CcrlR From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2318 posts, RR: 0 Posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4111 times:
Will United go out of business like they said next year if they still go under?
They said they might go under cause of this so do you think they will? What
other airlines might go under like Midway Airlines?
"He was right, it is a screaming metal deathtrap!"-Cosmo (from the Fairly Oddparents)
SAAB340 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 320 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4025 times:
Please dont talk about the possiblity of that!! All airlines are having hard times please look at the positive side of things! Sorry to sound mean but I am emotionaly hurt after 9/11 and the current status of Global Aviation.
UA865 From El Salvador, joined May 2000, 115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3958 times:
James Goodwin is a complete ***hole. He should have never said that. IMO he just said that to "scare" the unions so he can renegotiate the contracts especially pilots. What a stupid move, and NO UA won't go out business in a year the US goverment wont let that happen.
MDL_777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 267 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3921 times:
I think Goodwin was trying to convey the seriousness of United's position, as well as justification for the schedule reduction to United employees. From what I've read, this sounds like an internal memo to employees that got leaked. Look at the language of the letter: he says that they will perish if they continue in the same vein. In other words, if they do nothing, they will collapse.
There's no denying that United has financial problems right now. Analysts are expecting their earnings announcement on November 1st to be "ridiculously horrible," as one analyst put it. Having said that, there have been airline sector analysts that have been quoted saying that they would be "shocked" if United were to "perish" next year, as Mr. Goodwin puts it. One thing that helps United is that they own the majority of their own planes - which means plenty of capital to liquidate should things become really dire.
I think United will be fine in the long run. There's going to be a rough period of time ahead, though, where they will have to tighten up, focus on core businesses, if you will, and become "leaner and meaner." It probably wouldn't hurt to have a change at the top, either. It will be a long road back, and their schedule changes yesterday are the first step.
UAL1837 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3877 times:
First of all, United needs to streamline its fleet, lower wages, especially for pilots and management, their pay is disgusting. They also need to advertise more and better.
- Once things stabilize, start replacing the 737 fleet (the entire thing) with A319/A320 aircraft to increase commonality. Leave the 757s alone, they are fine. Reduce the 747 fleet and buy 777-300ERS in their place. Maybe have a small (15 or so) 747 fleet for Australia/NZ flights. This way, they would only need a 747 crew base in, say, LAX or SFO instead of all over the place. The 777 would then become the workhorse of United's widebody fleet. And, when the 767-200s age too much (not much longer), considering replacing them with 767-300 aircraft for the transcon flights, or fit a select 757 fleet with the transcon style seating.
- Follow American's lead and make United Economy Plus an all-cabin thing, not just the first half.
- Implement a customer feedback program through inserts in seatback pockets asking customers to comment on service and to name exceptional flight attendants. After receiving a certain number of positive comments, a flight attendant would be rewarded with a raise, confirmed space coupons, or other bonuses. This would give flight attendants and other frontline employees incentives to be extra special and nice to customers.
- Last but not least; implement some type of slogan that represents the compay the way "Fly the friendly skies" used to. My idea:
Life's A Journey; Fly It Well
The NEW United.
ILUV767 From United States of America, joined May 2000, 3142 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3864 times:
I belive that James Goodwin is bluffing. It is a scare tactic. He is trying to scare the unions, as well as the federal government. IMO he is making a fool out of him self. He is the worst CEO that we have had at United, and it is time to see him leave.
I do belive that his days are numbered. The second that he leaves office at Elk Grove, and moves on to destroy another airline or company, I feel that the new CEO (good god...please let it be someone from CO) will step in at this time of crisis, and work to pull the airline out of this slum.
The first thing that the new managment would need to do is to create a sence of unity amung the employee's. Make it so they want to come to work each day, and that they are part of the family. Happy employee's reflect directly to the customers. I like UAL1837's idea about comment cards; this would allow the passenger to rate employee's and when the employee has a certain amount of good write ups, they get rewarded. I know that most of the employee's that are front line would jump at that chace. Give a little, get some in return.
Next, the new CEO would have to stop out-ragious spending. They will have to negociate a new contract with ALPA, as the pilots make a lot of money...money that could be spent else-where. Im talking maybe about a 10% reduction in pay. In addition to that, upper managment would also take a pay cut.
Pay cuts dont really help that much...sadly. The business jet idea is going to have to be droped.
United Airlines is going to have to launch a vicious add campaign to lure passengers back. They have a wonderful product with easy info...sadly, I have not seen any comercials for it, or about it. Make the average passenger want to fly United. Make it so United becomes a part of their journey.
Offer a good inflight product that can be a compeditive edge with other carriers.
If things keep up with the way that they are at the moment, then United will certainly die. If Goodwin and his ditto buddy Dutta leave, then the chances of United surviving goes way up. Its time to get those idiots out of the top.
Cch362 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 147 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3825 times:
"Clearly this bleeding has to be stopped - and soon - or United will perish sometime next year.'' - Jim Goodwin
Finally, Goodwin is right on something. Next for him is to do the right thing and resign.
He agreed to a contract with the pilots that the airline could not afford, not even then in 2000. Goodwin should have stood his ground against the pilots if he were truly in touch with the company's financial conditions. The pilots can certainly be blamed for their greed, and doubly guilty because Goodwin was their man after they ousted Edwardson for the CEO position. But either way, Goodwin was never CEO material, and he has demonstrated an abject incompetence as a leader through good and bad times.
But the real bleeding is all the spending that Goodwin made recently. People should be reminded that United is paying US Airways for the failed merger. Then there's the purchase of mypoints.com, which has nothing to do with flying airplanes. And at uncertain economic times, Goodwin is making a large bet - with cash - to gamble in the bizjet venture that is already crowded with competitors.
United was already in financial trouble before the terrorist attacks. Goodwin is using it as a scapegoat for ALL of United's problems this year, but it simply isn't so. While United is not hanging perilously to oblivion, it is going to fall behind other carriers in competitiveness soon, if nothing is done to reverse this directionless leadership.
I'm really wondering what the unions and the board are thinking about Goodwin. I'm struck by their silence and continued acceptance of Goodwin's leadership. Are they really only interested in a more lucrative contract, and not caring about where the company is headed?
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8291 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3806 times:
I definitely like your suggestions.
However, I would keep about 30 747-400's, based primarily at SFO and LAX. They will be primarily used on transpacific flights to NRT, HKG, PEK, PVG, SYD, MEL and AKL, plus some flights to Europe from SFO and LAX (LHR, CDG, and FRA). UA might buy more 777-200ER's--now with ETOPS 207 certification--so it can fly to Asia, Europe and South America from ORD, IAD, MIA and JFK. I really doubt UA will seriously consider the 777-300ER unless Boeing can demonstrate ETOPS 207 certification out of the box.
UA will likely buy more A320 Family planes, primarily used for shorter routes. The 737-300/500 planes will be slowly sold off to other airlines.
UALfa@jfk From United States of America, joined May 2000, 311 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3792 times:
Kona, ILUV67, et al, I definitely agree with you. But Cch362, you really, really hit the nail on the head big time. Every single point you made I couldn't agree more.
Regarding your point about the unions, well, I just read some blurbs on the AFA (flight attendant union) website that basically slams him and agrees that he shouldve been gone a long time ago. AFA gave him a vote of "no confidence" last spring, I believe. AFA, in particular, despises him more than ever now because of the bizjets purchases in light of all our layoffs. And if that's not enough, the union is pissed that this "Avolar" thing won't even hire ANY furloughed (or active) UA flight attendants. The FAs for the bizjets WILL GET MORE PAY THAN UA FA's. All of this is a slap in the face of the worse kind.
As for the pilots' union, ALPA, I read Rick Dubinsky's disappointing quote to Forbe's magazine (June '01 issue), that they'd rather "keep Goodwin"-- something along the lines that "it's better to keep the devil you already know, rather than getting a new devil you don't know."
Well, that thought might have changed recently because now that the UA's total narrowbody fleet is dipping below the 451 number (because of the 727, 732 retirement next month) there are some contractual violations vis-a-vis all of the United Express RJ flying that the company is doing. Basically, the company is supposed to keep the narrowbody fleet above 451 to prevent too many United Express RJs from infiltrating too much of our flying. It seems that management is trying to use the wartime "force majeure" argument to get around it. We'll see how this upcoming standoff between ALPA and Goodwin plays out. Rest assured, that UA won't win this if it goes to court for unfair labor practices. Not to mention that United has virtually zero political clout now in Washington because of the expensive bizjets purchase immediately after UA got the bailout money (wildly idiotic blunder by Goodwin).
IMHO, I think ALPA wants to keep Goofwin because they know they can get their way with him, as evidenced by the end of the summer of 2000. Goodwin is so spineless, and so easily pliable that anyone wouldn't mind retaining him as long as they can walk all over him.
Being a spineless jellyfish without any knowledge of labor negotiations, plus being someone who generally has no clue about airline operations is A VERY BAD COMBINATION. --Especially if you're gonna call yourself a CEO.
Jetfixer From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (14 years 4 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3778 times:
United will not go under, there is a lot of money floating around, its just hidden for contract negotiations. While United Airlines might have a cashflow problem, UAL corp does not, thats how come they can go ahead with the bizjet deal. The parent company is starting a new business, not United Airlines (the airline) starting a new business.
A lot of people seem to think the pilots at United are overpaid. I'll include myself in that catagory.
However I think that the storekeepers and cleaners are overpaid worse. Rampers to a lesser degree. I'm sorry, but there is no way in hell that someone who brings me parts and tools is worth 20 bucks an hour. I'd hate to think what they'd be earning if there wasn't the ESOP. Driving a cart around collecting parts is worth $10 or $11 an hour tops. This company would save millions if these people were paid what they are worth.
Well thats enough of my raving about overpaid
employees. United is going now where any time soon.
I am still trying to work out why Goodwin is still here, what does this guy have to do to get fired? and my other question is what is he doing that makes people think he's worth keeping?
Feel free to answer my questions cause I'd sure like to know.
Andreas From Germany, joined Oct 2001, 6104 posts, RR: 29
Reply 20, posted (14 years 4 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3758 times:
Not really, though sept. 11 has hit hard on all Airlines worldwide, but hardest on US carriers. It is a pretty good way to ask the US government for more money. In times like these, the meaning of "free markets" is interpreted in a rather strange way all around the world. That is probably the reason for a little quarrel in the past few weeks between Lufthansa and United management, as Lufthansa as a European carrier does not get any free money except coverage of the insurance problem.
All things considered: Don't worry, they will still be there, as most US carriers though some of them only because of Sept. 11 and the financial aid they are receiving (as terribel as this may sound).
Na From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 11494 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (14 years 4 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3710 times:
No way if the airline industry is able to avoid a similar disaster as the 911 tragedy. UA is such a big and important company. And others like Continental are in deep trouble, too. UA might shrink again, but collapse, no.
A lot of the bad business talk at the moment is as true as the "Gold-digging"-talk at stock exchanges 2 years ago. Two years ago the big-snowball-system at the stock exchanges blew up the market until the average man wasted its money on stocks, then many bosses sold their shares, got the cream and the Dow Jones collapsed. 911 was only the biggest bullet to hit the goal - the shaking heart of Mr.Everbody on the street.
Companies want subsidies, they want offload people now (My job is at risk too), so that they can come up again with "great news" in a year or two. The boom times of the late 90s oversaturated the markets, not only in the aviation industry.
SFOintern From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 770 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (14 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3674 times:
Clearly, United is not doing this to ask for subsidies. If you read the rhetoric in the official letter, you'll note how Goodwin focuses on how loans are a crutch, not a cure.
This is a very good point, but it is being used to surreptitiously advance labor wage cuts. United would do better to be more honest, such as providing the unions with official numbers of UAL's (not United Airlines') real cash position.
The Letter: (don't worry, this is legal: extracted of the Rocky Mountain News)
Dear Fellow United Employee:
This is the first of a series of letters to keep you abreast of what's happening
at United and our evolving financial situation.
Prior to September 11, all of the major U.S. airlines were having financial
difficulties as a result of the weakening economy. The economic pain was worse
for us because we rely more heavily on frequent business travelers for our
business than they do. But, while things were difficult, we were putting in
place the cornerstones of a strategic plan to improve our revenue and
Then came September 11th.
In the wake of that day's horrific events, we are in nothing less than a fight
for our life. Never in our 75-year history have we faced an economic challenge
of this magnitude, where the drop-off in air travel has been so unexpected and
Our number one priority now is to get United into a financial position that will
allow us to continue operating. We are not there yet. To get there, we must
focus on breakeven cash flow. That means being in the position where we have as
much money coming into our bank account as we have streaming out of it. In the
past, we struggled to make a profit. Now we're in a struggle just to survive.
So getting ourselves back to a breakeven cash flow -- whatever it takes -- is
job one for the foreseeable future. Because if we don't succeed we'll eventually
run out of money -- it's that simple and that painful.
Let me illustrate the financial hole we're in. Before September 11th, we were
not in a comfortable financial state, with costs exceeding our revenue on a
daily basis. Today, the situation is exacerbated with costs exceeding revenues
at four times the pre-September 11 rate. Today, we are literally hemorrhaging
Clearly, this bleeding has to be stopped -- and soon -- or United will perish
sometime next year. We need to get this loss rate down to zero. . . . That will
give us the breather we need to regain our bearings and start crawling back to
profitability and begin to rebuild our balance sheet.
While we do have a cushion from borrowing, government-guaranteed loans and other
sources available to us, this leaves absolutely no room for complacency. Pan Am
and Eastern went too far down that trail and never returned. They borrowed to
meet expenses -- then borrowed some more against assets to pay off the initial
loans -- and then were forced to sell their assets to cover the second loans. In
short, they borrowed their tomorrows to live just another few days.
We don't want to follow in those footsteps because we recognize that loans are
merely crutches, not cures. I want to make it clear: Our top priority now must
be to reduce costs and increase revenue to the point where what we spend (in all
areas, including payroll and operations) equals what we take in (from sales of
passenger tickets, cargo and other sources).
We've already done much to cut costs. We've immediately reduced our flying
schedule by 20 to 25 percent; shut down non-aircraft capital projects (including
JFK Terminal 6 and Dulles Tier 2); reduced supplier and discretionary spending,
and -- most difficult of all -- decided to furlough 20,000 United employees.
I wish I could report that work in this area is completed. It isn't. We are
continuing to look at all aspects of our business -- from payroll and operations
to examining the costs under our labor contracts. Nothing is sacred or
We also are working hard to generate revenue. The first step is to get people
comfortable about flying again. We and the rest of the industry -- along with
the U.S. President, other elected officials and government agencies -- are doing
everything we can.
To get passengers back on our planes, we also need to convince them that airline
travel is safe. We are joining with the rest of the industry and the government
to implement a number of measures, including reinforced cockpit doors and
placing responsibility for security under federal jurisdiction. We're also
issuing special fares, Mileage Plus offers and new ads that will feature United
employees encouraging our customers to return to the skies.
However, much of our success in generating revenue will depend upon you. Once we
bring customers back to our ticket counters, gate areas and airplane cabins, it
will be up to you to make them comfortable and provide them with the service
they've come to expect from United.
I'm very proud of the work you're doing. In the wake of the September 11th
tragedies, I've seen a renewed spirit at United. People are giving more of
themselves to this company than I've ever witnessed in the 35 years I've been
here. This is the true fabric of United.
Thank you for your loyalty, for your hard work and for your service on behalf of
our customers in these, the most difficult of times. Let's keep it up. The
sooner we get to break even, the sooner we'll remove the doubts about our
James E. Goodwin
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Greg From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (14 years 4 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3663 times:
It's not all that bad. Goodwin is just painting a bleak picture for the unions.
Oddly enough, it will accelerate some programs that should have taken place earlier such as capacity reduction and retirement of older equipment.
: Nope, don't think it will. Goodwin and United have been reviewing the conditions to get some of the 10 billion in loans guarantees, and they don't lik
: Nope, don't think it will. Goodwin and United have been reviewing the conditions to get some of the 10 billion in loans guarantees, and they don't lik
: I'm sure there weren't that many people who would have thought that Pan Am could have gone out of business in the ol' days.