PANAM_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 3987 posts, RR: 93 Posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 7546 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW COMMUNITY MANAGER
United filed with the SEC yesterday that contingent upon Bankruptcy Court approval they have reached agreement with Boeing to cancel their remaining 777 on order. This should "free up" the $45m deposit for other purposes. This 777 was the final airplane on order from their 1990 order for 744 & 777
PM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6717 posts, RR: 65 Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7224 times:
Quoting PANAM_DC10 (Reply 2): In the filing it states it was the final of 34 ordered in 1990.
I believe the original order (1990 sounds about right) was for 34 firm and 34 options. They later converted 27 of the options, taking their total to 61. 60 of these were delivered and the cancelled plane is (was) the 61st and final on firm order.
In what order the various planes were delivered I have no idea. Maybe this particular example is indeed the 34th of the original order. Either way, it's gone.
Widebody From Ireland, joined Aug 2000, 1150 posts, RR: 9 Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7208 times:
'Free up' the deposit? More like free up the outstanding payments on the total aircraft cost? Deposits, especially on aircraft, are non-refundable. They can be merged into other orders, but I understand United have no further orders with Boeing.
FlyinTLow From Germany, joined Oct 2004, 501 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7200 times:
That's really sad. Love those 777s for UA. Kinda hard to believe that UA cannot utilize a 777, especially since everyone says intercontinental routes are where the money is for US airlines. And those would be the 777s routes...
The agreement with Boeing is for UAL to pay $14M "damages" for being allowed to cancel the order. The remaining £31M will be used as a credit against future orders, if there is one!
PANAM_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 3987 posts, RR: 93 Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7160 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW COMMUNITY MANAGER
Quoting Widebody (Reply 4): 'Free up' the deposit? More like free up the outstanding payments on the total aircraft cost?
I'm assumed that the deposit would be included in the "Advanced payment" so perhaps the deposit is the part of the payment that Boeing retained as UAL said it would get a significant portion which does imply they have not had the full $45m returned. The only outstanding orders mentioned in the Filing are Airbus A319 & A320. No more on order with Boeing. Been a long time since United had no outstanding orders with Boeing.
UnitedTristar From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1241 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 6599 times:
BoeingNut,
Obviously this is not to just survive. If you read the rest of the postings its not a refundable deposit. There is a penalty but even then the money won't be transferred back to United. It will be used toward future aircraft orders! It is definitely a good sign for United. They are planning future fleet plans! They are looking ahead! Its a positive! This is obviously saying that UA feels it doesn't need more 777's. My guess would be something smaller, perhaps the 787 or the 737's boeing is talking about selling based on the 787 technology! Not Ironic..Positive!
-m
Welcome aboard United Airlines L1011 Friendship Service to Osaka!
N60659 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 654 posts, RR: 28 Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5925 times:
On a different facet of the same issue here are a few questions:
(a) Was the aircraft a -200 or -200ER?
(b) When was it scheduled to be delivered.
(c) We know that carriers like AI, 9W and IC (among others) are wanting to increase capacity with aircraft in this class. Would any of them have a shot at that delivery slot?
NWAFA From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 1893 posts, RR: 16 Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5785 times:
United Transtar,
There is NOTHING that said there will be future fleet plans. UA is loosing that money....they are in no place, today tomorrow or next year to add more fleet. Having UA cancel their order helps with the daily expense of operating another a/c and lease payments on that, loosing the money they put down on it, is money that is already written off.
THANK YOU FOR FLYING NORTHWEST AIRLINES, WE TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR BUSINESS!
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 7458 posts, RR: 5 Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5621 times:
T7s are not cheap and I think UA is wise to avoid the costs (and cash flow) associated with another delivery. I would bet that the same discussions are going on with Airbus. UA needs to be in a position to operate with the planes they have until they are in a lot better position.
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5384 times:
Quoting FlyinTLow (Reply 5): That's really sad. Love those 777s for UA. Kinda hard to believe that UA cannot utilize a 777, especially since everyone says intercontinental routes are where the money is for US airlines. And those would be the 777s routes...
Well, they still have lots of them flying and they are not going anywhere for a while
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4006 posts, RR: 6 Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4735 times:
Quoting FlyinTLow (Reply 5): Kinda hard to believe that UA cannot utilize a 777, especially since everyone says intercontinental routes are where the money is for US airlines.
No doubt that UA could use it...but they can't pay for it.
Thrust From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 2673 posts, RR: 11 Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4614 times:
It is so disappointing to see that the launch/co-launch customer of the 727, 737, 767, and 777 in such a harsh financial future with too little cash to buy a single 772ER. For the 777 launch customer to trip at the finish line is truly a bummer. Save UA, Save UA
PlaneSmart From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 739 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4577 times:
Deposits on orders are publicly non-refundable, non-transferrable & non-deferrable. Deposits on options, if more than a dollar a plane, are usually refundable, transferrable and deferrable.
Just because it was stated publicly the depo is not being returned, don't count on it where UA & B are concerned. Most likely the depo will be used as a credit to acquire spares.
However, if this aircraft was to be purchased using external finance, or leased, there may well be financial penalties to be met for the funding.
GothamSpotter From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 586 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4490 times:
If UA "doesn't need" another 777, could that mean a full conversion to Ted is far behind? (j/k)
Seriously though, I don't see why they'd bother cancelling the order right now if they're not getting any cash back and it wasn't even slotted for construction yet. Is it possible the $31 million credit could be used for other Boeing products, namely replacement parts, meaning UA would actually see an immediate financial benefit from this deal?
PANAM_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 3987 posts, RR: 93 Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4207 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW COMMUNITY MANAGER
Quoting PlaneSmart (Reply 19): Just because it was stated publicly the depo is not being returned, don't count on it where UA & B are concerned. Most likely the depo will be used as a credit to acquire spares.
Thank you, I agree that in the case UA & Boeing there is a strong possibility of this occuring.
Quoting GothamSpotter (Reply 20): I don't see why they'd bother cancelling the order right now if they're not getting any cash back
They do get the $31m and can do whatever they so choose with it contingent upon Court approval for the agreement with Boeing.
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 3987 posts, 
From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, 
From India, joined Feb 2005, 6717 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Aug 2000, 1150 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2004, 501 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1178 posts, 
In this case United can use those funds elsewhere and not for new orders with Boeing if they so choose. 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 739 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
