Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AA Reports 2nd Q Results - Loss!  
User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Posted (4 years 1 month 2 days ago) and read 8946 times:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/AMR-Co...ts-prnews-4032341104.html?x=0&.v=1

AA are not follwing the trend set by DL, AA and US.

62 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineaacun From Mexico, joined Jan 2004, 522 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 2 days ago) and read 8850 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Operating profit was 196 million............. they juggle the numbers.......... Dont let them fool you. They are making money

User currently offlineTUSdawg23 From United States of America, joined May 2010, 111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 2 days ago) and read 8812 times:

Quoting UAL777UK (Thread starter):
AA are not follwing the trend set by DL, AA and US.

I think you're a bit quick to judge. When you consider at this time last year they lost 390 million, and this year to only lose 10.7 million, I'd have to disagree and say that things are trending upward for AA financially. The Revenue Sharing with some of the big boys across the pond(BA/IB and AY to a smaller extent) along with partnering up with B6(finally a Legacy that sees the advantage of partnering with an LCC) for codesharing purposes and soon hopefully, joint FF programs shows that AA is taking some aggressive steps to ensure it remains a competitive player in the market for the foreseeable future.


User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 2 days ago) and read 8709 times:

Quoting TUSdawg23 (Reply 2):
I think you're a bit quick to judge.

Quick to judge???....They are the ones reporting the loss not me, get your facts right and dont shoot the messenger.


User currently offlineAAAL From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 127 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 2 days ago) and read 8649 times:

Look at numbers and you will see the operation was profitable. It's looking very good for AA.

User currently offlineUAL777UK From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 3356 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 2 days ago) and read 8591 times:

Quoting AAAL (Reply 4):
Look at numbers and you will see the operation was profitable. It's looking very good for AA.

I agree, I have looked at the numbers and it looks so much better than it was and can only get better with ATI in place with BA/IB, however TUDdawg23 likes to go off on a tangent when I am only reporting the facts. We have seen his comments on the UA Q2 thread as well which were quite amusing to some.


User currently offlineairfrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2826 posts, RR: 42
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8467 times:

Quoting aacun (Reply 1):
Operating profit was 196 million............. they juggle the numbers.......... Dont let them fool you. They are making money

And committing fraud?

This is the exact attitude/behavior that led to massive financial melt-downs over the last decade, and it's going to result in hammering of AA stock over the next quarter. If they can't make a profit now - when aviation is suddenly booming, when will they?


User currently offlineBD338 From United States of America, joined Jul 2010, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8447 times:

Quoting AAAL (Reply 4):
Look at numbers and you will see the operation was profitable. It's looking very good for AA.

Operationaly profitable, yes, but 3.4% margin versus the 10% or so that DL posted. RASM trend was positive and reflected other carrier reports so that is also a positive. cash reserves were also a significant improvement. The drain was in the interest expenses, was this a 'one-off'?. From a financial health perspective, operations could be wildly successful but if the requirements elsewhere in the business are a financial burden outweighing operational success then ultimately the prospects are poor, unless the business can be balanced (I believe AA can do it). While things look better for AA I wouldn't go to "very good" just yet. The BA/IB ATI should be a boost later in the year as well. All trending in the right direction at least.


User currently offlineburnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7537 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8425 times:

Quoting AAAL (Reply 4):
Look at numbers and you will see the operation was profitable

Operationally most airlines were making money before when they were posting losses... but their other costs were making them lose money, so bottom line it doesn't matter till you get to your net profit/loss margin.

Plus when you compare AA's "operationally profit" compared to UA, US, DL, it's pretty poor compared to their competitors, are things looking up at AA? Maybe, but everyone improved from last year, its a trend, and other airlines capitalized on the markets, while AA didn't do so as well.

[Edited 2010-07-21 07:19:36]


"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
User currently offlineisitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8172 times:

Quoting airfrnt (Reply 6):
And committing fraud?

No fraud chum. Everyone on the planet who has had accounting 101-102 knows there is always more then one set of books and numbers.
Relax.
My take is AA keeps the unions at an arms length with this report.
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineRIPCORDD From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 1159 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 8098 times:

Also keep in mind contracts are up and they are in a hurry to get them done also plays good to shift the numbers....I have heard that AA cargo income dosnt go to AA it goes AMR so AA has the expenses for the Cargo but none of the income from it is this true?

User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5211 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 7910 times:

One other thing to remember. AMR breaks out the financial results for AA, but it doesn't break out the results for Eagle. It could be that AA is doing reasonably well, but Eagle is a money pit. We know AA's CASM, but management never breaks out the CASM for Eagle.

Most major carriers have divested themselves of their regional carriers, but not AMR/AA. If AMR ever sold Eagle, you could see better numbers, i.e., higher margins, for AMR/AA.

Glad to see AA ordering more 738s.


User currently offlinePRAirbus From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2005, 1136 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7691 times:

AA needs new Top Management!!! Employees gave concessions to stay away from BANKRUPTCY. AA has downsized, cut services to the max and yet not making money??? AA Top Management keeps getting hefty bonu$e$ every now and then...something's wrong with that picture. AA needs new blood, a new vision, new planes, new logo, new uniforms...all other USA Majors got in shape after ransacking employees' pockets and going bankrupt; AA did not! What a shame!!! What's the solution? New Top Management, I guess.

User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7584 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 11):
One other thing to remember. AMR breaks out the financial results for AA, but it doesn't break out the results for Eagle. It could be that AA is doing reasonably well, but Eagle is a money pit. We know AA's CASM, but management never breaks out the CASM for Eagle.

Most major carriers have divested themselves of their regional carriers, but not AMR/AA. If AMR ever sold Eagle, you could see better numbers, i.e., higher margins, for AMR/AA.

I truly doubt Eagle is what is causing AA's woes. If that was the case they would have been spun off a long, long time ago. Yes, AA has publicly saif Eagle is still for sale but if you truly have a loosing subsidiary, there are ways to fix the problem.

Honestly, AA needs to start getting creative in their way of doing business. Over the past 10 years they seem to have taken the low road and have a "sit and wait" type attitude; trailing the competion in many aspects. ATI COULD have been pursued more aggressively. Yes, we all know it was made into a big stink in the past, yada, yada, yada and the arm chairing will continue. This is in fact a forum. Is it not?

AA isn't going anywhere. They still command a premium in many markets and carries a HUGE chunk of the domestic and international market. The money is there to be made and they are making it but they are burning through it a lot faster than they would like; seeing little to no return. All the while a/c leases needs to be paid, bi-anually mortage payments on their a/c need to be paid, credit card holds/recipts are still there which eats into a pretty good chunk of an airline's reserve cash. Oh, and you still have to send checks out twice a month to the empoyees  .

If/ when they can get labor in check, they would do fine. I really have little doubt about that...OVERALL. Once the games between the unions and the front office stops and they focus on what's important, keeping THEIR airline solvent then yes, we can say AA is in a pretty darn good position in the industry. Until then, who knows.

This kind of brings me back memories of the Chief Executive Officer (and I spell it out for a reason because you would think their #1 man would know better) publicly stated they are basing their plan on how well/poor their competitors do. World Traveler had the thread and I will try to find it and post. Pretty piss poor if you ask me.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6464 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7533 times:

Quoting isitsafenow (Reply 9):
No fraud chum. Everyone on the planet who has had accounting 101-102 knows there is always more then one set of books and numbers.
Relax.


Chum back at you. Having taken accounting 101 and 102, I have to say I am unaware of there always being more than one set of books. What you are saying is part of folklore, that sounds good but lacks in substance. Before you fire back I am aware that have been examples of two sets of books, but ALWAYS? No I don't think so.


User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 7508 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 14):
Chum back at you. Having taken accounting 101 and 102, I have to say I am unaware of there always being more than one set of books. What you are saying is part of folklore, that sounds good but lacks in substance. Before you fire back I am aware that have been examples of two sets of books, but ALWAYS? No I don't think so.

      And any TRUE investor//accountant/financier can smell bs two football fields away and knows how to read these reports...



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineisitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7282 times:

Quoting bobnwa (Reply 14):
bobnwa

1. You and I had different instructors.
2.You are correct ....not always...but just when you wish to make a point to someone or some group.

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 15):

Right again. But the one who knows usually keeps his trap shut, no matter which side of fence they sit.
They usually have a "skeleton" or two in the closet. If they fire a shot, the opposition will fire a cannon.

youknowwhatImean?
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5211 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7105 times:

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 13):
ATI COULD have been pursued more aggressively.

Wasn't this the third application for ATI? The past attempts to get ATI came with the requirement to drop a lot of slots at LHR, and whatever slots were necessary in the U.S. This was because service to the U.S. from LHR was limited to AA, BA, UA, and VS.

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 13):
I truly doubt Eagle is what is causing AA's woes. If that was the case they would have been spun off a long, long time ago. Yes, AA has publicly saif Eagle is still for sale but if you truly have a loosing subsidiary, there are ways to fix the problem.

I agree that all of AMR's problems aren't caused by Eagle, but it would be interesting to know who Eagle's CASM compares to mainline, as well as to the likes of SkyWest, Pinnacle, Republic, Mesa, etc. From what I understand, Eagle has the highest labor costs among the regionals.

Remember that when AMR management went looking for concessions, Eagle employees weren't included. So relative to mainline, Eagle has become a more expensive operation. I know AA people who say that if AMR put up all regional flying for bid, they would save a substantial amount of money.

Quoting PRAirbus (Reply 12):
AA needs new Top Management!!! Employees gave concessions to stay away from BANKRUPTCY. AA has downsized, cut services to the max and yet not making money??? AA Top Management keeps getting hefty bonu$e$ every now and then...something's wrong with that picture. AA needs new blood, a new vision, new planes, new logo, new uniforms...all other USA Majors got in shape after ransacking employees' pockets and going bankrupt; AA did not! What a shame!!! What's the solution? New Top Management, I guess.

If you look at bonuses, they are often a very small part of the compensation costs for an airline (payroll, health insurance, pensions, etc.). One reason that AMR paid bonuses was because the concessions limited pay raises. The last thing you want are people leaving, because the pay is better somewhere else.

As for new planes, how about all of the 737-800s that are being delivered? From what I know, management is not keen on replacing the entire MD-80 fleet, because they last thing they want is to be locked into a large order, then see Boeing come out with the 737/757 replacement. Remember that among the airlines pressing Boeing for a new narrowbody is AA.

Also, AA has 50 787s on order with an option for 50.

New logo? That is one of the most identifiable brands in transportation. Notice that Delta put the widget back on the tails of their aircraft and got rid of the wavy gravy logo? Getting rid of the current logo would make as much sense as when UA dropped "Fly the Friendly Skies" for "United, Rising."

New uniforms? I might be inclined to put the F/As in something a little less business suit.

And wouldn't you want to give management credit for preserving the pensions? In an era when so many businesses have either closed pension plans to new employees or worse, there's a lot to be said for keeping the pension plans and staying out of bankruptcy.

There only people who win in bankruptcy are the lawyers. The creditors get a fraction of what they are owed. The employees wind up with bad contracts. The shareholders lose their investments.

Now, if AA needs new management, do you have a CEO in mind? There is a saying in the U.S. Army. Don't criticize something, unless you can offer a solution.

So, do you have a name in mind? Or would you suggest say a person from a specific industry?


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7545 posts, RR: 25
Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7089 times:

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 13):
AA isn't going anywhere. They still command a premium in many markets and carries a HUGE chunk of the domestic and international market. The money is there to be made and they are making it but they are burning through it a lot faster than they would like; seeing little to no return.

This is basically the situation. They are generating the cash, but their costs are too high, so they burn through it too fast.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineJFKPurser From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 486 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 7044 times:

Quoting TUSdawg23 (Reply 2):
I think you're a bit quick to judge. When you consider at this time last year they lost 390 million, and this year to only lose 10.7 million, I'd have to disagree and say that things are trending upward for AA financially. The Revenue Sharing with some of the big boys across the pond(BA/IB and AY to a smaller extent) along with partnering up with B6(finally a Legacy that sees the advantage of partnering with an LCC) for codesharing purposes and soon hopefully, joint FF programs shows that AA is taking some aggressive steps to ensure it remains a competitive player in the market for the foreseeable future.

It's very inconvenient to their argument that their labor cost disadvantage is the primary reason for their woes when they report even the slightest profit. Their accountants are far more creative than the guy who does my taxes, I'm sure.

We will continue to see losses posted as long as all of their labor contracts are open.


User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 6999 times:

Quoting JFKPurser (Reply 19):

I still have to agree with Bob. The accountants at AA are smart but the union number crunchers are just as samrt. You can't hide what's there. To the average Joe like me that does not know how to read an SEC filing or detailed earnigs statement, sure. But I call BS on professionals; which both of these organizations employ.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25056 posts, RR: 46
Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6922 times:

Quoting JFKPurser (Reply 19):
It's very inconvenient to their argument that their labor cost disadvantage is the primary reason for their woes when they report even the slightest profit. Their accountants are far more creative than the guy who does my taxes, I'm sure.

We will continue to see losses posted as long as all of their labor contracts are open.

Its not a matter of convenience, its truth.

One startling measure that needs to be realized is the advantage the remainder of much of the industry does have over AMR with their CBAs.
If OAL labor contracts with their different labor rates and work rules could be grafted into AMR, you would see HUGE cost improvements, and resultant profitability at AA.

A very specific example is if US Airways contracts were adopted across the board, AA would experience a $1Billion dollar reduction in labor cost.
Simply put, the CBA cost delta when averaged across the industry penalize AA to the tune of $600mil net annually.

This is a huge added ball & chain that the company must struggle with.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineIrishAyes From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 2179 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6911 times:

"American blamed the loss on a 24% jump in spending on jet fuel. American is pinning its hopes for recovery on a strategy of focusing flights at a handful of big hub airports and boosting revenue by working more closely with international partners. On Tuesday, U.S. antitrust regulators gave the company permission to cooperate with British Airways and others in setting fares and schedules on flights between the U.S. and Europe."

Every other major US carrier is dealing with escalating fuel costs. So what if they're operation is profitable? So what if the YoY losses have narrowed? The fact is and remains that AA is still losing money because of their high operating costs. Searching for new revenue opportunities can only go so far when your legacy competitors have significantly managed to lower costs and post profits, leaving AA in the dust.

In my opinion, the solution needs to come from the top. Seven years and billions of losses and Arpey is still running the show. He needs to go.



next flights: jfk-icn, icn-hkg-bkk-cdg, cdg-phl-msp
User currently offlineisitsafenow From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4984 posts, RR: 23
Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6878 times:

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 20):
but the union number crunchers are just as samrt(smart).

nadda...that's their weakness and the higher ups of the unions know it......and they are working to
fix it.
safe



If two people agree on EVERYTHING, then one isn't necessary.
User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7118 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 6693 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 11):
If AMR ever sold Eagle, you could see better numbers, i.e., higher margins, for AMR/AA.
Quoting ckfred (Reply 17):
I know AA people who say that if AMR put up all regional flying for bid, they would save a substantial amount of money.

That is one take, the other is that AA does not have some of the "other" issues that carriers who have out-sourced their regional flying, example the brand is still AA including the look of the a/c, not XXX operating a DL flight etc.

Quoting ckfred (Reply 17):
In an era when so many businesses have either closed pension plans to new employees or worse, there's a lot to be said for keeping the pension plans and staying out of bankruptcy.

Except that such nobilty has not translated into improved productivity or labour peace with the workforce, so at the end of the day, from an economic postion the question has to be asked, was it really worth it?

I am certainely glad that AA did not take the Chpt.11 route as others did as a financial tool to unload their high operating cost and change their CBA's, but it is akin to the baggage fees, everyone hates them, everyone complains about them, but until we see clear indications that more folks are flying with WN, B6 or other carriers who have not jumped on the first bag charge it is simply more hot air being blown around with nothing to show for it - from the pax side that is, the companies are rolling in the funds.


25 AA1818 : Explain how AA is being left in the dust- being a large player both TATL and PAC, largest in the Americas, pending ATI with JAL and recent ATI with I
26 commavia : Not having owned regional airlines is hardly what most of AA's competitors would call an "issue," as they still maintain the branding on the side of
27 ckfred : Look at it this way. Things might be worse, if AA had gone into BK and dumped the pension plans. Remember how UA's F/As kept threatening CHAOS strike
28 PlanesNTrains : I'm proof. Despite having a higher airfare, our family saved almost $200 recently by choosing WN over AS, with the bag fees being the tipping point.
29 JFKPurser : It's only a question of time until other carriers' CBAs mirror AA's. Everyone always wants -- and usually eventually gets -- what everybody else has.
30 LAXintl : As Jamie Baker today asked, so whats next? AA surely cant think that is the end game. There are so many industry variables including the LCC threat a
31 commavia : Thank you for, once again, illustrating perfectly exactly how divergent the expectations of today's reality are depending on whether your AMR labor o
32 RIPCORDD : I have 2 CEO'S that would do an amazing job Bob Crandall and Gordon Bethune.....AA top team is very weak they have done some good things but they are
33 Slider : I'd say their fuel management people need to hit the bricks too.
34 tpac : AA = Earnings Zombie I will not invest unless management is replaced and investor confidence can be restored.
35 LAXdude1023 : So, the correct answer is to do nothing and just wait for everyone else cost to rise? I fear thats what AA's management is doing and a reason they ha
36 crosswinds21 : This is a good result, given that AA's coses are significantly higher than its competitors. A net loss of $10.7M with revenues of $5.7B is a virtually
37 Macsog6 : And what about us few thousand of loyal AA pax who, aside from a few occasional irritations, like AA. If anything, AA needs to go back, in terms of s
38 laca773 : Exactly, B! AA does need a leader, who will treat his employees with dignity and respect which is something Arpey does not do. AA needs to get their
39 Post contains images Jacobin777 : Hi Laca773... We usually agree on 90% on things here (and I usually agree with about 95% of what LAXdude1023 says as well) but I'm going to respectfu
40 LipeGIG : Yes, AA is making money, less than the others, but it's making money and this is the most important as it provides relief after some quarters of loss.
41 UAL747DEN : You make me laugh! AA is doing good with their loss but UA is doing horrible with their profits! If AA has to account for the expenses then they also
42 IrishAyes : Contrary to popular belief, ATI isn't going to magically solve all of AA's problems overnight. Particularly not it's internal ones, which I believe a
43 TSS : Is he currently under a "do not compete" clause since leaving CO? If so, when does it run out?
44 JFKPurser : What I can predict -- with relative certainty at least as far as the DL flight attendant costs are concerned in your point -- is that the gap will cl
45 LAXintl : I used the term delta in lower case to represent the mathematical difference in value, not Delta the airline. I'm glad some people believe the gap wi
46 PlanesNTrains : Were I Bethune, I might choose to pass on AA. Better to die with everyone saying "If only Gordo had ran AA..." than to actually bring him in and have
47 Jacobin777 : I think that is the key point here, the situation (market) are completely different. The environment and variables have changed considerably. I think
48 TUSdawg23 : I never said UA was doing bad except in regards to the treatment of their paying passengers and their corporate culture. The reply in the AA thread w
49 FlyASAGuy2005 : And THEIR CEO was quoted saying something along these lines! It made a big stink on here. I Couldn't find the thread but I wish/hope someone can. ??
50 Post contains images UAL777UK : Oh, just two small things then!
51 ual777 : AA is WAY behind in the ATI game compared tu UA and LH. Also, they are not a "large player" in the pacific at all. In fact, they are one of the weake
52 aajfksjubklyn : AA would not DARE post a true "paper" profit when they are in negotiations with their unions....posting a $10mill loss is quite hysterical when you lo
53 bobnwa : Please allow me to disagree with your prediction. Can't speak for DL or UA but NW wasn't even close to shutting down.
54 nwaesc : This is one of those rare occasions where we completely agree. Why do people continue to (mistakenly) think NW was on life support?
55 Post contains images isitsafenow : I'll second your emotions here. NW?....shut down?....thats like the Vatican closing up shop. safe
56 flyfree727 : Never gonna happen.. AA knows it employes will NEVER give up a single penny again on a voluntary basis. The ball will start rolling once the NMB begi
57 JAL : At least the loss is much smaller than before!
58 Post contains images FlyASAGuy2005 : I don't know. The things i'm ready on here is just blowing me away. Anywho, this is a forum .
59 par13del : Vocal minority, it is generally held that NW went in to take advantage of the expiring Chpt.11 provisions which made it easy to use Chpt.11 as a "fin
60 777STL : Of course, you do realize that as a publicly owned and traded company, AA's accounting practices are routinely audited and oversighted by a neutral,
61 IrishAyes : I think they are audited by Ernst and Young? Or maybe I am confusing it with WN... Exactly. They've really missed the boat (no pun intended) on this
62 Jacobin777 : Filing for BK for almost as a "convenient tool" is basically illegal and most creditors (and judges) wont' allow it....while its true that BK laws we
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...
Boeing Reports 2nd Quarter Loss posted Thu Jul 24 2003 18:50:05 by Danny
AA Reports $1.4 Billion Loss For Qtr 2 posted Wed Jul 16 2008 06:16:07 by FFlyerWorld
Continental Reports Q1 2010 Loss posted Thu Apr 22 2010 05:13:30 by panamair
DL Reports Q4/2009 Loss posted Tue Jan 26 2010 06:59:36 by Alitalia744
CO Reports 3Q Results posted Fri Oct 23 2009 11:44:53 by EwRkId
SAS Reports 1 Billion SEK Loss posted Wed Aug 12 2009 02:33:40 by Robbie86
AMR Reports 2nd Quarter Financials posted Wed Jul 15 2009 06:49:35 by WorldTraveler
TAM 2008 Results: Loss Due To Fuel Hedge! posted Mon Mar 30 2009 20:48:04 by LipeGIG
AA 3Q2008 Route Profit/Loss posted Mon Mar 2 2009 20:31:06 by MOBflyer
TAM 3Q Results - Loss (R$ 112 Mm / US$ 50 Mm) posted Mon Nov 10 2008 07:05:52 by LipeGIG