Originally Posted by noOnespecial
If I remeber correctly, which I do, UAL was given money after 9-11. They
were given more money from the govt a little while after that also.
According to
this article, the federal government gave out $5 billion to 427 air-travel companies following 9/11. United received $774 million of that.
Whar
do they do with it, cut jobs, screw employees, start ted, and spend millions
upgrading chicago, and now cut ticket prices.
You mean adapt their business model? United has made billions in operating cost cuts and they have a ways to go until they're profitable. At least its trending in the right direction.
Flyi (ACA) made a profit
after 9-11. Since UAL was in bankruptcy they were screwed also with
so they left united and went onn there own.
How can you differentiate ACA from United after 9/11? ACA made exactly as much money as United and Delta paid them. They fly under contract as a feeder carrier and get paid whether they're carrying 1 passenger or 50.
Instead of taking govt cheese like united did, FLYi restructured there leases to try and make it work.
I'm not convinced ACA didn't get money after 9/11, but even if they didn't, their fortunes were directly tied to United. Healthy United = Healthy ACA. And what does this have to do with lease restructuring? That all happened after ACA split from United and they had no one to blame for their troubles except themselves.
So yes FLYi prices = good, United prices = bad. And if you think
the millions they got in 2001 and 2002 arent still around in some shape or
form, I'd say you were mistaken.
I don't get your point. United and FlyI are both burning through cash reserves. Uniteds cash reserves are from a decade of record breaking profit along with some government assistance. ACAs cash reserves are from what United paid them, back when they were profitable. Its all the same money!