W:EXCH:INVOL
Advanced
- Aug 20, 2002
- 171
- 0
Ahhh, slamming UA without actually mentioning them. Well done.
INVOL
INVOL
Industry May RASM performance
- Thread starter W:EXCH:INVOL
- Start date
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
It is my understanding that for the U.S. airline industry May pricing data showed improvement, but was behind expectations, especially on the domestic front.
Most observers expected the combination of pent up demand, capacity reductions and a peak leisure period would drive larger improvements; however, this was not the case.
ATA reports show unit revenue improved in May as traffic rebounded (slightly) and incremental capacity cuts remained intact.
According to an analyst report, domestic RASM improved by 1.0%, the first positive comparison since December, while System RASM improved by 1.6% following 3 months of negative comparisons. Atlantic RASM was surprisingly strong while Domestic data was a bit disappointing up 1%). The Pacific was expectedly atrocious and Latin America was relatively flat. The measured Domestic demand shortfall at 24.4%, an improvement from April, but still well off of pre-war levels.
Best regards,
Chip
Most observers expected the combination of pent up demand, capacity reductions and a peak leisure period would drive larger improvements; however, this was not the case.
ATA reports show unit revenue improved in May as traffic rebounded (slightly) and incremental capacity cuts remained intact.
According to an analyst report, domestic RASM improved by 1.0%, the first positive comparison since December, while System RASM improved by 1.6% following 3 months of negative comparisons. Atlantic RASM was surprisingly strong while Domestic data was a bit disappointing up 1%). The Pacific was expectedly atrocious and Latin America was relatively flat. The measured Domestic demand shortfall at 24.4%, an improvement from April, but still well off of pre-war levels.
Best regards,
Chip
ITRADE
Veteran
----------------
On 6/18/2003 11:56:00 AM W:EXCH:INVOL wrote:
Ahhh, slamming UA without actually mentioning them. Well done.
INVOL
----------------
Could apply equally to Delta, Northwest, American, or Continental. Pacific travel was awful last month.On 6/18/2003 11:56:00 AM W:EXCH:INVOL wrote:
Ahhh, slamming UA without actually mentioning them. Well done.
INVOL
----------------
----------------
On 6/18/2003 11:56:00 AM W:EXCH:INVOL wrote:
Ahhh, slamming UA without actually mentioning them. Well done.
----------------
On 6/18/2003 11:56:00 AM W:EXCH:INVOL wrote:
Ahhh, slamming UA without actually mentioning them. Well done.
----------------
Give it a rest! Chip may shade things certain ways when he writes, but who doesn''t?! If it sparks an educated debate, I''m all for it.
USFlyer,
Spirited debate is one thing, but Chip is beating a dead horse. Part of his Unique Corporate Transaction theory last year was that UAL would pull out of one or all of it''s west coast hubs, and U would take over. Now U is pulling out of SNA. This sounds like a bad omen to me.
Chip needs to realize that no matter how hard he hopes the UAL UCT will not come to fruition. He appears to be an intelligent person, and I feel his talents would be better utilized by promoting USAirways (realistically), rather than telling anyone who will listen that U is going to conquer the world with it''s ever increasing fleet of RJs.
Spirited debate is one thing, but Chip is beating a dead horse. Part of his Unique Corporate Transaction theory last year was that UAL would pull out of one or all of it''s west coast hubs, and U would take over. Now U is pulling out of SNA. This sounds like a bad omen to me.
Chip needs to realize that no matter how hard he hopes the UAL UCT will not come to fruition. He appears to be an intelligent person, and I feel his talents would be better utilized by promoting USAirways (realistically), rather than telling anyone who will listen that U is going to conquer the world with it''s ever increasing fleet of RJs.
OP
W:EXCH:INVOL
Advanced
- Aug 20, 2002
- 171
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #7
Taipan,
I was just wondering...since UA has stringent DIP financing requirements and the company is tied to US, how is today''s news that for the U.S. airline industry May pricing data showed improvement, but was behind expectations, especially on the domestic front and effect UA''s formal in-court restructuring?
Most observers expected the combination of pent up demand, capacity reductions and a peak leisure period would drive larger improvements; however, this was not the case.
ATA reports show unit revenue improved in May as traffic rebounded (slightly) and incremental capacity cuts remained intact.
According to an analyst report, domestic RASM improved by 1.0%, the first positive comparison since December, while System RASM improved by 1.6% following 3 months of negative comparisons. Atlantic RASM was surprisingly strong while Domestic data was a bit disappointing up 1%). The Pacific was expectedly atrocious and Latin America was relatively flat. The measured Domestic demand shortfall at 24.4%, an improvement from April, but still well off of pre-war levels.
By the way, is this only showing negative information regarding UA or is it reporting facts?
Best regards,
This one''s already sparking an educated debate on another thread.
INVOL
I was just wondering...since UA has stringent DIP financing requirements and the company is tied to US, how is today''s news that for the U.S. airline industry May pricing data showed improvement, but was behind expectations, especially on the domestic front and effect UA''s formal in-court restructuring?
Most observers expected the combination of pent up demand, capacity reductions and a peak leisure period would drive larger improvements; however, this was not the case.
ATA reports show unit revenue improved in May as traffic rebounded (slightly) and incremental capacity cuts remained intact.
According to an analyst report, domestic RASM improved by 1.0%, the first positive comparison since December, while System RASM improved by 1.6% following 3 months of negative comparisons. Atlantic RASM was surprisingly strong while Domestic data was a bit disappointing up 1%). The Pacific was expectedly atrocious and Latin America was relatively flat. The measured Domestic demand shortfall at 24.4%, an improvement from April, but still well off of pre-war levels.
By the way, is this only showing negative information regarding UA or is it reporting facts?
Best regards,
This one''s already sparking an educated debate on another thread.
INVOL
Chip is not bashing UA. He posts facts and then offers his opinions. There is nothing wrong with this. If you don''t like what he says, you''re free to refute it and argue the facts as you see them. We now have more posts on this board complaining about Chip than we do educated discussion.
TheLarkAscending
Veteran
----------------
On 6/18/2003 1:24:44 PM USFlyer wrote:
It''s very common for companies to map out "what if" scenarios, which is where a lot of this comes from.
----------------
On 6/18/2003 1:24:44 PM USFlyer wrote:
It''s very common for companies to map out "what if" scenarios, which is where a lot of this comes from.
----------------
I respectfully agree with your assessment, and appreciate your tone and delivery. Thank you.
TheLarkAscending
Veteran
----------------
On 6/18/2003 12:57:42 PM USFlyer wrote:
We now have more posts on this board complaining about Chip than we do educated discussion.
----------------
On 6/18/2003 12:57:42 PM USFlyer wrote:
We now have more posts on this board complaining about Chip than we do educated discussion.
----------------
That, in itself, speaks volumes, perhaps? Maybe we need a collective mantra type retort? "We comprehend, but may not agree"
For what it''s worth, I''ve heard from my own inside sources all of what Chip has stated here. Will all of it come to pass? Absolutely not. But, regardless, he''s not the only one saying these things. It''s very common for companies to map out "what if" scenarios, which is where a lot of this comes from.
----------------
On 6/18/2003 1:34:29 PM TheLarkAscending wrote:
I respectfully agree with your assessment, and appreciate your tone and delivery. Thank you.
----------------
On 6/18/2003 1:34:29 PM TheLarkAscending wrote:
I respectfully agree with your assessment, and appreciate your tone and delivery. Thank you.
----------------
Thanks. As an example, you better believe AA, UA, DL, NW, CO, WN, etc. all had "plans" in place for a US Chapter 7 liquidation. Sure, no one was going to make a huge run on PIT. But, PHL, DCA, LGA, etc. would all have been in play should US have liquidated, so I would put money on each of the major carriers having had plans in place to bid and/or move-in on various routes. Just as US should have plans in place for a possible UA Chapter 7 liquidation. Or an AMR Chapter 11. Or an AC withdrawal on some routes to the northeast/mid-atlantic. And the list goes on. Will any of this happen? It''s looking unlikely. But, management should have some sense of what they could use and/or want as things would move quickly if it were to happen.
OP
W:EXCH:INVOL
Advanced
- Aug 20, 2002
- 171
- 0
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #13
----------------
On 6/18/2003 12:32:07 PM ITRADE wrote:
----------------
On 6/18/2003 12:32:07 PM ITRADE wrote:
----------------
On 6/18/2003 11:56:00 AM W:EXCH:INVOL wrote:
Ahhh, slamming UA without actually mentioning them. Well done.
INVOL
----------------
Could apply equally to Delta, Northwest, American, or Continental. Pacific travel was awful last month.On 6/18/2003 11:56:00 AM W:EXCH:INVOL wrote:
Ahhh, slamming UA without actually mentioning them. Well done.
INVOL
----------------
----------------
Could have. But you and I both know it didn''t.
INVOL
ITRADE
Veteran
Can''t make that assumption. Sorry.
