Posted on 09/12/2005 3:15:48 PM PDT by AGreatPer
Only Delta's pilots are unionized.
Well, this conversation has taken a few turns, but the word that should've been in its place is "mortgage" not hawk. I was merely under the incorrect impression that the slang originated as an adulteration of "hawk" but I was wrong about that. I was not suggesting that hawk is the term that should be used or what was intended. I knew they meant it in place of "pawn" - but of course when you pawn something, you lose its utility until you reclaim it. In fact, as I'm now aware, the whole point of the slang is to signify that the possessions are now 'imprisoned' at the pawn shop. That is not what Delta is doing with those assets. It is mortgaging them. The term "hock" is incorrect notwithstanding that it is slang.
They were a small airline that tried to go head to head against the big airlines at the same airports. American would schedule flights just before and just after People Express flights. Basically they could saturate any market People Express would try to enter. Also due to a lack of a sophisticated reservation system, they had too few seats available for the number of tickets sold. American and other airlines were happy to book them on their flights.
Really? I have to try that. (Makes me want to go on a trip!) But without waiting in line, do you get the seat of your choosing?
Remember the Braniff "Airline Strip" ad?
Tediously pedantic tonight, eh?
Hocking is pawning and has been for a long time. Maybe slang is used intentionally in the article to highlight the shabby state of affairs at Delta: reduced to raising cash at an all-night Vegas pawn shop.
Inefficient fuel-guzzling narrow-body money losers that were obsolete in 1979.
So do I, and I have NEVER not gotten an aisle on SWA and usually get the exit row. I check in online and show up 30 minutes before. SWA flyers seem to think they are not allowed to sit in the exit row so it is usually available, LOL. Also often the bulkhead, since they travel in packs and want to stay together. If I'm with DH, we will take opposite exit row aisles and be comfy. The SWA boarding process is actually quicker than the majors.
It still looked cool!
Yes! I am in the zone. =)
Hocking is pawning and has been for a long time.
I knew that all along, and have known that since I first heard the term. My error was in assuming that it was an adulterated form of "hawk" when it is not.
Maybe slang is used intentionally in the article to highlight the shabby state of affairs at Delta: reduced to raising cash at an all-night Vegas pawn shop.
Of course that's why it's being used. It is an expression of Reuters glee at the downfall of an evil capitalist institution. To use the term "mortgage" would confer too much dignity to the proceedings.
Out of passenger service (at least in the US) before my time. I flew a BAC-111 as a kid on Allegheny. That's probably as old as it gets for me.
Delta. They've been unlucky. They sealed in some union contracts about 3 weeks before 9/11 and were powerless to get out of them when air travel collapsed for months thereafter. Other airlines were much closer to contract expiration and did not have to endure cash drain as long.
But that's all past tense. That all just served to erase Delta's cash reserve. The real problem for Delta is what it has been for all the legacy carriers -- the business model won't work at $70/barrel with Low Cost Carriers present domestically.
It really all does come down to that. You can't book Southwest to London, England. You can't fund an entire airline on only flights to London, England. The legacy hub and spoke carriers used domestic spokes to bring passengers to their international hubs. If the spokes are choked by LCC's, they can't raise prices to deal with fuel price explosion.
What will happen for Delta is bankruptcy will let them redo interest payments and buy them time for Congress to either let them delay pension funding kill it altogether like United did. Both those items will unload a lot of costs from Delta and give them time for the cost cuts they've already instituted in their pay structure to take effect.
Reuters sucks.
And I've been in that zone. I know how it feels. ;O)
I agree, good points. Although I don't fly nearly as often as you do, they are always prompt, and I've always landed early. Once I got used to their little idiosyncrasies, or what I thought they were, I noticed how nicely everything went.
I actually learned about this from my brother, who is a market analyst who specializes in logistics related businesses and technologies. He regularly states that Southwest is one of the savviest companies in the transportation/logistics business generally, even in the abstract.
You are correct that there is a limit on how far out standard off-the-shelf futures contracts go, but that is not an intrinsic limit. Two companies can agree to any kind of futures contract they'd like, it just takes special effort to do something unusual. In the case of Southwest, the way I remember it is that back when crude was around $15/bbl, they went to the suppliers and offered to buy mountains of futures contracts that went way out, enough to cover most of their projected operating requirements. To make the suppliers go for it they built a substantial premium into the proposed contract, an equivalent of something like $20/bbl prices. Their suppliers were unable to resist such a fat margin over prevailing spot and future prices (30% or so) and happily agreed to the unusual futures contracts.
At the time, industry analysts thought they were insane to invest heavily in terribly over-priced fuel contracts. Southwest bought the contracts not as a hedge against market price fluctuations, which some other airlines do, but to live on so that the market price is irrelevant. Even if the fuel was going to cost them more, having highly predictable fuel costs allowed them to operate and plan much more effectively. And as we know today, those 'over-priced' fuel contracts turned out to be a spectacularly good investment.
I do have to wonder though: did they do this deal simply so that their profits would not be subject to the whims of fuel costs, did their internal analysts predict a steep rise in fuel prices and cleverly hedge, or both?
If your in the A group you are one of the first 30-40 to board so you can grab an exit row if you are quick for the additional legroom.
The way I see it-kill those CEO golden parachutes, and make their salary contigent on performance. As a stockholder I would be pissed if the company I had invested in was going south, and their CEO throws in the towel while leaving with millions. Read USAirways. That carrier takes a lot of heat on this board, but as one of their partners I am saying with a straight face that they are one of the better carriers out there. Customer service, ontime performance, etc. They hold us (express partner)to very high standards. It bothers me to know that AA will survive and USAir is in so much trouble..
Hope you're right!
I'm an airline employee, and we've given paycuts to help out. But these fuel prices are way off anybodies planning sheet!
I will miss that small, pathetic bag of peanuts, and that tiny roasted cinnamon cookie for breakfast. I prided myself in being able to beg for an entire canned Coke, all for myself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.