Discussion:
American Airlines - Last one standing
(too old to reply)
zak
2005-09-14 22:30:07 UTC
Permalink
Well, after today's Chapter 11 filing by Delta and Northwest, it
appears that American Airlines is now the only pre-deregulation U.S.
major carrier left that hasn't seen a trip to Bankruptcy Court.

The major U.S. domestic carriers in 1978:

American
Continental - several trips to bankruptcy court
United - currently in bankruptcy
Delta - filed Ch. 11 today
Northwest - filed Ch. 11 today
US Airways - wasn't a major pre-deregulation, then a regional known as
Allegheny; several trips to Ch. 11

These are gone:

National - gobbled up by Pan Am in 1979
Braniff (original) - shut down 1982
Western - gobbled up by Delta in 1987
Eastern - shut down 1991
Pan Am (original) - shut down 1991
TWA - several trips to Ch. 11, remains gobbled up by AA in 2001

Will American eventually have to file for Chapter 11 just to get their
labor costs down and their debt restructured so they can compete with
the others on a level playing field? They don't just have to compete
with the other U.S. majors that have gone or are going through Ch. 11
reorganization, but also with the much leaner and meaner Southwest,
JetBlue, AirTran, Frontier, etc. If AA doesn't file for Ch. 11, they
will be at a huge disadvantage.

Don't know why AA, CO, DL, NW, UA, and US don't just stop flying
domestically and concentrate on international routes, which is where
they can still make a profit. DL could turn all their domestic flying
over to Song, United to Ted, and the other four could set up their own
low-cost domestic carriers. Or in the case of US, just become the
low-cost domestic feeder for AA, CO, or NW.

Anyway, it seems like some more consolidation among the majors will be
needed in the future. There isn't really a need for more than three
major airlines, probably AA, DL (merged with CO and NW), and UA
(merged with US).

All in all, what a sad day for U.S. aviation, and what a sad state of
affairs for a once-prestigious industry.
Blake S
2005-09-14 22:45:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by zak
Well, after today's Chapter 11 filing by Delta and Northwest, it
appears that American Airlines is now the only pre-deregulation U.S.
major carrier left that hasn't seen a trip to Bankruptcy Court.
Depends if you consider Alaska Airlines and Southwest to be major carriers
or not.
Post by zak
American
Continental - several trips to bankruptcy court
United - currently in bankruptcy
Delta - filed Ch. 11 today
Northwest - filed Ch. 11 today
US Airways - wasn't a major pre-deregulation, then a regional known as
Allegheny; several trips to Ch. 11
National - gobbled up by Pan Am in 1979
Braniff (original) - shut down 1982
Western - gobbled up by Delta in 1987
Eastern - shut down 1991
Pan Am (original) - shut down 1991
TWA - several trips to Ch. 11, remains gobbled up by AA in 2001
Will American eventually have to file for Chapter 11 just to get their
labor costs down and their debt restructured so they can compete with
the others on a level playing field? They don't just have to compete
with the other U.S. majors that have gone or are going through Ch. 11
reorganization, but also with the much leaner and meaner Southwest,
JetBlue, AirTran, Frontier, etc. If AA doesn't file for Ch. 11, they
will be at a huge disadvantage.
Don't know why AA, CO, DL, NW, UA, and US don't just stop flying
domestically and concentrate on international routes, which is where
they can still make a profit. DL could turn all their domestic flying
over to Song, United to Ted, and the other four could set up their own
low-cost domestic carriers. Or in the case of US, just become the
low-cost domestic feeder for AA, CO, or NW.
Anyway, it seems like some more consolidation among the majors will be
needed in the future. There isn't really a need for more than three
major airlines, probably AA, DL (merged with CO and NW), and UA
(merged with US).
All in all, what a sad day for U.S. aviation, and what a sad state of
affairs for a once-prestigious industry.
John Doe
2005-09-14 23:21:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by zak
Well, after today's Chapter 11 filing by Delta and Northwest, it
appears that American Airlines is now the only pre-deregulation U.S.
major carrier left that hasn't seen a trip to Bankruptcy Court.
American
Continental - several trips to bankruptcy court
United - currently in bankruptcy
Delta - filed Ch. 11 today
Northwest - filed Ch. 11 today
US Airways - wasn't a major pre-deregulation, then a regional known as
Allegheny; several trips to Ch. 11
National - gobbled up by Pan Am in 1979
Braniff (original) - shut down 1982
Western - gobbled up by Delta in 1987
Eastern - shut down 1991
Pan Am (original) - shut down 1991
TWA - several trips to Ch. 11, remains gobbled up by AA in 2001
Will American eventually have to file for Chapter 11 just to get their
labor costs down and their debt restructured so they can compete with
the others on a level playing field? They don't just have to compete
with the other U.S. majors that have gone or are going through Ch. 11
reorganization, but also with the much leaner and meaner Southwest,
JetBlue, AirTran, Frontier, etc. If AA doesn't file for Ch. 11, they
will be at a huge disadvantage.
Don't know why AA, CO, DL, NW, UA, and US don't just stop flying
domestically and concentrate on international routes, which is where
they can still make a profit. DL could turn all their domestic flying
over to Song, United to Ted, and the other four could set up their own
low-cost domestic carriers. Or in the case of US, just become the
low-cost domestic feeder for AA, CO, or NW.
Anyway, it seems like some more consolidation among the majors will be
needed in the future. There isn't really a need for more than three
major airlines, probably AA, DL (merged with CO and NW), and UA
(merged with US).
All in all, what a sad day for U.S. aviation, and what a sad state of
affairs for a once-prestigious industry.
I don't see the CEOs of either companies putting up forsale signs on their
nice big houses. The way these companies operated it's a wonder they
survived this long.

I don't think it's a sad day if you work for Southwest or AirTran or any
other airline that has continued to grow post 9/11.
Robert J Carpenter
2005-09-15 02:45:37 UTC
Permalink
I recall that at the time of the previous rash of airline failures,
1991???, Mr. Kahn ? - the chief architect of airline deregulation -
said that foreign airlines / owners ought to be let in to show how to
run an aitline. Back then that was particularly silly since most
European airlins still had protected turf and some subsidies (real or
hidden).

Last I heard, Barnson's Virgin organisation still insisted that they
are going to run an American airline through a "US Owned" shell.
Curious.
John Mazor
2005-09-15 04:03:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert J Carpenter
I recall that at the time of the previous rash of airline failures,
1991???, Mr. Kahn ? - the chief architect of airline deregulation -
said that foreign airlines / owners ought to be let in to show how to
run an aitline. Back then that was particularly silly since most
European airlins still had protected turf and some subsidies (real or
hidden).

To compound the idiocy, we still hear proposals to allow foreign airlines to
compete in U.S. domestic markets (cabotage). As if the solution to
overcapacity and the inability of many U.S. carriers to charge the
profitable rates that would allow better service is... bring on subsidized
competition from foreign carriers! Duh.
Post by Robert J Carpenter
Last I heard, Barnson's Virgin organisation still insisted that they
are going to run an American airline through a "US Owned" shell. Curious.
They're going to have to pass some stringent tests on corporate control.
Which prompts the question "Why would a foreign carrier start an airline (or
invest in one) in the crazy U.S. market right now unless they could dictate
its structure, marketing, policies and practices?" Or, to quote an old
airline joke: How do you make a small fortune in the airline business?
Start out with a large fortune.

-- John Mazor
"The search for wisdom is asymptotic."

"Except for Internet newsgroups, where it is divergent..."
-- R J Carpenter

(It's been a while since I used that sig, but it's still my favorite.)
John Mazor
2005-09-15 04:27:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert J Carpenter
Post by Robert J Carpenter
I recall that at the time of the previous rash of airline failures,
1991???, Mr. Kahn ? - the chief architect of airline deregulation -
said that foreign airlines / owners ought to be let in to show how to
run an aitline. Back then that was particularly silly since most
European airlins still had protected turf and some subsidies (real or
hidden).
To compound the idiocy, we still hear proposals to allow foreign
airlines to compete in U.S. domestic markets (cabotage).
Hey, US airlines do it in Europe....
*Originate* a flight that *starts out* in, say, Paris, and drops them at the
final destination of, say, Bordeaux, with the flight not stopping or
continuing elsewhere? That's cabotage. Many countries allow lesser
freedoms, such as if a United flight originating as JFK-Bordeaux makes a
stop in Paris - the next leg could pick up Paris-Bordeaux riders. You just
can't have a United flight that starts and ends as Paris-Bordeaux, which
would be cabotage. I may be wrong, but I can't recall any nation that
allows that, except maybe for some minor countries where they're glad to
have any service at all.
Gregory Morrow
2005-09-15 05:07:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Mazor
Post by Robert J Carpenter
Post by Robert J Carpenter
I recall that at the time of the previous rash of airline failures,
1991???, Mr. Kahn ? - the chief architect of airline deregulation -
said that foreign airlines / owners ought to be let in to show how to
run an aitline. Back then that was particularly silly since most
European airlins still had protected turf and some subsidies (real or
hidden).
To compound the idiocy, we still hear proposals to allow foreign
airlines to compete in U.S. domestic markets (cabotage).
Hey, US airlines do it in Europe....
*Originate* a flight that *starts out* in, say, Paris, and drops them at the
final destination of, say, Bordeaux, with the flight not stopping or
continuing elsewhere? That's cabotage. Many countries allow lesser
freedoms, such as if a United flight originating as JFK-Bordeaux makes a
stop in Paris - the next leg could pick up Paris-Bordeaux riders. You just
can't have a United flight that starts and ends as Paris-Bordeaux, which
would be cabotage. I may be wrong, but I can't recall any nation that
allows that, except maybe for some minor countries where they're glad to
have any service at all.
About the only recent example I can think of is the pre - 1991 intra -
German services from West Germany to West Berlin provided by PA, AF,
BA...but it was a special case as that monopoly service was set up by the
victorious Allies post - 1945; air rights to West Berlin were technically
administered by the US, France, and the UK.
--
Best
Greg
Jeff Hacker
2005-09-14 23:22:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by zak
Well, after today's Chapter 11 filing by Delta and Northwest, it
appears that American Airlines is now the only pre-deregulation U.S.
major carrier left that hasn't seen a trip to Bankruptcy Court.
American
Continental - several trips to bankruptcy court
United - currently in bankruptcy
Delta - filed Ch. 11 today
Northwest - filed Ch. 11 today
US Airways - wasn't a major pre-deregulation, then a regional known as
Allegheny; several trips to Ch. 11
National - gobbled up by Pan Am in 1979
Braniff (original) - shut down 1982
Western - gobbled up by Delta in 1987
Eastern - shut down 1991
Pan Am (original) - shut down 1991
TWA - several trips to Ch. 11, remains gobbled up by AA in 2001
Will American eventually have to file for Chapter 11 just to get their
labor costs down and their debt restructured so they can compete with
the others on a level playing field? They don't just have to compete
with the other U.S. majors that have gone or are going through Ch. 11
reorganization, but also with the much leaner and meaner Southwest,
JetBlue, AirTran, Frontier, etc. If AA doesn't file for Ch. 11, they
will be at a huge disadvantage.
Don't know why AA, CO, DL, NW, UA, and US don't just stop flying
domestically and concentrate on international routes, which is where
they can still make a profit. DL could turn all their domestic flying
over to Song, United to Ted, and the other four could set up their own
low-cost domestic carriers. Or in the case of US, just become the
low-cost domestic feeder for AA, CO, or NW.
Welcome to the world of "AirTrak" - no competition means lousy service.
period.
Post by zak
Anyway, it seems like some more consolidation among the majors will be
needed in the future. There isn't really a need for more than three
major airlines, probably AA, DL (merged with CO and NW), and UA
(merged with US).
All in all, what a sad day for U.S. aviation, and what a sad state of
affairs for a once-prestigious industry.
beavis
2005-09-15 02:01:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by zak
Well, after today's Chapter 11 filing by Delta and Northwest, it
appears that American Airlines is now the only pre-deregulation U.S.
major carrier left that hasn't seen a trip to Bankruptcy Court.
Southwest has over 420 airplanes, and $7 Billion in annual revenue. I
think they qualify as a major carrier. They've never gone bankrupt,
and have turned a profit every year for 32 years.
Steven P. McNicoll
2005-09-15 02:53:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by beavis
Southwest has over 420 airplanes, and $7 Billion in annual revenue. I
think they qualify as a major carrier.
He said pre-deregulation U.S. major carrier. Do you think Southwest
qualified as a major carrier before deregulation?
Pooh Bear
2005-09-15 02:56:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by beavis
Post by zak
Well, after today's Chapter 11 filing by Delta and Northwest, it
appears that American Airlines is now the only pre-deregulation U.S.
major carrier left that hasn't seen a trip to Bankruptcy Court.
Southwest has over 420 airplanes, and $7 Billion in annual revenue. I
think they qualify as a major carrier. They've never gone bankrupt,
and have turned a profit every year for 32 years.
Do they have 'fat cat' management ?

Graham
Joe Delphi
2005-09-15 03:33:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by beavis
Post by zak
Well, after today's Chapter 11 filing by Delta and Northwest, it
appears that American Airlines is now the only pre-deregulation U.S.
major carrier left that hasn't seen a trip to Bankruptcy Court.
Southwest has over 420 airplanes, and $7 Billion in annual revenue. I
think they qualify as a major carrier. They've never gone bankrupt,
and have turned a profit every year for 32 years.
Plus they have never had a fatal accident in those 32 years.

JD
John Mazor
2005-09-15 04:03:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe Delphi
Post by beavis
Post by zak
Well, after today's Chapter 11 filing by Delta and Northwest, it
appears that American Airlines is now the only pre-deregulation U.S.
major carrier left that hasn't seen a trip to Bankruptcy Court.
Southwest has over 420 airplanes, and $7 Billion in annual revenue. I
think they qualify as a major carrier. They've never gone bankrupt,
and have turned a profit every year for 32 years.
Plus they have never had a fatal accident in those 32 years.
They came damn close in San Diego. If that gas station had been on the
other side of the road...

I think that Kelleher's enlightened approach to corporate culture spilled
over into the safety arena, which is a good thing.
Joe Feise
2005-09-15 06:46:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Mazor
Post by Joe Delphi
Plus they have never had a fatal accident in those 32 years.
They came damn close in San Diego. If that gas station had been on the
other side of the road...
That was in Burbank, in the LA area.

-Joe

Jay Honeck
2005-09-15 02:25:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by zak
Anyway, it seems like some more consolidation among the majors will be
needed in the future. There isn't really a need for more than three
major airlines, probably AA, DL (merged with CO and NW), and UA
(merged with US).
Absolutely. The reason the airlines are in this mess is because Congress
refuses to let any major airline FAIL.

Unfortunately, that's what capitalism requires for success. In a truly free
market, the surviving airlines would feed on the carcass of a truly bankrupt
airline, plucking the profitable routes and leaving the deadwood behind.
In our current dream-world of "protected deregulation", Congress keeps
bailing out failing airlines, allowing them to continue operating at
below-profitable levels -- which means they can continue to charge less than
what it really costs to fly the routes, which, in turn, means that NONE of
the airlines can charge what it actually costs to fly.

Until the Feds let Northworst and Delta fail, this situation will continue
to get worse.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
Reef Fish
2005-09-15 03:05:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jay Honeck
The reason the airlines are in this mess is because Congress
refuses to let any major airline FAIL.
In a truly free
market, the surviving airlines would feed on the carcass of a truly bankrupt
airline, plucking the profitable routes and leaving the deadwood behind.
That's true. That's what the Free Market is all about. But the
airline industry is anything BUT a free market -- in fact, the
opposite.
Post by Jay Honeck
In our current dream-world of "protected deregulation", Congress keeps
bailing out failing airlines, allowing them to continue operating at
below-profitable levels -- which means they can continue to charge less than
what it really costs to fly the routes, which, in turn, means that NONE of
the airlines can charge what it actually costs to fly.
You are mistaken here. The MAJOR airlines are REQUIRED to continue
operating in unprofitable routes, whereas Regional Carriers can cut
the unprofitable routes.
Post by Jay Honeck
Until the Feds let Northworst and Delta fail, this situation will continue
to get worse.
It has already hit bottom. AA is the next to go. :-)

-- Bob.
John Mazor
2005-09-15 04:00:23 UTC
Permalink
I'm not disagreeing with your premises here, just amplifying on them.
Post by Jay Honeck
Post by zak
Anyway, it seems like some more consolidation among the majors will be
needed in the future. There isn't really a need for more than three
major airlines, probably AA, DL (merged with CO and NW), and UA
(merged with US).
Absolutely. The reason the airlines are in this mess is because Congress
refuses to let any major airline FAIL.
Well, there is the minor matter that until the US Airways/America West
merger, the administration also refused to allow mergers. Mergers provide a
rational, orderly reduction of capacity. Bankruptcy is a weapon of mass
destruction if reducing excess capacity is your goal.
Post by Jay Honeck
Unfortunately, that's what capitalism requires for success. In a truly
free market,

...the government would have been open to proposals for mergers.
Post by Jay Honeck
the surviving airlines would feed on the carcass of a truly bankrupt
airline, plucking the profitable routes and leaving the deadwood behind.
That already happens. You don't need bankruptcy for that.
Post by Jay Honeck
In our current dream-world of "protected deregulation", Congress keeps
bailing out failing airlines, allowing them to continue operating at
below-profitable levels
That goes all the way back to the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, where
Congress hedged its bets by providing "Essential Air Service" subsidies.
The problem has been that Congress and consumers want it both ways -
competition resulting in cheaper fares, while maintaining the expectation of
service levels that were possible under regulated pricing.
Post by Jay Honeck
-- which means they can continue to charge less than
what it really costs to fly the routes, which, in turn, means that NONE of
the airlines can charge what it actually costs to fly.
True as far as it goes, but there are other factors that have undercut
airlines' ability to set pricing or clear a profit, such as Internet fare
shopping (which the airlines foolishly embraced at first), the rising cost
of oil (even the carriers in bankruptcy would have had operating profits
except for rising fuel prices), the way that the government has treated
airlines as a cash cow (the taxes on a typical airline ticket are higher
than the "sin taxes" on alcohol and tobacco).

The irony here is that allowing airlines to go into bankruptcy allows them a
competitive edge over solvent carriers. The solution is to reduce the
period for management to have exclusionary control over the enterprise, and
not allow a bankrupt carrier to expand operations.
Post by Jay Honeck
Until the Feds let Northworst and Delta fail, this situation will continue
to get worse.

That's one solution, but not the only one. There are more rational
approaches to the capacity problem.
John Mazor
2005-09-15 04:12:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Mazor
I'm not disagreeing with your premises here, just amplifying on them.
Post by Jay Honeck
Post by zak
Anyway, it seems like some more consolidation among the majors will
be needed in the future. There isn't really a need for more than
three major airlines, probably AA, DL (merged with CO and NW), and
UA (merged with US).
Absolutely. The reason the airlines are in this mess is because
Congress refuses to let any major airline FAIL.
Well, there is the minor matter that until the US Airways/America West
merger, the administration also refused to allow mergers. Mergers
provide a rational, orderly reduction of capacity. Bankruptcy is a
weapon of mass destruction if reducing excess capacity is your goal.
Post by Jay Honeck
Unfortunately, that's what capitalism requires for success. In a truly
free market,
...the government would have been open to proposals for mergers.
Post by Jay Honeck
the surviving airlines would feed on the carcass of a truly bankrupt
airline, plucking the profitable routes and leaving the deadwood behind.
That already happens. You don't need bankruptcy for that.
Post by Jay Honeck
In our current dream-world of "protected deregulation", Congress
keeps bailing out failing airlines, allowing them to continue
operating at below-profitable levels
That goes all the way back to the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978,
where Congress hedged its bets by providing "Essential Air Service"
subsidies. The problem has been that Congress and consumers want it
both ways - competition resulting in cheaper fares, while maintaining
the expectation of service levels that were possible under regulated
pricing.
Post by Jay Honeck
-- which means they can continue to charge less than
what it really costs to fly the routes, which, in turn, means that
NONE of the airlines can charge what it actually costs to fly.
True as far as it goes, but there are other factors that have undercut
airlines' ability to set pricing or clear a profit, such as Internet
fare shopping (which the airlines foolishly embraced at first), the
rising cost of oil (even the carriers in bankruptcy would have had
operating profits except for rising fuel prices), the way that the
government has treated airlines as a cash cow (the taxes on a typical
airline ticket are higher than the "sin taxes" on alcohol and
tobacco).
The irony here is that allowing airlines to go into bankruptcy allows
them a competitive edge over solvent carriers. The solution is to
reduce the period for management to have exclusionary control over the
enterprise, and not allow a bankrupt carrier to expand operations.
Post by Jay Honeck
Until the Feds let Northworst and Delta fail, this situation will continue
to get worse.
That's one solution, but not the only one. There are more rational
approaches to the capacity problem.
Best solution is to limit it to the types of people that used to fly.
People that needed to. People that could afford to. People with class.
Bring back the DC-7, I say.
Oh wait, wrong problem.
Bring back the Connie. Now THERE was an airplane to fly in.

As to the pax, a simple literacy test would filter out the worst of the
riff-raff.
sfb
2005-09-15 04:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Airlines and all businesses do not play taxes. They collect them from
passengers and customers who are the government's cash cow. The airlines
problems are revenues vs. costs and taxes are a wash just passing
through the airline bank accounts.
Post by John Mazor
I'm not disagreeing with your premises here, just amplifying on them.
Post by Jay Honeck
Post by zak
Anyway, it seems like some more consolidation among the majors will be
needed in the future. There isn't really a need for more than three
major airlines, probably AA, DL (merged with CO and NW), and UA
(merged with US).
Absolutely. The reason the airlines are in this mess is because Congress
refuses to let any major airline FAIL.
Well, there is the minor matter that until the US Airways/America West
merger, the administration also refused to allow mergers. Mergers provide a
rational, orderly reduction of capacity. Bankruptcy is a weapon of mass
destruction if reducing excess capacity is your goal.
Post by Jay Honeck
Unfortunately, that's what capitalism requires for success. In a truly
free market,
...the government would have been open to proposals for mergers.
Post by Jay Honeck
the surviving airlines would feed on the carcass of a truly bankrupt
airline, plucking the profitable routes and leaving the deadwood behind.
That already happens. You don't need bankruptcy for that.
Post by Jay Honeck
In our current dream-world of "protected deregulation", Congress keeps
bailing out failing airlines, allowing them to continue operating at
below-profitable levels
That goes all the way back to the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, where
Congress hedged its bets by providing "Essential Air Service"
subsidies.
The problem has been that Congress and consumers want it both ways -
competition resulting in cheaper fares, while maintaining the
expectation of
service levels that were possible under regulated pricing.
Post by Jay Honeck
-- which means they can continue to charge less than
what it really costs to fly the routes, which, in turn, means that NONE of
the airlines can charge what it actually costs to fly.
True as far as it goes, but there are other factors that have undercut
airlines' ability to set pricing or clear a profit, such as Internet fare
shopping (which the airlines foolishly embraced at first), the rising cost
of oil (even the carriers in bankruptcy would have had operating profits
except for rising fuel prices), the way that the government has treated
airlines as a cash cow (the taxes on a typical airline ticket are higher
than the "sin taxes" on alcohol and tobacco).
The irony here is that allowing airlines to go into bankruptcy allows them a
competitive edge over solvent carriers. The solution is to reduce the
period for management to have exclusionary control over the
enterprise, and
not allow a bankrupt carrier to expand operations.
Post by Jay Honeck
Until the Feds let Northworst and Delta fail, this situation will continue
to get worse.
That's one solution, but not the only one. There are more rational
approaches to the capacity problem.
John Mazor
2005-09-15 04:37:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by sfb
Airlines and all businesses do not play taxes. They collect them from
passengers and customers who are the government's cash cow. The airlines
problems are revenues vs. costs and taxes are a wash just passing
through the airline bank accounts.
No. Taxes increase ticket prices. Airlines have to compete with other modes
of transportation and with other options such as corporate teleconferencing,
or for the typical consumer, the option of not making non-essential trips at
all if the price is too high. Do you think that traffic levels would remain
at current levels if the government imposed a $1,000 excise tax on every
ticket and the airlines passed along the cost to passengers?

Overcapacity is causing the cut-throat pricing of airline tickets, so
carriers often cannot pass along cost increases. Look how long it took them
to dare to impose modest price increases to partially offset rising fuel
costs.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...