RIP

[zkvac]

To be honest I'm not surprised about Skybus..

Watch Qantas (Jetonnect) in NZ here.

[Scandalian Airlines]

now, who next?

Oh i think Kalitta Air cargo will be next cause they only operate the 741 and 742 and there so fuel thirsty.

I think not, there is a world wide demand for cargo, especially odd sized and heavy cargo, so I think Kalitta will be around for a good while.
Also, cargo flights differs from PAX flights in a way, no cargo no flight no fuel expense, PAX with low loads need to go anyway, and it's more or less cargo that helps the flight break even on PAX routes as well. KLM has used that fact successfully for many years with their fleet of combo 747's, but even on a full pax 747 there is still room for a lot of small sized cargo.

[AirHanoverInternational]

I think not, there is a world wide demand for cargo, especially odd sized and heavy cargo, so I think Kalitta will be around for a good while.
Also, cargo flights differs from PAX flights in a way, no cargo no flight no fuel expense, PAX with low loads need to go anyway, and it's more or less cargo that helps the flight break even on PAX routes as well. KLM has used that fact successfully for many years with their fleet of combo 747's, but even on a full pax 747 there is still room for a lot of small sized cargo.

Although I agree to your theory I have heard/read somewhere (can't remember where) that cargo airlines complain about more cargo being moved by ships (significantly lower costs but longer shipment times). Especially cargo heading for Asia is pretty cheap by ship. Many ships come overloaded from Asia to Europe but go almost empty back.

[beerchaser301]

I think not, there is a world wide demand for cargo, especially odd sized and heavy cargo, so I think Kalitta will be around for a good while.
Also, cargo flights differs from PAX flights in a way, no cargo no flight no fuel expense, PAX with low loads need to go anyway, and it's more or less cargo that helps the flight break even on PAX routes as well. KLM has used that fact successfully for many years with their fleet of combo 747's, but even on a full pax 747 there is still room for a lot of small sized cargo.

Although I agree to your theory I have heard/read somewhere (can't remember where) that cargo airlines complain about more cargo being moved by ships (significantly lower costs but longer shipment times). Especially cargo heading for Asia is pretty cheap by ship. Many ships come overloaded from Asia to Europe but go almost empty back.

UPS, FEDEX, DHL, and all the others are still making out as our world becomes faster paced still. The idea of gotta be there by 10AM still holds true with most big business. The smaller cargo carriers probably will feel the economic strain of fuel prices though. The problem with pax load now, business travel is starting to dwindle now that technology has grown. Online video meetings are becoming more and more prevalent with rising ticket costs.  Not to mention postal service has dropped significantly with the dawn of email. Pretty soon, the only people flying will be tourists.
Beerchaser

[AirHanoverInternational]

UPS, FEDEX, DHL, and all the others are still making out as our world becomes faster paced still. The idea of gotta be there by 10AM still holds true with most big business. The smaller cargo carriers probably will feel the economic strain of fuel prices though. The problem with pax load now, business travel is starting to dwindle now that technology has grown. Online video meetings are becoming more and more prevalent with rising ticket costs.  Not to mention postal service has dropped significantly with the dawn of email. Pretty soon, the only people flying will be tourists.
Beerchaser

I dont think so. If you are selling products you definetly have to show the customer. The want to see and touch the real product. Therefore I need to travel. But I agree that my office is more or less "paperless" (at least in postal terms). I also agree on scheduled cargo. But if you ship bigger equipment (e.g. machines or fruits) companies use ships, trains or trucks more often.

Unfortunatly I heard some rumor about two other carriers that are in trouble. But those are still rumors. Time will tell. :wink:

[seafly4fun]

AS is safe for now even though Virgin America and Jet Blue are starting up routes on the west coast of the US. I say that AS is safe because of their great partnership with national and international partners, some would say it is the best millage program over all for the States. Also not too many airlines off upgrades starting at $50, no fee for checked bags, more flights to California and Alaska, no fee for stand by day of flight and I'm sure a few others that I am missing. Other then bags not arriving at airports when I am landing I've not had any major issues with AS other then not enough flights to ORD but oh well can't have everything.

[joyu12]

Coast Air ceased operations a little while ago because of pax load (on one route they were using a ATR 42 and only getting 1 pax per flight even thouhg they had cheap tickets!

[Seattle]

AS is safe for now even though Virgin America and Jet Blue are starting up routes on the west coast of the US. I say that AS is safe because of their great partnership with national and international partners, some would say it is the best millage program over all for the States. Also not too many airlines off upgrades starting at $50, no fee for checked bags, more flights to California and Alaska, no fee for stand by day of flight and I'm sure a few others that I am missing. Other then bags not arriving at airports when I am landing I've not had any major issues with AS other then not enough flights to ORD but oh well can't have everything.

not to mention several hundred million in the bank. (I think htey have.... about 500 mill)

Virgin America is doing okay, but if they cant get their act togeather soon, they'll be next. SWA is the most profitable carrier in the Americas... they have 2 or 3 billion stocked up

I think we may even see a legacy go under.... some have very little cash piles.... However, UA looks like it has the most cash as a legacy.

[TheEagle]

I do believe US Airways needs to be watched...I heard that somebody bought out United, I'm looking to see if its true. Too many mergers right now to keep up with. American is doing fine, they grounded some MD80s a couple days ago to do so volunteer inspections and to avoid fines from the FAA. They're also removing them from their fleet little by little and having them replaced by the 737-800. I think they're doing fine.

I don't know about jetBlue though. Its in pretty deep debt with Airbus and DirecTV. Delta is removing certain routes from the Carib because of competition. Theres a new airline opening in May called Aerolíneas Dominicanas based in the Dominican Republic...like all the others that begin from the Dominican Republic, it wont last long.

[Vamerica]

Virgin America has too much backing from Virgin Group to file chap. 11.

[AirHanoverInternational]

I don't know about jetBlue though. Its in pretty deep debt with Airbus and DirecTV.

I think for the moment they are safe as Lufthansa invested $300M recently. Read this:
http://investor.jetblue.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=131045&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1106237&highlight=lufthansa

[TheEagle]

I don't know about jetBlue though. Its in pretty deep debt with Airbus and DirecTV.

I think for the moment they are safe as Lufthansa invested $300M recently. Read this:
http://investor.jetblue.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=131045&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1106237&highlight=lufthansa

Oh ok, if it wasn't for Lufthansa jetBlue would've only last probably until the end of this year maybe a little more maybe a little less.

[Seattle]

Virgin America has too much backing from Virgin Group to file chap. 11.

Virgin America has no to little backing from the Virgin Group. None of the legacies have mergered yet...

Here are the "safest" legacy airlines in my opinion:

1. United (they have like 400 million in the bank)
2. NW  (also have quite abit of $ in the bank)
3. CO (I remember seeing a report with them having 91 mill)
4. AA (right under CO)
5. DL (deep in debt, however they have alot of new planes)
6. US (dont now much about them, however they look like theyre are okayish

[yourefired]

I'd add jetBlue to the list of airlines that aren't going anywhere.

[nwadeltaboy]

now, who next?

NORTHWEST

The only reason ATA stayed afloat was their affiliation with Southwest.