Qqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2276 posts, RR: 13 Posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4815 times:
From USA Today:
"A bankruptcy judge gave United until June 30 to submit a reorganization plan without risk of a competing plan from creditors or another party. That means United, which had planned to exit bankruptcy protection by June, isn't expected to exit until late summer or early fall. The judge refused United's request Friday for even more time. United sought bankruptcy protection in December 2002."
It says that UA may not emerge from BK until late summer or early fall, so does that mean bids from outsiders could be taken after June 30? Is UA in for a hostile takeover, or even Chapter 7? It doesn't seem likely to me, but it does sound like time is running out for them to get their plan in order.
The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
Haveric From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1247 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4032 times:
Yeah, shut 'em down. I mean, who really would be hurt by shutting down the second largest airline in the country? No one works for them. No one is employed by one of their suppliers. No one flies them. No one depends on them for health insurance or a pension. No one needs to get from Boston to Bangkok. No one needs to pay rent on all that gate space.
Before you all bury an airline, thing for just a second about the consequences. This country has liberal bankruptcy laws for a reason -- we, as a society, place value in supporting struggling businesses because of all that would collapse along with them.
FlyIGuy From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1102 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 4002 times:
They Can't get out of bankruptcy because they are trying to run 2 airlines at once. Instead of trying to get their major airline out of the hole they are just putting TED in with it. They should have emerged out of bankruptcy before starting TED...Whats your opinion ???
Just my two cents...
The opinions I post are of mine and mine alone, not of the airline I work for.
N1641 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 220 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3989 times:
the downside would be job loss, I'd imagine at hub cities theres quite a few employees, another down side is less competition means my ticket prices go up, but I dont need UA for anything else, I wont fly with them, service has always been crap the few times I've dealt with them
MSYtristar From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 6560 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3978 times:
Whomever willfully wishes to see a major airline shut down operations is in serious need of a head exam. It may be easy for people who don't work in the industry to say "oh they had it coming" or some brilliant statement like that. The truth is it would affect the lives of THOUSANDS of employees and their families. Not ten, not fifty, thousands. But that's ok as long as the fittest company survives right? People are either heartless, stupid, or both. But, that's what makes the world go 'round.
Everyone doesn't have to like every airline flying out there...heck, there are a few that I downright loathe...but on a business level, all airline employees are one big family. Over here in F9 land, no one that I know wants to see UA go under. And I would imagine the feelings are mutual. I would hope so in any case.
Dc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3920 times:
Haveric, You sure do sound like the typical liberal .......... And I agree with you 100%. I think United is going to make it. But, if US does go under efforts should be made to accommodate the ex-US employees at the other airlines. This was done when the original Branif went tits up ..... A lot of talented aviation experience would be lost along with those peoples jobs.
Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
Ssides From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4059 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3850 times:
First of all, Haveric stands like a typical conservative to me. He recognizes that businesses aren't the evil, malicious entities that liberals make them out to be, but that they are the engines that create jobs, innovation, and a high standard of living. Yet I digress, this isn't a political board and I hate it when the threads turn to that.
To root hard for an airline to go under is definitely a bad thing. We should want all of them to succeed, and for the industry to grow, bringing more aviation services to more people. That being said, we also have to be realistic. I would hate to see UA go under. Tens of thousands of people out of work, empty airports, and less international service from the US would definitely not be pleasant. However, I do think that there is too much capacity in the industry today, and that losing a carrier or two would be good for the industry in the long haul. The loss of pricing power is the key factor in the majors' decline over the past 10 years, and even with the presence of LCCs, one less major competitor would help some of the airlines restore their bottom lines.
Still, I think UA will make it. I have heard that their service improvements have been great -- hard for me to believe, based on my experiences with them a few years ago -- but if they are improving service and the bottom line, I wish them luck. I think USAirways will be the one to go under, and whether that turns out to be good for UA (less competition) or bad (loss of codeshare routes), is a long way off.
F9Widebody From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1604 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3800 times:
MSY Tristar wrote: Whomever willfully wishes to see a major airline shut down operations is in serious need of a head exam. It may be easy for people who don't work in the industry to say "oh they had it coming" or some brilliant statement like that. The truth is it would affect the lives of THOUSANDS of employees and their families. Not ten, not fifty, thousands.
Another thing to consider is the impact to a city like Denver. United controls over 2/3 of the traffic here and sure Frontier is a great airline, but they do not have nearly the capacity or destinations to handle the surge if United were to go under. As United goes, so goes Denver.
StevenUhl777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3798 times:
I dont need UA for anything else, I wont fly with them, service has always been crap the few times I've dealt with them
Sounds like a good reason to wish Ch. 7 on them....
What a stupid comment..
Haverick: right on, couldn't agree more.
Ssides: UA has made a big effort to increase the quality of their inflight product in order to win back customers and their confidence in United during this crucial time. United was the #1 on-time airline for 2002, and they have set several other operational benchmarks as well.
United will make it. In a way, I think this ruling is good, because it will in fact set the deadline to announce the business plan so they can reeemerge. The strength of that plan, and the reaction to it by the investment community and ATSB panel will determine if any other competing offers are put forward. Given UA's size and potential, I'm sure there is some group out there who would love to run it. Who knows...maybe that will be a choice for the winner of 'Apprentice II"
Aloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4480 posts, RR: 15
Reply 14, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3774 times:
What the hell is with you guys? Calling for them to shut down so you can get on with your lives. Oh really? United's problems are taking time away from your lives? What about the livelihood of the employees who work at UA? Should they need to sacrifice that to make you guys happy?
I swear, AC is in trouble, you guys say "I can't wait till they die", US is in trouble, you say the same, then this news from UA, and it's "yeah! shut 'em down!".
Are you guys aviation fans or not?
You know what, just because of this, I'm booking a flight on UA instead of HP to cali this summer. Just so I can fly on them proudly. Whether they go or don't go, I support them, they will earn money from me this august.
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3742 times:
I agree with the judge, doesn't matter if we are aviation fans or not, I don't see the point of prolonging UA status of protection from creditors and everything else, either you have a plan and a way to survive and pay your bills or go away, it is better for everyone involved in the long run. Aviation is a great thing, but in the end it's still a BUSINESS.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3711 times:
Problem is, short of this $1.6 billion that UA wants the taxpayers to fork over, I don't think UA has a plan. I think that IS their plan. And if they don't get it, they're up a creek without a paddle-hell, they don't even have a creek.
Startvalve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3621 times:
Ok here is how it works. There is are a finite number of air travelers in this country and probably the world at any given time. If an airline goes under the other airlines will grow to meet the need. There will be some job loss in redundant managerial jobs and maybe some loss of jobs for the people down the line, but most of the employees will be needed by whatever airline fills the vaccum. I am sick of my tax dollars being shoveled into an airline that has shown time and time again its upper management can't manage a mcdonalds.
Cjuniel From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 146 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3560 times:
Well I will first say I am a United man for life. Always have been, always will be. With that said, I think today's ruling is just what United needs. Nothing like setting a date to force you to deal with something. I think creating Ted while operating under bankruptcy was a huge mistake. I know I am going to get a LOT of flack for my next statement, but I do NOT think a legacy carrier can expect to operate the same way as an LCC. Don't get me wrong. I like Jet Blue and Southwest as much as the next man, but if I am planning a trip to Rio, Bangkok or Cape Town, I sure as hell am not about to go to www.southwest.com and check their schedules to these remote destinations. I wholeheartedly believe that deregulation was needed in the airline industry. But it created some major problems because prior to, you didn't have carriers with extensive domestic AND international operations. Just as LCC's serve a purpose, so do the major carriers. I honestly believe that is where the majors have lost sight. Is it reasonable to expect to get costs in line? Hell yes. But will you ever be able to turn a 747 or 777 around in 30-45 minutes? HELL NO! Is United going to survive? Most definitely. I do want to add as a sidenote to F9Widebody, in the unlikely event that United does go under, Denver shouldn't have much trouble attracting another hub airline. Continental was the #1 airline in Denver during the 80s, and had Frank Lorenzo not ran them into the ground, Continental and United would still be battling head to head in Denver as we speak.
Midway2airtran From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 864 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3517 times:
As a taxpayer, I would refuse to take on any of the tab to save UA. Especially when our goverment insists on paying the tab while putting large restrictions on foreign investment which could open many new doors to capital that might possibly be an answer to all the misery. As part of the this industry myself it would be hard to see the effect of a Chapter 7 on the many employees, suppliers, ect.. I've already been there, done that myself on a smaller account. The #1 killer of United is greed. My hope would be for a MAJOR and massive take-over, restructuring and new attitude from top to bottom.
Kudos to the Judge, finally someone has put their foot down on the matter and has opened the opportunity for something to happen!!
Artsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 24, posted (10 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3414 times:
With that said, I think today's ruling is just what United needs. Nothing like setting a date to force you to deal with something.
I totally agree. It appears to many that UAL are trying to avoid making any of the real tough decisions, and trying to ride along in Chapt 11 until the industry either recovers, or until the "new" industry playing field is a little more understood.
The Judge is now saying enough is enough, time to get your finger out and make the changes that are needed, and with that, we will see if enough can be done to correct the UAL business plan.
I have faith in Tilton, but I have my doubts about the things outwith UAL control.
: startvalve, im assuming that you mean all the airlines when you said you were sick of shoveling tax dollars into an airline that is mismanaged.....all
: Could TED evetually replace all Domestic services across the US? At a lower cost base, I am sure this looks more appealing to all those creditors. Not
: Since you all seem to be bickering amongst yourselves so much, and this is a Civil aviation forum, let me direct you to a place where it is more accep
: I see by the profiles of people like 'startvalve' and most of the other folks that are so eager for UA to close up shop that you aren't old enough to
: Could TED evetually replace all Domestic services across the US? At a lower cost base, I am sure this looks more appealing to all those creditors ****
: qqflyboy, before you spew anymore b.s.---please post the link to usa today about this.................
: the downside would be job loss, I'd imagine at hub cities theres quite a few employees, another down side is less competition means my ticket prices g
: ARTSYMAN, can you please show me were ted is costing more than ua mainline to operate?????
: Uadc8contrail, this report is in every paper now, not just the USA Today. I read it on various news sites today. J
: jeremy, since im a idiot....please post a link...thxxxxxxxxx
: i thought so.....no links=no story....only stirring the pot....nice try
: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/national/8449489.htm The part that the original post is refering to is..."Judge Eugene Wedoff of the U.S
: As for the story about Ted's costs, I just did a google search, and here is just one of many.... Coming of age in the 1980s, I remember when "Ted" ref
: As far as UA goes...all I can say is....remember what goes around comes around.....can you say TORQUE? My hearts bleeds for UA....not!
: ure qouting the mia herald?????come on jeremy get me a link to the chicago area papers or dont post it......if ual was in dire straits as most of you
: The additional seating in each of Ted's A-320 aircraft could offset those expenses, but that depends on taking customers from competitors. I think the
: goldentail, why do you think ual came up with torque????because your frank lorenzo luvin idiots were going over to ual tkt ctr and pulling free tkt ho
: ure qouting the mia herald?????come on jeremy get me a link to the chicago area papers or dont post it. **** The article is in all the national papers
: j, your making this out to be a monumental occasion, both the miami herald and the other papers have this out to be the death march on algonquin rd, j
: uadc8contrail.......Is that the best you got? Sorry you live in fantasyland....since I was a ticket counter supervisor in DEN at the time of TORQUE I'
: What the hell is with you guys? Calling for them to shut down so you can get on with your lives. Oh really? United's problems are taking time away fro
: goldentail, how did ua stab u guys in the heart if frank was dumping chreap seats into den and forcing ual to compete against you guys when you were i
: goldentail, maybe thats why co had problems....mgmt was card carrying twu members and the minnions were at the mercy of frank....you guys were hell be
: uadc8contrail...... Your a real piece of work! You must enjoy looking foolish. Oh lets not forget the fact UAL was going to buy Frontier and save it f
: Yeah, this Uadc8contrail guy is a bit nuts, he was offended when I called UA "cash strapped" in another post. Facts are facts.