Stream of consciousness...
--Politicans fly any and all airlines. Being from D.C., I personally have recognized politicians in UA
, and AA
boarding areas at DCA
--I don't understand this argument that UA
has "abused" the BK process. Yes, they've been in for a while, but we're talking about a multi-billion dollar corporation with thousand of creditors. This isn't the corner "Yarn Barn" store having a going out of business sale. And from the creditors' perspective, isn't it better for them to use BK to try and get most of their debts paid by UA
, versus the pennies-on-the-dollar they'd wind up with if UA
--There are a lot of variables here that will have a big impact on UA
, including whether US liquidates first, and whether the price of oil returns to a more reasonable level. My guess is UA
's trying to tread water in BK until at least 1 of these things happens, which may be enough to save them.
--I'm not old enough to know the details of Pan Am and Eastern BKs, but weren't they pretty long and painful? I know Pan Am sold off its int'l routes bit by bit. And yet it wasn't enough. With the exception of dropping a few routes or cities, show me an airline that has shrank its way to profitability.
As a result, were UA
to throw up its hands and just close its doors as some on this forum seem to advocate, while UA
may be replacable in the long-term, the short-term results would be disasterous for the economy. Major airports would be left without a rent-paying tenant, 70,000 people would be out of work, tens of thousands of pax would need to be accomodated by other airlines...and it's not exactly like AA
could just pick up UA
's planes and employees and take over service tomorrow. I think that scenario is UA
's trump card that they get one chance to play when it's fourth and inches with no time left on the clock.
"We hope you've enjoyed flying with us as much as we've enjoyed taking you for a ride."