Mesa Air Group April 2003 Traffic Increases 26.8% Year-Over-Year

[W:EXCH:INVOL]

----------------
On 5/9/2003 7:51:45 AM ITRADE wrote:

----------------
On 5/9/2003 7:06:03 AM W:EXCH:INVOL wrote:

"It certainly is a useful tool.  Note that one of the beauties of the industry - Southwest - utilizes significant outsourcing with respect to its maintenance.  Are you going to chant them down from the rafters?"

I wonder why they don''t outsource any of their flying?

INVOL

----------------​

Ummm...Maybe because you will never seem them flying to cities with less than 300,000 people (i.e. ROA, ERI, CHA, and BTV).

----------------​

Ummm...But they do fly to places like IND, SDF, CMH, RDU, ORF, BHM, BNA (there may be more), all cities that we serve too, with outsourced flying.

INVOL

 

[ITRADE]

What is your point in this? Not all airlines have to serve every destination with a 747, and not every airline has the same experience at every city.

I'm told that the load factors into SDF were running about 50% in the months prior to 9-11. Does this really justify the utilization of a 120 passenger jet???

 

[dash8ter]

I think the original point by BoredToDeath has gone in the wrong direction. I would never argue with the fact that outsourcing regional flying to contract carriers is smart financially today. The bigger concern is the lack of operational quality within the contract carriers. Built into the system of lower costs comes substandard management and poor service. Examples include ontime departures, controllable cancellation rates, and employee appearance. These are standards that the contract carriers are noticably falling short of, but the same standards are managed effectively within wholly-owned subs of the parent company, mostly due to the fact that the parent company has a watchful eye on its own kids more than the kids that play with its own kids. Thus, in the long run, which is more financially smart?

 

[the turtle]

just for you Dash I''ll wear a clean shirt and shave, heck maybe even show up for work on time. But only this once.

 

[N628AU]

----------------
On 5/8/2003 747 PM cubfan02us wrote:

Oh, and while I got you on the line since U made a profit of
a billion plus should''nt I get my 5% back?

----------------

The company had net income, not profit during the first quarter. The billion dollar loan has to be repaid. To say you profited is like taking out a home equity loan, depositing the check into the bank, and saying you got a raise.​

 

[BoredToDeath]

----------------
On 5/8/2003 11:02:19 PM PineyBob wrote:

----------------
On 5/8/2003 10:51:43 PM BoredToDeath wrote:

Bob,

Stop throwing around that free markett blah blah blah.  Whats right is right and there is way too much wrong with the things that go on in this company.

----------------​

Why BoredToDeath,
Are you like management? Only want to hear from people who agree with you? Or is the Free market Blah, Blah Blah to large of a dose of truth? Enquiring minds want to know?

----------------​

Wow, I''ve only been gone a day and look at what I''ve missed.

Bob,

I''m not like mgt, thank God, I respect and want to hear all of your opinions, even if they are wrong.lol The reason I''m tired of hearing the "free markett noise" is because I belive its used buy too many of those in power to avoid doing the right thing. I feel that most in mgt. are constantly taking the easy way out. Hence U''s significant shrinkage into profitabilty plan, which this company has been doing since the days when we bought PSA and pulled out of CA like a scared puppy.

 

[Light Years]

If anyone thinks the contract carriers offer a standard service with mainline, hop on a SAAB flight out of PIT. More than likely youll be embarrassed at the use of our logo and uniform.

 

[dash8ter]

----------------
On 5/9/2003 9:49:04 PM the turtle wrote:

just for you Dash I''ll wear a clean shirt and shave, heck maybe even show up for work on time. But only this once.

----------------​

Thanks for cleaning up turtle....
Just try not to wear makeup and high heels, like I saw a male Mesa FA doing one Saturday many weeks ago..... (yes, a TRUE story!)

 

[BoredToDeath]

----------------
On 5/9/2003 5:53:59 AM ITRADE wrote:

----------------
On 5/8/2003 1030 PM BoredToDeath wrote:

Do you really think that the economics and business dealings of today are any different than 50 or so years ago? Please, spare me, the rich just want to get richer at anyones expense.

----------------​

Airline economics are certainly different than they were 50 years ago (or 30). Prior to deregulation, you had guaranteed pricing, fixed fares, monopolistic routes, and little if any incentive to operate efficiently. I am not making a rich want to get richer argument - I am simply stating that in today''s world you have to use the tools that make the corporation better and return better dividends to its stockholders - many of whom are not rich. Corporations are not welfare states.

O.K. I''ll agree with most of that, but especially the part about how mgt. has had no incentive in the past to operate efficiently.

----------------
First of all, if things are too high and inefficent you can be sure its due to poor mgt.
----------------​

Demonstrate to me how all inefficiencies are attributable to management? Who threatened to strike and not work during all of these contractual negotiations?

Ah Ah! See above. If mgt. had no incentive to operate efficiently in the past before derregulation, show me instances of how, after deregulation, that they made changes to operate efficiently. Pulling out of markets is not what I call trying to make money.

----------------
In which case its up to mgt. to fix these problems while working with your employees to limit the impact on their lives.
----------------​

Agreed with the first half, but where is it said that it is required of management to guarantee employment. Hint, it isn''t.

Its not stated anywhere. Just like it''s not stated on the Brooklyn Bridge, "Don''t Jump" ! Common sense would dictate that any mgr. would want to do the very best by his/her employees.

----------------
Why you ask? Because a good mgt. team knows that with good LEADERSHIP an employee will do anything for their company, and those are the type of employees that make a company money. Not to leave out that the simple fact that mgt. has the MORAL obligation to do just that. You don''t just put people on the street then give their jobs to someone else. Its not ETHICAL.
----------------​

There is no moral obligation whatsoever. There is no contractual relationship between management and employee guaranteeing employment. All employees are essentially at will and serve at the pleasure of the ultimate management - the stockholders and debt holders. As to ethicacy, it is wholly ethical for the management to live up to their fiduciary duties and ensure that the company operates at a margin that the holders are comfortable with.

I can agree that the kind of mgt teams that have gotten this company into the mess it''s in think as you just stated. It''s time for change and a different way of thinking. Imagine how powerfull of a company U would be if we mgt. that we could trust.

----------------
Now lets talk about outsourcing. You seem to say that outsourcing is a tool better suited to make the company run better. Sorry I''m gonna call B.S. on this one. Unless you call paying full price for an airplane that is hardly ever full, then by all means outsource away.
----------------​

It certainly is a useful tool. Note that one of the beauties of the industry - Southwest - utilizes significant outsourcing with respect to its maintenance. Are you going to chant them down from the rafters?


Plan and simple, when U outsource''s flying to another airline, U will lose money. The only thing we gain are a few pax in the system. If U does it themselfves it keeps both the pax and the money. Don''t belive me? Then why are we getting ready to purchase a massive amount of RJS. U got the scope relief it needed, if outsourcing was really that wonderfull they would let the contract carriers do it all. And as we will soon see, thats not the case.

----------------
As for your last paragraph, it is written proof that you, like so many others in the "21st century business world" lack the simple skills needed to be part of a successfull mgt. team. ETHICS, MORALS, AND LEADERSHIP
----------------​

You forgot All Hail the Soviet in your slogan.

You''re living in a 19th century world that has moved on to bigger and better things. Your claims of "ethics, morals, and leadership" are thinly veiled covers for the fact that you''d like to see full employment of a work group that has clearly strangled and stifled the forward progress of any number of companies.

Oh well, thats fine. I''m glad that some can always be reminiscent. Makes for interesting postings.

I don''t see how these times are bigger and better for anyone except those in power who are abusing that power. It''s time for those who are in charge to change the way they conduct business. The employees deserve better than this.


----------------​