Aa's Purchase Of Twa

[jimntx]

.
The decision of Don Carty is still costing us a lot of money because we have wound up paying twice for the seat experiment on the AA fleet.

[post="245046"][/post]​

Didn't you leave out the "blip" where they took a row out of coach and added 2 more F/C seats on the S80? There was a short while where we had 16 F/C seats on some of the S80s around 1999-2000. That experiment ended shortly after I started flying in late 2000 and we went back to 14 seats in F/C.

This time, though, they are also adding another row in coach and taking out the closet at the back of F/C. F/C passengers are going to LOVE having to stuff their coats in the o/h bins once the closet in the front is full. And, then, there are the contingent who like to open their hanging bags and put them in that front closet now.

Since we normally don't hang f/c coats until the traffic to coach slows down, someone is going to have to guard the one FWD closet every second or it will be full before we ever start to hang f/c coats.

 

[mweiss]

Keep in mind that before AA purchased TWA, AA was in a very strong financial position.

[post="245374"][/post]​

Keep in mind that before AA purchased TWA, UA was in a very strong financial position, too. So was DL. Did they purchase other TWAs without us noticing?

 

[MCI transplant]

I don't think anyone here is blaming AA's problem TOTALLY on the TWA purchase. But purchasing another carrier as the economy and industry was going into a tailspin did not help AA's finances.

Keep in mind that before AA purchased TWA, AA was in a very strong financial position.I doubt very much TWA would have survived on its own if AA nearly filed for bankruptcy. Delta? NWA? TWA was no different. They would have either filed for another bankruptcy or seek a another carrier to merge with.

[post="245374"][/post]​

<_< The thing is that the employees of TWA had no say in any of this! But have been the primary wipping boy for any and all of a.a.'s problems! :angry:

 

[Hopeful]

<_< The thing is that the employees of TWA had no say in any of this! But have been the primary wipping boy for any and all of a.a.'s problems! :angry:

[post="245405"][/post]​

I agree. Neither did AA employees. In different economic times this might have been a great idea. But given the state of the industry and economy in general, the jury is still out.

 

[jimntx]

IKeep in mind that before AA purchased TWA, AA was in a very strong financial position.I doubt very much TWA would have survived on its own if AA nearly filed for bankruptcy. Delta? NWA? TWA was no different. They would have either filed for another bankruptcy or seek a another carrier to merge with.

[post="245374"][/post]​

Ah yes, the famous Delta bankruptcy. Oh and the NWA bankruptcy. Just as you predicted, great Swami. Oh, wait...are we talking about the Delta and NWA mergers. My mistake.

At the time of the purchase, TWA was both in the same financial shape as America West and eligible for an ATSB loan as was America West.

Now, can you say for sure that an ATSB loan for TWA would not have resulted in the same turnaround that we have seen at America West? Do you know for certain that if Boeing had bought TWA instead of American that they would have failed? Unless you are totally out of touch with reality, the answer to both questions is NO.

But, I guess you would rather find comfort in the same old tired not-based-on-fact arguments. This thread is just a re-hash of the same old, TWA is the source of all our problems. Boo-frickin-hoo.

 

[FWAAA]

Didn't you leave out the "blip" where they took a row out of coach and added 2 more F/C seats on the S80? There was a short while where we had 16 F/C seats on some of the S80s around 1999-2000. That experiment ended shortly after I started flying in late 2000 and we went back to 14 seats in F/C.

[post="245377"][/post]​

The blip increased the number of F seats on some MD-80s from 14 to 20 for business-heavy routes. IIRC, it began around 1997 or so to allow for more F upgrades. But by 1999, when the 738s began to arrive and replace the MD-80s on the ORD-west coast flights, the MD-80 F cabins were again shrunk back to 14 seats.

 

[Hopeful]

Ah yes, the famous Delta bankruptcy. Oh and the NWA bankruptcy. Just as you predicted, great Swami. Oh, wait...are we talking about the Delta and NWA mergers. My mistake.

At the time of the purchase, TWA was both in the same financial shape as America West and eligible for an ATSB loan as was America West.

Now, can you say for sure that an ATSB loan for TWA would not have resulted in the same turnaround that we have seen at America West? Do you know for certain that if Boeing had bought TWA instead of American that they would have failed? Unless you are totally out of touch with reality, the answer to both questions is NO.

But, I guess you would rather find comfort in the same old tired not-based-on-fact arguments. This thread is just a re-hash of the same old, TWA is the source of all our problems. Boo-frickin-hoo.

[post="245420"][/post]​

How's this?

This was the biggest mistake in the airline industry since deregulation!

Boohoo to you too!

 

[FWAAA]

Sounds great, but not practical. Bringing back the pilots on furlough requires a lot of re-training...

Also, from a maintenance perspective, UAL's 767 fleet may as well be A330's or 777s... Their -200s are JT9D powered, and their -300 fleet is PW4000 powered. AA's 767 fleet is CF6-80 powered.

It's also not as easy to bring back to life some of those "permanently retired" aircraft. Five of the 762's are already sold for conversion to freighters, and others (including MD80's) with a resale value lower than the component value will end up being parted out.

[post="244313"][/post]​

I stand corrected. Come to think of it, Beer has already publicly discussed the parting out of some of the stored aircraft.

Nevertheless, the point is, there is no compelling need for AA or anyone else to dramatically increase capacity if UAL or USAir shuts down.

AA would benefit by attracting some of those airlines' higher-yield customers, and ignoring the lower-yield pax. Let the L and N fare crowd find someone else.

And if AA really needed some capacity increases, there are lots and lots of airplanes out there. And although bringing back the furloughed pilots requires lots of training, it could be done.

Of course the UAL fleet is not compatible over the long term. But that's never stopped short-term leases of incompatible equipment in the past. Why would the future be any different?

 

[FWAAA]

--------------------------------------------------------------------
On the flip side, if AMR were to respond to a U/UAL failure and bet big on assets from UAL or U, recognizing that such a bet would place heavy committments on unencumbered cash: doesn't that mitigate towards another round of concessions or an attempt to escape the future cash committments required to fully fund the pension plans?

[post="244340"][/post]​

If AMR were to spend its cash trying to absorb a large part of a failed UAL, then we are in complete agreement. It would be nonsensical for AMR (or anyone else) to try to absorb the vast UAL domestic network and equipment.

The only part of UAL that would benefit AA would be the NRT rights and the China rights. LHR isn't an issue, since with plenty of access already, there's no way AA would get UAL's LHR rights.

On the domestic side, AA could benefit by capturing some of UAL's higher-yielding pax and placing them on AA's existing flights. That would squeeze some of AA's lower-yielding pax, but so what? Let the $99 crowd fly the flying greyhound.

 

[aafsc]

Ah yes, the famous Delta bankruptcy. Oh and the NWA bankruptcy. Just as you predicted, great Swami. Oh, wait...are we talking about the Delta and NWA mergers. My mistake.

At the time of the purchase, TWA was both in the same financial shape as America West and eligible for an ATSB loan as was America West.

Now, can you say for sure that an ATSB loan for TWA would not have resulted in the same turnaround that we have seen at America West? Do you know for certain that if Boeing had bought TWA instead of American that they would have failed? Unless you are totally out of touch with reality, the answer to both questions is NO.

But, I guess you would rather find comfort in the same old tired not-based-on-fact arguments. This thread is just a re-hash of the same old, TWA is the source of all our problems. Boo-frickin-hoo.

[post="245420"][/post]​

But America West did not have a man named Carl Icahn sucking cash out of it thru an agreement called "karabu". And the ATSB loans did not come out until the end of 2001. And Carl would have siphoned off that money if they did get the ATSB loan. And if there was a "better deal" for TWA and it's employees, then why did the union leaders at TWA, who were also on TWA's board of directors, not pursue this "better deal" and instead supported the AA/TWA transaction as TWA BOD members and waive seniority protections as union leaders? Still, no one has answered my last question. Also, jimntx, you seem bitter towards the APFA and sympathetic towards the ex-TWA people because you were "collateral damage" in the APFA concessionary agreement.

 

[MCI transplant]

But America West did not have a man named Carl Icahn sucking cash out of it thru an agreement called "karabu". And the ATSB loans did not come out until the end of 2001. And Carl would have siphoned off that money if they did get the ATSB loan. And if there was a "better deal" for TWA and it's employees, then why did the union leaders at TWA, who were also on TWA's board of directors, not pursue this "better deal" and instead supported the AA/TWA transaction as TWA BOD members and waive seniority protections as union leaders? Still, no one has answered my last question. Also, jimntx, you seem bitter towards the APFA and sympathetic towards the ex-TWA people because you were "collateral damage" in the APFA concessionary agreement.

[post="245565"][/post]​

<_< aa, we've been over this many, many, times! Each time you try and put your own little spin on it to prove what? The Union leaders on TWA's Board had non-voting seats! And the Unions waved their scope because Carty put a gun to their heads and threatened to have the Bankrupcy Judge terminate their entire contracts under section 1113, if we didn't! He also promised to teat us fairly!
So much for promises!!! To add insult to injury, the Aligany/Mohawk language, in the presant TWU contract, is the same language Carty had us pull from ours!

 

[okoge1027]

After almost 4 years, what do you think of the AA purchase of TWA?

[post="242713"][/post]​

AA should had never purchased TWA. It was the biggiest mistake. If it weren't for that, AA would had TONS of money still. And all the drama that had gone on, it wasn't worth it!

 

[MCI transplant]

AA should had never purchased TWA. It was the biggiest mistake. If it weren't for that, AA would had TONS of money still. And all the drama that had gone on, it wasn't worth it!

[post="245634"][/post]​

<_< I Agree!!!!!!

 

[aafsc]

<_< aa, we've been over this many, many, times! Each time you try and put your own little spin on it to prove what? The Union leaders on TWA's Board had non-voting seats! And the Unions waved their scope because Carty put a gun to their heads and threatened to have the Bankrupcy Judge terminate their entire contracts under section 1113, if we didn't! He also promised to teat us fairly!
So much for promises!!! To add insult to injury, the Aligany/Mohawk language, in the presant TWU contract, is the same language Carty had us pull from ours!

[post="245631"][/post]​

Even though they had non-voting seats, they still supported the deal when what they should have done was not to support the deal and yell and scream to the media and to their members that there was a better alternative (Just like AA union leaders did in opposing the deal). And you are right, he did put a gun to your heads regarding the deletion of the seniority protections. He also put a gun to the heads of nAAtives with regards to concessions or bankruptcy. As for Allegheny/Mohawk, almost all airline unions have them in their contracts. The Allegheny/Mohawk provisions in the TWU contract were meant to protect incumbent members (nAAtives) not future members (ex-TWA). And finally as to Carty, he fulfilled his promise, he hired a facilitator, that is all he was leaglly required to do to fulfill his promise. This was proven in court in the TWA pilots' lawsuit against the APA, AA, and TWA llc. Remember, you did get arbitration. If you mean Carty did not fulfill his promise by giving you your full seniority everywhere, he had no legal authority to do so. The AA unions have COMPLETE control of the lists. Or, if you mean that he did not fulfill his promise by guaranteeing all TWA people jobs for life, nobody can make that guarantee (just ask all the nAAtives of furlough). If the two preceding example are not what you mean by Carty "not keeping his promises", then please tell me what you do mean. What would Carty have had to have done in order to "keep his promises" and make you happy?

 

[MCI transplant]

Even though they had non-voting seats, they still supported the deal when what they should have done was not to support the deal and yell and scream to the media and to their members that there was a better alternative (Just like AA union leaders did in opposing the deal). And you are right, he did put a gun to your heads regarding the deletion of the seniority protections. He also put a gun to the heads of nAAtives with regards to concessions or bankruptcy. As for Allegheny/Mohawk, almost all airline unions have them in their contracts. The Allegheny/Mohawk provisions in the TWU contract were meant to protect incumbent members (nAAtives) not future members (ex-TWA). And finally as to Carty, he fulfilled his promise, he hired a facilitator, that is all he was leaglly required to do to fulfill his promise. This was proven in court in the TWA pilots' lawsuit against the APA, AA, and TWA llc. Remember, you did get arbitration. If you mean Carty did not fulfill his promise by giving you your full seniority everywhere, he had no legal authority to do so. The AA unions have COMPLETE control of the lists. Or, if you mean that he did not fulfill his promise by guaranteeing all TWA people jobs for life, nobody can make that guarantee (just ask all the nAAtives of furlough). If the two preceding example are not what you mean by Carty "not keeping his promises", then please tell me what you do mean. What would Carty have had to have done in order to "keep his promises" and make you happy?

[post="245664"][/post]​

<_< a.a.!!, a.a.!!! What a bunch of double talk! Just for your information. The Allegheny/ Mohawk provision was not part of the TWU contract until after the TWA buyout!!! But now that it is, it covers not only nAAtives, but ex-TWAers as well! Because the presant contract do'es not make any distinction between the two! And if it did, would be grounds for a discrimination suit in itself!