Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
TPG And USAirways May Make Joint Bid On AA  
User currently offlineetops1 From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 1073 posts, RR: 1
Posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 17185 times:

Looks like TPG is going help USAirways finance teir bid for AA. Another positive step for USAirways.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...air-jointbid-idUSBRE84U04Q20120531

67 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTX2FL From United States of America, joined May 2010, 24 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 16816 times:

Interesting. Wonder what this means for job security/job creation for AA'ers..

User currently offlineqqflyboy From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2275 posts, RR: 13
Reply 2, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 16561 times:

Quoting TX2FL (Reply 1):
Wonder what this means for job security/job creation for AA'ers..

US Airways has already said its agreements with the three unions at AA would preserve roughly 40% of the job cuts AA has announced, including 2,300 flight attendant jobs and 400 pilot jobs. AA has announced 14,200 job cuts, and US anticipates saving ~ 6,000 of those positions.



The views expressed are mine alone and do not necessarily reflect my employer’s views.
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7881 posts, RR: 52
Reply 3, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 16486 times:

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 3):
AA has announced 14,200 job cuts, and US anticipates saving ~ 6,000 of those positions.

Interesting how this situation is unfolding. Basically US is able to admit that they are cutting many jobs (just not as much as AA's plan) and they look like the good guys. I wonder what the reaction would be if AA hadn't announced tentative job cuts...



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineflashmeister From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 2900 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 16231 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 4):
I wonder what the reaction would be if AA hadn't announced tentative job cuts...

AMR had to announce some cuts or no one would have taken their restructuring seriously.


User currently offlineripcordd From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 1160 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 15871 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 4):

USAIR is offering less job cuts and less paay cuts.....So when you going from 2003 till 2018 without a paay raise as the TWU fleet service clerks are USAIR is walking on water to the current AA plan. It was USAIRs way to get the unions behind their merger offer...


User currently offlineSJUSXM From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 294 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 15815 times:

I still don't quite get how US can seriously say that there would be less jobs cuts at a combined airline. Clearly if the two were to merge it wouldn't be current AA+current US. There clearly would be some draw down somewhere. Certainly more than AA is planning on eliminating on its own. Wouldn't this give a combined AA+US some 30,000 more employees than UA and DL who would be roughly the same size? How is that feasible?


AT7, ER3, ER4, ER5, CR7, E70, E75, F100, M82, M83, 722, 732, 738, 752, 762, 763, AB6, 320, 321, 772, 77W
User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11554 posts, RR: 61
Reply 7, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 15730 times:

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 7):
I still don't quite get how US can seriously say that there would be less jobs cuts at a combined airline. Clearly if the two were to merge it wouldn't be current AA+current US. There clearly would be some draw down somewhere. Certainly more than AA is planning on eliminating on its own. Wouldn't this give a combined AA+US some 30,000 more employees than UA and DL who would be roughly the same size? How is that feasible?

One of the many questions USAirways still needs to answer with a greater level of specificity. The promises Parker has made to the unions are at this point just that - promises - and while they do seem to be better, in general, for the pilots and flight attendants, there seems to be little the USAirways is offering the TWU M&E employees that is all that much better than what AA has put on the table. USAirways doesn't appear to have made all that many meaningful promises of job protections for M&E at all.

It is rather questionable that USAirways thinks a combined 'new AA' would be fully competitive with more employees than either Delta or United despite being the same size. The devil, as they say, is in the details.


User currently offlineBoeing773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 426 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 15694 times:

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 7):

Well US Airways Group has 30,900 Employes
AMR Corporation has 73,800 Employees.
Now combined this is 104,700 employees, minus the 6,000 US would eliminate that would make 98,700. That is about 12,000 more than United Continental Holdings while Delta Airlines (I couldn't get the exact group amount) has 75,000 employees. So they would be a tad bit oversized, and I'm sure in the time they would size down to UA and DL size once US finds out how the merger effects everything.



Work Hard, Fly Right.
User currently offlinechepos From Puerto Rico, joined Dec 2000, 6214 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 15619 times:

If ther merger occurs it is almost a given that HDQ would move from Tempe to Centreport, right there some employes would jump ship on the US side (HDQ employees). Keep in mind you will defnitely have job losses at the station level as you will have a lot of duplicate positions (just like what happened when DL and NWA joined forces- look at all the NWA mgmt people who lost their jobs). When mergers occur all departments are analyzed and extra fat is pushed out, on the contrary some departments grow as well. We will all have to wait and see what hapens.

Regards,

Chepos

[Edited 2012-05-31 16:17:33]


Fly the Flag!!!!
User currently offlinepoLot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2159 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 15560 times:

It is important to note, when talking about the number of employees, that they were talking about saving 6,000 jobs at American. Note that they carefully avoided mentioning any possible job cuts from the US side of things....

User currently offlinecommavia From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 11554 posts, RR: 61
Reply 11, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 15500 times:

Quoting poLot (Reply 11):
It is important to note, when talking about the number of employees, that they were talking about saving 6,000 jobs at American. Note that they carefully avoided mentioning any possible job cuts from the US side of things....

Exactly right, and yet another absolutely fascinating wrinkle in this whole thing ...


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7562 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 15299 times:

Quoting qqflyboy (Reply 3):
US Airways has already said its agreements with the three unions at AA would preserve roughly 40% of the job cuts AA has announced, including 2,300 flight attendant jobs and 400 pilot jobs. AA has announced 14,200 job cuts, and US anticipates saving ~ 6,000 of those positions.
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 4):
Interesting how this situation is unfolding. Basically US is able to admit that they are cutting many jobs (just not as much as AA's plan) and they look like the good guys. I wonder what the reaction would be if AA hadn't announced tentative job cuts...

Nah, US will end up cutting just as many jobs. Its just those other jobs will come from US itself, not AA.

Im not opposed to the merger or US running the show, just thought that should be clarified. The US workforce better hang onto their hats.



Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineTX2FL From United States of America, joined May 2010, 24 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 14744 times:

Quoting chepos (Reply 10):
If ther merger occurs it is almost a given that HDQ would move from Tempe to Centreport, right there some employes would jump ship on the US side (HDQ employees). Keep in mind you will defnitely have job losses at the station level as you will have a lot of duplicate positions (just like what happened when DL and NWA joined forces- look at all the NWA mgmt people who lost their jobs). When mergers occur all departments are analyzed and extra fat is pushed out, on the contrary some departments grow as well. We will all have to wait and see what hapens.

I know people at pretty much all of the airlines, a few former NW and former CO have gone to US lately, and I know a few AA'ers have jumped ship in the past year or so as well. From what I read online on salary forums, and understand from employees on both sides, AA lower-middle management makes 25-50% MORE than the same management jobs at US at the operational management/analyst level. Doubt that they'd keep the high cost employees..and if they tried to cut their pay people would probably look elsewhere. I read somewhere that an AA station manager makes upwards of 85-125K a year for the same size station that a US manager makes 50K-75K. How many people will gladly take a pay cut of 25-50K a year? One person I know from CO went to US and is making about 20K less for the same job they did with CO.


User currently offline7673mech From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 720 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 14454 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It would be a real interesting merger.
Has US ever really completed their last merger in the cockpit or with the flight attendants?
Now they aim to add one of the most disenfranchised labor groups in the industry?

Gooood luck!
(For the thousands whose jobs are in the balance I mean this sincerely, even though I am typically an AA hater).


User currently offlineflybyguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 1801 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 13735 times:

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 7):
I still don't quite get how US can seriously say that there would be less jobs cuts at a combined airline. Clearly if the two were to merge it wouldn't be current AA+current US. There clearly would be some draw down somewhere. Certainly more than AA is planning on eliminating on its own. Wouldn't this give a combined AA+US some 30,000 more employees than UA and DL who would be roughly the same size? How is that feasible?

I totally agree. This is just the AA unions trying to give Horton his come-uppins with their short-term small thinking. USAirways once the merger is complete has zero intentions of preserving AA jobs and neither does the US unions. The AA union people are going to be at the bottom of the wrung at a US purchased AA. The corporate headquarters will move to where-ever Parker damn well pleases and outsourcing will happen carte blanche with all AA routes that aren't up to US snuff.

I think AA backed itself into this untenable corner by not merging with another large international carrier when it had the chance. Now all there's left is US, which is nothing more than a domestic trunk-line with a sprinkle of low yield international routes. This deal only benefits US Airways... and does nothing to expand international route diversity for the combined carrier like the UA/CO or DL/NW mergers did. The US/AA is just a forced merger that will end up as a Harvard business school case study definition for colossal business blunder... extensive web of low-yield domestic routes propped up by profits from Latin American destinations.



"Are you a pretender... or a thoroughbred?!" - Professor Matt Miller
User currently offlineHPRamper From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4056 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 13035 times:

Quoting SJUSXM (Reply 7):
I still don't quite get how US can seriously say that there would be less jobs cuts at a combined airline. Clearly if the two were to merge it wouldn't be current AA+current US. There clearly would be some draw down somewhere. Certainly more than AA is planning on eliminating on its own. Wouldn't this give a combined AA+US some 30,000 more employees than UA and DL who would be roughly the same size? How is that feasible?
Quoting LAXdude1023 (Reply 13):
Nah, US will end up cutting just as many jobs. Its just those other jobs will come from US itself, not AA.

Pretty simple...at many, many stations the combined number of flights will bring them above the staffing threshold, meaning jobs will be created, not lost. Well, jobs will be lost, but they will likely be from the ranks of ground handling contractors.

Quoting 7673mech (Reply 15):
Has US ever really completed their last merger in the cockpit or with the flight attendants?
Now they aim to add one of the most disenfranchised labor groups in the industry?

Gooood luck!

Sigh...this again? Ad nauseum...


User currently offlinerfields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 17, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 12923 times:

Quoting TX2FL (Reply 1):
Wonder what this means for job security/job creation for AA'ers..

For the actual workers of the airline - a new boss and a new set of issues for contracts.

The main job threat of a US merger is in the executive office sections of AA - probably looking at near 100% job loss.

So of course the people who have done such a fantastic job running the airline the past 10 years are against some one actually coming in and looking at costs and where money gets lost in operations.


User currently offlinedsuairptman From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 898 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 12818 times:

Most of these airline mergers are un-nessecary and will create nothing but hardship outside the executive suite while reducing the consumers options in airlines. US only really wants AA because Parker wants to show how small he really is.  


GEAUX SAINTS!
User currently offlineAA767400 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2358 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 12564 times:

Quoting flybyguy (Reply 16):
USAirways once the merger is complete has zero intentions of preserving AA jobs and neither does the US unions. The AA union people are going to be at the bottom of the wrung at a US purchased AA. The corporate headquarters will move to where-ever Parker damn well pleases and outsourcing will happen carte blanche with all AA routes that aren't up to US snuff.

There will be job cuts one way or another. However it will be on both sides of the spectrum. You are wrong however on several factors.

Headquarters will no doubt be in DFW. As they say, Everything's bigger in Texas. And this is no exception. The unions at AA will not be at the bottom of the US unions. Majority rules, and given that US FAs favor joining the APFA, the outcome is pretty clear. Stapling anyone to the bottom won't be happening due to the Macaskill-Bond amendment. Date of hire will be implemented, and that has been ironed out already.

The only thing that I agree on with you, is outsourcing jobs left and right. DL and UA have both done it, and AA/US will do it too. Outsourcing regionals left and right, and ground personnel. Job cuts for inflight will be mitigated by retirements. Because after armageddon, many will be leaving for sure.

Just my two cents.
  



"The low fares airline."
User currently offlineincitatus From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 4009 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 9711 times:

US has been walking around private equity firms with powerpoints on its magic merger and after six weeks this is all it has been able to muster - some vague headline on "working" with TPG. More likely US was finally permitted to show its presentation to a couple of private equity trainees.

There has been nothing material that US has been able to do. The agreement with the unions is not worth the paper it was written on, and all that it has accomplished is to scare off investors. Some of the articles are plain funny, even the Financial Times' one is a good piece of engineered news.



Stop pop up ads
User currently offlineckfred From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 5219 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 9373 times:

There was an article in this past Sunday's Chicago Tribune about the poor performance at UA/CO, since they went to the single computer system. The UA CSA's are having problems with the old CO system, especially when they have to start making a large number of rebookings.

Passengers are complaining that flights are running late more frequently, and delays are longer, when aircraft have to be swapped or replacement crews have to be found.

Obviously, UA is going to see some passengers defect to AA, DL, WN, US, AS, B6, etc. It happens every time a carrier goes through a meltdown due to a merger, strike, severe weather, and the like.

US had some serious issues a few years ago, when dealing with the HP merger (the baggage pile-up at PHL comes to mind). The US and HP pilots haven't agreed to a common seniority list. So, why would they put themselves through that hell again.

By the same token, why would AA's employees want to put themselves into the eventual situation of irritating customers. When AA tried to fly through an F/A strike in the early 90s, it irritated a lot of customers. A lot swore off AA. The same thing happened, when the pilots staged a sick-out over the QQ merger.

AA picked up a lot of customers in 2000, after UA's pilots staged their summer sick-out.

AA employees know full-well what happens when things don't run smoothly. Passengers switch carriers for a good long while. Why put themselves in that kind of risk, knowingly?

It's one thing to lobby the creditors, who presumably will wind up with AMR shares upon exit from Chapter 11, to change the management team in due course. I personally think that the corporate culture that Bob Crandall created hasn't produced a number of talented CEOs, and it's time to start over. But a merger with US isn't the solution, at least not for the next 6 to 18 months.


User currently offlinewilliam From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1262 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks ago) and read 8757 times:

Well, raising capital will not be a problem for US it seems.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/05...investors-eager-to-buy-amr-us.html


User currently offlineLAXdude1023 From India, joined Sep 2006, 7562 posts, RR: 25
Reply 23, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks ago) and read 8741 times:

Quoting HPRamper (Reply 17):
Pretty simple...at many, many stations the combined number of flights will bring them above the staffing threshold, meaning jobs will be created, not lost. Well, jobs will be lost, but they will likely be from the ranks of ground handling contractors.


With respect, that is way to optimistic to be based in reality. The number of jobs that could be created that way will be far outnumbered by those that will be lost.

Again, I dont care if Doug Parker and the US team run the show at all. But people seem to be hanging on the rhetoric instead of taking these promises to their logical conclusion.

[Edited 2012-06-01 15:20:31 by srbmod]


Stewed...Lewd...Crude...Irreverent...Belligerent
User currently offlineJFKPurser From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 486 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 7941 times:

Quoting incitatus (Reply 21):
US has been walking around private equity firms with powerpoints on its magic merger and after six weeks this is all it has been able to muster - some vague headline on "working" with TPG. More likely US was finally permitted to show its presentation to a couple of private equity trainees.

There has been nothing material that US has been able to do. The agreement with the unions is not worth the paper it was written on, and all that it has accomplished is to scare off investors. Some of the articles are plain funny, even the Financial Times' one is a good piece of engineered news.

This statement shows how little knowledge and understanding you have of how much has actually been going on behind the scenes for months now. The momentum of interest and support this merger has long created on Wall Street is well known on all sides of this story, and is a matter of public record. And you might also be interested to know that when Parker first came to AA's unions, he made it very clear -- even at that early point in the process -- that money was not going to be an issue on making the merger happen -- that he already had plenty of backers lined up, and that was one of the main features of the proposal that solidified all three unions' support in his plan. You seem to form your opinion solely on what you read in the press. Much of what is actually happening is not reported -- or leaked. It seems strange to me that you -- or anyone for that matter -- would give so little credit to what US has been saying or doing, especially amid regular reports in the financial media that this merger has a 90% chance of happening. Of course, anyone is free to form their opinions by cherry-picking from the information which is available, or simply discounting it altogether. But, in the end, your statement is not making any of this go away. Good luck with that.

[Edited 2012-06-01 15:22:03 by srbmod]

25 qqflyboy : While there's no question there will be job loses, US Airways plan, for now, means less of them. Another point to keep in mind is US is willing to hel
26 Flighty : US today is doing OK... I don't get how you believe it would be harmed by AA... it would seem AA has a lot to offer US. About prospective the cost cu
27 commavia : ... at pre-merger AA (as others have already said). Agreed. It is just stupid that AA won't agree to the buyouts. In fact - they should have done buy
28 kl911 : Wow, that would be sweet. Very good news for US. Only one carrier in a country should be allowed the name of that country IMO. Another positive thing
29 incitatus : Much is being reported about nothing happening. Headlines and articles about TPG and US are all of a non-committal type with unnamed sources. DL and
30 BDL757 : That's something I've never understood; why AA management was so unwilling to offer an early out program! They repeatedly pointed out that x% (can't
31 TX2FL : Yes they should have, but from what I've seen, they just want to save $ by making the employees so miserable that they quit or get fired. Then all th
32 Flighty : SABRE is great, but it's not needed to run an airline. It could be seen as an optional expense. At a megacarrier that's real serious money. There are
33 Post contains links commavia : Parker's proposal, as written - though not, yet, actually signed and ratified by either side - does, in certain cases, certainly appear better from th
34 Wingtips56 : On a side note, AA is not renewing it's contract with Sabre which expires in 2014, and is working on development of a new system with HP. Sabre has b
35 Post contains images JBfan1 : After reading the article, it still amazes me to think that AA believes they stand a chance to merge with B6...........I could be completely wrong, bu
36 etops1 : Sorry to sound DISRESPECTFUL but seriously have no clue as to what's going on with this transaction behind the scenes ...
37 slcdeltarumd11 : I just flew DEN-DFW last week and a pilot and flight attendant both in seats on the flight were openly and publicly discussing the drama of this from
38 LAXdude1023 : Do you? Simply being an FA and hearing gossip doesn't count.
39 Post contains images fxramper : Is this a joke? I hope AA files chp 7 and bit pieces away before US (which still doesn't even have an abbreviation on this site) attempts to 'merge' w
40 Beardown91737 : You can fit two Texases in Alaska, three Metroplexes in SoCal, and New York City can hold 4x the population of Houston. Green Bay has more NFL teams
41 AAIL86 : You can fit two Texases in Alaska, three Metroplexes in SoCal, and New York City can hold 4x the population of Houston. [/quote] And depending on your
42 F9animal : I am not sure how I feel about a US/AA merger. Parker somehow turned US around, which is impressive. But, I think AA is just too much to absorb for US
43 JBfan1 : I do not think I can recall any airline merger where the employees were not compromised to some degree. However I do agree with you, about the glorio
44 LAXdude1023 : Im going to go out on a limb and say you dont like Texas? Either way, the reality would be that the HQ is coming here and those who truly know the in
45 rfields5421 : I don't know the current commercial real estate market in Phoenix, but in the DFW area right now it is poor. It would be almost impossible to dispose
46 ckfred : I don't understand either why AA won't do buy-outs. Not only would it save millions of dollars in the long run, as employees at the top of the scale w
47 bobnwa : I would bet that the majority of the flying public world disagree with that statement
48 Post contains links AeroWesty : Last night the flight attendant's union formally placed the fate of their members either in the hands of the BK judge or a buyout candidate after las
49 rfields5421 : AA has done some buyouts in the past. I cannot say their exact reason for not doing more - but buyouts do not resolve a big problem for AA - the unde
50 poLot : I would bet that the majority of the flying public would not care if AA's planes were painted or not.
51 incitatus : Go ahead and list what is going on behind the scenes. Provide supporting evidence.
52 ckfred : Remember that AA has the oldest workforce in the industry. The most junior captain at Southwest was hired in 2002. At DL and UA, the most junior capt
53 Post contains images qqflyboy : Bingo. Pensions, more than work rules, were the single biggest drag on AA's employee costs. Contrary to popular belief, the Company and APFA made gre
54 rfields5421 : A 401K has one HUGE benefit for the company and employees. And one even larger downside for the employee. The company contribution is paid and done w
55 HPRamper : I wouldn't call that a downside. That's bad judgement and irresponsibility on the employee's part. If properly managed, a 401k can work just fine and
56 ckfred : You're right. People should simply rollover a 401(k) plan into the plan at the next employer. But, the problem with a pension is that it locks at ret
57 Nutsaboutplanes : If there was one thing that congress should regulate.....this is it. I have rolled my 401K over 3 times in 10 years as I have navigated the airline i
58 TUSAA : AA has already got the agents and a few of the TWU workgroups in the 401K direction. I think AA will match up to 5.5% on a 401K, not sure if it's all
59 HPRamper : On the contrary, when you make that little you hardly even notice that 5 or 6%. Most people starting out at only 8$ or $9 part-time are either going
60 JBo : Minor point ... keep in mind that AMR also has Eagle and US has two wholly owned regionals. UCH doesn't own any regionals, and DL only has Comair. Th
61 HPRamper : Are those employee head counts reflected in the commonly-stated employment numbers for US Airways Group and AMR Corp?
62 Flighty : Absolutely, but not of US Airways (the airline) or AA (the airline). You just named two holding companies that each hold multiple airlines.
63 HPRamper : That's what I meant. A lot has been made of the possible job cuts at the respective airlines, but are those job cuts definitively going to be from th
64 Nutsaboutplanes : This is a great question and something that I had not thought of.....this at the very least changes my perspective on the comparison of a combined AA
65 rfields5421 : The 73K figure is from the 2012 bankruptcy filing, but before a later announced 13,000 cuts. At AMR the job cuts are announced as being for the AA ai
66 Post contains links flashmeister : This is incorrect. AMR and both its American Airlines and American Eagle subsidiaries have filed for bankruptcy. From the press release (see http://w
67 HPRamper : So all three filed for bankruptcy separately? Wouldn't a single declaration, by nature, from the parent holding company preclude the smaller subsidiar
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...
And Again On AA's ORD-DME Flight... posted Mon Dec 22 2008 12:33:18 by Addd
Need Help: Info On AA And EZE posted Sun Jun 8 2008 15:23:02 by Transpac787
All Flights To EZE On AA Canceled Today (May 8) posted Thu May 8 2008 14:52:59 by LAXdude1023
Why No Moving Map On AA's 767s And A300s? posted Sun Jan 28 2007 00:38:24 by SvenvdM
Update On AA And Others @DAL? posted Wed Sep 13 2006 23:31:27 by Starstream707
Boyd On AA's New "Stop And Think" WA Strategy posted Fri Mar 31 2006 16:47:13 by SeeTheWorld
Chp 11's Affect On AA And CO? posted Thu Sep 15 2005 00:33:58 by Aa777jr
The Race Is On: AA And CO Apply For LAX-MEX posted Fri Jan 7 2005 22:06:17 by MAH4546
Do BA And AF Actually Make A Profit On Concordes? posted Fri Sep 20 2002 04:44:02 by Bobcat
AA And UA May Only Have Limited Liability posted Fri Sep 14 2001 05:43:06 by Bigo747