Bend Over Everyone
- Thread starter blueskies4ever
- Start date
Do you think that management can just "raise fares" and that will solve the problem? Don't you think that they would have done that already if it were possible?uafa21 said:
United's in real trouble and there's blame to go around to all. I don't like them cancelling the pensions, but do you have a better idea of how to solve the problem?
Tech-boy Yes I do believe this company could just raise fares.
UAL is in BK, they could raise fares. They would lose some customers but not all. They could have then changed some scheduling to accomadate the capacity decrease if there were some. While in bk the company could have turned in more leased planes. The company may have shrunk some more, but it's going to anyway.
I know that it is not all that simple, but the company was more concerned with revenue coming in than profitable revenue coming in. Look at TED, we shot ourselves in the foot to compete with our own comapny. A brilliant idea !! UA owned most of the market in Denver, TED didn't create it. F9 was not going to be able to provide the additional planes to take away what we had and besides they don't have the route feeder system that we have.
UAL is in BK, they could raise fares. They would lose some customers but not all. They could have then changed some scheduling to accomadate the capacity decrease if there were some. While in bk the company could have turned in more leased planes. The company may have shrunk some more, but it's going to anyway.
I know that it is not all that simple, but the company was more concerned with revenue coming in than profitable revenue coming in. Look at TED, we shot ourselves in the foot to compete with our own comapny. A brilliant idea !! UA owned most of the market in Denver, TED didn't create it. F9 was not going to be able to provide the additional planes to take away what we had and besides they don't have the route feeder system that we have.
I didn't know we HAD employees with 7 yrs or less....I said goodbye to them 2 yrs ago.....uafa21 said:
Folks, get used to high oil prices. They've nowhere to go but up. Sure, we may see some temporary price reductions ahead, but the world is accelerating faster towards peak oil production. Why do you think Dick Cheney will fight to the death before he allows his Energy Task Force notes to become public? Because he and the other oil companies know the true state of petroleum production. And they don't want to cause a worldwide panic and plunge economies into collapse the likes of which has never been seen before. There have been no major finds of vast oil/gas reserve fields in years. The ones that were long thought to lie in the Caspian Basin were WAY overestimated. The bottom line is that United is not overreacting to fuel prices. They will keep going up. My estimate is that oil will hit $75 a barrel by the end of the summer of 2005. If you think I'm lying, start reading and doing research on "peak oil". You'll be quite alarmed at what you uncover. Oil is going to break the back of this industry once and for all.
uafa21,
Your thoughts on raising fares are noble, but they have no basis in reality. The overcapacity problems of this industry will only be solved when all of the large, major airlines collectively begin to rationalize their ASM's. Don't count on it happening. They all cry about too much capacity, yet they trip over each other adding new service. Bethune was right when he said this is an industry run by idiots!
Simply raising fares won't work, unless you get your competitors to match. The reason is because raising fares without your competitors coming along will cause a dramatic negative shift in your market share. At no time in the industry's history has there been such price sensitivity as there is now. The internet has turned fare shopping into a Saturday spent at Wal-Mart. How many times has United or American attempted a $5 or $10 fare increase only to pull it back when airlines like Northwest didn't match. You simply HAVE to remain price competitive with your largest competitors. Otherwise, they will slowly steal your market share and your yields and load factor will fall faster than Road Runner's anvil! Therein lies the conundrum we're faced with: all the airlines realize that raising fares helps ALL of them. Yet not everyone wants to play along because they figure that keeping their fares where they're at hurts the other guys more than it does them. It's about as close a definition of economic irresponsibility as I can think of. The only way to reduce capacity and regain some semblance of pricing power is for 3 or 4 large, major airlines to go away. And that will happen, either the easy way (through consolidation) or the hard way, via Chapter 7 liquidations, during the next few years.
But if simply raising fares and damn the consequences were the right solution, it would have been done by now.
Your thoughts on raising fares are noble, but they have no basis in reality. The overcapacity problems of this industry will only be solved when all of the large, major airlines collectively begin to rationalize their ASM's. Don't count on it happening. They all cry about too much capacity, yet they trip over each other adding new service. Bethune was right when he said this is an industry run by idiots!
Simply raising fares won't work, unless you get your competitors to match. The reason is because raising fares without your competitors coming along will cause a dramatic negative shift in your market share. At no time in the industry's history has there been such price sensitivity as there is now. The internet has turned fare shopping into a Saturday spent at Wal-Mart. How many times has United or American attempted a $5 or $10 fare increase only to pull it back when airlines like Northwest didn't match. You simply HAVE to remain price competitive with your largest competitors. Otherwise, they will slowly steal your market share and your yields and load factor will fall faster than Road Runner's anvil! Therein lies the conundrum we're faced with: all the airlines realize that raising fares helps ALL of them. Yet not everyone wants to play along because they figure that keeping their fares where they're at hurts the other guys more than it does them. It's about as close a definition of economic irresponsibility as I can think of. The only way to reduce capacity and regain some semblance of pricing power is for 3 or 4 large, major airlines to go away. And that will happen, either the easy way (through consolidation) or the hard way, via Chapter 7 liquidations, during the next few years.
But if simply raising fares and damn the consequences were the right solution, it would have been done by now.
herkav8r said:
Herk,
You do understand that some people consider their employment a 'career' and not a 'hobby'.
I'm happy that you were able to create your own business, but don't you think it is slightly hypocritical to pull the '320CAPT' verbiage while you have already created a business to support yourself and your loved ones? Do you not think that the 'unwashed masses' have entrepreneurial qualities as well?
Would you expect one to respect your opinion of others as you consider being a pilot a hobby?
However I do appreciate your comments as it reflects your disdain to those that actually work for a living.
:angry: UT
uafa21 said:
uufa21,
Haven't heard of the 'three year' scenario.
I do know that AMFA National and Local9 have been doing research on the subject as it applies to AMFA members.
As I said before, the EAL folks are getting what their contract stipulated at the time and I expect that we will get something of the same.
Take Care,
B) UT
The Ronin said:I guess that depends on what you know how to do.....
[post="198361"][/post]
Exactly!!!
UTkcabpilot said:
Some quick number crunching for Pilots (using round figures)
They want 191 million per year from ALPA
There are 7,000 ALPA members
That is $27285 each - per year
which equates to about a 13% pay cut
Yea, I feel the pain now...........
Thanks
:rant: UT
uafa21 said:
You can't raise fares, lose customers and increase revenue. Lets say that on a $200 ticket they raise the fare $10. that makes it $210. If 50 pax travel at this higher rate the increase in revenue is $500. But if just 3 of those people balk and go to a carrier where they can get the same flight for the $200, you just lost revenue on that flight. Until the ASM's come down, the airlines aren't going to have any pricing power.
casual rat
Senior
- Aug 25, 2002
- 413
- 3
Oil prices rise....we do nothing.....it's almost shocking why we can't make any money...somehow it seems as if the 8 ball has already hit its 'pocket'...
Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please offer another voluntary furlough.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
Why do they need to offer a voluntary furlough? The pay cut will be enough to push some people out the door. They may offer one, but they may not.
Jungleclone,
you are right that oil prices will go up and world demand is fast outstripping supply. However, taking ever business downturn out of the hides of employees virtually ensures that the company will not survive. Just read about the service failures that are now happening at US and you have to be convinced that dissatisfied employees will drive off customers. Given that UA has long had a pretty good reputation as a service provider, it will be a very sad day if UA employees decide they no longer care about the company or their customers. I hope it doesn't come to that.
Jungleclone,
you are right that oil prices will go up and world demand is fast outstripping supply. However, taking ever business downturn out of the hides of employees virtually ensures that the company will not survive. Just read about the service failures that are now happening at US and you have to be convinced that dissatisfied employees will drive off customers. Given that UA has long had a pretty good reputation as a service provider, it will be a very sad day if UA employees decide they no longer care about the company or their customers. I hope it doesn't come to that.
