UK and Ireland both have arrangements whereby companies, including airlines, can continue operations if a court is convinced there are reasonable prospects of profitability for the future. This largely, but not entirely, parallels Chapter 11 in the US. Antoin Daltun ----- Original Message ----- From: "Travel Pages" <travelpages@xxxxxxxxx> To: <AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: 27 September 2004 20:20 Subject: Re: Industry Changes > CO could also be said to have abused the state of Chapter 11 to the extreme detriment of the entire market. Operating for YEARS under cost in an attempt to recoup market share totally pushes the envelope of what bankruptcy is supposed to do. It is not supposed to reshape a market. > > Reminder to all observers that in Europe, when you become insolvent, your ticket is immediately pulled. Consequently, Euro-carriers cannot plan to file bankruptcy as a "what if" scenario in their marketing plans. Bankruptcy is the end of the operation, and they do indeed behave very differently than US carriers because of this restriction on a company living beyond it's means. Just one reason why Euro-fares are inherently different and will remain so for a long time to come. > > You wonder what US airfares would look like if carriers equated "bankruptcy" with "liquidation." Methinks you'd see fewer irrational fares. > > Douglas Schnell <dks28@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > CO benefits mightily from cost savings imposed during its two trips to > bankruptcy in the early 90s. In that sense, they could be said to have > extreme foresight. > > They also have made a conscious decision to focus on business travelers as > their core market, another decision that seems to be paying dividends. > > -----Original Message----- > From: The Airline List [mailto:AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Alireza Alivandivafa > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 11:51 AM > To: AIRLINE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Industry Changes > > I think CO is a good example of a legacy carrier that is treating its > employees decently, offering good fares and keeping up service with things > like meals on longer (and I mean over 2 hours) flights and the like. They > have a seat-mile cost around that of WN according to recent measurements, > mostly because they do things in house. They do their own catering (decent > too) and keep their costs way down. A cool enough concept that I have > Onepass now and am considering going elite on them next year (as I fly a lot > more now). > > <want good service, but they want it cheaply too. If UA, AA, and DL can't > find a way to do that, they are going to continue to have hard times. I > suspect that most people don't care that they don't get the bad airline food > anymore. I for one am not about to choose what airline I fly based on > whether or not they serve food. I think BAHA, you are the exception to the > rule here.>> > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. >