Originally Posted by
ATOBTTR
That’s not a straw a man as I’m aware of that. My fact pointed out that GE Aviation isn’t the problem within GE as a whole and that despite the other problems within GE, GE Aviation is one of its strongest areas and isn’t contributing to GE’s losses. You arguing to the contrary about GE as a whole when the discussion was about GE Aviation is the strawman.
Suggest you re-read my (tongue and cheek) post you responded to. My response you quoted was about GE (and my response was to a post about GE). You tried to switch the convo to GE Av.
GE is the company, GE Av is a Division of GE. Investors don't buy GE Av, they buy GE (which is why I used it). Regardless, I seriously doubt either has a great outlook at the moment.
Originally Posted by
ATOBTTR
You could just admit you were wrong or unaware and say “Gee I didn’t that despite cargo being small potatoes across the network as a whole that some specific routes do operate profitably in large part due to cargo”. But based on your last response and responses to other posters, I guess you’d rather be argumentative.
I wasn't wrong. As stated, I've worked in both cargo, ramp, system operations, RM and as an analyst. If you don't believe me, just look at an airline's financials. You can keep trying to spew misinformation, but saying it over and over doesn't make it true. Pax airlines don't fly flights just because of cargo. It's ancillary revenue and a small piece of it at that.
It's not an argument, it's a discussion. Keep trolling my friend!
TL;DR: Despite a.net and ft.com keyboard CEO assertions, pax airlines don't operate flights solely for cargo. (note: I know DL was (is?) operating some cargo only flights during COVID19, but that's going to be short term until quarantines are dropped).