Jim, I've been reading what you have said in many posts. I can't help it, but I think you're very angry about about how the "Big Cartels" screwed the upstate cities like SYC and your hometown ROC.
What on earth have I said that could give you that impression?
As a close school teacher friend puts it, the passionate get society's dirty work done. Airline management and unions are very passionate about keeping fares as high as possible, unnecessarily high, at the expense of consumers and local economies. Years of unjustly high fares at home at ROC have made me--along with all of our elected officials--passionate about denouncing the racket. The small and medium-size markets of this country don't have a well-funded management or union, to represent them. Thus, occasionally obsessive people like myself speak up for them. And we will continue to do so until broad-scale, long-lasting change occurs.
While I can understand you're angry about paying big bucks in the past, it can get a bit tiresome reading about your comments.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but the need to represent the consumer and community viewpoint remains. The Cartel has thoroughly earned our wrath, and will continue to enjoy it until a lot more change occurs.
I don't know how other feels about it but for me, if the big cartels are getting business, then they are getting business. But, it just a matter of times before the low cost carriers will flies into all cities and everybody will have a choice. It seems that you expected Southwest, AirTrans, and other low cost carriers to fly in all cities by now but that isn't gotta happened. It will takes time.
I'm not sure where you get that idea. I've written consistently that conservative growth is a key element of the financial success of low-fare carriers. The post 9/11 environment has opened new opportunities, and AirTran in particular has taken them. But still, you don't see *any* low-fare carrier--not even JetBlue--growing helter skelter the way People Express did in the 1980's.
Now, the big cartels are struggling and I have friends working there. They are worried they may lose jobs (so am I at Amtrak). But I get the sense you don't care about people losing job and you expect all the employees to be working at minimum wage while you can fly anywhere at a cost that you want it to be. That isn't gotta happened.
Unfortunately, I don't always make clear that I do care about the disruptions involved in the industry's changes. Losing a job is never fun, I know all about it, and about the fear of not being able to pay bills. But I firmly believe that all will be better off, and enjoy more jobs, in a reorganized industry that does not rely on exceptionally high fares to prop up 12-cent CASM's in order to be profitable.
As for "minimum wage..." that's a lie spread by Cartel unions. Southwest pays its people well, as is well known. It simply expects more work from them, and cross trains them as to be more valuable and productive in the organization. Why should WN hire a full baggage crew to service three flights, and play poker the rest of the day, when the same crew, on the same salaries, can service 10 flights? (That some cities, like ROC, have gotten into the baggage handling business to help new carriers, is another issue. But the point remains the same).
The idea that communities and consumer advocates want to see airline employees starving is a *lie* propagated by people with an interest in preserving the status quo.
Maybe we should be focusing on getting Southwest, Air Trans, or any low cost carriers to start flying into National Airport. Dave
Absolutely. I don't think WN would fly there, though, would cannibalize BWI. Both AirTran and JetBlue have expressed interest in DCA, though the last remarks to this effect (at least that I have seen) were before 9/11, and the current developments of these airlines in the DC area. As I said, wouldn't a B6 DCA station cannibalize IAD? Unless....B6 were to launch DCA-JFK, which pick a fight with the Cartel shuttles, and that (it seems to me) would go against B6's grain.