Welcome back. I missed your "critical" input. From what I've heard, Fred is already experimenting with Ground delivering Express in test markets. How is that passing the legal test of separation?
It's difficult to speculate considering that all you have is gossip and rumors. Hell, you don't even know *that* it's happening, let alone the particulars of it!
He's also moving Ground freight every day on Express aircraft. I've provided many examples of markets where this is happening and my other resident critic (quadro) backs me up on it.
All you've ever provided is *gossip*. How about proof?
So he's already using the assets of one company to generate revenue for the other. Perhaps a long letter to the SEC with appropriate evidence would get Fred's hand slapped for making such a big "mistake". Maybe a E2 and SOS shift isn't happening right away, but many of us think that's where he's headed if he can preserve the low-cost structure of Ground and also improve service levels. The legal question is a big one, and the "degree of control" aspect of it is the critical point of contention.
You can't read very well. If one pays the other for whatever you allege they're doing, there's no problem with it. You missed that part, y'know.
So you go ahead and write your little letter to the SEC! Make sure you tell them that you know what you're talking about because you'be been at FedEx for 25 years and you have gossip contacts all over the country who give you the juiciest gossip. Considering that they get hundreds of boring letters daily that say things like "XYZ Inc. is in violation of 23 USC 222(a)(1)(ii) because the revenue on line 12 of their statement of cash flows is derived from securities that were purchased by John Smith, who did not hold a series 7 license at the time," I'm sure yours would be a refreshing change of pace.
I'm just curious how you know that shifting the freight would have a neglible effect on FDX stock? The logical mind would assume stock prices would go up reflecting the reduced costs of the Ground structure and the elimination of Express positions. I disagree that the costs of bringing the Ground network to parity with Express are "incalculable". FedEx has been headed down this path for quite awhile, and they most likely have cost projections in place that take into account several different possible scenarios.
For Ground to take on that additional service on a national level, they'll either have to buy airplanes or pay for space on airplanes and their expenses go up. With increased volumes comes increases in employment expenses (handlers and so forth). Let's not forget that you think Ground drivers are stupid trailer park idiots who probably couldn't make service anyway. What about the air freight? Here are the options:
a) Use higher-paid Express employees to handle Ground freight, which defeats the purpose.
b) Use Ground employees who make relative chump wages, which probably isn't a good idea.
c) Pay Ground employees Express-level wages, which defeats the purpose.
Then there's the ridiculous notion that Express would give up a little more than half of its domestic revenue while its infrastructure costs (especially air) are roughly the same. Good luck with cutting all the FT employees down to PT PO-only shifts. I'm sure that'll work out swimmingly.
That all boils down to the simple reason why it would have a negligible benefit to FDX stock: to provide Express-level service, you're going to have to pay Express-level money. There's no way around it. Even if "Fred" is the devil, he's still not greater than the fundamentals of accounting, finance, and economics.