FriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4016 posts, RR: 5 Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1916 times:
Yet another twist on Mr. Tilton's wild ride...but this time UA seems to be the good guy and AWAC the bad. That's if I read the article right. Seems like UA's creditors are trying to make sure their money ("UA" money) doesn't get paid to AWAC if AWAC doesn't do what it got paid for.
Avek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4094 posts, RR: 18 Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1871 times:
IANYAL, but United has an extremely difficult case to make, and I doubt that they will prevail.
1. Air Wisconsin has done nothing wrong unless there was contractual language present which extended the duty of good care to a prohibition against working with United competitors. This seems unlikely, given that AWAC has done flying for other airlines while offering commuter services to United.
2. There is no unjust enrichment issue present. United received a benefit from the Air Wisconsin contract in the form of continued (and indeed, expanded after ACAI left UAX) flying in exchange for the consideration provided to AWAC in the form of bonuses.
3. United's failure to anticipate a prolonged stay in bankruptcy does not create any sort of obligation on Whisky's part, nor does it raise any issues of unconscionability with the AWAC contract itself. The parties had equal bargaining power and access to pertinent information at the time the contract was formed.
In short, it's United and its creditors posing as the bad guy while AWAC is the good guy who has done nothing wrong.
Jetdeltamsy From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 2984 posts, RR: 8 Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1836 times:
i think for UA to want money back is ridicilous.
Air Wis earned the money per the contract.
Worked for too many airlines to list. Banktupcy after bankruptcy after bankruptcy.
UAL Bagsmasher From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 2131 posts, RR: 11 Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1815 times:
You have to remember that this is the way UA operates, ass backwards. Then they wonder why they are in BK going on 3 years.
AV8terORD From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 8 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 1729 times:
I think the biggest issue is whether we (AWAC) used the 90M from United (which is supposedly sitting in an Escrow account) to fund the 125M given to US, of which US has already received 75M. If this is true, then our company is dumb and probably are the bad guys. If AWAC's loan to US was from seperate funds, then screw United, its our money if they cancel the contract, and THEY are the bad guys. I'm PRAYING our company didn't jeopordize everything by using "United's money" to prop up US.
PSU.DTW.SCE From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 6910 posts, RR: 29 Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1680 times:
This is like a bad Jerry Springer episode......
United issues and RFP, forcing AWAC to put in a bid in to save their flying.
United threatens to drop AWAC.
AWAC goes and props up US, and hopes to secure additional flying for them
AWAC may or may not have used $ from United
United & US have a codeshare argeement and attempted to merge not so long ago
United & US are both in Ch. 11
AWAC may or may not have seriously ticked off the hand that currently feeds them.
Seriously, how much more messed up can these situations get?
Uadc8contrail From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1782 posts, RR: 10 Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1500 times:
Id be willing to bet that ual knew what was going on from the get go and some how the word got out.....and ual had to react as if this they had no knowledge of it....did whq "forget"that they were paying zw more than what was agreed to ?????(gentlemans handshake)ual and awac are just as guilty as ual was the pimp and awac was just doing what it was told to do until their little secret wasnt a little secret anymore.....
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4576 posts, RR: 28 Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 1507 times:
Quoting PSU.DTW.SCE (Reply 6): United issues and RFP, forcing AWAC to put in a bid in to save their flying.
United threatens to drop AWAC.
AWAC goes and props up US, and hopes to secure additional flying for them
AWAC may or may not have used $ from United
United & US have a codeshare argeement and attempted to merge not so long ago
United & US are both in Ch. 11
AWAC may or may not have seriously ticked off the hand that currently feeds them.
Boy, I can't understand why DH chose to go it alone
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2944 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
