The future of airlines

[Nkosi]

In reply to: bananabender on Tuesday 08/07/08 04:34pm

It is actually very simple: The heaver the passenger the more fuel will be burnt to get that passenger from A to B. Age, color, creed and height will not affect fuel burn. So, a weight penalty is not a bad idea and is actually being proposed by an American airline.

[Andus]

Thats right stop taking this personally peoples it;s numbers bums on seats cago weight, it costs to transport weight . pay for the weight you transport be it luggage or ya ass .On the other side do little light people with little luggage pay less ?

[swuzzlebubble]

In reply to: Andus on Tuesday 08/07/08 05:18pm

QUOTE

do little light people with little luggage pay less

You would probably have a base rate with a certain all-up allowance (say 100kg) and above that pays penatly per kg.

But below it would not be any cheaper.

Eg kids would still pay base rate.

[MBA]

It's one problem after the other in the airline business thatÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s why I think it makes for such a crappy investment. At the moment the fuel prices are high so that affects the airlines, a few years ago it was 9/11 and the terrorism attacks that caused people to stop flying. Then there are the unions; Dixon said that heÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s on the phone to them nearly every day of the week.

 

Yes it's an iconic Aussie company but itÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s a bad industry to be in and invest in, so many problems can happen and the margins are not great.

 

I think the two most important paragraphs from the article are these:

 

QUOTE

United, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines and other US carriers have said they'll drop at least 11,850 jobs as they ground 413 planes to trim spending on fuel, the industry's largest expense. They're also raising fares and adding fees.

&

 

QUOTE

United has said it expects to pay $US9.5 billion for fuel this year, up $US3.5 billion from 2007. It has 460 planes in its main jet fleet.

 

Huge numbers mentioned in there, especially the amount they spend on fuel. Can't wait to see Qantas statements in a few months time.

[MBA]

Also some commentary on the airline industry and what we should see in the future by Steve Bartholomeusz:

 

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf...ocument&src=kgb

 

 

[sirob]

In reply to: mminion on Tuesday 08/07/08 05:24pm

Hello mminion,

I did read the topic and whilst I understand the suggestions would be of benifit to airlines and save on fuel costs and we could extent the theory to many other areas but I believe there are many other factors other than cost that need to be considered, humane considerations, very simplistic to put forward an idea in isolation. Its a bit like the suggestion that we could save resources by not treating smokers with lung cancer, true but where do we draw the line, think about it. JMO

[bananabender]

In reply to: sirob on Tuesday 08/07/08 06:02pm

Sirob,

Hate to tell you but if you need a liver transplant you better be off the grog or it goes to a more deserving recipient... too scarce and too expensive to "waste". Already drawing lines! http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/wink.gif

[alonso]

In reply to: bananabender on Tuesday 08/07/08 10:34pm

How did we get from airlines to liver transplants . .is this a new service Qantas is offering for business class? http://www.sharescene.com/html/emoticons/tongue.gif

[bananabender]

In reply to: alonso on Wednesday 09/07/08 10:06am

Missing posts and topic drift... apologies!

[alonso]

In reply to: bananabender on Wednesday 09/07/08 10:10am

no no no . .it was a joke, if a bad one