Your OP title is a misquote. And would actually suggest that he thinks they could still lose money again. @:-)

Anyway, how many unprofitable years has Southwest had in the past decades?

Thank you for factually linking the quote. We’ve already reached the level of calling him an idiot.

Shouldn't we be celebrating this point of our American flag carriers who sustained the disaster that was the 00s (9/11/SARS/oil/recession/etc.) and are pulling in these kind of profits today? To see their employees being properly compensated again?

I swear there’s a certain contingent of flyers who couldn’t give a damn about what the employees are getting paid and are entirely focused on their upgrade, or how great a Middle East carrier is...pathetic.

Apparently mods are trying to make the thread title match Dougie's exact quote. They've almost got it right. One more try should do the trick. :)

Mr. Parker, head over to Home Goods and purchase a bigger mirror for your office wall.

Your ego has obviously outgrown the current mirror hanging in your office....

I think some people are still holding out for another great recession so that generous FFer benefits will return for elite members. And you have to admit, having a huge segment of the population suffering economically is worth such an occurance. :rolleyes:

When I buy something, anything, I typically don't investigate how much employees are getting paid prior to making the purchase. Is that your normal routine? When you go to a restaurant do you first verify the salary of the staff rather than being focused on whether you steak was prepared correctly? :confused:

Why would a flyer be more interested in how much an employee gets paid over their upgrade? When I am traveling there are certain things that are important to me, I have never considered whether the the person cleaning the airport bathroom is paid well. So, as to not be pathetic per "tuolumne", next time the TSA is patting me down, rather than being worried if they are going to fondle my oysters I will rather inquire about their salary.

I am not entire sure what the OP is trying to get at here. New time I need to fly to Abu Dhabi, should I fly American, United, or Delta? :confused:

Why would you think higher profits necessarily mean more compensation for employees? In fact, a frequent plan to increase profits is to cut employee compensation.

Higher profits means a larger spread between what customers pay and the business's costs (including spending on employees). It can also mean the business doesn't have to try as hard to attract customers. If so, that's not a good thing for customers.

Higher profits can attract more entrants to an industry, increasing competition, which would tend to be good for customers. Unfortunately, that's not what's happening throughout the airline industry.

Parker also told the FTC that the merger would be good for consumers. It was amazing to me how many people on FT believed that at the time...

I've got a few defense contractors I can introduce you to...

But the broader point being that most CEOs lack Mr. Parker's sense of invincibility, external factors be damned.

How would various groups of people react to AA CEO's bold statement "I dont think we're ever going to lose money again"?

• Customers: OH NO! We're gonna get price-gouged!
• Employees: OH NO! No more raises, reduction in benefits, reduction in staff.
• Investors: OH NO! Priced far above the competition!
• Suppliers: OH NO! Reduction in purchases. We'll get paid late, if ever.
• Competitors: OH NO! They're divesting their low-margin business, so all our sales efforts will yield no profit!
• Journalists: OH NO! Now we won't have any bad news to report about AA!

Is there any group of people who would have a favorable view of that statement? I always thought CEOs rose to that position because they were exceptionally good at saying things that people want to hear. I wonder who AA's next CEO will be?

See: Gazprom

Given the responses, this regrettably does seem to be he case for some.

I care about the benefits and compensation of workers when making purchasing decisions. Of course, this is not fool proof, but I try where I can.

Of course, if I need to go to a desert city in the Middle East, I would have to fly a Gulf carrier. But I’m not going to connect in a desert hub to get somewhere because I don’t support the treatment of their employees, and the tactics they are using to try and undercut my own nation’s flag carriers.

I think it’s a great thing that AMR and UAL survived the absolute terror and devestation that was loosing 2 aircraft 9/11, bankruptcy, rising oil, SARS, and huge benefit and compensation slashes employees had to take to save their employers. It’s still pathetic in my eyes some people could care less that we are now in the other side, with all of that compromise and hardship being worth something - stable, large entities with strong networks, balance sheets, and compensation for their employees.

I know oligopoly gets thrown around a lot, but truth is the industry needed consolidation in order to survive. We had over decade of proof that it was too fragmented, and nearly a decade now as proof that it worked. Glenn Tilton was at the forefront, sounding the alarm almost as soon as he took over UAL Corp. in late 2002.

Of course he was brought in to engineer an acquisition/merger to save the company, and although it took him longer than him and the board though, he ultimately prevailed. CO could not survive on their own in a post DL/NW and UA/US (which nearly happened in 2010) world; US Air the same in a DL/NW and UA/CO one.

I personally think that telecoms/cable conglomerates have become too large and could stand to be split up without the worry of the marketplace being thrown into financial ruin. However, I could not stay the same in for the current US airline marketplace, which I’m confident which would be thrown into absolutely chaos if any forced breaking up the government took place. There’s also the little thing of US airlines being an essential part of US national security.

In short, the US airline marketplace is in a competitive posture in which the entrants can finally produce returns that cover their cost of capital - Something has been not happened for decades. This is what Mr. Parked was getting at.

Any/All of the following could put a big dent in AA's (as well as other airlines) bottom line:
(1)Fuel prices rise dramatically
(2)Recession
(3)A 9/11 type of event
(4)Employees demand and get much higher salaries
(5)More low cost carriers compete (especially on intl. routes) and also offer "bargain" FC/BC
(6)Congress finally passes legislation to protect consumers

I'm honestly really surprised at all the pay raises that have been happening in the industry. For consumers, there's only a few airlines, so they can charge really high prices and consumers have no other options. Why isn't it the same for employees? If pay is unilaterally slashed to poverty levels for all non-management employees, where are they going to go? It most cases in history, when there are very few competitors, salaries are low and prices are high and all the money goes to the top.

You do realize that 1 and 2 are inversely correlated with 5. The huge growth of LCCs is fueled by a low fuel price and a strong economy. This has led to significant price wars and the lowest average ticket prices consumers have seen in a while.

If you wish for any of these scenarios, while the airline may suffer, do expect it to come with a corresponding increase in ticket prices as well.