Make Your Predictions For 2004

[willyloman]

The Chipster will suddenly fall in love with 767jetz. Horrified, Jetz will spurn his advances, exclaiming, "No, no, Chip. There will be no unusual merger with me. Off with you this instant."

Brokenhearted, Chip will designate Dave Siegel as the beneficiary of his Defined COntribution Pension Plan. Jetz will breathe a sigh of relief that Chip has turned his affecctions elsewhere, for he will worshipfully follow Dave into the netherworld of failed CEOs. Jetz's predictions of a successful UAL will come true. USAirways will live happily ever after without Dave and Chip. And all with be right with the world.

 

[willyloman]

The Chipster will suddenly fall in love with 767jetz. Horrified, Jetz will spurn his advances, exclaiming, "No, no, Chip. There will be no unusual merger with me. Off with you this instant."

Brokenhearted, Chip will designate Dave Siegel as the beneficiary of his Defined COntribution Pension Plan. Jetz will breathe a sigh of relief that Chip has turned his affecctions elsewhere, for he will worshipfully follow Dave into the netherworld of failed CEOs. Jetz's predictions of a successful UAL will come true. USAirways will live happily ever after without Dave and Chip. And all with be right with the world.

 

[Doc]

I see Doc pulling his head out of his a$$ and facing reality.

Didn't realize you were so sensative. I don't beleive we will merge but you must amit getting this loan is no easy road....read this article.......
Then you can remove your head.................





http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/19/business/19air.html

 

[Ukridge]

Willyloman - A Chip/Jetz (or Siegel) link up? Hmm. We would then have to call this the "CUT" for "Chip's Uxorial Transaction"

Well stated points from Novaqt, UAL06, and others however, I see that a brush fire may have already broken out with the Mesa/ACA/United issue. I am perplexed at why United continues to place so much reliance on third party vendors for so much of their flying. Would they not simply be to the better if they would bring a lot of this flying in house? In this manner they would not be subject to the vagaries of hiring another firm that may have completely different at heart interests. Just from the amateur's viewpoint it seems a risky game to play.
Cheers

 

[whlinder]

I'll play.

Independence Air takes flight. They are surprisingly successful.

United responds by eventually restoring 100% of ACA's old flying with Mesa/SkyWest/Air Whisky. UA adds more big planes at IAD, including Ted, to fight ACA.

The competitive pressure from DH's low fares with UA matching them at IAD forces down fares at DCA, hurting yields for US Airways.

The downward fare pressure from WAS steals business away from WN at BWI, who turns around and finds their loads out of BWI have dropped. With their PHL operation a huge success, WN moves some capacity from BWI to PHL and add more flights and new cities.

WN expanding at PHL and Independence Air at IAD trash US' yields, and so they end up back in Chapter 11. US Airways does not simplify their fare structure after they determine that the current structure maximixes revenue moreso than a simpler structure would.

United emerges from Chapter 11 with the ATSB loan.

AA/NW/DL's performance improves over 2003.

CO's losses increase.

AS starts flying SEA-PHL/ATL.

HP has good success with their transcons and continues to expand.

TACA joins Star.

Bush gets re-elected.

 

[atabuy]

Well stated points from Novaqt, UAL06, and others however, I see that a brush fire may have already broken out with the Mesa/ACA/United issue. I am perplexed at why United continues to place so much reliance on third party vendors for so much of their flying. Would they not simply be to the better if they would bring a lot of this flying in house? In this manner they would not be subject to the vagaries of hiring another firm that may have completely different at heart interests. Just from the amateur's viewpoint it seems a risky game to play.

Uk,

If you are in a business climate, why is this not apparent to you?
It is cheaper for Ual to contract out some work to other airlines because they can do it for less than Ual can. Plain and simple. Let me give you different examples.

Ual buys an airplane to go from Iad to Phl.
The smallest plane that Ual flies is a 737.
How much will the airplane cost? Employees to work and fly it and maintenance to maintain it?
What if 2 employees call off sick? What if the crew is sick? What if they can't fill the plane?

Small airplanes are needed to feed the larger stations. We have none and even the small planes don't always go out full.

When you can't fill up a 50 seater, what happens to the extra seats on a 737?
It is called an operating loss.
Ual has enough of these already.

 

[HPearlyretiree]

Despite a bunch of "lookie loos" the 7E7 has subpar orders, yet Boeing stays with it.

AirTran continues its westward expansion.

Frontier backs away from its MSP flights and adds more Mexico.

America West adds 757's announces plan to phase out 737's and adds San Juan and Belize.

Southwest continues to make money.

Jet Blue goes after USAirways with a vengance

USairways goes bankrupt again.

Ted debuts to howls of unintentional laughter, planes end up in the desert parked next to Continental Lite and Metro Jet and Shuttle planes.

Gordon Bethune gets angry says something stupid to the press.

Northwest does quite well, DC9's will soon be twice as old as their newest pilots.

Delta and American do nothing of interest.

Ed Beauvais and his sons leave Pittsburg in the middle of the night with a van full of investor's cash, he turns up in Medicine Hat where he promises to build a huge low fare Canadian airline that will service the world, gullible investors give him tons of cash, he skips town to...?

 

[Ukridge]

Atabuy enquired: "If you are in a business climate, why is this not apparent to you?"

The reason is that the conditions of the first part of your enquiry are not met. I am not in this business other than an outside observer thus my myriad of questions. Nothing other than the broadest of impressions are apparent to me for the U.S. air industry and even then I must make comparisons with the European airlines as that is my perhaps flawed frame of reference. Moreover, as an observer, I see the large continental carriers (LH, BA, Air France, KLM, etc. ) that although they rely in part on regional feeders, still maintain significant control and ownership of the express and not some shell firm of which they can wash their hands of when times get rough.
Notice Lufthansa. Their express is call ed Lufthansa CityLine and is, if not completely owened by Lufthansa main, then certainly still subject to near 100% control. KLM and Air France seem to be similar in their approach. Thus my question of why United does not simply own their feed as opposed to exposing themselves to the type of uproar that is going on at the moment at Dulles. Even if it is resolved to the benefit of United, staff has still been taken from the field to deal with the problem and in this role cannot take an active fight to the field against United's 'enemies.' So again, I ask, would it just not be simpler in the long run to own the feed?
Cheers