Page 1 of 1

MIA in heated feud with American Airlines

PostPosted: 29 Feb 2012, 17:51
by Bazz
Interesting piece fro the Miami Herald:

MIA in heated feud with American Airlines over new baggage handling system

Airport administrators and federal regulators say a long-awaited baggage handling system is ready for service in the new North Terminal. But American Airlines has pushed to postpone its launch so it can make millions of dollars in upgrades.

Link to full article: http://bit.ly/w5rfiF

The upgrades referred to are to the baggage handling system not the sort of upgrades we all know and love... :P

Re: MIA in heated feud with American Airlines

PostPosted: 01 Mar 2012, 08:05
by Pete
I'm confused by the headline. How do AA *make* millions of dollars out of the upgrade? The article mentions AA might need to pony up $20-$30m in order to put in a new software upgrade, but couldn't see how AA will profit. Or is the headline just plain wrong?

Re: MIA in heated feud with American Airlines

PostPosted: 01 Mar 2012, 10:00
by slinky09
Pete wrote:I'm confused by the headline. How do AA *make* millions of dollars out of the upgrade? The article mentions AA might need to pony up $20-$30m in order to put in a new software upgrade, but couldn't see how AA will profit. Or is the headline just plain wrong?


Maybe they can't charge for extra bags with the current system ):

Re: MIA in heated feud with American Airlines

PostPosted: 01 Mar 2012, 14:09
by tontybear
Pete wrote:I'm confused by the headline. How do AA *make* millions of dollars out of the upgrade? The article mentions AA might need to pony up $20-$30m in order to put in a new software upgrade, but couldn't see how AA will profit. Or is the headline just plain wrong?


Pete I think you are reading it wrong but the sentence should probbaly have said 'ofupgrades ' rather than 'in upgrades' i.e. AA will be spending $$ on making further changes to the system.

Re: MIA in heated feud with American Airlines

PostPosted: 03 Mar 2012, 11:22
by Bazz
That was how I read it, and yes probably using "of" in place of "in" would have made it much more clear.