Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
American Airlines Order Turns To Dismay  
User currently offlineGizmoNC From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 309 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 40911 times:

Was the AA order all smoke and glass.

check this link posted on Aviation Week http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...20Turns%20To%20Dismay&channel=comm

90 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinemcdu From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1487 posts, RR: 17
Reply 1, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 40689 times:

This article is filled with conjecture versus fact. None of the AA issues are insurmountable. It almost reads as if he wants AA to fail.

User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7812 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 40541 times:

I cant remember reading an article with that much bias. AA has problems and big ones at that, but that article is more wishful thinking than anything else.


Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11979 posts, RR: 62
Reply 3, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 40481 times:

What a complete joke - I'm stunned that an editor at AvWeek actually allowed this pathetic excuse for "journalism" to be published.

This contains not a single piece of new news, or facts of any kind - merely veiled, vague, unsubstantiated conjecture on topics already well digested, publicized and discussed throughout the industry press in the last two weeks.

To imply that AA's entire order was a mirage because AA is relying heavily on financing is ridiculous. Question AMR's ability to raise its own financing, question the logic of manufacturers bending over backwards to give AMR a good deal, question AMR's overall financial wherewithal, but to say that AA signing a contract for hundreds of aircraft - half of which are under signed financing agreements - is somehow not real is just a joke. AMR "offers no details on how it will integrate so many aircraft that quickly?" Seriously? This is the best this clown can come up with? Specifically what details does he want AMR to provide, and precisely what is so unbelievable about an airline taking delivery of 250 airplanes in five years? Is that really all that enormous of a task to accomplish for one of the largest and most experienced airlines on earth? This isn't exactly AA's first rodeo when it comes to rapid aircraft delivery.

Finally, I love how he uses the word "dismay." I would like to know who is "dismayed" by this massive order from AMR, besides perhaps some of the treasury and risk management folks at Boeing and Airbus.


User currently offlineDLPMMM From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3602 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 40474 times:

Quoting mcdu (Reply 1):
This article is filled with conjecture versus fact. None of the AA issues are insurmountable. It almost reads as if he wants AA to fail.

I find it filled with interesting facts...some I knew and some I didn't know. The article didn't say the issues were insurmountable, but you can't deny that AA is not in the best condition.

I didn't know the AA pilots union have the right to keep AA from purchasing any new type or even variant of aircraft or that AA's the 787 order is not yet firm.

I did know the financials of AA were less than stellar, but not everyone who reads AW track airline finances.

Just because you don't like the news, don't disparage the messenger..and I am not an AA hater..I'm an EXP for the last 5 years.

[Edited 2011-08-03 07:37:15]

[Edited 2011-08-03 07:38:27]

User currently offlineaajfksjubklyn From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 915 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 40333 times:

Who is this person? Darren Shannon. Almost appears that he wasn't satisfied with the news so he wrote an article like this to pull it out, or get the media going. Unbeilavable that something like this would be published.

[Edited 2011-08-03 07:47:43]

User currently offlinePlaneAdmirer From United States of America, joined Jul 2009, 564 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 40085 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 3):
I would like to know who is "dismayed" by this massive order from AMR, besides perhaps some of the treasury and risk management folks at Boeing and Airbus.

   Agreed. The risk in all of this isn't American's, it is mostly on A&B (financially, not operationally) and the lessors and whatever assurances A&B might have had to provide the lessors for taking the credit risk.

[Edited 2011-08-03 07:49:06]

User currently offlineusair330 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 830 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 40079 times:

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 4):
I didn't know the AA pilots union have the right to keep AA from purchasing any new type or even variant of aircraft or that AA's the 787 order is not yet firm.

If i'm not mistaken WN had to get approval from it's pilots union for the 737-800 order. I think most airlines work this way depending on there union.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11979 posts, RR: 62
Reply 8, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 39902 times:

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 4):
I find it filled with interesting facts...some I knew and some I didn't know.

There are no "facts" in there beyond that AMR is highly leveraged at the moment. Newsflash.   

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 4):
I didn't know the AA pilots union have the right to keep AA from purchasing any new type or even variant of aircraft

... that's because it isn't true. The APA does not get veto over AMR's fleet purchase decisions, as evidenced by the fact that AMR has now - in the last year - bought into at least two (777-300ER and A320 family) new aircraft types without specific contract language or "approval" from the APA. These are not wishy-washy commitments - this a legally-binding and enforceable contract with money changing hands - and AMR didn't need APA's approval.

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 4):
Just because you don't like the news, don't disparage the messenger

It's not that I don't like the news - it's that there is no news. It's just conjecture and poorly researched and comically vague statements masquerading as "facts."


User currently offlineLDVAviation From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 1116 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 39804 times:

Sad to say, but the quality of the reporting in Aviation Week has been declining for years. I've been a subscriber of the magazine since the early 90's. In the 90's, AV was a great source of information and analysis. Now, it almost seems like the editors at FOXNews are running the place.

User currently offlineC767P From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 893 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 39494 times:

I am not sure why everyone is so bent out of shape over this article. I think it points out something that I definitely questioned when the order was announced but most everyone here seemed to not pay attention to it. The fact that the pilots have to agree to adding new type and variant can be rather significant in AA receiving this order.

Three years after the 787 order and they don’t have an agreement on it. What is to say they will now quickly get something done?

This says the pilots won't work out side deals for the new planes:
http://blogs.star-telegram.com/sky_t...only-consider-a-full-contract.html


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4416 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 39006 times:

Well, for what it's worth, this article is just journalism at its worst. There is no fresh in sites into what the writer has to say. Of course there are going to be issues with the APA, that is their mandate. It all boils down to money and AA just may not have much to bargain with nor the APA bargaining power with the employer.


Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinejetlanta From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 3365 posts, RR: 35
Reply 12, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 38587 times:

Interesting that the author says pretty much exactly what Wall Street said yet is vilified immediately here. You may not agree with him, but its kind of pathetic to denigrate him for pointing out some very real concerns shared by many.

User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5310 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 38605 times:

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 4):
I didn't know the AA pilots union have the right to keep AA from purchasing any new type or even variant of aircraft or that AA's the 787 order is not yet firm.
Quoting commavia (Reply 8):
... that's because it isn't true. The APA does not get veto over AMR's fleet purchase decisions, as evidenced by the fact that AMR has now - in the last year - bought into at least two (777-300ER and A320 family) new aircraft types without specific contract language or "approval" from the APA. These are not wishy-washy commitments - this a legally-binding and enforceable contract with money changing hands - and AMR didn't need APA's approval.

A friend of mine is an AA captain. He has told me for years that under any given contract, there is a formula to figure out how to figure out pay rates for aircraft. It's based on weight. That way, if AA buys a new airplane (new type or a new series of an existing type), management and the union don't have to sit down and negotiate pay. At some point, there will be formal inclusion of a new airplane as an amendment to the contract, but the pilots can't keep AA from buying a new aircraft type.

Quoting C767P (Reply 10):
I am not sure why everyone is so bent out of shape over this article. I think it points out something that I definitely questioned when the order was announced but most everyone here seemed to not pay attention to it. The fact that the pilots have to agree to adding new type and variant can be rather significant in AA receiving this order.

Three years after the 787 order and they don’t have an agreement on it. What is to say they will now quickly get something done?

But, the language in AA's purchase agreement with Boeing, from my understanding, was put in at management's request. The idea was to get the pilots to agree. In other words, if the pilots want new airplanes to fly, they have to agree to a contract.


User currently offlineaajfksjubklyn From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 915 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 38067 times:

I think we should pay more attention to the Face of the American Airlines and not AA's issues with Unions and this and that and the other thing. It amazes me when the inner guts of AA are always explored on these boards as though we are all trying to figure out our blood results without consulting with a Doctor. AA will, has and eventually will settle their problems. One way or the other. In all honesty folks, if AA went under the Aviation industry and economy would suffer. They are a needed component to local economies, they employ ~80k people. Sure Pan Am, Eastern and host of others went away, but if AA collapsed right now, who would buy theri assets, routes? Thats a great question. The others are stripped and tapped from purchasing each other, with integration of those mergers STILL happening. I say all of this, because as always the underlying tone from most, is loving the thought of collapse of AA. It gets tired after a while.

And now, lets talk about....hum,..Delta?


User currently offlineH53Epilot From Israel, joined Mar 2004, 177 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 37976 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 13):
But, the language in AA's purchase agreement with Boeing, from my understanding, was put in at management's request. The idea was to get the pilots to agree. In other words, if the pilots want new airplanes to fly, they have to agree to a contract.

Bingo-the company can buy any plane it wants. However, without an agreement with APA over rates, the company won't be flying them.


User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11979 posts, RR: 62
Reply 16, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 37888 times:

Quoting jetlanta (Reply 12):
Interesting that the author says pretty much exactly what Wall Street said yet is vilified immediately here. You may not agree with him, but its kind of pathetic to denigrate him for pointing out some very real concerns shared by many.

Again - this issue isn't that he is pointing out concerns - it's the ridiculous implications and conclusions he draws from those concerns.

Nobody is criticizing anyone for highlighting AMR's strained balance sheet, or its historically (although reportedly recently improving) labor relations. But there is not a single shred of evidence to suggest that AMR is in any way incapable of taking delivery of 250 airplanes in five years, nor that a pilot contract is required to order these planes, nor for the implication by the "journalist" that this is somehow not a "real" order. All of that is made up B.S.

But implying that somehow this has led to "dismay" over the largest order in aviation is just simply shoddy writing. It hasn't. None of the actors involved here - AMR, or the unions, or frankly even the manufacturers - are at all "dismayed" over this deal. AMR can't wait to get the MD80s off property, cut their fuel bill by a fifth, and probably reduce maintenance expenditure by more than that. The union is salivating over new airplanes, and a new contract around the corner. And the manufacturers have just sold tens of billions of airplanes to one of the world's largest airlines.

An actual journalist would have titled the article, "Questions Linger About AMR Fleet Plans" or "Uncertainty Remains Around AMR Balance Sheet," and then proceeded to write a dispassionate, fact-based article about AMR's outstanding debt, the details released (and not released) thus far about the financing of the first 230 planes, and the economic implications to AMR - both positive and negative - from inducting hundreds of new planes into the fleet so quickly, and simultaneously eliminating hundreds of fuel-inefficient, older aircraft. That would have been an article worth of AvWeek, and would have drawn lots of discussion - but no criticism - from most here on A.net.

Quoting aajfksjubklyn (Reply 14):
I think we should pay more attention to the Face of the American Airlines and not AA's issues with Unions and this and that and the other thing. It amazes me when the inner guts of AA are always explored on these boards as though we are all trying to figure out our blood results without consulting with a Doctor. AA will, has and eventually will settle their problems. One way or the other. In all honesty folks, if AA went under the Aviation industry and economy would suffer. They are a needed component to local economies, they employ ~80k people. Sure Pan Am, Eastern and host of others went away, but if AA collapsed right now, who would buy theri assets, routes? Thats a great question. The others are stripped and tapped from purchasing each other, with integration of those mergers STILL happening. I say all of this, because as always the underlying tone from most, is loving the thought of collapse of AA. It gets tired after a while.

Sometimes it seems as though there is some sort of morbid fascination/obsession with AMR failure.

AMR has major work to do, major problems to fix, and major challenges to overcome - no question about any of that. But I, personally, continue to believe that AMR is not in quite as dire a position as some here on A.net seem to continually want to imply, discuss and project.

[Edited 2011-08-03 09:07:58]

User currently offlineBabybus From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 37435 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 3):
I'm stunned that an editor at AvWeek actually allowed this pathetic excuse for "journalism" to be published.

That rag is unreadable. Who in the aviation world would even buy that rubbish? I stopped reading it years ago when I worked for an airline as I found most of the articles were inaccurate. I'm not about to start reading it now.


User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5310 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 37004 times:

Quoting H53Epilot (Reply 15):
Bingo-the company can buy any plane it wants. However, without an agreement with APA over rates, the company won't be flying them.

My friend who is an AA pilot tells me otherwise. Remember that in the mid 1990s, while managment was negotiating a new pilot contract. the company made an announcment that it had take delivery of the last plane under its various contracts with Boeing, McDonnell Douglas, Airbus, and Fokker, and that there was no outstanding orders for aircraft.

In other words, if the pilots wanted to see any further aircraft deliveries, they better make some headway on a new contract. Eventually, AA then signed it's long-term deal with Boeing, when there was progress.

The reason that AA made the delivery of the 787s conditional on having a pilot agreement was that AA wanted to get favorable delivery slots on the 787-9. If the company waited until it had a new contract, AA might have been waiting several years longer to get 787s.


User currently onlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 7189 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 36353 times:

I see no need to castigate AW over their reporting; granted, there are few facts in the piece but there are few facts available. What is clear is that AA is on very shaky financial ground, and this is not news. Part of the reason is that its fleet is old and fuel-guzzling. With fuel prices as they are, they have two choices; either renew their fleet or throw in the towel. They have obviously chosen the first option, but the road is still very rough. I give them only a 50-50 chance at best to pull it off. If they can manage to survive until the new planes arrive and can then manage the payments they might climb out of their hole, but it will not be easy. Frankly, I think the odds are against it.


The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently onlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13549 posts, RR: 100
Reply 20, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 36272 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

All this article pointed out is that the unions could destroy AA. But there could be mediation. I'm not sure the pilot's union would like that as with AA's current financial help, the new pay rates might look pretty ugly...

Would the pilots really not negotiate as the MD-80s were scrapped? I doubt the furlough would be temporary...

I noticed binding arbitration wasn't mentioned in the arcle which leads too:

Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 2):
I cant remember reading an article with that much bias. AA has problems and big ones at that, but that article is more wishful thinking than anything else.

Not just bias, but shockingly poor journalism. If one is going to pretend to understand the issue, the article should have noted binding arbitration...

Quoting commavia (Reply 3):
What a complete joke - I'm stunned that an editor at AvWeek actually allowed this pathetic excuse for "journalism" to be published.

Why did they publish it? Their quality is slipping.  

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20822 posts, RR: 62
Reply 21, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 36269 times:

Quoting ckfred (Reply 18):
In other words, if the pilots wanted to see any further aircraft deliveries, they better make some headway on a new contract.

Instead of all this conjecture from everyone, why doesn't someone who has access just publish an excerpt from the pilot's contract that defines whether the airline can fly new types with or without a new contract or pilot approval? That should end the speculation by letting everyone read the relevant material themselves.

Meanwhile, AMR stock is down 30% since the order was announced, and continues to slide while oil prices are declining. Perhaps there's some substance to the article. Without seeing the pertinent parts of the contract, there's really no way to tell.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1406 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 35957 times:

Quoting commavia (Reply 16):
An actual journalist would have titled the article, "Questions Linger About AMR Fleet Plans" or "Uncertainty Remains Around AMR Balance Sheet,"

It is the editor that sets the article titles.


User currently offlinecongaboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 352 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 35762 times:

Quoting mcdu (Reply 1):
This article is filled with conjecture versus fact. None of the AA issues are insurmountable. It almost reads as if he wants AA to fail.

Uh, no...there are very relavent facts, like AA is losing money, and employee/pilot ratification is needed. Are these issues insurmountable? No, but professional investors are betting against AA, another fact. Come on , man...



"Joey, you like movies about gladiators?"
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11979 posts, RR: 62
Reply 24, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 35671 times:

Breaking headlines from next week's AvWeek:

Delta Network's Glut of Unprofitable Regional Aircraft Causes "Dismay"
Sub-headline: What will Delta do with all those RJs?

"Dismay" at UnitedContinental Over Pilot Integration Challenges Ahead
Sub-headline: Can United merge two airlines and two pilot groups? Is it possible?!?!?!

  


25 dirtyfrankd : Good grief that article is so biased. I wonder if he's trying to short AMR stock...
26 FlyPNS1 : If AMR's finances continue as they are, I don't see how financially they can afford these aircraft. While they got financing from Airbus/Boeing, the
27 LDVAviation : Funny about a year ago when I cited an Aviation Week article that suggested that Korean Air had no urgent need or interest in forming a JV with Delta
28 commavia : That's a different story. Again - nobody is debating that AMR's balance sheet is under pressure. The implication, however, is that AMR may be operati
29 LDVAviation : You know the worst thing that could happen to everyone wishing for an AA bankruptcy is that in bankruptcy AA slashes its costs way below those of Del
30 Qazar : WOW... Why is everyone over-reacting to this article.... I think it raises some very interesting questions about the AA order... I for one, went strai
31 NeutronStar73 : Exactly! If the article was "poor journalism" and "rubbish", as all the posers on this site say it is, why has Wall Street sucked away some of AA's v
32 Post contains links jetlanta : Indeed. More shoddy journalism? http://seekingalpha.com/article/2842...will-not-save-airline?source=yahoo I wish all the best for AA, I really do. Bu
33 commavia : AA has lots of issues to deal with. This is hardly one of them. AA is more than capable of doing 6 aircraft deliveries per month - this isn't exactly
34 congaboy : Sorry, bud, I can only agree with you over the word "dismay"...that's sensationlism. But there are many valid points raised that all add up to invest
35 UALWN : Some people here and Mr. Shannon don't seem to realize that the 2008 787 order has yet to be firmed, pending "pilot approval," while last month's Airb
36 mcdu : AA can buy anything they want. To fly them on the line they need agreed to pay rates. This is a common contract requirement. And as far as I remember
37 SonomaFlyer : The union is clearly expecting not only to negotiate the new aircraft into their scales but also to make more money since they state they're paid 1992
38 flashmeister : Although not a cancellation, pilot contracts and pay rates have been cited as a reason that DL kept their 777 fleet so tiny for so long (not that it'
39 Max Q : Think you meant to say smoke and mirrors !
40 Post contains links yyztpa : AC did in 2005. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/80bbe112-e109-11d9-a3fb-00000e2511c8.html There was a subsequent order placed after the contract was signed
41 777STL : Those are my thoughts as well. AA is indeed on shaky financial ground, but it's by no means a lost cause as many here would have you believe. Additio
42 KC135TopBoom : You are so wrong. Check with AA and APA.
43 commavia : Please provide proof that the APA gets veto over AMR's fleet acquisitions, and thus also please provide accompanying proof that the 777-300ER and A32
44 jjsilver : Hi Everyone, first post here...WOHOOO!!!! lol. Seriously as a person who has a semi journalistic backgorund a lot of journalism is to fill in holes in
45 QatarA340 : To put it simply when I book a hotel room and pay for the room, I check the cancellation policy and the refund policy and my credit card. In a bit lar
46 VS11 : I also agree that this article is of very questionable quality. Just reading some of the questions/issues raised is eye-brow raising. For isntance: ".
47 Ruscoe : I must say that although the article is based on known information it does raise some interesting questions. In this case it is the Deal and the finan
48 Thrust : I for one can't comprehend how A.A. would commit themselves to such a large order, then just as soon withdraw them. I seriously can't believe this art
49 UALWN : And you know this exactly how? You tell me. Airbus, who before the AA order had sold over 1000 NEOs?
50 Post contains images nicoeddf : Yeah, actually I would love to hear reasoning for that, too!
51 scbriml : Given the significant discount that AA would have received for placing such a large order, their contract with Airbus would certainly include clauses
52 SSPhoenix : I find it really disturbing that a 'respected' or rather popular aviation news site is reporting such heavily negative OPINION on the AA order, especi
53 aajfksjubklyn : Its all the time on these boards. It's really amazing.
54 keesje : I think the Airbus AA contract didn't land well in many places. Boeing was on the brink of striking back with innovation, washing away the eurocraft.
55 jfklganyc : "Sometimes it seems as though there is some sort of morbid fascination/obsession with AMR failure Its all the time on these boards. It's really amazin
56 LAXtoATL : He doesn't know that. In fact, I know it to be completely false since one of the terms of the deal which is known is that all the aircraft scheduled
57 Post contains images enilria : I found the article reasonable except this one section... The carrier also leaves open the idea that similarly sized Airbus and Boeing aircraft could
58 LAXdude1023 : I think most of the problems that people have with the article is the way it was written, not because it points out AA has problems. As an AA Plat and
59 rbgso : Very true. I don't see how AA can avoid BK. And if the US heads back into recession, which seems to be a real possibility these days, BK could be soo
60 frmrCapCadet : Looking at this from a 'black box' perspective, the assumptions above seem about in order.
61 Post contains links SSTsomeday : Air Canada had a similar issue when it initially cancelled a large 777 and 787 order a little over 10 years ago when a new, cost-cutting agreement on
62 777STL : I'm sure it's not at all coincidental that the same people that perpetuate these threads are also self avowed DL fans. Bingo. Most of the points he b
63 Post contains images scbriml : Well, given that 130 A321s for AA have now shown up on Airbus's July order book and that Boeing this week booked 100 737 orders for AA, I don't see a
64 delta2ual : I don't know about that. Every airline on here gets bashed by the same people all the time, whether AA,UA,DL or even WN. Back to topic, I think that
65 Post contains links and images keesje : Indeed. I think this rumors are a bit of AA-Airbus cold day in hell fall out. Better no deal at all then an Airbus win. http://www.flightglobal.com/a
66 Stitch : I don't think Boeing will bother. The 757-200 replacement market is too small to justify a huge expenditure on the 737-900ER to try and capture it. I
67 LAXtoATL : Correct me if I am wrong but the 130 aircraft Airbus added to their July orders were not NEOs but current generation and were not specified for A321
68 keesje : Airlines are not just replacing 757s. Airlines are filling network requirements for the next 20 years. Those network are operated by the current fleet
69 Stitch : And those that have chosen the A321-200 to do that will most likely buy A321-200neos. And those that have chosen the 737-900ER to do that will most l
70 fcogafa : Rather strange article, first it says that the order is for A321NEO's, then it says... 'Airbus said that the American order - part of a broader deal f
71 keesje : UA has both 737NG and A320 fleets and 737NG on order. DL has both 737NG and A320 fleets and 737NG on order. Both can order the 737-900RE and A321NEO.
72 Stitch : UA has the 737-900ER, so I expect them to also order the 737-900RE as well as the A321-200neo. DL does not have the 737-900ER, but does have the A321-
73 American 767 : No they don't. Delta has A319s and A320s, but no A321s. All of them came from Northwest, which used to fly the 319 and 320 but not the 321.
74 Stitch : Fair enough. I thought NW had some A321-200s. So perhaps DL will also split their order as I expect UA to.
75 Post contains links scbriml : They were booked by Airbus as 130 A321s. It was reported that they are the neos and the classics will be added by leasing companies as soon as the fi
76 LAXtoATL : They were booked by Airbus as 130 A321s. It was reported that they are the neos and the classics will be added by leasing companies as soon as the fin
77 scbriml : If you download Airbus's Orders & Deliveries spreadsheet, it lists them as A321s. I think they simply mean the fist batch of the 260 orders, not
78 keesje : From an AA standpoint A321s ASAP seems logical. So no NEO's, they not will be available before 2016/17? However it can also be that by early reserving
79 LAXtoATL : I didn't download the spreadsheet, but when I went to their Orders & Deliveries page, their summary says this... "New business during the month w
80 DFWEagle : This makes perfect sense and would fit in exactly with what AA needs. I would expect that the initial (non-neo) Airbus aircraft end up being A319s, s
81 Reggaebird : I believe that the order is a moot point because AA will eventually be forced to file Chapter 11 Bankruptcy like everyone of it's peers. During the ba
82 Stitch : The speculation I am hearing amongst analysts is that AA will indeed file Chapter 11, but one of the goals of such a filing is to divest themselves o
83 dynamo12 : Sitch, My sense is was also to pick up some traction on employee group cost issues. Any sense of how a Ch11 would hit that side? I think United unload
84 United1 : AA would be able to renegotiate any labor contract that it has during a chapter 11 filling. They would have two paths to new contracts either AA and
85 SonomaFlyer : Was chapter 11 modified under the Bush administration or was that just personal bankruptcy?
86 AADC10 : It was Chapter 7 that was modified to make it more difficult. Corporations can file for Ch. 7 as well but as a practical matter, there was only an im
87 jfk777 : What is it about airlines and labor relations. AA has ordered every plane they can think of, A320neo's, 737-800RE, 787-9 and 777-300ER, some in huge q
88 cslusarc : Since AMR filing for Chapter 11 is almost written in stone, when will it happen? After Eagle is spun off is my guess. Are there any other profitable b
89 lightsaber : 100% agree. It isn't just getting rid of obsolete aircraft. AA has taken on obligations that it will never be able to pay back. If they can... any bu
90 StuckInCA : Sadly, I must say I think that Ch 11 will be a very good thing for AA. I only wish they had done it a few years ago when all of their competitors were
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...
American Airlines Digs Deep To Save Fuel posted Sun Jul 3 2005 22:19:37 by KarlB737
American Airlines Code Share To Pakistan posted Thu Mar 18 2004 09:45:14 by Airmale
American Airlines 777 Inbound To Lansing! posted Mon Dec 22 2003 13:22:51 by Maiznblu_757
American Airlines To Try 'in-flight Happy Hour' posted Fri Nov 19 2010 06:53:32 by EricR
ALAFCO 787 Order (8 a/c) Transfered To Saudia Arabian Airlines. posted Fri Nov 12 2010 07:39:28 by FCKC
American Airlines APFA To Analysts: What Cost Problem? posted Thu Nov 11 2010 14:29:31 by MaverickM11
American Airlines To Cut More Jobs posted Fri Jun 12 2009 20:08:19 by Co757
American Airlines In Talks With Citi To Boost Cash posted Fri Apr 3 2009 06:27:06 by CF105Arrow
American Airlines To Serve Sioux Falls? posted Thu Oct 2 2008 19:56:44 by Jet13
American Airlines To Lay Of 1,300 Mechanics posted Fri Jul 18 2008 08:49:30 by Luv2fly