Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is AA Certain Bankrupt  
User currently offlineUal767ord From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 156 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2604 times:

Is AA propably going to file for chapter 11?. Having the 2 largest airlines bankrupt will the goverment help?

11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMirrodie From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 7444 posts, RR: 62
Reply 1, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2551 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well, it ain't over til Ethyl Merman sings.

We'll wait and see. But there was an article yesterday about the FAA keeping tight reigns on the big three. If all big three are chapter 11, it would be the first time in history and the FAA does not want their quality to sink as a result.

It wants to make sure that whatever happens, they won;t cut the corners on issues like overall safety.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-lifaa0315.story



Forum moderator 2001-2010; He's a pedantic, pontificating, pretentious bastard, a belligerent old fart, a worthless st
User currently offlineExusair From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 684 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2525 times:

AA has been consulting with various bankruptcy lawyers as of late. It is not certain, but it appears to be on the horizon. If a bankruptcy filing should occur, it will likely be within the coming months.

As for a government bailout such as the post 9/11 setup, it appears as that will be highly unlikely. It is the contention of the government that many factors regarding airline finance were exacerbated by the events of that day, and the situation of overcapacity became more acute in the months following.

The attitude of government currently is that it has already done enough for the airlines, and it does not wish to tap into the "trust fund" in order to prolong an inevitability, that cash starved carriers with high costs cannot continue its failing business model. It seems that UAL will be the sacrificial lamb for the greater good of the industry.

Current lobbying efforts are for the goverment to pay for airport security functions. This function alone would release the shackels of a multibillion dollar burdon that the industry has been footing for over 1 year. There is also an effort to decrease the amount of tax levied to air travellers which could make up over 26% of a ticket price if a passenger transits an airlines hub twice in a roundtrip itinerary.

If the government would view airline security as a national security function, many of our nations carriers would be in better shape. It is up to the government to raise the funds necessary to fund the TSA. Airports with commercial air service should be the primary source of these revenues through Passenger Facilities Charges (PFC's), revenues garnered from parking facilities, and a small tax levied on goods and services obtained at local airports.

The government should release funds from the Aviation Trust Fund in order to fund security equipment and functions. This money sits in a bank and is earmarked exclusively to federal programs such as ATC renewal and facility construction.

Only 1 new airport has been built (DEN) since these moneys have been collected since the 1980's. There are no new airports in the planning stages and most faciltiy improvements are paid for by the air carriers themselves.


User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 3, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2503 times:

Airlines like Continental were doing fine before 9.11 however, and despite the falling yields, have repeatedly stated that the reason for their current losses is only to do with the extra security taxes placed on them since 9.11.

Continentals last financial report confirmed that if they were not lumbered with the security taxes, then they would have made a profit in the last quarters


User currently offlineLfutia From Netherlands, joined Dec 2002, 3345 posts, RR: 31
Reply 4, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2455 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This is a posible scenario but here goes. Say AA does file for Ch.11 and we already know that UA is in Ch.11 As you all know, AA and UA have hubs in ORD. If they both fall, who would take over? ORD would have a gaping hole if both were liquidated....

Leo/ORD



Leo/ORD -- Groetjes uit de VS! -- Heeft u laatst nog met KLM gevlogen?
User currently offlineJ32driver From United States of America, joined May 2000, 399 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2401 times:

No politician can ever touch the Trust fund. They use it to balance the overall budget. The money is only there on paper. It really doesn't exist.

User currently offlineBeltwayBandit From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 495 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 7 months 2 weeks ago) and read 2332 times:

The FAA worries more about an airline that has not yet filed bankruptcy. That's when financial concerns might make them make poor decisions on maintenance, etc.

Once bankrupt, there is somewhat of a honeymoon period when cashflow improves.


User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2298 times:

This is a posible scenario but here goes. Say AA does file for Ch.11 and we already know that UA is in Ch.11 As you all know, AA and UA have hubs in ORD. If they both fall, who would take over? ORD would have a gaping hole if both were liquidated....

How many times will this scenario be repeatedly asked?  Insane

Basically, common sense would tell you that if one O'Hare carrier dies, the other would most likely survive on the dead carrier's carcass. If conditions are such that both failed at the same time (unlikely), then no doubt other forces would have to come into play for the airline industry.


User currently offlineShaun3000 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2207 times:

A wonderful article on why airlines are failing: http://www.southwest.com/swatakeoff/post911.html

Written by none other than Herb Kelleher!


User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 9, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2196 times:

Gordon Bethune would say exactly the same thing as Herb.

User currently offlineBoeingfan From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 385 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2170 times:

AA is not certain for bankruptcy. Repeat AA is not certain to file for chapter 11 reorganization.

If UA goes down which could happen in days, or maximum a couple of weeks of war, AA will be the victor.

On the other debate, AA would have alot to gain in a (ch. 11) reorganization, and emerge one of the most powerful global airlines. It maybe best for AA to file Ch. 11, reduce cost, reorganize and then, emerge healthy. Attack and retake from the interim victor the UA market strong holds all while preserving revenue with higher prices.

Look for airfares to increase at least 33% by 2004 in the ORD area, this will save AA. Fasten your seat belts, and get your "sale tickets now" 'cause it is going to be a short bumpy ride.

2cents Bf


User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (11 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2161 times:

An even better presentation can be found in the "Plane Talk" section of the same site by Southwest CFO Laura Wright. She says that the new security taxes will eat up all that the airlines got in the post-9/11 cash bailout in less then a year. That is because, in this environment, it is nearly indisputable that this cost is being transfered to the airlines as customers. This is because they take it into account in deciding when and if to travel. Flying is perhaps the most overtaxed activity other than smoking, drinking alcohol and gambling. And the taxes on those activities were imposed in order to deliberatly discourage them.

Though the conclusions are sound. some of the logic has to be taken with a grain of salt. Laura said -

----
Q: Does a tax, fee, or charge of just a few dollars per passenger really matter to Southwest?
A: Yes. In the five calendar quarters since 9/11, Southwest's net profit per passenger was only $2.96. To put that in perspective, the federal sales tax on an average Southwest ticket is $6.25; federal "segment" and security fees add another $5 per segment flown; and 51 of our 59 airports have passenger facility charges of $3 - $4.50. So, government makes a lot more money off our Customers than we do!
----

The point that the fees matter is sound. Yet she is comparing Southwest's PROFIT off of a ticket with the government's REVENUE. They are not the same thing, so this is a falacious comparison. The government's "profit" off of all these fees would be what is left over after the cost of everything the taxes pay for is taken out. For example, take all the money that is generated by all taxes imposed to pay for security. Subtract the cost of the TSA from that. The result would be the government's "profit" from the security tax - this may very well be a small or even negative number.

Divide this "profit" from all ticket taxes by the number of tickets, and you would have a good idea of how much money the government "makes" from Southwest customers. This could be compared to Southwest's PROFIT. Or take the total ticket taxes collected by the government, and then compare that to Southwest's REVENUE. Either comparison is fair, and Southwest in fact uses the second method when it says that ticket taxes can be up to 30% of the purchase price of a ticket or even more.

But it is NOT fair to say that ".....government makes a lot more money off our Customers than we do!". At least, it is not fair to say this on the basis of ticket taxes alone.



Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Is AA Stock So Low? posted Wed Feb 4 2009 19:49:09 by Mattnrsa
Why Is AA LAX/EGE A 752 Yet LAX/DEN S80 Or 738 posted Sat Oct 4 2008 15:17:49 by REALDEAL
How Is AA Performing At BCN? posted Sat Jun 21 2008 03:12:28 by UPPERDECKFAN
Why Is AA Dropping ORD-PDX? posted Mon Nov 5 2007 11:20:38 by Ghillier
Where Is AA Putting One Of MIA-EZE's 777? posted Mon Aug 6 2007 20:55:50 by Anetter123
How Is AA Doing At Dallas Love Field? posted Fri Jul 13 2007 15:45:37 by Ghillier
Is AA Droping ORD-ANC? posted Thu May 10 2007 03:10:47 by Ebs757
Why Is AA Cheaper Than BA For The Same Flights? posted Thu Jul 20 2006 22:55:14 by Highpeaklad
Is AA's Customer Service Representative Mistaken? posted Thu Apr 27 2006 21:32:11 by SkyHigh777
Is AA Receiving New 772's? posted Fri Apr 14 2006 20:56:04 by Flybynight