Originally Posted by
pbarnette
This is getting off topic, but a) NW was not profitable, at least not over any significantly long period, b) DL was not profitable, at least not over any significantly long period, and c) DL/NW is not profitable. The combined entity needs those cost savings simply to try and get into the black. My guess is even that will not be enough and that we won't see any of the legacies become consistently profitable any time soon.
Amen and +1. And it's not just DL, NW or DL/NW. Several well-regarded economists have researched the financial history of the airline industry as a whole and all came to the same conclusion. If one averages all the profits and losses of the commercial passenger aviation industry throughout its history, there has been a net loss. Even if one excludes the guaranteed-to-lose-money government owned airlines, there has still been a net loss because the bankruptcies, liquidations and short sale aquisitions erase any profits. So running a profitable airline is a relatively novel concept and a rare accomplishment. They all say they want to do it, but very few succeed.
I don't hold striving for profitably against DL. I do think, however, that some of their fee changes and policy changes have been ham-fisted and less than honestly presented.
Getting back on topic, it was probably wise for DL and Jeff Robertson in particular to stick to previously released policy information at last weekend's event. Some of Jeff's previous announcements here on FT have been perceived as . . . well, go back and look at the content of and response to some of his posts, and you'll see. He didn't do too well in the PR department.