Na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10978 posts, RR: 9 Posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4567 times:
To all who still think UAL wouldn´t part from their beloved 777s: The current "World Airline Fleets" issue mentions that some newer ones owned by Boeing Capital might be recovered by the manufacturer quite soon if UAL fails to fulfill its lease contracts under Chapter 11.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8119 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4234 times:
But how long ago was that article printed??? I'm sure that Boeing Capital has since the time the article was printed worked out better terms so the newer 777-200ER's will stay in UA's fleet, since the 772ER will become the backbone of UA's international operations in the future. Now, Boeing Capital buying back the older 777-200A's would make more sense since UA won't need such a large plane with much shorter range than the 772ER.
Speedport From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 284 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4203 times:
You've missed the whole point.
The point is that United can not bank on cutting the lease rates on newer 777s by very much, like they are with older aircraft such as a 757, because newer 777s can easily be leased to other airlines, unlike older aircraft.
All the article was trying to point out is that United doesn't have much leverage in its renegotiation of newer 777 leases, and if they try by playing hard ball, Boeing could also play hard ball by pulling their planes.
It is knee jerk reactions like yours, which only want to see the worst happen to United, that gives the competition a bad name.
KaiTakFan From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1588 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3946 times:
Dave, you see a spelling mistake and you assume it is an American? God how disgusting people can be with generalizations! That kind of attitude sure does no good to a great breed of people (aussies) on this planet.
Donder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6660 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3654 times:
Americans are not a race but a collection of races thus it is xenophobia not racism ,if anything at all.
UA could do with losing the non-ER versions IMO,if they have to lose some 772s,as they will help to eliminate a sub-type.However,I believe these are configured in the domestic lay-out so re-configuring some ER versions into this lay-out may off-set the saving made by reducing the sub-type.But do UA really need a domestic 777 fleet?Perhaps they could reconfigure some international 763s into domestics and then cut the 777 non-ERs?
Ryanair From United Kingdom, joined Jul 1999, 654 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3425 times:
Boeing will do all it can to keep UAL flying, if UAL want a discount Boeing will bend over backwards to help. Having UAL's fleet grounded and up for grabs would be a nightmare situtaion for Boeing, short term cheaper lease rates, even if that were to spread to other airlines (as it would probably to a degree) is a lessor evil.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 81
Reply 14, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3318 times:
60 777s is a pretty valuable order, and would cause ruin to the 777 line if they all suddenly became available.
I'd go so far to say that the 60 777s is probably worth a good fraction of what an order for 737-300s and -400s would have been, since that was all that was available when UA started ordering Airbus. I bet Boeing is perfectly happy with the business they got.
A330_DTW From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 371 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3076 times:
Even more off-topic, English is a rather complex language which is why so many spelling and grammar mistakes are so frequently made.
For instance, the British penchant for placing the letter "u" in some rather strange places, such as in "colour", "flavour", "neighbour", etc.
"Our" is not pronounced as "er", so why throw that "u" in the middle of those words? Furthermore, "Lieutenant" has no "f" in it, and "settee" has two "t"s, so why is it pronounced as if there were none, i.e., "se'ee", where the " ' "is a glottal stop?
By the way, I've seen some Brits screw up "their", "there" and "they're" just as we "Yanks" do, as well as "your" and "you're".
AAMD11 From UK - Wales, joined Nov 2001, 1063 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3069 times:
It's OUR language, and so if we want to put a "U" in there, we can and we will!
Back on topic.
I do think it is in Boeings best interests to keep the 777s with United, they dont want the market to be flooded with used 777s that will damage the value of the new-builds, which are [apparantly] still in demand - they'd like to keep the production lines busy would they not?
MxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 34
Reply 20, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2879 times:
Since we are venturing WAY off topic here anyway, leave it to the Brits (and Canadian Brits as well) to put those pesky damn extra u's where they don't belong but remember folks, this is coming from the same people who cannot properly pronounce "aluminum"
Freight Dogs Anonymous - O.O.T.S.K.
DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
Fsuwxman From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 439 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 2749 times:
I am 100% American, and I use the u's in the words, I think it looks better and have been doing it for years since back in middle school (+10 years). Yes, I did lose a few points in class for using them... but oh well, it looks cooler...
Dynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1875 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2661 times:
Wow! People here are very imaginative. Firstly, Boeing Capital doesn't own all of UA's 777s, only the last few newly delivered ones in the past two years or so. Secondly, when the time comes that UA will need to ground all their 777s, it means UA would likely have to sell their trans-Atlantic and/or trans-Pacific ops. Then whoever that might pick up UA's international ops will likely pick up UA's 777s, just like UA picked up many of Pan Am's 747s when UA bought PA's LHR and trans-Pacific network. If UA collapses, the 777 in UA's fleet will likely be placed with other airlines much sooner than the other aircraft types in UA's fleet.
DeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8929 posts, RR: 11
Reply 24, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2563 times:
I wouldn't be surprised to see UA lose some 777s, even voluntarily. While they are new, getting rid of them could "cut some fat" off of overcapacitated routes.
And on the language front, I too, use the British spellings, even though I was born in NYC and have lived on the Eastern Seaboard my entire life. I just think that the majority of Americans have screwed another thing up, this being spelling.
: We may put u's in all our words.. but at least im not tempted to mis-spell QANTAS lol who ever heard of Quantas anyways??? morons A^A MD-11
: Isn't Boeing one of United's biggest creditors? If that is true, I don't think that they are going to be running to court to seize United's 777s. It i
: Boeing is not UA's biggest creditor. Airbus is. Boeing wasn't even on the list of creditors for the Chapter 11 filing. I don't believe Boeing actually
: AAMD11, People mis-spell it Q-U-A-N-T-A-S because they are unaware that it is actually an acronym Q-A-N-T-A-S (Queensland And National Transport Air S
: I like the use of "s" in place of "z", myself, and I'm American. Specialisation, normalisation, capitalisation, etc. Almost sounds more sophisticated
: Queensland And National Transport Air System Actually, it's "Queensland And Northern Territories Aerial Service Ltd."
: ConcordeBoy, Thanks for the correction. As I stated, I wasn't too sure what it was but I was certain that it was an acronym. Thanks again. MxCtrlr Fre
: ConcordeBoy was close, but it should be Aerial Services. He missed the plural part.
: if/when they come out of Chap 11, future orders are for Boeings only? ---- If I remember correctly, exclusivity contracts are illegal now.I've got a v
: Airbus griped, and got them overturned No they didnt. Boeing agreed to release the airlines from contractual obligation as a prerequisite of taking ov