<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by SEA_Tigger:
Well, god forbid anything UA does makes sense, but it sure seems silly for them to prop-up money-losing routes by UAX, much less try and expand them.
Unless those UAX passangers are bringing in sufficient revenue on United flights from the hubs to cover the cost of flying them into the hubs, it seems to be a mix of insanity and stupidity to keep it going, much less expand it.</font>
At his last quarterly financials press conference before "resigning," to pursue other interests, Rono Dutta had some interesting comments about the RJ's. He said that UA only makes money when a pax gets off an SJ and onto a mainline flight. So naturally one of the analysts questioned why he wanted to move the percentage of UAX flying from around 20% up to %40. He didn't have much of an answer, but have no fear Hacker's here!