What do we do Now?
- Thread starter Hope777
- Start date
N305AS
Advanced
- Aug 20, 2002
- 133
- 0
----------------
On 6/10/2003 2:06:01 PM ITRADE wrote:
----------------
On 6/10/2003 2:06:01 PM ITRADE wrote:
----------------
On 6/10/2003 1:40:47 PM FM2436 wrote:
JetBlue Chief Executive David Neeleman said the move was designed to allow the carrier to fly to destinations not efficiently served with its existing Airbus A320 fleet, possibly including destinations outside the United States for the first time.
"We can reach into Canada if we want to, we can go into Mexico, we can go into the Caribbean," Neeleman said in a press conference. "There are so many market opportunities."
----------------
Let''s have a round of applause for David "Locutus" NeelemanOn 6/10/2003 1:40:47 PM FM2436 wrote:
JetBlue Chief Executive David Neeleman said the move was designed to allow the carrier to fly to destinations not efficiently served with its existing Airbus A320 fleet, possibly including destinations outside the United States for the first time.
"We can reach into Canada if we want to, we can go into Mexico, we can go into the Caribbean," Neeleman said in a press conference. "There are so many market opportunities."
----------------
----------------
I agree wholeheartedly! When B6 announced their A320 orders awhile back, I said (much to the chagrin of the B6 fans):
"Lovely. The Borg are getting more Cubes."
So I guess this makes the 190s "assimilation Spheres" then?
Chip,
I don''t know where you get your info. from, but you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about when it comes to JetBlue''s financials or strategic plans. It''s funny, I didn''t hear or see your presence this morning when those very same topics were being addressed. Meantime, we will continue to do what we do best, which is to make our customers and our employees happy. BTW, I''ll leave you with one little tidbit to ponder. Our profit margin is currently just under 16%, and with the addition of the 190''s, it''s forecast to rise to 24% pre-tax. Meantime, I''d get your resume in quickly, cause at the present time we are have over 6,000 pilot applications on file, and growing! Just don''t forget to add that you were Dave''s Siegel''s "organ grinder''s monkey".
I don''t know where you get your info. from, but you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about when it comes to JetBlue''s financials or strategic plans. It''s funny, I didn''t hear or see your presence this morning when those very same topics were being addressed. Meantime, we will continue to do what we do best, which is to make our customers and our employees happy. BTW, I''ll leave you with one little tidbit to ponder. Our profit margin is currently just under 16%, and with the addition of the 190''s, it''s forecast to rise to 24% pre-tax. Meantime, I''d get your resume in quickly, cause at the present time we are have over 6,000 pilot applications on file, and growing! Just don''t forget to add that you were Dave''s Siegel''s "organ grinder''s monkey".
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Chock1:
I appreciate your posts, but with all due respect, if you''re going to insult somebody would you at least identify yourself, if you have the courage.
Best regards,
Chip
I appreciate your posts, but with all due respect, if you''re going to insult somebody would you at least identify yourself, if you have the courage.
Best regards,
Chip
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
Chock1:
In my opinion, today’s analysis in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette accurately described Dave Siegel and his efforts to revive US Airways. The column said Siegel’s strengths as an airline leader seeking to be as efficient as possible while operating in a sluggish economy in which cost reductions are essential. "For Siegel, it's strictly business," the article said. "What Siegel has come to realize is what Southwest Airlines figured out and seized on long ago -- that the airline business … is a commodity business. And the carrier that's able to do it the cheapest, quickest way possible is going to get the business."
What’s interesting about the B6 decision to acquire EMB-190s is that this move is a dramatic departure from the established low cost single fleet business model and analysts have questioned the wisdom of this decision. Why? B6 is going to mitigate its cost advantage and raise its CASM by one cent, which is about 15%. This is a dramatic shift in business strategy that has risks, specifically to profitability.
US Airways' Achilles Heal has always been its unit costs, which are still too high, but now are much more competitive. Siegel will continue to ratchet down the CASM, which is expected to drop another .4 cents in the next 12 months. In addition, costs will further drop with the discussions with Pennsylvania leaders over PIT and PHL hubs, strategic alliance synergies (both domestic and international – whether or not UA survives), IT automation, and the major 2004 "cost take out" program Siegel discussed at Tuesday’s Wall Street Conference.
However, cost reduction is only one area that US is focusing on return the airline to being profitable. Another key element in the on-going US restructuring is for the airline to improve upon its industry leading Yield RPM. According to a recent report released by AVMARK analyst Barbara Beyer, US has the highest "Big 7" Yield. Specifically, the 7 top airlines Yield RPM is:
Airline – Yield RPM
US – 13.05
AA – 11.86
CO – 11.57
WN – 11.54
DL – 11.33
NW – 10.76
UA – 10.54
Source: AVMARK, Inc.
In March 2002 US had slipped from its traditional top spot to about a 93 to 94% revenue disadvantage, but now has a revenue premium. Furthermore, the company is now focusing on major initiatives to boost its revenue advantage (which is necessary to cover its higher than average unit costs) by focusing on big airline revenues, with a more modest route network. This will be accomplished with code sharing, RJs, East Coast focus city/airport dominance (BOS, LGA, & DCA), and its Corporate Travel Department.
For example, the UA alliance is exceeding expectations and US has gained over 10,000 passengers per day from this business relationship. Later this year the LH alliance will begin, which is expected to add $50 million per year to the bottom line and then in Q1 2004 the Star Alliance will commence that will provide another $25 million per year in bottom line profits.
In regard to RJs, US will begin receiving revenue from its EMB-170 product in January 2004, which will have a 70-seat, two-class cabin, mainline type aircraft operated at the lowest industry RJ CASM. Not that this is good for employee pasy and benefits, but these mainline like narrowbody aircraft will have the lowest industry RJ labor expense. When you combine this product with worldwide airline passenger amenities (FFP, Clubs, interline baggage check in, etc.), I agree with Siegel that this product "will change the game and be revolutionary".
Chock1, US still has its work cut out for itself and B6 is a great airline, but I believe US has the tools, timeframe to continue to restructure, and ability to compete with your company or any other low-cost operator and I look forward to the challenge.
Moreover, I agree with PineyBob when he wrote "It's a different airline, a lean mean organization who judging from their reaction to JB is spoiling for a fight."
Therefore, bring it on.
Best regards,
Chip
P.S. By the way, by the time B6 has a meaningful EMB-190 presence, all things being equal, I'll likely be an A330 Captain, (with the US 2007-2009 A330 order), all things being equal, where my pay and benefits will dramatically exceed those of B6 pilots. Therefore, I do not share your comments of "Meantime, I'd get your resume in quickly, cause at the present time we are have over 6,000 pilot applications on file, and growing! Just don't forget to add that you were Dave's Siegel's "organ grinder's monkey"."
In my opinion, today’s analysis in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette accurately described Dave Siegel and his efforts to revive US Airways. The column said Siegel’s strengths as an airline leader seeking to be as efficient as possible while operating in a sluggish economy in which cost reductions are essential. "For Siegel, it's strictly business," the article said. "What Siegel has come to realize is what Southwest Airlines figured out and seized on long ago -- that the airline business … is a commodity business. And the carrier that's able to do it the cheapest, quickest way possible is going to get the business."
What’s interesting about the B6 decision to acquire EMB-190s is that this move is a dramatic departure from the established low cost single fleet business model and analysts have questioned the wisdom of this decision. Why? B6 is going to mitigate its cost advantage and raise its CASM by one cent, which is about 15%. This is a dramatic shift in business strategy that has risks, specifically to profitability.
US Airways' Achilles Heal has always been its unit costs, which are still too high, but now are much more competitive. Siegel will continue to ratchet down the CASM, which is expected to drop another .4 cents in the next 12 months. In addition, costs will further drop with the discussions with Pennsylvania leaders over PIT and PHL hubs, strategic alliance synergies (both domestic and international – whether or not UA survives), IT automation, and the major 2004 "cost take out" program Siegel discussed at Tuesday’s Wall Street Conference.
However, cost reduction is only one area that US is focusing on return the airline to being profitable. Another key element in the on-going US restructuring is for the airline to improve upon its industry leading Yield RPM. According to a recent report released by AVMARK analyst Barbara Beyer, US has the highest "Big 7" Yield. Specifically, the 7 top airlines Yield RPM is:
Airline – Yield RPM
US – 13.05
AA – 11.86
CO – 11.57
WN – 11.54
DL – 11.33
NW – 10.76
UA – 10.54
Source: AVMARK, Inc.
In March 2002 US had slipped from its traditional top spot to about a 93 to 94% revenue disadvantage, but now has a revenue premium. Furthermore, the company is now focusing on major initiatives to boost its revenue advantage (which is necessary to cover its higher than average unit costs) by focusing on big airline revenues, with a more modest route network. This will be accomplished with code sharing, RJs, East Coast focus city/airport dominance (BOS, LGA, & DCA), and its Corporate Travel Department.
For example, the UA alliance is exceeding expectations and US has gained over 10,000 passengers per day from this business relationship. Later this year the LH alliance will begin, which is expected to add $50 million per year to the bottom line and then in Q1 2004 the Star Alliance will commence that will provide another $25 million per year in bottom line profits.
In regard to RJs, US will begin receiving revenue from its EMB-170 product in January 2004, which will have a 70-seat, two-class cabin, mainline type aircraft operated at the lowest industry RJ CASM. Not that this is good for employee pasy and benefits, but these mainline like narrowbody aircraft will have the lowest industry RJ labor expense. When you combine this product with worldwide airline passenger amenities (FFP, Clubs, interline baggage check in, etc.), I agree with Siegel that this product "will change the game and be revolutionary".
Chock1, US still has its work cut out for itself and B6 is a great airline, but I believe US has the tools, timeframe to continue to restructure, and ability to compete with your company or any other low-cost operator and I look forward to the challenge.
Moreover, I agree with PineyBob when he wrote "It's a different airline, a lean mean organization who judging from their reaction to JB is spoiling for a fight."
Therefore, bring it on.
Best regards,
Chip
P.S. By the way, by the time B6 has a meaningful EMB-190 presence, all things being equal, I'll likely be an A330 Captain, (with the US 2007-2009 A330 order), all things being equal, where my pay and benefits will dramatically exceed those of B6 pilots. Therefore, I do not share your comments of "Meantime, I'd get your resume in quickly, cause at the present time we are have over 6,000 pilot applications on file, and growing! Just don't forget to add that you were Dave's Siegel's "organ grinder's monkey"."
Smoke and Mirrors
Member
- Apr 29, 2003
- 29
- 0
Revenue Passenger Miles (RPM): This is also called traffic. It means one revenue paying passenger that is transported one mile.
Available Seat Mile (ASM): Also called Capacity. One seat that is transported one mile, whether empty or full.
Unit Cost per Available Seat Mile (CASM): Operating Expenses/ASM. This is how much it costs an airline to fly one seat-one mile.
Yield/RPM: This is the passenger revenues/RPM and how much an airline is receiving per mile flown.
Yield/ASM: Passenger Revenues/ASM: This is referred to as RASM, how much revenue an airline is receiving per seat in its system.
PAX = Passenger
Available Seat Mile (ASM): Also called Capacity. One seat that is transported one mile, whether empty or full.
Unit Cost per Available Seat Mile (CASM): Operating Expenses/ASM. This is how much it costs an airline to fly one seat-one mile.
Yield/RPM: This is the passenger revenues/RPM and how much an airline is receiving per mile flown.
Yield/ASM: Passenger Revenues/ASM: This is referred to as RASM, how much revenue an airline is receiving per seat in its system.
PAX = Passenger
"I got my trunks, hand wraps, gloves, foulproof cup and mouthpiece handy! LOL"
Uhuh, I know what you are thinking Piney, did they order 100 or two hundred EMB-190''s, well, I gotta tell you, in all this excitement, I forgot myself, but, considering jetBlue CASM may very well be much below U''s, you gotta ask yourself a question. Do I feel lucky? Well, do you Piney?
Chip: Perhaps you should start conquering the world after U post a profit. I stayed out of you and the UAL debacle, but now you are after jetBlue. The only reason U is still in business, is because of a trip through Ch.11 and had it not been for a government loan guarantee, it is doubtful any one would have been willing to finance continued operation. Things being what they are, you got money, lets forget for a second that U is, from what I read recently, not posting a profit.
No one knows, what the payscale will be on the EMB-190 at jetBlue, least of all Mr. Siegel, so any reference to U having a lower CASM is purely speculation from Mr. Siegel. jetBlue has a lower CASM on the A-320 than U, so what makes you think it will be lower on the 170. After all, while direct operating cost on a EMB-170 is slightly lower than the 190, the 190 has more seats, which more than offsets that cost.
Uhuh, I know what you are thinking Piney, did they order 100 or two hundred EMB-190''s, well, I gotta tell you, in all this excitement, I forgot myself, but, considering jetBlue CASM may very well be much below U''s, you gotta ask yourself a question. Do I feel lucky? Well, do you Piney?
Chip: Perhaps you should start conquering the world after U post a profit. I stayed out of you and the UAL debacle, but now you are after jetBlue. The only reason U is still in business, is because of a trip through Ch.11 and had it not been for a government loan guarantee, it is doubtful any one would have been willing to finance continued operation. Things being what they are, you got money, lets forget for a second that U is, from what I read recently, not posting a profit.
No one knows, what the payscale will be on the EMB-190 at jetBlue, least of all Mr. Siegel, so any reference to U having a lower CASM is purely speculation from Mr. Siegel. jetBlue has a lower CASM on the A-320 than U, so what makes you think it will be lower on the 170. After all, while direct operating cost on a EMB-170 is slightly lower than the 190, the 190 has more seats, which more than offsets that cost.
BoredToDeath
Advanced
- Oct 19, 2002
- 119
- 0
Chip says," mainline type aircraft"
Bored says,"Just when you thought we could'nt find another word for an RJ. Whats next Chip? Maybe "small mainline type aircraft", "medium mainline type aircraft" or howbout "large mainline type aircraft"? Please stop the name game and call it what it is. An RJ!
Bored says,"Just when you thought we could'nt find another word for an RJ. Whats next Chip? Maybe "small mainline type aircraft", "medium mainline type aircraft" or howbout "large mainline type aircraft"? Please stop the name game and call it what it is. An RJ!
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
The EMB-190LR has a maximum takeoff weight of 110,893 pounds, has a range of 2,300 nautical miles, and has a dual class configuration of 8 first and 86-coach class seats (96 total) or 98 seats in a single class configuration.
The EMB-195LR has a maximum takeoff weight of 111,973 pounds, has a range of 1,800 nautical miles, and has a dual class configuration of 8 first and 98-coach class seats (106 total) or 116 seats in a single class configuration.
In relation to previous US mainline aircraft, the F100 was configured for 8 first and 91-coach class seats (99 total), which is basically the size of an EMB-190. For more information, click onto www.embraer.com.
The only comparison the EMB-190 has to an RJ is that the aircraft, which hasn't even been built, is built by a leading RJ manufacturer. The aircraft is larger than an F100.
However, the EMB-190 has not been built, has not flown one test flight, and if like the EMB-170 could see certification delays. I'm not overly concerned about the B6 EMB-190 when by the end of 2007 the JFK-based airline could have about 36 of these jets, if there are any delivery delays that could easily occur.
My comparison is that US will have a competitive low cost carrier product in the EMB-170/175 aircraft and will have a couple years of market opportunites before B6 begins its EMB-190 "proving runs". Also noteworthy, and a very key point, is that US will operate the EMB-170 with a "mainline like" product at the lowest industry unit costs, which should make this product very competitive with low cost operators.
Finally, I have never taken a shot at anybody on this message board, whether it's UA, B6, or an individual; therefore, Diesel, I fail to understand your point.
Best regards,
Chip
The EMB-195LR has a maximum takeoff weight of 111,973 pounds, has a range of 1,800 nautical miles, and has a dual class configuration of 8 first and 98-coach class seats (106 total) or 116 seats in a single class configuration.
In relation to previous US mainline aircraft, the F100 was configured for 8 first and 91-coach class seats (99 total), which is basically the size of an EMB-190. For more information, click onto www.embraer.com.
The only comparison the EMB-190 has to an RJ is that the aircraft, which hasn't even been built, is built by a leading RJ manufacturer. The aircraft is larger than an F100.
However, the EMB-190 has not been built, has not flown one test flight, and if like the EMB-170 could see certification delays. I'm not overly concerned about the B6 EMB-190 when by the end of 2007 the JFK-based airline could have about 36 of these jets, if there are any delivery delays that could easily occur.
My comparison is that US will have a competitive low cost carrier product in the EMB-170/175 aircraft and will have a couple years of market opportunites before B6 begins its EMB-190 "proving runs". Also noteworthy, and a very key point, is that US will operate the EMB-170 with a "mainline like" product at the lowest industry unit costs, which should make this product very competitive with low cost operators.
Finally, I have never taken a shot at anybody on this message board, whether it's UA, B6, or an individual; therefore, Diesel, I fail to understand your point.
Best regards,
Chip
Chip Says:
"By the way, by the time B6 has a meaningful EMB-190 presence, all things being equal, I''ll likely be an A330 Captain, (with the US 2007-2009 A330 order), all things being equal, where my pay and benefits will dramatically exceed those of B6 pilots."
Well Chip, there you go counting your chickens before they''re hatched. With your track record, and the gang rape U management gave its pilots on "pay & benefits," your post will surely come back to haunt you. You should of bailed from U when you had that "big" opportunity with the anonymous foreign airline. As a betting man, I''d put my money on those lowly B6 pilots. Their most senior pilots will most likely command an A330 before you ever will. 2007 might as well be 2207 as far as you''re concerned.
signed,
Steve Doucey
"By the way, by the time B6 has a meaningful EMB-190 presence, all things being equal, I''ll likely be an A330 Captain, (with the US 2007-2009 A330 order), all things being equal, where my pay and benefits will dramatically exceed those of B6 pilots."
Well Chip, there you go counting your chickens before they''re hatched. With your track record, and the gang rape U management gave its pilots on "pay & benefits," your post will surely come back to haunt you. You should of bailed from U when you had that "big" opportunity with the anonymous foreign airline. As a betting man, I''d put my money on those lowly B6 pilots. Their most senior pilots will most likely command an A330 before you ever will. 2007 might as well be 2207 as far as you''re concerned.
signed,
Steve Doucey
Chip,
I stand by my statement, would you care to stand by your analysis of JetBlue''s financial viability, or were you just expressing your own personnel opinion. The fact is, JetBlue continues to prosper and serve it''s customers well, while at the same time, treating the employees as it''s most valuable asset. This is not "lip service", but it is expressed and manifested in every segment of our operation.
I have heard many a story from our pundits, who try to justify or give excuses for our success. At best, it is pure entertainment, and at the least, it''s a bit irritating. So, now we have the latest round of rhetoric from the "peanut gallery" as to how we will fall on our face and how the acquisition of a few EMB-190''s will signal the beginning of our demise. Meanwhile, we will continue to execute our business plan, while keeping our customers and employees "happy"! In essence, our business plan is quite simple, the difficulty for most others, lies in it''s execution.
Sadly, my biggest regret in leaving USAir, was seeing such an awesome wealth of talent and potential squandered due to mismanagement. I have always believed that the employees of USAir are some of the best in the business. Too bad, we never had any leadership to realize it''s true potential.
I will also say this, I have encouraged many to leave and we have been very successful here in gaining their talents, which of course is to our benefit, and to the detriment of USAir. As one fellow expatriate said recently, "Yea, it took balls to leave, but it takes even bigger balls to stay". Take it for what it''s worth.
Steve Serras
P.S. I''ll look you up in a few years and check to see how how your fairing in your A-330. But in the meantime, I am still waiting for some of your other predictions to come true!
I stand by my statement, would you care to stand by your analysis of JetBlue''s financial viability, or were you just expressing your own personnel opinion. The fact is, JetBlue continues to prosper and serve it''s customers well, while at the same time, treating the employees as it''s most valuable asset. This is not "lip service", but it is expressed and manifested in every segment of our operation.
I have heard many a story from our pundits, who try to justify or give excuses for our success. At best, it is pure entertainment, and at the least, it''s a bit irritating. So, now we have the latest round of rhetoric from the "peanut gallery" as to how we will fall on our face and how the acquisition of a few EMB-190''s will signal the beginning of our demise. Meanwhile, we will continue to execute our business plan, while keeping our customers and employees "happy"! In essence, our business plan is quite simple, the difficulty for most others, lies in it''s execution.
Sadly, my biggest regret in leaving USAir, was seeing such an awesome wealth of talent and potential squandered due to mismanagement. I have always believed that the employees of USAir are some of the best in the business. Too bad, we never had any leadership to realize it''s true potential.
I will also say this, I have encouraged many to leave and we have been very successful here in gaining their talents, which of course is to our benefit, and to the detriment of USAir. As one fellow expatriate said recently, "Yea, it took balls to leave, but it takes even bigger balls to stay". Take it for what it''s worth.
Steve Serras
P.S. I''ll look you up in a few years and check to see how how your fairing in your A-330. But in the meantime, I am still waiting for some of your other predictions to come true!
