PHL-BOS, or $1200 ALB-BUF. We will not tolerate that just so Ma and Pa Kettle can go to California for $99.....

The airline business is the only one I know of which does not price according to cost of goods plus markup. RATIONAL fares would lift yields and represent a better value to ALL customers.....

I hope this helps you a little.....

My BEST to you ALL.

Art: How bout LAX OXR LAX for a cool $1.200. It's about a 20 min flt.
But the drive can take up to 2 hrs. I wonder if anyone has paid that.

In 98 we had a CSR get a corporate job. When he found out how much
they were spending on fares he voluteered to be their travel agt.
He probably saved them thousands. Thanks BF

 

[YVINTERN]

Art: How bout LAX OXR LAX for a cool $1.200. It's about a 20 min flt.
But the drive can take up to 2 hrs. I wonder if anyone has paid that.

In 98 we had a CSR get a corporate job. When he found out how much
they were spending on fares he voluteered to be their travel agt.
He probably saved them thousands. Thanks BF

I've flown LAX-OXR-LAX before for $225 Someone else was paying but damn $225 for a short 20 minute wheels up to wheels down at this Naval airport

 

[mrman]

Well obviously you do it in a slightly more intelligent fashion (or I would hope). Tack the fuel surcharge onto the lower, restricted, fare classes like O, S, Q, L, M, etc. This would improve revenue and wouldn't burden the Y and B fares with yet another expense.

The WN stockholders will love this as more US goes WN

 

[JS]

Careful,

You're right, that is my tag line....but let me explain it a little. If you recall, I do NOT advocate for LOW or artificially depressed fares. I advocate for FAIR fares. Fares are lower today adjusted for inflation than they were 20-25 years ago, and I am sorry, but there is no reason why fares can't keep up with TRUE costs....it's time for the flying public to pay their share....

As I stated in another thread, there is no reason for $99 transcon fares any more. That ship has sailed. Those who offer it are looking to attract itinerant travelers who might not be able to afford higher fares...my question is why? The business traveler will no longer subsidize these outrageously low fares...no more $979 PHL-BOS, or $1200 ALB-BUF. We will not tolerate that just so Ma and Pa Kettle can go to California for $99.....

The airline business is the only one I know of which does not price according to cost of goods plus markup. RATIONAL fares would lift yields and represent a better value to ALL customers.....

I hope this helps you a little.....

My BEST to you ALL.

Those are two different planes. If US cuts out the $99 transcon fare and drops the ALB-BUF fare, they will have a few more people on a B1900 (or whatever flies that route) and a few empty seats on a PHL-LAX flight. That doesn't help matters because it will lower systemwide revenue without reducing costs (a loss, plain and simple).

US' problems are deeply ingrained and they are in this for the short run. They will continue to use the legacy carrier playbook until the last day, whether it's this year or 5 years from now.

Even Delta, the first legacy carrier that imposed upon itself a fare ceiling (similar to Southwest but higher), cut the change fee to $50 and eliminated the Saturday night stay, is having to slowly but surely undo those. The change fee is now $75 and some fares require a Saturday night stay (or longer mid-week stay, so it's not all bad I guess). Fuel costs are awful and show no signs of going down anytime soon.

If US would just go out of business it would make things so much easier for the rest of the airlines. Someone will come along and fly ALB-BUF for $99. US will never do it, partly because of rotten airline management and partly because of union contracts that will never go away regardless of how many times the airline merges.

 

[tadjr]

If US would just go out of business it would make things so much easier for the rest of the airlines. Someone will come along and fly ALB-BUF for $99. US will never do it, partly because of rotten airline management and partly because of union contracts that will never go away regardless of how many times the airline merges.

After all we've been through why should we be the ones to kick the bucket? If someone who really wanted to make tons of money would come in and do whats right for the employees and customers, this place could make a killing. Instead, short term greed seems to once again be the word of the day in corporate.
Also, if $99 ALB-BUF were worthwhile, someone would already be doing it, be it WN or B6.

 

[JS]

After all we've been through why should we be the ones to kick the bucket? If someone who really wanted to make tons of money would come in and do whats right for the employees and customers, this place could make a killing. Instead, short term greed seems to once again be the word of the day in corporate.

It's nothing personal. I've gotten great service from US employees, both for flights (before the HP merger) and for non-flight stuff like hotels and ground transportation. The old timers are as good as seasoned travel agents. However, US is definitely the most screwed up of the legacy carriers. Merger after merger after merger over many years, and things just get worse, not better.

Also, if $99 ALB-BUF were worthwhile, someone would already be doing it, be it WN or B6.

Not if US is in the market. Everyone knows what happens -- US drops the fare to match, people fly US to earn miles, the new entrant pulls out, and we're back to square one (PHL-BOS being the most recent one).