Many people have been saying that the passenger levels were not the problem.
For arguements sake, lets just say the Allegiant loads were 80-85%. Lets also assume that they are comparable to the loads out of Portsmouth and/or Newburgh, NH. I also believe that the ticket prices are comparable in these three markes, so lets even assume one more thing that the total revenues per flight are approximately the same in these three markets.
If the total revenues in these three markets are approximately the same and the other two markets had better yields, that means the expenses were higher at ORH then these two markets.
What is it in the ORH cost structure that creates this difference between ORH and these other two markets?
Thanks
Bill
Same Time Next Year
-
It’s been nearly a year since I wrote about the problems that come from
having 11 bosses who are not on the same page about anything, as well as
suggestion...
4 months ago
2 comments:
Steve:
I agree with all your points.. My question was really to the the bloggers that leave comments usually "anonymously", who say that passenger levels were great, as good as the other markets.
If it wasn't not the revenues, as "Jim" and other have commented, then what was it that made ORH the "worst". I do not know the answer either, but maybe someone else does.
Bill
Post a Comment