Fragmentation Or Liquidation?
- Thread starter USA320Pilot
- Start date
I noticed that Chautauqua's 170s are configured for 6 first and some Eplus, but have the same number of rows that U has. http://www.republicairlines.com/aircraft.asp# See subsequent slide about three quarters through the show.
How is that possible? Well, I guess U has greater pitch throughout..... must be quite a difference.
So, you can take 18 rows of 33 to 34 in pitch and shuffle the inches around to create the same number of rows in three pitch configurations. I would not have thought that. Maybe the pitch in regular economy is really tight.
Well a little bit of simple math and it looks right.
18 rows at 33.5 in equals 603 (approx of U's pitch)
603 minus two rows of first at 37 in ea. equals 529
529 minus four rows of Eplus at 35 in ea equals 389
389 minus the balance of 12 rows in coach equals 32.4 in each.
The differential could be even greater.
How is that possible? Well, I guess U has greater pitch throughout..... must be quite a difference.
So, you can take 18 rows of 33 to 34 in pitch and shuffle the inches around to create the same number of rows in three pitch configurations. I would not have thought that. Maybe the pitch in regular economy is really tight.
Well a little bit of simple math and it looks right.
18 rows at 33.5 in equals 603 (approx of U's pitch)
603 minus two rows of first at 37 in ea. equals 529
529 minus four rows of Eplus at 35 in ea equals 389
389 minus the balance of 12 rows in coach equals 32.4 in each.
The differential could be even greater.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
Do you all not see a transatlantic role for a reformulated US? If Virgin is the acquirer (and they probably have the deepest pockets of any players mentioned), it seems they would very much like to be able to add continental Europe to their current US-UK offerings and get a leg up on the other European carriers who will soon (but cannot now) fly between the US and other Euro countries besides their own.
Either way, I think the chances are good that those of who have experience (flying or maintenance) will be re-employed soon, although clearly under a different set of rules.
I’m also not sure that PHL will be relegated to an MDA hub – it still has a lot of potential as a large jet hub, particularly if the limited runway space is not used for turboprops. CLT also will quickly be pounced on; between PHL and CLT, I would bet many US employees will have an opportunity to be employed in aviation within the next 6 months if they desire. In both cases, other carriers will try hard to fragment both hubs but there will still be incentives for a carrier to develop a large operation in both cities.
I’m also not sure that AA would be successful in acquiring the Shuttle. They have enough slots that they could fly it with mainline aircraft now. What they don’t have is a terminal to handle it and they won’t have that if CO takes control of the US terminal. It will be interesting but I don’t think any of US’ major cities will have much of a dip in their level of air service. And if a new entrant carrier succeeds at buying US assets, your prospects are better than if an established carrier does. Do you think Branson and Bronner could get along?
Either way, I think the chances are good that those of who have experience (flying or maintenance) will be re-employed soon, although clearly under a different set of rules.
I’m also not sure that PHL will be relegated to an MDA hub – it still has a lot of potential as a large jet hub, particularly if the limited runway space is not used for turboprops. CLT also will quickly be pounced on; between PHL and CLT, I would bet many US employees will have an opportunity to be employed in aviation within the next 6 months if they desire. In both cases, other carriers will try hard to fragment both hubs but there will still be incentives for a carrier to develop a large operation in both cities.
I’m also not sure that AA would be successful in acquiring the Shuttle. They have enough slots that they could fly it with mainline aircraft now. What they don’t have is a terminal to handle it and they won’t have that if CO takes control of the US terminal. It will be interesting but I don’t think any of US’ major cities will have much of a dip in their level of air service. And if a new entrant carrier succeeds at buying US assets, your prospects are better than if an established carrier does. Do you think Branson and Bronner could get along?
Yeah, I don't buy this Bronner reformulating US Airways into Alabama Air with a hub at Mobile... And I don't buy it for three reasons:
1. Bronner has turned RSA into a powerhouse by making smart, calculating investments... That means taking some risk with the hope of big reward. US Airways will be the one that got away from him. Had he been able to turn US Airways around, he'd have been rewarded handsomely. However, at this point, this seems extremely remote.
2. The economics of a hub in Mobile (or anywhere in Alabama) are just not very good. BHM already has LCC fare levels (thanks to Southwest) and all of the cities are too small to mount any kind of major hub, or even point-to-point network. Bronner may love Alabama, but the reality is that airlines don't work on a "build it and they will come" scenario. An airline based in Mobile will have lots of empty seats because folks just aren't headed there in large numbers...
Another way to look at this is this... America West is the only (so-far) post-deregulation carrier to become a major carrier, and that is for one reason only... They are based in the two cities which routinely vie for America's fastest growing cities, PHX and LAS. AirTran and jetBlue may get added to this list, however, AirTran's success comes from essentially replacing Eastern, and jetBlue's comes from being based from the US's two largest cities (NYC and LA)... None of these "formulae for success" show a small market like MOB.
3. The "Alabama Air" comment was an off-handed comment which has become a PR disaster for Bronner. I don't think he was seriously suggesting that he would reformulate the airline in Alabama. If there were truly money to be made here, then US Airways would have announced a big expansion at Mobile, not FLL.
1. Bronner has turned RSA into a powerhouse by making smart, calculating investments... That means taking some risk with the hope of big reward. US Airways will be the one that got away from him. Had he been able to turn US Airways around, he'd have been rewarded handsomely. However, at this point, this seems extremely remote.
2. The economics of a hub in Mobile (or anywhere in Alabama) are just not very good. BHM already has LCC fare levels (thanks to Southwest) and all of the cities are too small to mount any kind of major hub, or even point-to-point network. Bronner may love Alabama, but the reality is that airlines don't work on a "build it and they will come" scenario. An airline based in Mobile will have lots of empty seats because folks just aren't headed there in large numbers...
Another way to look at this is this... America West is the only (so-far) post-deregulation carrier to become a major carrier, and that is for one reason only... They are based in the two cities which routinely vie for America's fastest growing cities, PHX and LAS. AirTran and jetBlue may get added to this list, however, AirTran's success comes from essentially replacing Eastern, and jetBlue's comes from being based from the US's two largest cities (NYC and LA)... None of these "formulae for success" show a small market like MOB.
3. The "Alabama Air" comment was an off-handed comment which has become a PR disaster for Bronner. I don't think he was seriously suggesting that he would reformulate the airline in Alabama. If there were truly money to be made here, then US Airways would have announced a big expansion at Mobile, not FLL.
Piedmont ran a very succesful airline out of little old Winston-Salem NC, and that was not their hub.
On March 11th, 2002, Republic Airways Holdings Inc., the parent of Chautauqua Airlines, announced that it has filed a registration statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission relating to the intial public offering of its common stock. All of the shares are being offered by Republic Airways Holdings on the NASDAQ national market under the ticker symbol RJET.
Wrong.. employees would get back-pay, vaction pay, etc before Bronner & RSA see a dime as a equity holders.
Equity holders ALWAYS come last. Employees wages (a liability) come before even preferred stock holders though Uair has not issued any prefered stock to the best of my knowledge.
Where Im not clear is where employees fall in the list of creditors.. I'll find out and let you know later.
Seeing as how total assets less intangibles and goodwill are about $3 billion less than the total liabilities.. its pretty safe to say that common stock holders are not going to get dick in the case of liquidation.
Similar threads
