AA employees got shares for what reason?
- Thread starter zflygrl
- Start date
traderjake
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 5,669
- 9,308
Phoenix said:
It takes more than courage.
APA were unsecured creditors and had leverage.
And for us, it was a bluff, because whether or not mechanics gave concessions they still would have filed. Do you dispute that? I believe that the comment that you are citing was accompanied by the statement that even if we gave the company everything they wanted they could still file, and that the Pilots contract was much more of a factor than ours.
I'll admit, I, as well as many others were surprised that they filed with over $5billion in cash and 500 new planes on order. I underestimated how corrupt the C-11 bankruptcy system had become. The intent of the law was to allow desperate companies who are imminently in danger liquidating of to escape from onerous contracts that put them there and allow them to negotiate new ones based upon current market conditions, not impose whatever they want, in our case way below market rates. In our case the courts helped AA take an already below market rate contract and impose an even worse one while denying us the right every other creditor has to self help.
I'll admit, I, as well as many others were surprised that they filed with over $5billion in cash and 500 new planes on order. I underestimated how corrupt the C-11 bankruptcy system had become. The intent of the law was to allow desperate companies who are imminently in danger liquidating of to escape from onerous contracts that put them there and allow them to negotiate new ones based upon current market conditions, not impose whatever they want, in our case way below market rates. In our case the courts helped AA take an already below market rate contract and impose an even worse one while denying us the right every other creditor has to self help.
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
And what a bluff it turned out to be...eolesen said:
MetalMover
Veteran
- Sep 16, 2013
- 3,543
- 2,410
The pilots did lose out in bk, but they did receive more in equity and 401k match as a result of what they lost.700UW said:
WRONG, yet again. You authoritatively post a lot about things you don't know.700UW said:
Secured creditors have no real leverage - they don't even get to vote on the plan of reorganization if their debts are fully provided for in the plan, and that was the case in the AA Ch 11 case.
The unsecured creditors hold all the cards - as they're the ones taking the haircut (presumably). In AA's case, unsecured claims were paid at 100%, and the only parties that actually lost anything were the employees. The holders of the old stock (AMR) are likely to see several billion dollars of new stock by day 120.
The pilots lost in Ch11, and you're right - their equity claim was partial compensation, but for the 100th time - their 14% 401k contribution is in the loss category, not a gain.MetalMover said:
Before Ch 11, the pilots had a huge, generous defined benefit pension PLUS a company-paid 11% defined contribution plan.
Their big concession was the freeze of their defined benefit plan and its replacement with a mere 3% bump in the defined contribution plan.
Sure, to non-pilots, their 14% (now 16% as a result of the Parker-promises to gain their merger support) looks lavish, but the 3% add in their 401k didn't make up for the defined benefit pension. Previously, the pilots could withdraw a portion of their defined benefit pension as a lump-sum upon retirement, and that's gone. For many pilots, that was a lump of more than $1 million.
Phoenix
Veteran
- Apr 16, 2003
- 8,584
- 7,430
traderjake said:
Failure takes division and APA will have plenty of it.
Read the point before you post. 
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1(b)(2), Intervenor US Airways, Inc. (“US
Airways”) hereby provides the following supplemental disclosure. As of December 9, 2013,
American Airlines Group, Inc., a publicly traded company (NASDAQ: AAL), owns 100 percent
of the stock of US Airways Group, Inc., which in turn owns 100 percent of the stock of US
Airways.
AANOTOK
Veteran
- Oct 10, 2009
- 4,627
- 2,242
Great...more smiles appear in the AA forum!Phoenix said:
Failure takes division and APA will have plenty of it.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1( B)(2), Intervenor US Airways, Inc. (“US
Airways”) hereby provides the following supplemental disclosure. As of December 9, 2013,
American Airlines Group, Inc., a publicly traded company (NASDAQ: AAL), owns 100 percent
of the stock of US Airways Group, Inc., which in turn owns 100 percent of the stock of US
Airways.
NYer
Veteran
- Jun 4, 2010
- 4,167
- 905
Bob Owens said:
You've been talking about Bankruptcy being a ploy, a scare tactic throughout the negotiations dating back to 2008. During the last round of voting for the deal before they filed you kept stating that it was all a tactic, just like 2003. We should have let them go in 2003 and if they want file they can do it again because in your mind it was bluff, no company with $4B in cash will be allowed to file. After they filed it because another tactic of hardball because even if they liquidate, the mechanics would be able to get jobs with whomever takes over the assets.
The tough guy talk has taken you this far, but at some point there needs to be some substance. You can only blame Little and Co., so long, although there is a new cast of characters that can become the villains to your failed ideas.
The beauty is that most people can see what is really going on with your rhetoric because most of your prognostication has been wrong. Blaming others can only mask that so much.
OP
zflygrl
Advanced
- Oct 7, 2005
- 104
- 11
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #88
Sorry I have been gone on the road.....my response to this post is:Slopoke said:
And why should you get or be entitled to any equity distribution.....your lose was with "the
Old AA" not the "new AA"......I believe that is called check mate.....mate. When you gave concessions to keep the old AA from falling out of the sky it was YOUR choice to do so... Now you get a hand out from the new AA like some street person selling a sob story....it makes no sense and I think it could be argued in court as a bribe or an illegal enhancement...
Let's face it....now a days you can sue a ham sandwich and while your in court nothing gets done.....no contracts.....no agreements.....nada.....
Remember while AA was riding high and egos grew....other fellow pilots and FAs at other airlines lost their....butts....it amazes me that the people at the old AA feel they have the right to step on the futures of the employees of the company that acquired SAID AIRLINE.
So play nice......or I will have to call nanny and send you all to bed without your supper.....lol
jimntx
Veteran
Well, hon I invite you to hire a lawyer and contest the awards. As you say, these day you can sue a ham sandwich (for not being kosher, I assume ).
).
