TEDSKI From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 983 times:
It is a shame that a terrific airline like TWA that has been around for decades will be gone. I remember flying on one of their 707s in 1973 from JFK to ATH, that was a terrific flight. And I also remember flying on one of their DC-9s in late 1986 (after they bought out Ozark Airlines), from San Antonio TX to Champaign Urbana IL. I will miss them very much!!!
AA-SAN From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 139 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 968 times:
I don't know where you are coming from. Since when does anybody claim that the only reason that AA is taking over TW is for charity. Yes, they are going to keep TW form being shut down, but they would be the first to admit that they are in a situation to gain a lot if they get TW. So where exactly you got the imprressoin that people argue that AA is just making a charitable act, I'm not sure.
B747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 946 times:
Until AMR raised their bid to $742 million, they were making off like bandits with the TWA assets. I was closely involved with the sale proceedings and our independant analysis showed $750 million as AA's 5 year break-even cost for TWA. Assuming the $8 million variance is a result of the legal fees, I think AA knows the same thing. If the IAM doesn't co-operate, then AA will lose bigtime on costs. There is no charity involved here, but there was definitely AA trying to steal the assets by paying under market price. Its a more balanced deal with the revised numbers.
FDXmech From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3251 posts, RR: 38 Reply 6, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 924 times:
IMHO, if I was a mechanic for TWA today, I would be very happy if the AA/TWA deal went through. Getting absorbed by a large and stable airline like AA definetely has its advantages. Reading the financial pages every night and the predictions of your companys inevitable demise is depressing and demoralizing. For those who think its a noble thing, I suggest you resign your present position and join a company thats hitting the skids and preferably in a position where all you can do is hope for the best, that is a position where you have little control of your destiny. It aint pretty.
Penguinflies From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 975 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 915 times:
ok...as newly loayal customer to TWA (just a couple of years) I join the many who say that it is sad to see the airline go. But as I read up on the other bids that were submitted, and issues that the other airlines have with this deal (AA and TWA and AA's stake in DCAir, which angered Continental), I found that I would really want AA to pick up the pieces of TWA.
If the judge doesn't approve their bid, whose to say they will not fly tomorrow? The judge's opinion on the other two bids range from a joke(Ichan) to not knowing if the group is for real (JAG). AA is the only real bidder.
The assets that they pick up are very valuable, including slots, gates, terminals, and routings. But they also pick up long-term debt that is due, aircraft leases that are high (which they will renegoiate), and older (seniority), higher paid labor force. If AA doesn't buy them, then who will?
I agree that this deal is not all charity, but I came to terms that if it doesn't go through, then we have 21000 more people on unemployment, the St. Louis area air-economy can bust (with 76% of the traffic on TWA and 11% on SWA, who will fly those routes on Tuesday if AA doesn't get a hold of the planes and TWA does stop flying?)
Of the top ten majors: NWA and CO are having their problems right now...SWA has told the City of St. Louis that if TWA does stop operating, they will not increase their flights, Delta might look into establishing something here, America West has its own problems with schedules and maintence, UA and US are trying to seal a deal, and Alaska (opinion of mine here) might not see it's business plan extending into the midwest. Couple that with lenghty delivery times for new aircraft...and small availiblity of leased aircraft (though if TWA does stop then there is an additional 190 aircraft on the market), St. Louis might be out of luck in finding a new carrier fast for the 60+ gates TWA operates from now on the short term..but in the long run someone will reestablish a hub here.
This a purely a business move...I make no mistake...if AA does get TWA, then some predict that they will be one of the largest (if not the largest) carriers in the Northeast, Carribean, and Transcontinental. The chairity part is the human and economic interest of the main cities that TWA serves..mainly st. louis (yes...that is my opinion too).
Blink182 From Azerbaijan, joined Oct 1999, 5430 posts, RR: 19 Reply 10, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 883 times:
I will admit that I am an AA fan, but I am also a TWA fan. I would oppose the merger if AA would just dispose of everything about TWA, but AA is saving a couple thousand of people's jobs, the city of St. Louis and lots of frequent fliers as well. I will admit that part of the deal is not just charity, as TWA has a lot of slots any airline would want. On the whole, the name "TWA" will be gone, but not most of the routes. For TWA employees, this is a good thing for them, they know they are getting a pay check and they know they have a steady job.
Give me a break, I created this username when I was a kid...
Tan flyr From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1847 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 859 times:
If I were a TWA employee, I'd be damn happy a stable company like AA was taking over my bankrupt employer with a promise to the court (and politicians) of maintaining almost 20,000 jobs, most of which will get a raise. Now, if any of those TWA employees don't want to work for AA, then quit. Go find yourself a better job( in a slowing economy) it still is a free country. No one forces anyone to work anywhere last time I checked!
Now, as I have stated before, I am very sad to see TWA go. The poor company has been bastardized since Howard Hughes.Yet, thru the resiliance of its' employees it has hung thru successive mis-management for over 25 yrs.
I sincerely wish ALL TWA employees the best in the coming weeks as they move to AA or on to other opportunites in life.
Logos From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 768 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 843 times:
As I've said before, I'm sorry to see TWA go. I'll miss them.
But this hostility toward American is wholly misdirected. In case you hadn't noticed, TWA just went up for auction and no other credible bidder came forward (and, no, neither Icahn's group nor JAG counts). No one ever said that American isn't getting something for it's investment, but they would also seem to be the only viable party interested at this point.
While it's not charity, a number of TWA employees stand to be a lot better off than if TWA liquidates or is taken over by an undercapitalized group. A whole bunch of TWA FF members will have their lot measureably improved.
Whoever got the idea that this was charity? American is taking a risk and making an investment. When they were the only bidder, they could well expect that they were going to get TWA at something of a discount. When the other bidders showed up, they had to bid something closer to fair value.
Nothing wrong with that. Happens on E-bay every day. But I'll bet you like being in the position where you snap up a bargain at auction, too. So, I suspect, would AMR shareholders, to whom AA management ultimately answers.
Che From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 537 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 827 times:
Where else would TWA go? Eventually they would go out of buissness. AA is doing all the things you said, but they are also saving them. Unfortunatly the TWA name will dissappear but it will be in good hands with AA. I think this is the best way for both companies.
FDXmech From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3251 posts, RR: 38 Reply 15, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 812 times:
To add .02 cents more. I worked for AA approx 2 years, not a long stay but barring industry wide labor woes going on now, they were a very nice outfit to work for and I was treated very nicely. Truly a class outfit.
Penguinflies From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 975 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 800 times:
sorry about that...let me clarify my opinion on the leased aircraft. On a short term basis, I don't think that the hundreds and hundreds of aircraft either parked in a desert or currently for sale or lease can be brought here in a short notice. I don't know the amount of time that it would take for say, US to get an old 737 back on line once they park them (i'll guess anywhere from a week to a couple of months depending on the maintenace needed and the backlogs are each respected shop). As for other leasing...Wet Leased aircraft can come in a day or two (horribly expensive)..but it usually takes longer for anyone to get an aircraft that is properly certified to get in the air either from Boeing lease, GECAS or any other reputable lessor. Maybe a major can work the magic and grease the wheels to get some online, but St. Louis and other, smaller cities that depend on air service will still be left with the choice of driving or Amtrak.
Thinking about it though...maybe Delta might keep around those L1011s if something does change? oh well...unless we're the judge, we won't know till tomorrow.
Aa737 From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 849 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 793 times:
If you think AA is buying another airline just for some charity work you probably wouldn't make a good manager at all. Companies don't spend hundreds of millions if there isn't some benefit for themselves. As nice as it would be that TWA would stay around, you have to be realistic.
VirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 782 times:
As much as I hate AA and their high fares. I think TWA is much better off with them (AA) than being put under Ichan's thumb to be furthur bastardized and raped by this man with no morals and doesn't give a damn about the employees. After all; If he did care then he wouldn't have tried to syphoneout the money from pilot's pensions as well as sell TWA's LHR route authority in 1992 for $445 million to AA. I do hope to see AA, AMR lawyers and the bankruptcy court judge to give Ichan Hell!!!!