Want to know why the Airlines are going bankrupt? (1 Viewer)

[Julie K]

I'm not totally surprised at this given the general leap to lunacy that this country seems to have taken after the attacks. We've got airline bans on nail clippers, tweezers, plastic knives, and starting recently airlines discontinuing coffee creamer. Now we can only have "approved" reading material it seems. Next time I fly I'm going to have to give my purse a real 'sanitizing' and perhaps now even my bookcase.

------------------
My DVDs
"Some people think I'm over-prepared, paranoid...maybe even a little crazy. But they never met any pre-Cambrian life forms, did they?"

 

[Deane Johnson]

I don't have much sympathy for the airlines going bankrupt.
I think the airline problem started long before Sept. 11. A few years ago they turned airplanes into cattle trucks. Flying was no longer a pleasure. It was a major hassle just to go somewhere. And a flight with lunch is often a bag of peanuts (but at least they're honey roasted.)
Then there was the issue of them allowing people on with so much carry-on you'd think they should have booked their travel with United Van Lines, not United Airlines.
I took a vow 5 years ago to never again set foot on an airliner and I will stick to it. The current saftey issue doesn't even enter into it, it's the terrible service they provide.
Deane

 

[Steve Enemark]

Andy Rooney had the best suggestion I've heard on this subject: give the $15 billion federal bailout money to the railroads. Or, better yet, give the money to travellers in form of plane tickets or train tickets (your choice).
------------------
"Always make the audience suffer as much as possible" - Alfred Hitchcock

 

[Rob Lutter]

Home of the Free Indeed... if something like that ever happened to me, I would have a lawyer on them SO fast that their heads would spin. Ever heard of the first amendment right? Jez, lighten up people...
...the world is starting to become like 1984
------------------

My DVD Collection/ AIM: roblutter/ email:[email protected]
"Why, that's the biggest Kahn since Genghis" -Sealab 2021

 

[Richard Kim]

Would it have been any different if he came onto the plane carrying the Anarchist Cookbook? Would you feel comfortable on the plane with the passenger next to you reading how to make explosives?

I guess all of us who are who have read or seen Fight Club are all potential terrorists then.

 

[DaveF]

In other words, pretty much the opposite of the profile of this suspected terrorist.

That doesn't matter much. The nation is still very concerned, airlines are wigging out, trying to convince everyone things are safe. And this kid had a passing similarity to the collective perception of what a terrorist is (and was):
- young, uneducated male, without job or immediate family; willing to blow himself up for some larger "goal".
And his profile, IMO, is not like "most people in their early 20's". Most kids early 20's are in school and/or working, have a valid driver's license, and don't read anarchist-based literature. There's nothing wrong with being that person -- but people are still concerned, and not always acting rationally. (and yes, the kid claimed the license was valid; but the airport people thought it was expired, right or wrong).
If the story is true as reported, then the kid was wronged. It was foolish to go to the airport with a book about violently anarchy -- with a picture of DYNAMITE on the cover! -- but that isn't cause for denying him service.
I can believe this happened, and without much surprise. I just hope this was an exception to the rule, because of present circumstances.

 

[MickeS]

Most kids early 20's are in school and/or working, have a valid driver's license, and don't read anarchist-based literature.

His license WAS valid, the staff looked at the wrong date, according to the article.
But OK "most" was wrong, I should have said "many".
/Mike

 

[Brian Perry]

Warren Buffett has stated that since the beginning of air travel, going all the way back to the Wright Brothers, the industry has made ZERO money, net. (And his statement was made a while back, before any of this recent ugliness.)
That's mind-boggling. In other words, the total losses of the industry have exceeded the cumulative profits since the beginning of aviation. If this is true, something must fundamentally change about the way we view flying. What that is, I have no idea. Do we scrap 70% of the airlines? Do we demand that pilots earn less? Do we get rid of the unions?
While most of the blame falls on the airlines, I feel that much of it falls on the government (and therefore, on us). After all, isn't it a government-imposed requirement that the ticket agent ask you if "anyone else has packed your bags?" Anyone with a six-grade education knows that type of question is absolute BULLSHIT and does nothing to help security. And yet we sit back and accept these Mickey Mouse regulations, when we should be clamoring for REAL security measures, such as NO carry on materials allowed. But I guess that would be too inconvenient.
------------------
Home Theater Pictures

 

[Julie K]

hen we should be clamoring for REAL security measures, such as NO carry on materials allowed. But I guess that would be too inconvenient.

Damn right it would.
Would you hand over that nice shiny new expensive laptop to the baggage handlers? How about that nice bag containing a surprise diamond ring for your fiance?
And then there's the whole issue of people with certain medical conditions needing their medications yet can't get to them because they're checked.
------------------
My DVDs
"Some people think I'm over-prepared, paranoid...maybe even a little crazy. But they never met any pre-Cambrian life forms, did they?"

 

[RobertR]

Or, better yet, give the money to travellers in form of plane tickets or train tickets (your choice).

In other words, take money from non train and plane travelers, and give it to train and plane travelers. Also makes (no) sense.
I'd prefer seeing which train lines and air lines can make money without subsidization (in other words, reward those using sound, efficient business practices).

 

[Dennis Reno]

in other words, reward those using sound, efficient business practices

Robert - surely you jest. Do you believe for a second that business or even individuals could survive without the assistance of BIG GOVERNMENT?!?! Oh, the horror of it!

How could we possibly protect ourselves from... ourselves???
The airline industry has brought this on themselves. Several airlines were already in major financial trouble before the attack on September 11. I say let 'em fold.

 

[Ryan Wright]

Do we demand that pilots earn less?

Do you know how much most pilots earn? Here's a typical pilot for you:
1. Loves flying. Figures, hey, let's do this for a living.
2. Spends $5000 getting private pilot's license.
3. Decides to make it a career. Spends another $20-$40K at a private school getting all necessary licenses. In the meantime, finds a job as an instructor as it's the only way to pay the bills and rack up enough hours to get a job at an airline.
4. By age 25, lands job at airline. Pilots medium sized airplanes on bullshit routes. Earns $20K a year if lucky. Still lives with parents.
5. By age 30, is an airplane captain. Earns $25-$30K a year if lucky. Still lives with parents, or perhaps is married with a spouse who actually makes enough to allow them to afford an apartment. Nevermind that he never sees his spouse because he's never home, but he's persuing his dream job.
Only the highly experienced, older captains on major routes make the 3 figure salaries. Most of the guys flying our planes make less than $30k a year, barely enough to live on. No, I'm not kidding.
------------------
-Ryan (http://www.ryanwright.com )
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, when you do criticize them, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes.

 

[Ryan Wright]

I should have added this to my last post, but forgot to.

I say let 'em fold.

I agree with this 5000%. Why is our government taking our money to prop up this industry? And why are we allowing them to do it? Don't think for a second that air travel will cease to exist if the major airlines fold. They'll be replaced by startups with intelligent business plans in a hurry. The entire airline industry NEEDS to fold so that a new, efficient industry can rise out of the ashes. As long as we continue to bail them out, they'll continue to waste their money.
Consider a flight I took a few months ago on business. Our business jet wasn't available so I had to fly commercial. There were three of us on a jet that will hold some 80 passengers. Our combined fares for that leg of the trip wouldn't even pay for the pilot, copilot & stewardess, let alone the fuel and aircraft maintenance. I don't know what else needs to be done here (using smaller planes in situations like this?), but the industry needs to be a little more flexible.
Then, on the flight home later that evening, both aircraft (for both legs of my trip) were (a) packed with people, and (b) had no air conditioning. It was so hot in there I thought I was going to die. They gave us all ice chips to suck on. I don't know about the rest of you, but paying $500 for three hours in two 100+ degree planes (and another three hours on the ground, waiting around in airports) is not my idea of fun.
------------------
-Ryan (http://www.ryanwright.com )
Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes.
That way, when you do criticize them, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes.

 

[MickeS]

Warren Buffett has stated that since the beginning of air travel, going all the way back to the Wright Brothers, the industry has made ZERO money, net.

I haven't mady ANY money, net, either. It's all gone to food, insurance, taxes, movies, soda, travel, 401(K), education, books, pens, toothpaste, shoelaces, jeans, golf clubs, and other expenses.
/Mike

 

[DaveF]

Several airlines were already in major financial trouble before the attack on September 11. I say let 'em fold.

Can't happen. The failures would be blamed on the terrorist attacks. Public confidence would be hugely shaken. There would likely be a major recession, if not full-on depression soon to follow. With consumer confidence shaken, all the support industries for the airlines (Manufacturers, service, airports, food co., hotels, rental car agencies) would also suffer, with many possibly going out of business.
Enter the vicious cycle.
These companies are too big to let fail. So we won't.
I don't like it, but it's necessary.
(hopefully this is sufficiently politics-free to avoid thread-closure problems. admin: please delete if not)

 

[Steve Enemark]

I'd prefer seeing which train lines and air lines can make money without subsidization (in other words, reward those using sound, efficient business practices).

OK, fine. Let's see how the airlines do without their corporate welfare checks. But, given the choice, I'd rather travel by train. But I'm just silly that way, prefering speed, reliability, comfort and cheapness.
------------------
"Always make the audience suffer as much as possible" - Alfred Hitchcock

 

[RobertR]

given the choice, I'd rather travel by train.

Choice is good. Let's let consumers choose, not politicians.
------------------

 

[Mitty]

Anyone else feel that companies (not just airlines) may be using Sept. 11th as a justification to lay off employees?
I'm sure getting that vibe. Ordinarily bottom line, mass layoffs are terrible PR for companies, and the recent economic hiccups resulting from Sept. 11 are giving them a guilt free pass to eliminate as many jobs as they want. In non-organized companies, there's really nothing to stop them from letting experienced (read: higher salaried) employees go, waiting a while and then replacing them with cheaper labour; and they can do it without any public outcry. In fact, people will even sympathize with them.
Maybe I'm cynical. It just seems a lot more jobs are being lost than Sept. 11th is really responsible for.
------------------
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/uub/Forum9/HTML/007822.html
Scary Movie Challenge: 13, 12...8, 7 6 to go!

 

[BrianB]

Anyone else feel that companies (not just airlines) may be using Sept. 11th as a justification to lay off employees?

I believe companies are using it to do layoffs with less adverse publicity - they're using it to clean house in ways they wanted to do, but couldn't because of the bad publicity that the layoffs would garner in a regular atmosphere. Now, they're justifying their already poor financial position through Sept 11th & laying off staff, closing offices etc as they'd like to do.
Of course, I could be completely cynical too. I know what's happening to my wife's company/job & it smacks of the situation I've described.
------------------
Nothing In Particular

 

[MickeS]

Mitty, I agree with you. I think some business are just using Sept 11th as an excuse to finally make massive cuts.
Edited the rest out, no need to get into details... but I feel like BrianB does, my wife's business is also closing down, and Sept 11th is given as a reason, but I know they had problems before that, but couldn't shut down due to legal reasons. Now they finally can.
/Mike
[Edited last by MickeS on October 25, 2001 at 11:39 AM]