Merged Thoughts
- Thread starter USA320Pilot
- Start date
- Thread Starter
- #77
What I find interesting and somewhat amusing is this thread started with no discussion of United Airlines and focused on two facts, which were comments by US Airways’ top two officers. In particular:
Dave Siegel said last week that domestic consolidation is "inevitable".
Dave Bronner recently said, “if the airline (US Airways) turns profitable, it could invest in acquiring more assets."
Therefore, why are the United employees pounding this thread and “shooting the messenger†when their company was never mentioned, until the United employees began posting on this message board? If a corporate transaction is not going to proceed between the business partners as indicated by the United employees, than why even post a comment on the US Airways board? Another words, why waste the bandwidth?
Interesting…
Tic...Toc...Tic...Toc...
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Dave Siegel said last week that domestic consolidation is "inevitable".
Dave Bronner recently said, “if the airline (US Airways) turns profitable, it could invest in acquiring more assets."
Therefore, why are the United employees pounding this thread and “shooting the messenger†when their company was never mentioned, until the United employees began posting on this message board? If a corporate transaction is not going to proceed between the business partners as indicated by the United employees, than why even post a comment on the US Airways board? Another words, why waste the bandwidth?
Interesting…
Tic...Toc...Tic...Toc...
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
PITbull
Veteran
Dave Siegel said last week that domestic consolidation is "inevitable".
Dave Bronner recently said, “if the airline (US Airways) turns profitable, it could invest in acquiring more assets."
USA320,
Its your implications.
You keep posting some kind of inevitable by "hanging on every last word" jesus and moses spout.
"Consolidaton" could also mean the Bases to reflect a more point to point system vs keeping all these hubs.
"Acquiring more assets" could mean growth within mainline or MAA. And then again, it COULD mean nothing but feel-good words to achieve the means!
You assume we are all stupid on these boards. UAL employees see this so clearly. They want to make sure we do too. AND WE DO!
Dave Bronner recently said, “if the airline (US Airways) turns profitable, it could invest in acquiring more assets."
USA320,
Its your implications.
You keep posting some kind of inevitable by "hanging on every last word" jesus and moses spout.
"Consolidaton" could also mean the Bases to reflect a more point to point system vs keeping all these hubs.
"Acquiring more assets" could mean growth within mainline or MAA. And then again, it COULD mean nothing but feel-good words to achieve the means!
You assume we are all stupid on these boards. UAL employees see this so clearly. They want to make sure we do too. AND WE DO!
If a corporate transaction is not going to proceed between the business partners as indicated by the United employees, than why even post a comment on the US Airways board? Another words, why waste the bandwidth?
Interesting…
Tic...Toc...Tic...Toc...
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you the ONLY one who knows this information? Where are the other people who know, why are you the only one speaking out? After all these years, why are you still posting this stuff? You were doing the exact same thing on the Yahoo boards and nothing ever came of it, and you were laughed at back then too. Talk about wasted bandwidth. I don't see any fruit being produced with the bandwidth you’re using.
Respectfully,
cavalier
Interesting…
Tic...Toc...Tic...Toc...
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are you the ONLY one who knows this information? Where are the other people who know, why are you the only one speaking out? After all these years, why are you still posting this stuff? You were doing the exact same thing on the Yahoo boards and nothing ever came of it, and you were laughed at back then too. Talk about wasted bandwidth. I don't see any fruit being produced with the bandwidth you’re using.
Respectfully,
cavalier
:cop: Because you are a tool - your messages are about as accurate as the former Iraqi minister Baghdad Bob.
There is one thing Siegel said a few days ago that I have not seen mentioned on these boards. Others have picked certain paragraphs from that speech to expand upon; but have not commented on this particularly paragraph. That is:
"I think that the aviation market in the greater Washington region will only benefit from the changes taking place in the industry. The local economy is strong, dynamic and diverse. There are a variety of choices amongst airports and airlines and that will remain so. Those last vestiges of high fares will not be around forever. One way or another, low-cost carriers will eventually operate assets like the Shuttle to New York and Boston. As the growth of low fares raises expectations, customers will eventually demand $69 or $89 fares to New York, rather than $200 fares that are
commonplace today. But as we have discussed here today, the only way to make money charging $69 or $89 fares to New York is to have costs low enough that those prices are above the cost to provide the service."
(from the "Dave Siegel - Potomac Officers Club" thread of Feb. 25)
The part that gets me is that he and the other Dave have both said the "Shuttle" may be for sale (for top dollar of course); but, in his speech he at least insinuated that the shuttle ain't worth dilly. It is like saying I will sell you my cream puff vehicle for top dollar - by the way it has just been dropped off at the salvage yard by the wrecker.
Perhaps just a case of "Open mouth - insert foot". Or perhaps - "Beware Lizarus Ye Stompus".
"I think that the aviation market in the greater Washington region will only benefit from the changes taking place in the industry. The local economy is strong, dynamic and diverse. There are a variety of choices amongst airports and airlines and that will remain so. Those last vestiges of high fares will not be around forever. One way or another, low-cost carriers will eventually operate assets like the Shuttle to New York and Boston. As the growth of low fares raises expectations, customers will eventually demand $69 or $89 fares to New York, rather than $200 fares that are
commonplace today. But as we have discussed here today, the only way to make money charging $69 or $89 fares to New York is to have costs low enough that those prices are above the cost to provide the service."
(from the "Dave Siegel - Potomac Officers Club" thread of Feb. 25)
The part that gets me is that he and the other Dave have both said the "Shuttle" may be for sale (for top dollar of course); but, in his speech he at least insinuated that the shuttle ain't worth dilly. It is like saying I will sell you my cream puff vehicle for top dollar - by the way it has just been dropped off at the salvage yard by the wrecker.
Perhaps just a case of "Open mouth - insert foot". Or perhaps - "Beware Lizarus Ye Stompus".
Translate : Just envision a large crusher about to come down on an item that all males cherish. Yes, all males do cherish their vehicles, especially their old trucks.
Glad to hear the two segments on UAL went well. Hope to see you again on UAL soon.
Glad to hear the two segments on UAL went well. Hope to see you again on UAL soon.
Chip,
Because most UAL employees mostly pilots actually believe their own press releases. They salivate at the thought of cherry picking US or staple us on the bottom. Heck they changed the ALPA merger policy several years ago to make sure they could screw someone . Go read their thread about mergers ,they have it all figured out. If it comes to a merger and I hope it does not ,they will do everything they can to screw us. They already have their own definition of "career expectations". A real class act those girls and boys. They also denied eight of our pilots jumpseat during the last mess. If I was you I would not waste my time with that group. Whatever happens, happens. If we merge then we will go to court. If we are cherry picked then we can watch the salivation process begin. Union sisters and brothers my (deleted).
Because most UAL employees mostly pilots actually believe their own press releases. They salivate at the thought of cherry picking US or staple us on the bottom. Heck they changed the ALPA merger policy several years ago to make sure they could screw someone . Go read their thread about mergers ,they have it all figured out. If it comes to a merger and I hope it does not ,they will do everything they can to screw us. They already have their own definition of "career expectations". A real class act those girls and boys. They also denied eight of our pilots jumpseat during the last mess. If I was you I would not waste my time with that group. Whatever happens, happens. If we merge then we will go to court. If we are cherry picked then we can watch the salivation process begin. Union sisters and brothers my (deleted).
>>gowest Posted: Feb 29 2004, 09:40 PM
Newbie
Group: Member
Posts: 6
Member No.: 3,369
Joined: 30-January 04
Chip,
Because most UAL employees mostly pilots actually believe their own press releases. They salivate at the thought of cherry picking US or staple us on the bottom. Heck they changed the ALPA merger policy several years ago to make sure they could screw someone . Go read their thread about mergers ,they have it all figured out. If it comes to a merger and I hope it does not ,they will do everything they can to screw us. They already have their own definition of "career expectations". A real class act those girls and boys. They also denied eight of our pilots jumpseat during the last mess. If I was you I would not waste my time with that group. Whatever happens, happens. If we merge then we will go to court. If we are cherry picked then we can watch the salivation process begin. Union sisters and brothers my (deleted). <<
Got news for ya. Don't flatter yourselves.
Believe me, there are NO UA pilots who care less about flying ANYTHING US Air operates much less salivate over cherry picking your assets. You have no assets worth the drool. All we want is continue to fly what we currently own and to continue with the carrier expectations, for better or for worse, that we currently enjoy. If you call that screwing another pilot group then so be it.
Hypothetically, let me ask you that, in the case of one of Bagdad Bob's Imaginary Corporate Transactions, would any US Air pilot consent to a 20 year fence on equipment. You fly yours - We fly ours???...I didn't think so.
The problem that you don't seem to grasp is that the perceived greed of the U Air pilots and their designs on our equipment was well known at United (as evidenced by the preceeding posts). Most of us agreed that on paper the route structures meshed well but not enough to compensate for the over zealous ambitions of some of the more boisterous US Air voices. Consequently, these loud voices were the ones heard the clearest and the bailout was effectively squashed by the pilot group.
You keep clinging to this date of hire thing cause thats all you have. You don't have career expectations, large airplanes or good routes. There is nothing that you can bring to a merger table cause what you have, nobody wants!
Tumbleweed
Newbie
Group: Member
Posts: 6
Member No.: 3,369
Joined: 30-January 04
Chip,
Because most UAL employees mostly pilots actually believe their own press releases. They salivate at the thought of cherry picking US or staple us on the bottom. Heck they changed the ALPA merger policy several years ago to make sure they could screw someone . Go read their thread about mergers ,they have it all figured out. If it comes to a merger and I hope it does not ,they will do everything they can to screw us. They already have their own definition of "career expectations". A real class act those girls and boys. They also denied eight of our pilots jumpseat during the last mess. If I was you I would not waste my time with that group. Whatever happens, happens. If we merge then we will go to court. If we are cherry picked then we can watch the salivation process begin. Union sisters and brothers my (deleted). <<
Got news for ya. Don't flatter yourselves.
Believe me, there are NO UA pilots who care less about flying ANYTHING US Air operates much less salivate over cherry picking your assets. You have no assets worth the drool. All we want is continue to fly what we currently own and to continue with the carrier expectations, for better or for worse, that we currently enjoy. If you call that screwing another pilot group then so be it.
Hypothetically, let me ask you that, in the case of one of Bagdad Bob's Imaginary Corporate Transactions, would any US Air pilot consent to a 20 year fence on equipment. You fly yours - We fly ours???...I didn't think so.
The problem that you don't seem to grasp is that the perceived greed of the U Air pilots and their designs on our equipment was well known at United (as evidenced by the preceeding posts). Most of us agreed that on paper the route structures meshed well but not enough to compensate for the over zealous ambitions of some of the more boisterous US Air voices. Consequently, these loud voices were the ones heard the clearest and the bailout was effectively squashed by the pilot group.
You keep clinging to this date of hire thing cause thats all you have. You don't have career expectations, large airplanes or good routes. There is nothing that you can bring to a merger table cause what you have, nobody wants!
Tumbleweed
LMFAO! Correction: Whenever USA320Pilot makes a merger comment, readers assume you are referring to a UAL/USAir merger because USA320Pilot has never posted anything about any other merger. Meanwhile, USA320Pilot has droned on and on about a merger/UCT/ICT between UAL and USAirways for about two years. So, forgive us for assuming we know what you are thinking, as you have clearly deliniated it here for years.USA320Pilot said:
As I have pointed out before, "Consolidation is inevitable." has been uttered by many airline CEO's and industry pundits since 1978. I wish I had the time to go find some quotes from 1978-2001 and list the folks who have uttered this statement.
Consolidation does not equal merger. As I have noted on other threads, the airline industry consolidated when Braniff (1982), Eastern (1991), and Midway (1991) failed. This consolidation occured with no mergers. Certain key assets were sold, but the bulk of these operations were left to die.
Oh, and I am not a UAL employee.
Similar threads
