Skywest to fly for Airtran

[SoCalAprch]

Originally Posted by E_Dawg

Yeah, I never really 'got' MKE as a hub either... it's not really on the way to anywhere, it's not a major destination in and of itself, it's too close to ORD, etc etc. Don't get me wrong I love WI, MKE, even been known to down miller lite on occasion, but as a hub I just don't get it...

Because its an hour drive from Chicago and even shorter from the northern suburbs. When the people in the burbs gotta fly they can drive 30 min to O'hare or 30 min to MKE and if you have been into ORD lately you probably know why more and more people are choosing the latter. Especially when you factor in the amount of LCCs that are setting up shop there. Makes sense to me...

[SoCalAprch]

Originally Posted by deadstick

Ooooh. I wonder if they still have the ovens?!? More cookies!

BTW, do the Republic 190s and 170s have ovens?

Yes the RAH planes do have the ovens.

[Killtron2000]

Originally Posted by Gonzo

What does the union have do to with if a 50 seats can make money.

FYI: It looks like this deal is going to cost FL zero money. The problem is the cost to run a CRJ-200 is about the same as a 717.

Skywest can make a CRJ profitable where airtran can't make a 717 profitable. Which probably has everything to do with the fact that Skywest is non union. It also explains why the union is objecting to this but airtrans shareholders and management aren't.

Companies with unionized labor pretty consistently lose business to nonunionized companies in every industry.

[Doug Taylor]

Lemme guess. Classic example is SWA, right?

[Killtron2000]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Lemme guess. Classic example is SWA, right?

I thought they had their own union.

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by Killtron2000

Skywest can make a CRJ profitable where airtran can't make a 717 profitable.

Pretty bold statement considering they haven't even started flying them. Odds are pretty good they're just trying to get SOME money coming in rather than paying penalties on lease returns or having to pay the leases on them while they sit in the desert generating no cash.

Basically, previous poster was correct. The only thing AirTran is having to do in the deal is allow Skywest to sell tickets to their flying on the AirTran reservation system. It's a win-win for AirTran management. Skywest needed SOMEONE with an established route network to attract customers.

[surreal1221]

Originally Posted by Killtron2000

Companies with unionized labor pretty consistently lose business to nonunionized companies in every industry.

What's your formal education in again?

[Gonzo]

Originally Posted by Killtron2000

Skywest can make a CRJ profitable where airtran can't make a 717 profitable. Which probably has everything to do with the fact that Skywest is non union. It also explains why the union is objecting to this but airtrans shareholders and management aren't.

Companies with unionized labor pretty consistently lose business to nonunionized companies in every industry.

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Lemme guess. Classic example is SWA, right?

Originally Posted by Killtron2000

I thought they had their own union.

Good thing RAH isn't growing. Also yes SWA has a union in fact they are the most unionized airline in the world.

Unions have very little to do with profit and management had a lot.

[Gonzo]

A little reading for you:
http://www.wired.com/cars/futuretran...portfolio_0708

Strong Management
The public face of Southwest Airlines for a generation, hard-drinking, chain-smoking, always-leave-'em laughing Herb Kelleher, finally stepped away from the carrier earlier this year. Kelleher's bonhomie masked the discipline that Southwest has had throughout its history. The airline has always avoided fads and eschewed anything that increased costs or complicated the basic travel proposition. When it has changed—last year it ended its infamous cattle-call boarding process to favor its most frequent fliers and highest-fare customers—it has done so without slowing down the movement of aircraft. Management ranks are lean, but well compensated and, most importantly, productive. I once calculated that the top executives of Southwest generated 10 times more revenue per dollar of compensation than did the C-suite types at some of the network carriers.

A Relatively Happy Workforce
Network carriers have railed for decades about the power of their employee unions. But guess who's the most unionized carrier in the nation? Southwest, of course. The airline says that 87 percent of its employees belong to a union. Southwest has never had a strike, and now that the network carriers have whacked away at salaries and benefits, Southwest staffers are generally the highest paid in the industry. But since Southwest has about 30 percent fewer employees per aircraft than its network competitors, it has the lowest non-fuel C.A.S.M. (cost per available seat mile) of any of the major carriers.

[mxflyer]

Originally Posted by Trip7

So the rumors were true!

Rise of the Super-regional continues....

You must have forgotten about Republic. But I wouldn't consider this the rise of a super-regional but one trying to keep from shrinking. I hope this works out for AirTran and SkyWest without costing more pilot jobs.

[Kingairer]

Air Tran is just trying to take as many pax from RAH as they can, and in this case without spending a lot of money since Skywest is taking the risk. Airtran is hoping RAH gives up on MKE and focuses elsewhere, like DEN.

[stuckingfk]

Originally Posted by Gonzo

What does the union have do to with if a 50 seats can make money.

FYI: It looks like this deal is going to cost FL zero money. The problem is the cost to run a CRJ-200 is about the same as a 717.

Would like to see your source because I guarantee you are wrong.

And I want numbers to numbers. Per hour basis, none of this CASM crap.

[stuckingfk]

Originally Posted by SoCalAprch

Because its an hour drive from Chicago and even shorter from the northern suburbs. When the people in the burbs gotta fly they can drive 30 min to O'hare or 30 min to MKE and if you have been into ORD lately you probably know why more and more people are choosing the latter. Especially when you factor in the amount of LCCs that are setting up shop there. Makes sense to me...

Agreed 100%.

I don't have the stats in front of me, so pulling this out thin air, but willing to bet there's 3 million+ people within an hour drive of MKE. There are so many norther Suburbs, and Milwaukee isn't a small town either (shade under 1 mil in the Milwaukee County according to the 2008 census).

Much less delays in MKE when compared to Chicago, might even find some cheaper fares too due to the LCCs.

[Gonzo]

Originally Posted by stuckingfk

Would like to see your source because I guarantee you are wrong.

And I want numbers to numbers. Per hour basis, none of this CASM crap.

I can't find numbers for Skywest but for Pinnacle it is about $1300 (without fuel) per an hour.

http://www.marketwire.com/press-rele...L-1027335.html


Only numbers I can find for Airtran are from 2004 and put the cost at about $1300 ($2,000 - $700 in fuel)

http://avisupser.dgrsolutions.com/cost/b717-200.html

[Killtron2000]

Originally Posted by kellwolf

Pretty bold statement considering they haven't even started flying them. Odds are pretty good they're just trying to get SOME money coming in rather than paying penalties on lease returns or having to pay the leases on them while they sit in the desert generating no cash.

Basically, previous poster was correct. The only thing AirTran is having to do in the deal is allow Skywest to sell tickets to their flying on the AirTran reservation system. It's a win-win for AirTran management. Skywest needed SOMEONE with an established route network to attract customers.

So why would the union care what Skywest is doing if they are on their own and it doesn't effect airtrans own routes?

Originally Posted by surreal1221

What's your formal education in again?

Everyday I thank god we have surreal to bring such relevant questions and insights to every thread. How do you manage this? You're such a genius.

Originally Posted by Gonzo

Good thing RAH isn't growing. Also yes SWA has a union in fact they are the most unionized airline in the world.

Unions have very little to do with profit and management had a lot.

SWA has done well in spite of the unions not because of them. Airtran would be better off (not necessarily doing well) without it's union too.

[kellwolf]

Originally Posted by Killtron2000

So why would the union care what Skywest is doing if they are on their own and it doesn't effect airtrans own routes?

Because they don't want to be the next Frontier or Midwest. Honestly, I can't say I blame them. What's with the union witch hunt? Seems the work pretty well for SWA. Most unionized carrier in the biz, yet they somehow seem to turn a profit every time. Maybe it's because the union and management work together for the good of the company and the employees? The trouble comes when management starts gunning for their own pocketbooks or golden parachutes, then the unions have to get tough to protect their members.

Every airline out there with a union has one because somewhere in their past management did something to bring about its existence. They don't just appear and get voted in for the hell of it.

[Gonzo]

Originally Posted by Killtron2000

SWA has done well in spite of the unions not because of them. Airtran would be better off (not necessarily doing well) without it's union too.

So you think management has nothing to do with SWA being a profitable company. I think you need to read Nutz because the guy who ran SWA doesn't see it that way. A union can't help or hurt a company only good or bad management can.

[Capt. Caucasian]

Doug,

I've said it before and I have said it again, remember that conversation we had in the crew room and your post that was a result of it? Where was that? Every time a thread like this pops up I think it might be a good idea to re-post that. You know, I love it when folks that have nothing to do with the airline pilot profession proclaim how much more they know than us. Pure awesomeness!

[Gonzo]

Originally Posted by kellwolf

Because they don't want to be the next Frontier or Midwest. Honestly, I can't say I blame them. What's with the union witch hunt? Seems the work pretty well for SWA. Most unionized carrier in the biz, yet they somehow seem to turn a profit every time. Maybe it's because the union and management work together for the good of the company and the employees? The trouble comes when management starts gunning for their own pocketbooks or golden parachutes, then the unions have to get tough to protect their members.

Management and the union working together I don't think has a lot to do with profit. Just look at AMR under Crandall the guy hated the unions and was an ass to work for the the company made money and the employees got paid.

[Doug Taylor]

Originally Posted by Gonzo

Good thing RAH isn't growing. Also yes SWA has a union in fact they are the most unionized airline in the world.

Unions have very little to do with profit and management had a lot.

I was trying to goad him into saying "YES!!!", darnutt!

[Doug Taylor]

Originally Posted by Capt. Caucasian

Doug,

I've said it before and I have said it again, remember that conversation we had in the crew room and your post that was a result of it? Where was that? Every time a thread like this pops up I think it might be a good idea to re-post that. You know, I love it when folks that have nothing to do with the airline pilot profession proclaim how much more they know than us. Pure awesomeness!

I remember, fo' show dawg.

You know, you and I work for one of the least unionized airlines in the business and got drug through the bankruptcy courts so I'm not buying the "unions R expensive and cost a lot of money" angle.

[Killtron2000]

Originally Posted by Gonzo

So you think management has nothing to do with SWA being a profitable company. I think you need to read Nutz because the guy who ran SWA doesn't see it that way. A union can't help or hurt a company only good or bad management can.

They run things differently at SWA which is because of management. I'm not disputing that management has the bigger influence on the health of airtran or SWA. I only thought it was assinine that a union would try to say that their concern is for the passengers and for airtrans bottom line.

[Doug Taylor]

Originally Posted by Killtron2000

They run things differently at SWA which is because of management. I'm not disputing that management has the bigger influence on the health of airtran or SWA. I only thought it was assinine that a union would try to say that their concern is for the passengers and for airtrans bottom line.

On what basis do you qualify your statement upon?

[PeanuckleCRJ]

Originally Posted by Killtron2000

They run things differently at SWA which is because of management. I'm not disputing that management has the bigger influence on the health of airtran or SWA. I only thought it was assinine that a union would try to say that their concern is for the passengers and for airtrans bottom line.

A union looks out for the employees that it represents. Employees benefit from a company that is viable and has a good bottom line.

Not working out so well for you tonight....

[Killtron2000]

Originally Posted by kellwolf

Because they don't want to be the next Frontier or Midwest. Honestly, I can't say I blame them. What's with the union witch hunt? Seems the work pretty well for SWA. Most unionized carrier in the biz, yet they somehow seem to turn a profit every time. Maybe it's because the union and management work together for the good of the company and the employees? The trouble comes when management starts gunning for their own pocketbooks or golden parachutes, then the unions have to get tough to protect their members.

Every airline out there with a union has one because somewhere in their past management did something to bring about its existence. They don't just appear and get voted in for the hell of it.

The union is saying they oppose this deal because it would be bad for the flying public and the company. You said yourself this is a win win for airtran. I would go as far as to speculate that the union opposes skywest in anything they do because their pilots don't pay union dues.