NYTimes.com Article: Costs Are Important, but Revenue Is Crucial

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



This article from NYTimes.com
has been sent to you by psa188@juno.com.



Costs Are Important, but Revenue Is Crucial

December 6, 2002
By DAVID LEONHARDT






For United Airlines, high costs are just part of the
equation.

As United executives continue their desperate attempts to
persuade workers to accept concessions, wages have become
the dominant symbol of the company's troubles.

But United's descent from a highly profitable airline - and
the world's largest - a few years ago to one on the cusp of
bankruptcy involves far more than salaries and other costs.
What separates United from its peers who are still solvent,
according to industry statistics and many analysts, may be
its struggle to bring in new revenue even more than its
inability to contain costs.

With employees owning a majority stake in United, labor
costs have risen significantly since the mid-1990's, but
they remain no higher than those at American Airlines,
United's main rival. Instead, the employee-ownership plan
appears to have left United with a dysfunctional business
model that has kept it from retaining high-paying
passengers as well as its rivals.

In a bluntly worded letter rejecting United's request for
$1.8 billion in loan guarantees this week, a federal board
highlighted the company's revenue struggle. The board said
United's executives overestimated the industry's prospects
for a quick recovery and underestimated the effects of the
continued growth of low-fare carriers like Southwest
Airlines.

Some of United's problems are unique to the company's long
history of labor strife and weak finances, helping to
explain why no other truly national carrier finds itself in
such a precarious condition. Analysts expect United, a unit
of UAL, to file for bankruptcy protection in the coming
days or weeks.

Other problems, however, exist in some form throughout the
industry. In this way, the decline of United - which was
born in the 1920's as a mail carrier in the Pacific
Northwest and spun off Boeing shortly afterward - suggests
that the near future is likely to be a rocky one for other
carriers as well.

"American is burning cash at almost the same rate" as
United, said Randy Babbitt, chief executive of Eclat
Consulting, an aviation firm, and former president of the
nation's biggest pilots' union. "They just have more stuff
to burn."

Tim Doke, a spokesman for American, said, "We have
basically the same labor cost structure and facility cost."
He added, "We certainly aren't in a strong financial
condition right now, but we aren't where United is."
American is a unit of AMR.

The severity of United's revenue problems stems partly from
its heavy reliance on the bubble spending of technology
companies, as well as its unusual exposure to Southwest's
low-fare service.

Two of its hub airports are San Francisco International and
Washington-Dulles International, both in regions hit hard
by the bursting of the technology bubble. Companies like
America Online, with offices near Washington, and Cisco
Systems, in Silicon Valley, once spent heavily on travel to
drum up new business, but they have cut back severely.

Other companies have reduced travel as well, leaving fewer
buyers of last-minute tickets, which increased rapidly in
price in the late 1990's and allowed United and other
carriers to make record profits.

"They were building up a fare structure based on a market
that was unrealistic," said Michael S. Allen, chief
operating officer of Back Aviation Solutions, a research
company. "The costs went up faster than the revenues when
the business passengers got off."

At the same time, Southwest was growing rapidly, squeezing
United's profits. Along with Los Angeles International
Airport and O'hare International Airport in Chicago, also
United hubs, the Dulles and San Francisco airports share
metropolitan areas with Southwest strongholds. Southwest's
eight largest operations are in Baltimore, Chicago, Dallas,
Houston, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Oakland and Phoenix.

Since 2000, the revenue United brings in for each seat it
flies one mile has fallen 17 percent, according to Back
Aviation. Continental's has dropped 13 percent and
Northwest is down 10 percent.

United is not alone at the bottom of the pack. The per-seat
revenues at American and Delta have fallen about the same.

But the big raises that United gave its pilots in 2000
left it with high costs and less of a financial cushion
when hard times hit. As part of the 1994 Employees Stock
Ownership Plan, or ESOP, the pilots received one quarter of
United's stock and wielded unusual power.

The mechanics also own shares, but their only raise since
1994 did not come until this year, and the flight
attendants, who were not part of the ownership plan, also
did not fare as well as the pilots. This helps explain why
United's total labor costs remain similar to those at
American, analysts say.

Perhaps more important, the ownership plan, after some
early successes, set off internal bickering between workers
and management and among the different unions about how the
company should be run.

"The United ESOP was one of the worst-structured ESOP's of
any I've ever seen," said Corey Rosen, executive director
of the National Center for Employee Ownership.

Employees stopped receiving stock after five years, making
the plan seem like a temporary fix, and flight attendants
decided not to join the plan, Mr. Rosen said. After an
initial burst of activity, he added, United's management
stopped involving workers in major decisions.

Christopher Macken, president of Ownership Associates in
Cambridge, Mass., who advised United about employee
ownership, recalled a meeting with a senior executive in
the mid-1990's. After Mr. Macken sat down, the executive
told him he had no interest in employee ownership as a
management tool.

"This was strangled in the crib," Mr. Macken said.

When
United tried to buy US Airways in 2000, some executives
became consumed with persuading the unions to back the deal
and paid too little attention to the existing business,
said a former United executive who insisted on anonymity.
"We sort of took our eye off the ball," the executive said.
"That set us back."

If anything, the internal fights and the anger of workers
at the stock's fall from over $100 in 1997 to almost
nothing have created a workplace that is less flexible than
those of its competitors, analysts say.

Over the last year, United has angered corporate travel
managers, many of whom influence multimillion-dollar travel
budgets, by giving its employees less freedom to negotiate
discounts, the managers say. They ranked United the
seventh-best carrier to work with, according to a recent
survey by Business Travel News. In 2001, United was second.


"From a flexibility standpoint, it seems like they are just
lacking," said Mark Walton, a principal at Consulting
Strategies in Lincolnshire, Ill., who advises corporate
travel managers. "For an airline not to empower its field
staff is pretty significant."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/06/business/06UNIT.html?ex=1040189297&ei=1&en=0d8167565c18d3f2



HOW TO ADVERTISE
---------------------------------
For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters
or other creative advertising opportunities with The
New York Times on the Web, please contact
onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media
kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo

For general information about NYTimes.com, write to
help@nytimes.com.

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company

[Index of Archives]         [NTSB]     [NASA KSC]     [Yosemite]     [Steve's Art]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [NTSB]     [STB]     [Share Photos]     [Yosemite Campsites]