SHUPirate1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 3670 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1711 times:
But yes, that 106.2% breakeven loadfactor doesn't stand up to my own auditing skills, much like North American's -15.1%...83.5% is the number I calculated out, and is a more likely breakeven loadfactor for Continental.
Burma's constitutional referendum options: A. Yes, B. Go to Insein Prison!
Artsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4748 posts, RR: 32
Reply 7, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1687 times:
I am sure there must be some merit to the DOT numbers, but they are not an accurate reflection at all of what is happening on the ground. If they were, then you'd have seen UAL make money, and CO lose a ridiculously large amount, yet almost the opposite happened in reality.
Maybe it is based on domestic only or something like that.
Bjones From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 123 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 3 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1674 times:
Those numbers in the report can be a bit misleading. For instance look at ATA's numbers for other quarters and you will see they are drastically different. Look further and why are the expenses for the quarter almost double the same quarter in the previos year. The answer is found in their SEC filing for the quarter which shows a reorganization expense of $318,483,000 for the quarter. That will throw numbers way off for the quarter.