MohawkWeekend wrote:

The Citation that recently went down in Connecticut had 2 passengers - Doctors.

I don't know whether they were flying on business or vacations. But I believe there are a lot more people flying private because 1) Americans with really good jobs ($250k plus) usually have 401k and 403b that are worth millions and houses that are worth millions. $20 to $30 k isn't really a show stopper.
2) People with money won't put up with the US airline experience anymore. We recently had an incident at CLE were a passenger from NY assaulted a teenage in the TSA line. It's not just crazy on the planes.

Non-ULCC AIrline's absolutely need every high revenue passengers to be profitable and survive. We're going to see that in the first earnings statements after payroll support ends.

A $250k income is not all that. Take out taxes, 401k contributions (before you max out), insurance, etc., and your take home is about $15,000 a month. That's actually NOT that much money. Throw in a $3500 mortgage, $500 in car payments, $1000 for kid college contributions, and $750 in utilities, and you're down to under $9,000 in disposable income. Nobody is going to be flying corporate when your income gap isnt that big.

Those are terrible numbers for AA and UA. Most likely related to some expected recovery in business bookings that did not happen.

JetBlue also came out with their guidance this morning.
http://otp.investis.com/generic/sec/sec ... 3&Type=PDF
revenue expected to now be down 6 to 9% vs guidance of down 4 to 9% from late July.

A lot of businesses that were looking at 9/1 restart dates have either gone to incremental postponements (instead of delaying 90 days, they're delaying 30, and then another 30, and then another 30 (kind of like what AA does when they do their delays....)). A lot of other companies have said f**k it, and are now hands-off until 1/1. My company opted for the 1/1 restart just yesterday.

washingtonflyer wrote:

A lot of businesses that were looking at 9/1 restart dates have either gone to incremental postponements (instead of delaying 90 days, they're delaying 30, and then another 30, and then another 30 (kind of like what AA does when they do their delays....)). A lot of other companies have said f**k it, and are now hands-off until 1/1. My company opted for the 1/1 restart just yesterday.

Yes it seems the vibe for rest-of-year travel has turned distinctively negative by corporate America as everyone has come back from the Labor Day holiday. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the US big four carriers scramble to re-visit rest-of-year capacity over the next two weeks. I expect to see further domestic and international cutbacks in schedules for the balance of 2021.

washingtonflyer wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

The Citation that recently went down in Connecticut had 2 passengers - Doctors.

I don't know whether they were flying on business or vacations. But I believe there are a lot more people flying private because 1) Americans with really good jobs ($250k plus) usually have 401k and 403b that are worth millions and houses that are worth millions. $20 to $30 k isn't really a show stopper.
2) People with money won't put up with the US airline experience anymore. We recently had an incident at CLE were a passenger from NY assaulted a teenage in the TSA line. It's not just crazy on the planes.

Non-ULCC AIrline's absolutely need every high revenue passengers to be profitable and survive. We're going to see that in the first earnings statements after payroll support ends.

A $250k income is not all that. Take out taxes, 401k contributions (before you max out), insurance, etc., and your take home is about $15,000 a month. That's actually NOT that much money. Throw in a $3500 mortgage, $500 in car payments, $1000 for kid college contributions, and $750 in utilities, and you're down to under $9,000 in disposable income. Nobody is going to be flying corporate when your income gap isnt that big.

This is the breakdown of leisure traveler income:



https://www.cirium.com/thoughtcloud/us- ... 9-outlook/

Seat1F wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

A lot of businesses that were looking at 9/1 restart dates have either gone to incremental postponements (instead of delaying 90 days, they're delaying 30, and then another 30, and then another 30 (kind of like what AA does when they do their delays....)). A lot of other companies have said f**k it, and are now hands-off until 1/1. My company opted for the 1/1 restart just yesterday.

Yes it seems the vibe for rest-of-year travel has turned distinctively negative by corporate America as everyone has come back from the Labor Day holiday. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the US big four carriers scramble to re-visit rest-of-year capacity over the next two weeks. I expect to see further domestic and international cutbacks in schedules for the balance of 2021.

Yes there will be cutbacks to the end of year schedules since many airlines still have their 2019 schedules in place, but some airlines put out their q4 guidance today, and long story short don't expect anything extreme.

G4:
"We will continue to monitor trends and tweak fourth quarter capacity accordingly but given peak-period performance, we remain encouraged about the upcoming holiday travel season."
https://ir.allegiantair.com/news-releas ... 21-traffic

AA:
"The Company’s booked load factor for peak travel periods, including the fourth-quarter holiday periods, remains very strong"
https://americanairlines.gcs-web.com/sec-filings

WN:
"Based on current bookings, the Company is experiencing fairly typical booking patterns for holiday travel periods in fourth quarter 2021"
https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/ ... F&hasPdf=1

Midwestindy wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

What exactly does AA "Adjusted total operating expenses (excluding fuel) ($ millions) (b)$490 - $500 mean?

Thats F9, not AA

https://ir.flyfrontier.com/static-files ... fe69895c02


DL:

https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/C ... da9aec.pdf

Missed that - thanks

washingtonflyer wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

The Citation that recently went down in Connecticut had 2 passengers - Doctors.

I don't know whether they were flying on business or vacations. But I believe there are a lot more people flying private because 1) Americans with really good jobs ($250k plus) usually have 401k and 403b that are worth millions and houses that are worth millions. $20 to $30 k isn't really a show stopper.
2) People with money won't put up with the US airline experience anymore. We recently had an incident at CLE were a passenger from NY assaulted a teenage in the TSA line. It's not just crazy on the planes.

Non-ULCC AIrline's absolutely need every high revenue passengers to be profitable and survive. We're going to see that in the first earnings statements after payroll support ends.

A $250k income is not all that. Take out taxes, 401k contributions (before you max out), insurance, etc., and your take home is about $15,000 a month. That's actually NOT that much money. Throw in a $3500 mortgage, $500 in car payments, $1000 for kid college contributions, and $750 in utilities, and you're down to under $9,000 in disposable income. Nobody is going to be flying corporate when your income gap isnt that big.

I was guesstimating the income of each of the 2 doctors who tragically were onboard the Citation that went down in Connecticut. I read later that they were Cardiologists so their income was probably multitudes of that. https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/ma ... s/2483860/

washingtonflyer wrote:

A lot of businesses that were looking at 9/1 restart dates have either gone to incremental postponements (instead of delaying 90 days, they're delaying 30, and then another 30, and then another 30 (kind of like what AA does when they do their delays....)). A lot of other companies have said f**k it, and are now hands-off until 1/1. My company opted for the 1/1 restart just yesterday.

The longer this goes on, the more companies are going to elect for a permanent hybrid or virtual schedule.

Many companies already have.

Our cities are empty…it isnt just NYC. Ive been in downtown Denver for a few days…a ghost town.

I am very vocal in my belief that the business travel levels of 2019 will never be back. There are many reasons for this: cost, reducing emissions, Covid concerns…But the main reason is that we have the technology to do it a lot easier than ever before.

The main pushback I get is the “I like corporate travel” argument. But that isnt good enough to override all the arguments above

Midwestindy wrote:

Seat1F wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

A lot of businesses that were looking at 9/1 restart dates have either gone to incremental postponements (instead of delaying 90 days, they're delaying 30, and then another 30, and then another 30 (kind of like what AA does when they do their delays....)). A lot of other companies have said f**k it, and are now hands-off until 1/1. My company opted for the 1/1 restart just yesterday.

Yes it seems the vibe for rest-of-year travel has turned distinctively negative by corporate America as everyone has come back from the Labor Day holiday. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the US big four carriers scramble to re-visit rest-of-year capacity over the next two weeks. I expect to see further domestic and international cutbacks in schedules for the balance of 2021.

Yes there will be cutbacks to the end of year schedules since many airlines still have their 2019 schedules in place, but some airlines put out their q4 guidance today, and long story short don't expect anything extreme.

G4:
"We will continue to monitor trends and tweak fourth quarter capacity accordingly but given peak-period performance, we remain encouraged about the upcoming holiday travel season."
https://ir.allegiantair.com/news-releas ... 21-traffic

AA:
"The Company’s booked load factor for peak travel periods, including the fourth-quarter holiday periods, remains very strong"
https://americanairlines.gcs-web.com/sec-filings

WN:
"Based on current bookings, the Company is experiencing fairly typical booking patterns for holiday travel periods in fourth quarter 2021"
https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/ ... F&hasPdf=1

All carriers are not affected the same way. I see no reason ULCCs need to cut capacity ahead of time. On the other hand, UA seeing revenue still down 33% in Q3 is really bad. They can keep saying that there will no change to united Next plan, but if international business traffic doesn't come back for a few years, there just isn't enough revenue for UA to push forward with its expansion plans.

Are any industry insiders seeing hiring being reduced from the early summer announcements?

jfklganyc wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

A lot of businesses that were looking at 9/1 restart dates have either gone to incremental postponements (instead of delaying 90 days, they're delaying 30, and then another 30, and then another 30 (kind of like what AA does when they do their delays....)). A lot of other companies have said f**k it, and are now hands-off until 1/1. My company opted for the 1/1 restart just yesterday.

The longer this goes on, the more companies are going to elect for a permanent hybrid or virtual schedule.

Many companies already have.

Our cities are empty…it isnt just NYC. Ive been in downtown Denver for a few days…a ghost town.

I am very vocal in my belief that the business travel levels of 2019 will never be back. There are many reasons for this: cost, reducing emissions, Covid concerns…But the main reason is that we have the technology to do it a lot easier than ever before.

The main pushback I get is the “I like corporate travel” argument. But that isnt good enough to override all the arguments above

Maybe for a few years but eventually the remote virtual thing will lead to laziness and complacency and companies will put an end to it. I’ve been saying that for quite some time now. Currently because schools are still remote in some areas and other aspects of life aren’t back there are less distractions. Once distractions return to 2018-2019 levels people working from home will start doing a progressively lousier job

World class cities have continued to experience rising incomes and house prices for the most part. They only look empty. And those people living in tents on the street have never been the ones buying airline tickets. The economics of this pandemic are odd. The one commercial office in our condo is a worldwide employment recruiter for high skilled blue collar workers. They have signs out - ALL skills needed. Probably about everyone of those hired will be taking trips to far off locations.

LNCS0930 wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

A lot of businesses that were looking at 9/1 restart dates have either gone to incremental postponements (instead of delaying 90 days, they're delaying 30, and then another 30, and then another 30 (kind of like what AA does when they do their delays....)). A lot of other companies have said f**k it, and are now hands-off until 1/1. My company opted for the 1/1 restart just yesterday.

The longer this goes on, the more companies are going to elect for a permanent hybrid or virtual schedule.

Many companies already have.

Our cities are empty…it isnt just NYC. Ive been in downtown Denver for a few days…a ghost town.

I am very vocal in my belief that the business travel levels of 2019 will never be back. There are many reasons for this: cost, reducing emissions, Covid concerns…But the main reason is that we have the technology to do it a lot easier than ever before.

The main pushback I get is the “I like corporate travel” argument. But that isnt good enough to override all the arguments above

Maybe for a few years but eventually the remote virtual thing will lead to laziness and complacency and companies will put an end to it. I’ve been saying that for quite some time now. Currently because schools are still remote in some areas and other aspects of life aren’t back there are less distractions. Once distractions return to 2018-2019 levels people working from home will start doing a progressively lousier job

I find that strange as generally people tend to become better at doing something the longer they do it and the more accustomed they get to it. As such, it's more likely that people will become better at remote work, not worse at it as time passes. What I think the airlines really should be worried about is not so much the short term effect of the pandemic but the longer term impacts on business travel. Most executives today are still in the Baby Boomer/Gen X age range and they seem to be the most hostile to remote work. As more and more millennials and Gen Zers ascend to positions that would have otherwise required travel and to senior management positions, I think they will be a lot more open to forgoing travel and using remote work as an alternative.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

World class cities have continued to experience rising incomes and house prices for the most part. They only look empty. And those people living in tents on the street have never been the ones buying airline tickets. The economics of this pandemic are odd. The one commercial office in our condo is a worldwide employment recruiter for high skilled blue collar workers. They have signs out - ALL skills needed. Probably about everyone of those hired will be taking trips to far off locations.

Offices are only occupied at 20% to 30% of normal levels.

Cities are empty of their workers

That cannot be disputed

MohawkWeekend wrote:

Are any industry insiders seeing hiring being reduced from the early summer announcements?

My impression so far is that airlines are treating this as a short term blip and demand will be coming back by holiday season. I'd be surprised if any airlines have changed their hiring outlook so far. I think that if domestic business demand is not back to close to 2019 level by next summer (which seemed to be AA's working assumption based on their Q2 comments), the big 3 will have to re-evaluate their future outlook.

The current level of business travel (down 60% vs 2019) is obviously unsustainable for legacy airlines. But even a smaller drop of 20% down for domestic/Latam business and 50% down for TATL/TPAC business by next summer will be disastrous for Big 3 imo.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Can you provide documentation of that statistic? I would bet that is going to vary drastically by region.

Per WSJ story 2 days ago;

Offices in 10 major U.S. cities were just 33.1% occupied in the week ending Aug. 25, according to Kastle Systems, an access-control company that tracks how many people swipe into buildings. That figure is a slight increase over the prior week but down from a 34.8% peak in late July.
In New York and San Francisco, the two worst markets among the 10 major metros tracked by Kastle, occupancy rates were a mere 22.3% and 19.7%, respectively.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/office-occ ... 1631016001

This weeks update



https://i.ibb.co/7KTFYmk/Kastle090621.png

America essentially has 2/3 of its office jobs working from home.

Amazon announced some major hiring for its 'office type' employees. Seattle itself is getting 12,000 of them. Few at this point will actually be going down town just now, but it bodes well for the apartments and condos which are being built at the 10K plus per year. Google for links, this really is old news.

jfklganyc wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

World class cities have continued to experience rising incomes and house prices for the most part. They only look empty. And those people living in tents on the street have never been the ones buying airline tickets. The economics of this pandemic are odd. The one commercial office in our condo is a worldwide employment recruiter for high skilled blue collar workers. They have signs out - ALL skills needed. Probably about everyone of those hired will be taking trips to far off locations.

Offices are only occupied at 20% to 30% of normal levels.

Cities are empty of their workers

That cannot be disputed

Offices are largely empty, but that doesn't mean that business still doesn't have to get done. Go out to flyover country and in many facilities and manufacturing plants, its more like "what coronavirus"? They're all producing full out.

White collar gets to play from their home offices; can't drop a 150 ton heat of molten steel into your kitchen without consequences.

As to travel: its rebounding and in some places becoming required. We snagged a client last month on a $1,000,000 project because three of us were willing to fly out to Cedar Rapids, IA and meet with the client and have dinner whereas the two other firms in the beauty pageant were too afraid to do anything but Zoom/Webex/Teams calls. I was told privately by the SVP of sales that one of the main reasons why we were selected is because we had the "balls" to get out and see them....

washingtonflyer wrote:

jfklganyc wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

World class cities have continued to experience rising incomes and house prices for the most part. They only look empty. And those people living in tents on the street have never been the ones buying airline tickets. The economics of this pandemic are odd. The one commercial office in our condo is a worldwide employment recruiter for high skilled blue collar workers. They have signs out - ALL skills needed. Probably about everyone of those hired will be taking trips to far off locations.

Offices are only occupied at 20% to 30% of normal levels.

Cities are empty of their workers

That cannot be disputed

Offices are largely empty, but that doesn't mean that business still doesn't have to get done. Go out to flyover country and in many facilities and manufacturing plants, its more like "what coronavirus"? They're all producing full out.

White collar gets to play from their home offices; can't drop a 150 ton heat of molten steel into your kitchen without consequences.

As to travel: its rebounding and in some places becoming required. We snagged a client last month on a $1,000,000 project because three of us were willing to fly out to Cedar Rapids, IA and meet with the client and have dinner whereas the two other firms in the beauty pageant were too afraid to do anything but Zoom/Webex/Teams calls. I was told privately by the SVP of sales that one of the main reasons why we were selected is because we had the "balls" to get out and see them....

The thing is, those white collar workers represent the overwhelming bulk of overall business travel. So yes I agree that smaller businesses and businesses that require physical presence will resume travel out of necessity but it’s not until white collar traffic returns that the airlines are going to see a meaningful return for business travel.

Seems W21 more comparable to last winter versus 2019 in terms of actual passengers flying? Of course on much weaker revenues. It seems like fall and winter 21/22 will hit legacy carriers again hardest.

Question I have is for the F9,NK, G4; Should also expect lower demand given lesser stimulus money pushing demand (certainly most people spent vs saved in 2020) and without payroll support propping up supply.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

This weeks update



https://i.ibb.co/7KTFYmk/Kastle090621.png

America essentially has 2/3 of its office jobs working from home.

Thank you for this. This does show there is a huge disparity between cities. All cities are way down, but some much more than others.

the cities that have a lot of people working from home will continue to have a lot of people work from home even next year. The remote working policies are very flexible around NYC area, so I don't expect everyone to go back to office (maybe 60 to 70% will?). Most companies are probably going to also downsize their office space to live with this new reality.

Again, how that affects business travel is a different discussion. I do think business travel will eventually surpass 2019 numbers, but how much larger will leisure be by then?

flyboy80 wrote:

Seems W21 more comparable to last winter versus 2019 in terms of actual passengers flying? Of course on much weaker revenues. It seems like fall and winter 21/22 will hit legacy carriers again hardest.

Question I have is for the F9,NK, G4; Should also expect lower demand given lesser stimulus money pushing demand (certainly most people spent vs saved in 2020) and without payroll support propping up supply.

I don't think there's any way the market regresses to the lows of last winter. The leisure market has shown itself to be resilient and I think we will start to see bookings for winter holidays in the next month or two. The business market is still weak but relatively much stronger than it was a year ago. Remember that at the lowest point, we were seeing business travel 10-20% of 2019 levels. Now we are at 20-50% regionally and 30% nationally.

Midwestindy wrote:

Seat1F wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

A lot of businesses that were looking at 9/1 restart dates have either gone to incremental postponements (instead of delaying 90 days, they're delaying 30, and then another 30, and then another 30 (kind of like what AA does when they do their delays....)). A lot of other companies have said f**k it, and are now hands-off until 1/1. My company opted for the 1/1 restart just yesterday.

Yes it seems the vibe for rest-of-year travel has turned distinctively negative by corporate America as everyone has come back from the Labor Day holiday. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the US big four carriers scramble to re-visit rest-of-year capacity over the next two weeks. I expect to see further domestic and international cutbacks in schedules for the balance of 2021.

Yes there will be cutbacks to the end of year schedules since many airlines still have their 2019 schedules in place, but some airlines put out their q4 guidance today, and long story short don't expect anything extreme.

G4:
"We will continue to monitor trends and tweak fourth quarter capacity accordingly but given peak-period performance, we remain encouraged about the upcoming holiday travel season."
https://ir.allegiantair.com/news-releas ... 21-traffic

AA:
"The Company’s booked load factor for peak travel periods, including the fourth-quarter holiday periods, remains very strong"
https://americanairlines.gcs-web.com/sec-filings

WN:
"Based on current bookings, the Company is experiencing fairly typical booking patterns for holiday travel periods in fourth quarter 2021"
https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/ ... F&hasPdf=1

My comment related to corporate travel for the balance of the year on the big four US carriers. Holiday travel and G4 have nothing to do with that.

chrisair wrote:

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

$250k? Yeah right. Thats in the demographic that will buy domestic first or maybe splurge on J to Europe for a special trip but not regular customers of private charters.

$2.5 M maybe.

Jet Cards make private more "affordable." Wheels Up for someone with $250k/yr isn't unreasonable. They'll use it once or twice a year and all is good. But nobody is going to pull from their 401k/403b/home equity to pay for private. I mean, really?

If you want to see how busy private is, NetJets has suspended all jet card sales.

Cubsrule wrote:

Does any road warrior have an employer or clients who will pay for charter?

There are certain cases where companies can (and do) justify the use of a company jet or charter. You need to move many people between sites routinely? It's faster/easier/cheaper to charter especially when you look at the routing. Walmart is famous for moving large groups of people via their jets. If you're based in Bentonville, Ark., and need to get a team of six to the stores in Spokane, Boise and Idaho Falls, it's far more efficient to move them via your own metal than sending them on all over creation on commercial.

I own a high-end limo company in LA, and I literally take people to their private jets from Van Nuys to Orange County. There isn't anyone in the $250k-$500k income range taking private, and the closest they come to flying private is through Jet Suitex. The only ones flying private are the the ones living in $5m + homes, and most of them are in the $10m-$20m house range. I also have quite a few private charter pilots, and they fly the extremely wealthy and superstars. Case in point a couple of weeks ago, after flying from Paris to LA, they were flying someone from Seattle to New Zealand in a Bombardier Global 7500(I believe).

Even though I personally fall in that income range, and a lot of my friends do, I don't think anyone of us have ever considered private. Heck, we usually fly economy domestically and hope for an upgrade, and buy international J during a fare sale when LAX-Europe is $2k.

Will SW and AA pilots go from too much work to not enough very shortly?

Seat1F wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

Seat1F wrote:

Yes it seems the vibe for rest-of-year travel has turned distinctively negative by corporate America as everyone has come back from the Labor Day holiday. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the US big four carriers scramble to re-visit rest-of-year capacity over the next two weeks. I expect to see further domestic and international cutbacks in schedules for the balance of 2021.

Yes there will be cutbacks to the end of year schedules since many airlines still have their 2019 schedules in place, but some airlines put out their q4 guidance today, and long story short don't expect anything extreme.

G4:
"We will continue to monitor trends and tweak fourth quarter capacity accordingly but given peak-period performance, we remain encouraged about the upcoming holiday travel season."
https://ir.allegiantair.com/news-releas ... 21-traffic

AA:
"The Company’s booked load factor for peak travel periods, including the fourth-quarter holiday periods, remains very strong"
https://americanairlines.gcs-web.com/sec-filings

WN:
"Based on current bookings, the Company is experiencing fairly typical booking patterns for holiday travel periods in fourth quarter 2021"
https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/ ... F&hasPdf=1

My comment related to corporate travel for the balance of the year on the big four US carriers. Holiday travel and G4 have nothing to do with that.

"It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the US big four carriers scramble to re-visit rest-of-year capacity over the next two weeks. I expect to see further domestic and international cutbacks in schedules for the balance of 2021"

Notice how I included 3 airlines, not just G4. But regardless...

This has everything to do with holiday capacity, because the months in question are largely shaped by major holiday periods, and are also some of the slowest months of the year for corporate travel outside of October/early Nov (and the October schedules are already finalized).

Cases have stabilized, and booking declines have done the same. Airlines bookings for November/December didn't fall off, for example UBS's weekly booking report shows airline domestic bookings for November are at 89% of 2019. No reason to unnecessarily slash capacity more than necessary, as evidenced by WN affirming today that they plan to operate 95% of 2019 capacity in Q4

DoctorVenkman wrote:

flyboy80 wrote:

Seems W21 more comparable to last winter versus 2019 in terms of actual passengers flying? Of course on much weaker revenues. It seems like fall and winter 21/22 will hit legacy carriers again hardest.

Question I have is for the F9,NK, G4; Should also expect lower demand given lesser stimulus money pushing demand (certainly most people spent vs saved in 2020) and without payroll support propping up supply.

I don't think there's any way the market regresses to the lows of last winter. The leisure market has shown itself to be resilient and I think we will start to see bookings for winter holidays in the next month or two. The business market is still weak but relatively much stronger than it was a year ago. Remember that at the lowest point, we were seeing business travel 10-20% of 2019 levels. Now we are at 20-50% regionally and 30% nationally.

You are correct on all counts, except business travel is more around 40%

LAXdude1023 wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

This weeks update



https://i.ibb.co/7KTFYmk/Kastle090621.png

America essentially has 2/3 of its office jobs working from home.

Thank you for this. This does show there is a huge disparity between cities. All cities are way down, but some much more than others.

20 points is significant, but not a "huge disparity." What is huge, is that more than half of office workers in Dallas, Houston and Austin are working remotely, in spite of a multitude of comments within this thread that things are back to normal in Texas.

Just a thought. Keep an eye on bookings - route increases / decreases on Southwest Airlines to determine how well the airline industry is doing un the USA. Isn't Southwest Airlines the airfare leader?

flyboy80 wrote:

Seems W21 more comparable to last winter versus 2019 in terms of actual passengers flying? Of course on much weaker revenues. It seems like fall and winter 21/22 will hit legacy carriers again hardest.

Question I have is for the F9,NK, G4; Should also expect lower demand given lesser stimulus money pushing demand (certainly most people spent vs saved in 2020) and without payroll support propping up supply.

I think people are very cautious about spending money because of covid-19 and the economy. Instead of traveling, people will spend the stimulus money on rent, food, bills, paying off debt etc.

What would really be helpful is a chart that showed monthly or quarterly cost per available seat mile and revenue per available seat mile by airline. Are those readily available?

dc10lover wrote:

Just a thought. Keep an eye on bookings - route increases / decreases on Southwest Airlines to determine how well the airline industry is doing un the USA. Isn't Southwest Airlines the airfare leader?

WN said yesterday that next year will be an enormous year for the airline, as the are looking to exercise all their options on inducting new aircraft.

Yeah WN is the airfare leader though, the US3 base their domestic pricing off of what WN does.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

What would really be helpful is a chart that showed monthly or quarterly cost per available seat mile and revenue per available seat mile by airline. Are those readily available?

Can't compare monthly since its reported on a quarterly basis.

Q3 2021 comparisons coming next month will be useful, but any comparison from Q2 2020->Q2 2021 will be wonky since seat blocking was in place for at least one airline, which throws off the ASM values in the CASM/RASM calculations.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

WidebodyPTV wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Thank you for this. This does show there is a huge disparity between cities. All cities are way down, but some much more than others.

20 points is significant, but not a "huge disparity." What is huge, is that more than half of office workers in Dallas, Houston and Austin are working remotely, in spite of a multitude of comments within this thread that things are back to normal in Texas.

It gives a good indication which markets will be fastest to return to the office in larger numbers. Texas is harder hit in this stage of the pandemic than California or New York, yet a much larger portion of the population is working from the office.

LAXintl wrote:

LAXdude1023 wrote:

Can you provide documentation of that statistic? I would bet that is going to vary drastically by region.

Per WSJ story 2 days ago;

Offices in 10 major U.S. cities were just 33.1% occupied in the week ending Aug. 25, according to Kastle Systems, an access-control company that tracks how many people swipe into buildings. That figure is a slight increase over the prior week but down from a 34.8% peak in late July.
In New York and San Francisco, the two worst markets among the 10 major metros tracked by Kastle, occupancy rates were a mere 22.3% and 19.7%, respectively.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/office-occ ... 1631016001

Note, these are occupancy rates from one access control company only covering 2,000 buildings across the entire US.

I'd use these numbers as a rough gauge to compare which markets are recovering fastest by occupancy rates, because similar companies have different numbers given we are talking about relatively small sample sizes considering there are millions of office buildings in the US.

For example, Brivio says:

"Despite a slight uptick since the start of the year, office use in major markets remains just a fraction of pre-pandemic averages from the first quarter of 2020 — 38 percent in New York, 49 percent in Chicago and 62 percent in Los Angeles, according to anonymized data from Brivo."

https://therealdeal.com/issues_articles/delta-force/

I don't see how NYC can be back to 38% occupancy by this point.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

washingtonflyer wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

The Citation that recently went down in Connecticut had 2 passengers - Doctors.

I don't know whether they were flying on business or vacations. But I believe there are a lot more people flying private because 1) Americans with really good jobs ($250k plus) usually have 401k and 403b that are worth millions and houses that are worth millions. $20 to $30 k isn't really a show stopper.
2) People with money won't put up with the US airline experience anymore. We recently had an incident at CLE were a passenger from NY assaulted a teenage in the TSA line. It's not just crazy on the planes.

Non-ULCC AIrline's absolutely need every high revenue passengers to be profitable and survive. We're going to see that in the first earnings statements after payroll support ends.

A $250k income is not all that. Take out taxes, 401k contributions (before you max out), insurance, etc., and your take home is about $15,000 a month. That's actually NOT that much money. Throw in a $3500 mortgage, $500 in car payments, $1000 for kid college contributions, and $750 in utilities, and you're down to under $9,000 in disposable income. Nobody is going to be flying corporate when your income gap isnt that big.

I was guesstimating the income of each of the 2 doctors who tragically were onboard the Citation that went down in Connecticut. I read later that they were Cardiologists so their income was probably multitudes of that. https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/ma ... s/2483860/

My brother and his wife are both physicians and no kids. Albeit they're not cardiologists, which a successful one can earn $750k/year to upwards of $1m, but they just recently started buying international J, even though they still fly Frontier domestically if the price is cheap...but they are annoyingly cheap...

LAXdude1023 wrote:

tphuang wrote:

I don't see how NYC can be back to 38% occupancy by this point.

NYC is at 22.3%.

Let's be explicit:

It's not at 22.3%, it's 22.3% for office buildings under Kastle systems umbrella, which is only 2,000 buildings across the entire US.

For example in Chicago, Kastle systems has office occupancy at 25-30%, while the Chicago business alliance has occupancy at slightly under 40%, and another office tracking system (Brivio that I cited above) has it at nearly 49%.

Moral is that these numbers are not exact, since they are using small sample sizes.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

What would really be helpful is a chart that showed monthly or quarterly cost per available seat mile and revenue per available seat mile by airline. Are those readily available?

Can't compare monthly since its reported on a quarterly basis.

Q3 2021 comparisons coming next month will be useful, but any comparison from Q2 2020->Q2 2021 will be wonky since seat blocking was in place for at least one airline, which throws off the ASM values in the CASM/RASM calculations.

Do you know (or think) any US airline will report a Q3 RASM greater than its CASM? Perhaps a ULCC?

Well NFL games are not stopping so far there's gotta be some fans flying during this period,as a Bronco fan i tried looking at flights to and from JFK on DL and its full on the way back to LAX...OH well i watch the game from home...

dlflynhayn wrote:

Well NFL games are not stopping so far there's gotta be some fans flying during this period,as a Bronco fan i tried looking at flights to and from JFK on DL and its full on the way back to LAX...OH well i watch the game from home...

I'm in NYC right now, it's the US Open, New York Fashion Week, and 20th anniversary of 9/11, so flights are more full right now.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

Do you know (or think) any US airline will report a Q3 RASM greater than its CASM? Perhaps a ULCC?

G4, SY, WN, and maybe a couple others are my guesses.

Revenue is coming in at lower end of guidance, but fuel prices are also coming in below guidance so there is a bit of an offset there.

Midwestindy wrote:

G4, SY, WN, and maybe a couple others are my guesses.

Revenue is coming in at lower end of guidance, but fuel prices are also coming in below guidance so there is a bit of an offset there.

Delta is still anticipating a pre-tax adjusted (ie excluding special items) profit for Q3 despite revenues at the lower end of guidance.

panamair wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

G4, SY, WN, and maybe a couple others are my guesses.

Revenue is coming in at lower end of guidance, but fuel prices are also coming in below guidance so there is a bit of an offset there.

Delta is still anticipating a pre-tax adjusted (ie excluding special items) profit for Q3 despite revenues at the lower end of guidance.

Our tax dollars at work…

WidebodyPTV wrote:

panamair wrote:

Midwestindy wrote:

G4, SY, WN, and maybe a couple others are my guesses.

Revenue is coming in at lower end of guidance, but fuel prices are also coming in below guidance so there is a bit of an offset there.

Delta is still anticipating a pre-tax adjusted (ie excluding special items) profit for Q3 despite revenues at the lower end of guidance.

Our tax dollars at work…

No, government support money would be counted as part of GAAP results; it is excluded from the "adjusted" figure. For example for Q2: Delta reported a GAAP pre-tax profit of $776m due to the payroll support funds; without that, they reported an adjusted pre-tax loss of $881m. For Q3, they are guiding to an adjusted (i.e., without government money and other special items) pre-tax profit.

Delete...duplicate post

tphuang wrote:

I don't see how NYC can be back to 38% occupancy by this point.

Yeah no kidding. I wonder how "occupancy" is measured. If your staff are working from home most days of the month but come in to the office 4 days a month for face to face meetings, how is that measured in office occupancy terms? Are they office-based or home-based?