Retiring more aircraft

[59 Dano]

It’s never good to lose your biggest customer! It’s that simple. FedEx management couldn’t make it profitable and ups can. Kiss…

UPS is taking the freight to fill empty space on existing flights and you guys think FedEx should continue to operate flights for the sole purpose of transporting mail and wHy CaN't ThEy MaKe It WoRK?

 

[59 Dano]

Sophomoric logic only satisfies the uninformed.

If Amazon only shipped the unprofitable packages with your company, and demanded a deeply discounted rate, anyone with an iota of business acumen would acknowledge that no matter how big Amazon was as a customer, you'd be better off not servicing them.

Why does it make any difference who the customer is, Amazon or USPS? The net result is the same.

Exactly. Math plays no favorites.

Some of these people think the company should do things with its money that they would never do with their own.

 

[zeev]

UPS is taking the freight to fill empty space on existing flights and you guys think FedEx should continue to operate flights for the sole purpose of transporting mail and wHy CaN't ThEy MaKe It WoRK?

Wrong USPS runs during the day for the last 25 years,

 

[59 Dano]

Wrong USPS runs during the day for the last 25 years,

Who said it doesn't? What are you talking about?

 

[zeev]

Not existing flights new day flights.

 

[59 Dano]

Not existing flights new day flights.

Oh, and you believe this -- why? It makes no sense for them to do that.

 

[59 Dano]

Our business model isn't third party airlift.

Let's walk through the justification of the expense.

Does this third party endeavor add any value or benefit to the service we provide to our other customers? No.
Does this create any significant bottom line benefit? No.
Is it a revenue stream that will grow in the future? No.
Is there a scenario where a realignment of resources and "right sizing" the operation provides any meaningful improvement in profitability? No.

Should I keep going?

I say yes, I should.

Does this expense create or enhance any efficiencies anywhere else in our network? No.
Can this expense be used to create other revenue opportunities for any other segment or area of the company? No.
Are there any likely reductions in this expense that would provide any meaningful increase in profitability? No.
Does this expense create greater flexibility in the deployment of existing resources? No.

And on and on it goes.

 

[yadig]

UPS is taking the freight to fill empty space on existing flights and you guys think FedEx should continue to operate flights for the sole purpose of transporting mail and wHy CaN't ThEy MaKe It WoRK?

We were trying to keep the contract and ups won. Its gonna be ok.

 

[59 Dano]

Not existing flights new day flights.

Oh, and you believe this -- why? It makes no sense for them to do that.

I was hoping you would answer, but you won't.

But allow me to correct you. UPS is putting the mail on existing flights, not new day flights.

 

[59 Dano]

We were trying to keep the contract and ups won. Its gonna be ok.

No kidding. Glad you finally came around.

 

[bacha29]

Tell me something guys. After FDX has been thoroughly eviscerated, sold off, forfeited, down sized handed off to cash strapped third party contractors completely uncertain as to what they're actually going to continue to be able to do, leaving so little left....what shipper is even going to want to be bothered with the limited capability remnants of what is left of the company?

 

[zeev]

I was hoping you would answer, but you won't.

But allow me to correct you. UPS is putting the mail on existing flights, nnot new day flights.

 

[zeev]

Mail on FedEx for 25 years hss been on separate flights by outside contractors,you have very little to do with it obviously.

 

[FedupExpress]

Tell me something guys. After FDX has been thoroughly eviscerated, sold off, forfeited, down sized handed off to cash strapped third party contractors completely uncertain as to what they're actually going to continue to be able to do, leaving so little left....what shipper is even going to want to be bothered with the limited capability remnants of what is left of the company?

That's the point, self destruction. It's similar to what they are doing with the USA currently.

 

[Fred's Myth]

Tell me something guys. After FDX has been thoroughly eviscerated, sold off, forfeited, down sized handed off to cash strapped third party contractors completely uncertain as to what they're actually going to continue to be able to do, leaving so little left....what shipper is even going to want to be bothered with the limited capability remnants of what is left of the company?

So FDX is following your business plan?

 

[Lineandinitial]

That's the point, self destruction. It's similar to what they are doing with the USA currently.

If they really wanted to destroy the company, they’d bring in the Teamsters

 

[bacha29]

So FDX is following your business plan?

I'm asking you a question. If you're an international high volume multi class shipper and see what's left of FDX and the new world of constrained shipping services and options would you still want to be bothered with it or move on to someone else?

 

[yadig]

No kidding. Glad you finally came around.

You keep saying that it wasn’t profitable and FedEx didn’t want the contract. Brie was all over the news talking bout how FedEx was close to making a deal. UPS came in and beat FedEx out and will make it profitable. It’s funny how a better managed company keeps one step ahead.

 

[Fred's Myth]

I'm asking you a question. If you're an international high volume multi class shipper and see what's left of FDX and the new world of constrained shipping services and options would you still want to be bothered with it or move on to someone else?

I’d continue to utilize the services of a shipper that guarantees their service, until they failed to provide that service, or honor their guarantee.

I wouldn’t be investing in them, unless I believed the risk and ROI support that.

See the difference? Your emotional response notwithstanding.

 

[bacha29]

I’d continue to utilize the services of a shipper that guarantees their service, until they failed to provide that service, or honor their guarantee.

I wouldn’t be investing in them, unless I believed the risk and ROI support that.

See the difference? Your emotional response notwithstanding.

That's the entire expletive deleted point. If the carrier can no longer provide services that protects the shippers interests and ROI ,no longer has the capabilities and diversity of services the shipper needs do you think he'll stick around? It's quite clear that your response is based on your sentiment and loyalty to FDX. It clearly appears that the entire thinking of FDX surrounds the question of what it can get rid of rather than what it must keep.