Selling and Shorting delta stock would be a good plan with fast Eddie at the helm.

If someone had a 3 hour delay, then $200 seems fine to me. 6+, 12+, 24+ hour delays should get increasingly more in terms of voucher or points, IMO. At 24 hours, $200 is $8.30/hour. And it's not like this was weather or air traffic related. Plus those with 12-24 hour delays likely had to pay for hotels or other transport (unless willing to stand in line for hours at 1 AM behind 100s of people for hotel/meal vouchers and etc).

Gotcha. Back in 2014, there were bad delays at CLT, so pmUS rebooked me onto UA through ORD, which then had a diversion to MSN due to weather hammering ORD, then UA rebooked me onto DL nonstop to DCA.

Originally was SFO-CLT-DCA. Turned out to be SFO-MSN<ORD>-DCA.

Wow.

No power transfer switch in these racks? No secondary power for these components?

I don't get it.

Around 300 of about 7,000 data center components were discovered to not have been configured appropriately to avail backup power.


What a passive voice avoidance of having to state the true message:


We did not properly provide emergency backup power to around 300 of about 7,000 data center components.


So much clearer when you scrub out the PR and lawyer speak. :rolleyes:

That pretty much gets you fired in the disaster recovery business. Completely unacceptable. But kudos to Delta for actually telling customers what the real root cause was.

I have a different interpretation. While they likely have dual powerfeeds and dual power supplies for all devices, 300 of the devices had both power supplies plugged into the same power feed that went down (rather than each power supply fed from a separate independent feed). We've had this occur at several of our equipment site locations.

That's what I was hinting at. Shocking for an airline.

I spend a fair bit of time in datacentres and the companies I work with implement redundancy to the gills: dual power, dual network, dual fibre, dual interconnects, at least two backup copies, etc.

Unfortunately, airlines are like the private sector version of government IT, though may be a bit better. They have old rubbish, they do not invest enough, they'd rather misdirect people's attention to something gimmicky and they often lack skilled staff. For them it is more about patching it and keeping it going rather than bringing it into the 21st century. And, if it is cheaper to deal with an every-once-in-a-while crisis than invest into something new, where is the incentive? So many airlines are public companies and are in a thin margin business try to appease investors and provide shareholder value. IT costs money, it is not a money-maker for airlines, so it will always be down the pecking order compared to initiatives that generate revenue.

I hate to say this, but it is kinda' true :D.. (I own six shares lol -not that that's that much. ;))

And yet, Delta executive compensation was $37,919,099 in 2015, $15 million more than in 2011. I see where they have their priorities.

http://insiders.morningstar.com/trad...n.action?t=DAL

Wasn't Bastian & the Board not happy with the prior CIO wanting big budget increases for IT infrastructure? I recall something about that being their issue when the CIO was pushed out several months back.

Bastian is a finance and bottom-line guy. IT and security are not deemed important by most large corporations until the s**t hits the fan and a C-level loses his or her job. I've experienced it numerous times in my field. When the s**t does hit the fan, they all cry and wonder how it happened.

The vast majority of that figure came from restricted stock awards, so not the same as cash that buys you servers and pays for power bills ;)

Using restricted stock as a means to finance investments/capital investment projects and cover operational costs? It's been done before.