Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Did US Show To The Atsb That UA Didn't?  
User currently offlineUALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1990 times:

The ATSB said that UA failed to show a buisness plan that would not endanger the taxpayers money. Fair enough. What did US show the ATSB according to the NYTimes the primary US Lender is threatening Chapter 7 liquidation.

See this link:

If US is now thretening liquidation what did they show the ATSB that convinced them?

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 1, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1979 times:

A business plan that worked in the current environment. I hope that United can get it sorted out too, I know I am critical of the lack of ownership of blame issue, but they are a great airline, and I know what it feels like to fear the loss of job, and I wouldnt wish it upon anyone. Good luck to them all

Jeremy


User currently offlineDesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7780 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1938 times:

From what I have read is that Uniteds revenue projects were based on bad models and were completely unrealistic. I would assume that USAirways' revenue projects were far more realistic.


Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
User currently offlineLoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3826 posts, RR: 33
Reply 3, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 1886 times:

Keep in mind that the ATSB's approval to provide a loan guarantee for USAirways is not a done deal yet.

http://www.usairways.com/about/press/nw_02_1107a.htm

Note in the press release it says:

The ATSB gave conditional approval of a $900 million federal guarantee of a $1 billion loan this past summer, but the airline must meet certain financial conditions and emerge from Chapter 11 protection before it can access the funds.

If USAirways goes into Chapter 7 as some are saying, then there will be no money given to them.

BTW, UALPHLCS, can you try again to post the link you are wanting us to see? I'm not seeing it on your original post to this thread. Thanks.

LoneStarMike

User currently offlineUal777contrail From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 1859 times:

what did they have? the texas three.bush had carty, uncle leo, and the bathune from CO. who other than the employees wants to see united fly?
guess it pays to be from texas, and it didnt work for the oil men.


ual 777 contrail


User currently offlineUALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1764 times:

Here it is again:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/07/business/07WAYS.html?todaysheadlines

I don't know why it didn't work the first time.


User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 6, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1746 times:

who other than the employees wants to see united fly?

Are these the same employees who rejected the last concession offer ?

Are these the same employees who some wonderfully operated the Summer of discontent ?

Are these the same employees who more or less went on strike to get their 38% raises

and don't give us the nonsense about how 6 years ago UAL was poorly paid, as it is a crock, my girlfriend was hired by UAL as an FA in 1991, and at that time they were still much higher paid than the others, same as they are now.

A-scale back then was higher at UAL than it is at CO now, it is fair to say you were not the paupers that some are claiming

Jeremy

"United are not too big to fail, they'll just make a bigger hole when they hit the ground" - G. Bethune


User currently offlineUALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1696 times:

Artsyman you love showing your ignorance don't you?

Who other than the employees wants to see UA fly?
1) United's customers. UA has Hubs in Five of the largest metropolitain areas in the US. A few years ago a Goldman-Sachs report noted that UA's hubs are in a 3 hour dive of 75% of the ENTIRE US population. No one covers the US like UA.
2) Star Alliance They also depend on feed traffic from UA from the largest single travel market in the world.
3) The Share holders of UAL

Are these the same employees who rejected the last concession offer ?

Only one group rejected the concessions package 13,000 out of 85,000 and it was only 57% of those 13,000 who voted NO.

Are these the same employees who some wonderfully operated the Summer of discontent ?

No we know who was resoncible for taking the job action, we also know who was responcible for allowing it to continue without seeking a a court injuction to stop it. It WAS UA enmployees who suffered along w/ the customers. It was UA employee that did a heroic job to clean up the mess. It wasn't another company's employees customers turned to for rebooking, it was UA employees.

Are these the same employees who more or less went on strike to get their 38% raises

No as I said the one single group that hled out was IAM 141M not ALPA, not AFA, not IAM 141. 57% of the mechanics.

and don't give us the nonsense about how 6 years ago UAL was poorly paid, as it is a crock, my girlfriend was hired by UAL as an FA in 1991, and at that time they were still much higher paid than the others, same as they are now.

This is my favorite. You really show you know nothing about the situation w/ this comment.

AFA was the ONLY group that DID NOT join ESOP. They signed a ten year contract w/ pay raises to be determined YEARLY by arbitration. SO if your girlfriend's pay is what your basing this on, you can't possibly be right. All other work groups wages where frozen. MAxed out employees didn't even get a Cost of Living increase for 6 years. So if you want to talk about "crocks" look at your own post.

A-scale back then was higher at UAL than it is at CO now, it is fair to say you were not the paupers that some are claiming

I don't know what CO's A-scale is. I don't even know what work group your talking about. I do know that no one at UA has ever claimed to be a pauper. They have claimed that they were not paid what they were worth. CS and reservations certainly lived up to that claim during the Summer of 2000 when we had to do what we had to do, w/ some making only $9 an hour as I was. Top scale making only $18. We proved to the Company what we where worth. And when the Company was in trouble we offered give backs as well.

I feel bad for you Jeremy. Everyone of your arguments was based on BS. Most of that BS coming from Bethune. How objective an observer is he? Thats like asking Saddam Hussien to critique US forgien policy in the Middle East.


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 8, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1668 times:

The Summer of 2000 could not have been stopped using a court injunction. Most of the delays stemmed from pilots refusing to fly overtime. That is NOT illegal. The UAL pilots warned management that there were not enough pilots to fly the schedule and UAL management chose to do nothing.

That's not to say some pilots out there didn't intentionally slow things down, but I don't think UAL could have proved it was an organized slow down.

As for how did UAL fail to get the ATSB loan, the concessions fell way short of target. So UAL set the revenue targets higher to make up for the lacking concessions. Of course, it was clear the revenue targets were way too optimistic (AA,NW,CAL gave their own analysis just to aggravate the situation). So the ATSB denied it. Honestly, I don't see how UAL management could have expected the application to be accepted.


User currently offlineUALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1656 times:

In defense of my argument.

The Pilots slowdown was deliberate. In many cases we had crew delays of 2 and 3 hours. I saw pilots refusing aircraft for minor deferable items. (the mechanics where made to fix windsheild wipers in the rain because they where not wiping together in synch) All of a sudden, these problems just stopped. Planes w/ minor deferable items left on time. Crew delays where non-existant. Management got a court order 1 day after the mechanics started playing thier games. I still blame management, I still belive they rolled over for the pilots and I don't belive the propaganda of ALPA.

As to the point of this thread. USAirways has approval for thier ATSB loan. They are in much WORSE shape than UA, and still they get the ATSB loan. I know what the reasons the ATSB gave, and I know AA, DL, and CO's argument against UA. My question is still valid. IF US is in worse shape that UA, what did they show that UA didn't.

Or was it politics...?


User currently offline727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6436 posts, RR: 17
Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1635 times:

Who says USAirways is in worse shape?????? If UAL were to make these debt payments, they'd be OUT, OUT, OUT of cash. THAT sounds like BAD SHAPE to me.

And to those who would argue that UAL is not as heavily mortgaged as USAirways, then why couldn't UAL use collateral to borrow cash?  Confused



Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1627 times:

I agree with 727Lover, who says US is in worse shape?

Also, remember that US's ATSB approval is CONDITIONAL. If US is unable to get some more productivity changes and concessions, they may still lose the ATSB backed loans and the DIP financing as well.


User currently offlineUALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1609 times:

What assets does US have right now. They are out.

UA on the other hand:

United's filing dwarfs all other airline bankruptcies. The previous largest was by Continental Airlines in 1990. United listed almost $25.4 billion in assets as of Sept. 30 - more than twice Continental's when it filed.

Thats according to the AP.

UA is indeed out of cash. But US is out of cash and running out of things to mortage. I never said that UA wasn't in knee deep with alligators floating around. But look at the facts US is in worse shape and the ATSB approved thier loan. WHY? If the reasons UA was turned down where valid then US should have been turned down as well. Conversly if US was approved and is in this bad of shape then UA should have been approved becasue it is stronger than US.


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 13, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 1589 times:

You're missing the point. It isn't about what shape the airline is currently in....it's about what the airline plans to do in the future.

US came to the ATSB with huge concessions, reasonable revenue projections and actual plans for turning the company around.

UA came to the ATSB with inadequate concessions, unreasonable revenue projections and very weak to nonexistent plans for turning the company around.

The ATSB doesn't care who has the most assets or whose assets are worth more, the ATSB wanted to see a sound business plan. US presented a sound business plan. UA did not.


User currently offlineArtsyman From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 4745 posts, RR: 34
Reply 14, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 1570 times:

UALPHLCS, I think it is best that we agree to disagree, I see things a lot different to you, but I want to make sure of this, this is not personal, I feel really bad for the situation that you are in, I don't feel good about it, I hope your job remains safe, and I wish you a good holiday season.

Jeremy


User currently offlineUALPHLCS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1547 times:

What US showed the ATSB must have been pretty convincing to get the ATSB ot sign off on it. I mean here is a company that now has little in the way of assets other than major conncessions which have only stemmed the bleeding a bit US has nothing left to base a recovery on. Yet the ATSB granted them a loan.

UA on the other hand as we see from todays news reports has 24 Billion in assets. 24 times what they are asking the ATSB to gaurantee.

If US's model isn't earning them a way out of chapter 11 yet it was good enough to get ATSB approval. Why hasn't UA's plan been approved.

There is a fundamental flaw here in the reasoning of the ATSB.


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 16, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1540 times:

Remember, the 24 Billion in assets that UAL claims is what UAL THINKS the assets are worth. In reality, most independent observers believe the assets to be worth much less. Again, don't focus so much on assets. The ATSB wanted to see a real plan, not just a bunch of assets.

Also don't forget that the ATSB only gave US CONDITIONAL approval, US doesn't have the money yet. The ATSB could still deny US the loan and likely will if US doesn't manage to get even more concessions. The ATSB is being plenty hard on US and demanding major concessions.

UA's work groups were unwilling to come anywhere near the concessions that the ATSB demanded, so the ATSB realized it wasn't even worth giving them conditional approval. If you're unhappy, blame your management for putting together a poor application OR blame your unions for being unwilling to give up the needed concessions.


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1538 times:

The ATSB got it right. I think they acted as impartially as they possibly could have and they had some serious analytical horsepower backing them.

UA made revenue assumptions that were unrealistic and UA's proposed cutting was short of what was required. US's unions are more pliant than United's. US's unions did not take the position they would give up nothing unless every other union also took a cut. Rather, their unions acted independently. That's why US application looked a lot better than United's. The union coordination at United slowed negotiations to molasses speed and prevented unilateral action even if some rank and file might have been willing to take the hit. I think from the ATSB's point of view, it was hard to see how UA would ever reach break-even let alone return to profitability with the plan they presented.

US's future is not looking all that great...the ATSB might end up regretting giving them the loan guarantee.


User currently offlineAA717driver From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 1566 posts, RR: 13
Reply 18, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1501 times:

I think the ATSB is already regretting giving the guarantee(conditionally) and might yank their approval. I also believe USAir's underperformance with respect to their plan did not do UAL any favors.

They have to know that UAL's numbers weren't a worst case scenario. In fact, like USAir's, they were probably a little optimistic.TC



FL450, M.85
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...
What Happened To The Brits That Snuck On BA 747? posted Sat Jun 5 2004 17:19:29 by 727LOVER
What Is Airbus Doing To The A380?!? posted Fri Dec 8 2006 09:11:28 by Baron95
What Plane Brought Taylor To The Hague? posted Wed Jun 21 2006 14:35:41 by EHHO
What Is This Next To The A380? posted Sun Oct 23 2005 21:24:21 by Frontiercpt
US Airways To Repurchase Atsb Warrants posted Mon Oct 3 2005 20:18:08 by A330323X
What Would US Need To Start South American Ops? posted Mon Aug 22 2005 20:38:57 by Jdwfloyd
What Did It Cost To Sponsor A WP Logo Jet? posted Mon Feb 16 2004 04:55:32 by Clickhappy
Did VS Switch To The A346 For HKG (VS200)? posted Fri Dec 6 2002 13:40:42 by Hkgspotter1
What Did You Do To Pass Time On Longest Flight? posted Sat Oct 12 2002 05:29:45 by Airplanetire
US Airways To The Eastern Caribbean posted Wed Jun 12 2002 21:43:39 by Ahlfors