"boeing, United, And The Windy City"

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

With 2 of Illinois(and the US's) largest companys headquartered in "greater Chicago, UAL in BK-11 and looking for a $$$"sugar daddy", and Boeing "needing" an outlet to showcase their 7E7, what better "arraingement" than to have Boeing bankroll UAL, while United flys/advertise's the(potentially) greatest A/C ever to be built, in US history !!


Your thoughts ??


NH/BB's

ps,
A situation like that, would certainly give AA and DL something to "think about"
(NW soon to be almost all Air Bus)

 

[ZMAN777]

NHBB,

This is certainly a possibility. There won't be any public announcements till after exiting BK for sure. But I think it's safe to assume that Boeing will be focusing on being the provider for the 787/777 (i.e. widebodies) to UAL while ceding the narrowbody market (A320's) to Airbus where UAL is concerned.

With continued emphasis on developing/expanding international routes, especially to China and the Far East, UAL is a prime candidate for the 787 and additional 777's. The 747-400 will slowly be replaced, IMHO, by the 777-200/300ER's over the next 5-10 years. Expect a similar path for the 737-300 fleet, these replaced by additional A320's.

None of this will happen suddenly upon exit from BK (fingers crossed!) but if you're going to acquire 787's you need to pony up and get your orders in soon to secure production slots.

Cheers,
Z B)

 

[Busdrvr]

With 2 of Illinois(and the US's) largest companys headquartered in "greater Chicago, UAL in BK-11 and looking for a $$$"sugar daddy", and Boeing "needing" an outlet to showcase their 7E7, what better "arraingement" than to have Boeing bankroll UAL, while United flys/advertise's the(potentially) greatest A/C ever to be built, in US history !!
Your thoughts ??
NH/BB's

ps,
A situation like that, would certainly give AA and DL something to "think about"
(NW soon to be almost all Air Bus)

[post="247351"][/post]​

You do realize the irony of that type of move right? UAL/Boeing were one and the same until the government forced a "breakup".

 

[Eagle]

As much as I would not mind it, how do you think other airlines would react to doing future business with Boeing if it was bankrolling United.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

As much as I would not mind it, how do you think other airlines would react to doing future business with Boeing if it was bankrolling United.

[post="247368"][/post]​

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Excellent question Eagle.

While there would certainly be "opposition" from carriers like AA and DL, to name a few, I would think the question should be, "Would it be LEGAL" ??

I don't see anything wrong with Boeing working out financeing arrangements with any carrier, such as taking older A/C in trade, for say the 7E7.

All boeing might have to do is create some "exotic" wording in the details for UA.

I remember VERY well when BOB CRANDALL got AA's A-300's, for a "song", when Boeing would'nt "jump thru hoops" $$$$ for "Uncle Bobby"

But that did'nt mean Airbus was obligated to offer the same deal to anyone else.

(Hypothetically) WE all would know what Boeing and UAL was up to, but as they say, "The devil is in the details"

IMHO, I fully expect the judge to throw out AMFA's contract, and AMFA to shut down UA as we know it. Would that mean UAL would disappear forever ??
IMHO, certainly NOT. They just would return as a new version of themselves,"ridin' around in "brand new" equiptment !!

Stranger things have happened !!

NH/BB's

 

[mrfish3726]

NBB says, "I remember VERY well when BOB CRANDALL got AA's A-300's, for a "song", when Boeing would'nt "jump thru hoops" $$$$ for "Uncle Bobby"


Remember though NBB that in the later 90's when Crandall was gone AA ordered and ALL Boeing fleet in excess of 600+ aircraft!!!! So who in reality would Boeing truly be interested in? An airline that is souly dedicated in replacing they're entire fleet with Boeing aircraft. Or a company in BK that choses to continually add more Airbus aircraft to the fleet?

IMO the government would NEVER let it happen, and AA's clout with Boeing would surely keep it from happeneing! We'll probably see AA order the 7E7 and launch it here in the US before UniTED ever does.

 

[casual rat]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


IMHO, I fully expect the judge to throw out AMFA's contract, and AMFA to shut down UA as we know it.          Would that mean UAL would disappear forever ??
IMHO, certainly NOT.  They just would return as a new version  of themselves,"ridin' around in "brand new" equiptment !!

Stranger things have happened !!

NH/BB's

[post="247381"][/post]​

I can see that happening, bringing the IAM along for the ride too... I think that's been the plan since UA entered BK.

 

[Fly]

As much as I would not mind it, how do you think other airlines would react to doing future business with Boeing if it was bankrolling United.

[post="247368"][/post]​

It didn't seem to bother anyone with JetBlue and Airbus.

 

[mrfish3726]

FLY,

Every Airbus operator will regret that they didn't buy Boeing. Airbus builds a 10YR disposable aircraft. Ask the mechanics at any airline that have worked Boeing and Airbus. They will tell you that Boeing is a much more dependable product. Even here at F-9, none of us in maintenance liked the decision management made to go with an all Airbus fleet. They will regret one day that they didn't negotiate harder with Boeing. Airbus practically gives the plane away; you pay for it in parts down the road BIG TIME. And you also pay for it with reliability issues that Airbus continually does not address. The aircraft to this day are still plagued with ECAM/INOP SYS/Maintenance MSG issues that Boeing would have NEVER let get swept under the rug the way Airbus does. AA made a good choice in selecting an entire Boeing fleet, so who would you see being appriciated more at BOEING AA or UniTED? I'll go with AA!!!! Personally I think we should have sent the Statue of Liberty back to French A LONG TIME AGO!!!!!!

 

[Borescope]

It didn't seem to bother anyone with JetBlue and Airbus.

[post="247441"][/post]​

This is a joke. I heard it numerous time that JB got the airplanes "free", "no payments for five years", "No interest", "Interest only payments", etc, etc, etc. It's all a bunch of sheet. What company would do any of that to get they're product to the market and not worry about making a profit. Don't kid yourself, they want to turn a profit just like everyone else. The fact is they made payments and probably got a sweetheart deal on the planes. But they had no maintaince costs as the aircraft were under warrantee. Once that expired they had to start paying for the maintaince themselves (which is now) and thus you are seeing their profits start to trend down. If the fuel and pricing stays status quo, they (JB) will join the ranks of the rest of the losers

 

[MCI transplant]

<_< Bear may be on to something! Before a.a. stole TWA, The TWA Unions were talking to Boeing to finance a Boeing overhaul facility here at MCI to overhaul their previously owned, Boeing Aircraft. The idea being, build them, and service them also. But, things just didn't work out that way! Doesn't mean the idea couldn't work!

 

[Busdrvr]

This is a joke. I heard it numerous time that JB got the airplanes "free", "no payments for five years", "No interest", "Interest only payments", etc, etc, etc. It's all a bunch of sheet. What company would do any of that to get they're product to the market and not worry about making a profit. Don't kid yourself, they want to turn a profit just like everyone else. The fact is they made payments and probably got a sweetheart deal on the planes. But they had no maintaince costs as the aircraft were under warrantee. Once that expired they had to start paying for the maintaince themselves (which is now) and thus you are seeing their profits start to trend down. If the fuel and pricing stays status quo, they (JB) will join the ranks of the rest of the losers

[post="247592"][/post]​

Most of the leases were of a very short term (5 years) with the undisclosed terms for renewal.
virtually all the debt (and interest portion of the leases) was at a HIGHLY variable rate (London overnight bank rate).
Warenties have a value. AB carries them on the balance sheet as liabilities, the person customer should likewise carry them as assets.
When FRNT had the guppies, they used an "estimated" mx per jet/period accounting scheme. this meant MX cost would stay relatively consistant. When they bought the AB's, they "changed" to the Blu scheme to prop up the books. In FRNT's case, the leasors are not as accomadating as at blu, and they must fork over a certain amount for mx to the leasors as part of the deal.

 

[Fly]

This is a joke.  I heard it numerous time that JB got the airplanes "free", "no payments for five years", "No interest", "Interest only payments", etc, etc, etc.  It's all a bunch of sheet.  What company would do any of that to get they're product to the market and not worry about making a profit.  Don't kid yourself, they want to turn a profit just like everyone else.  The fact is they made payments and probably got a sweetheart deal on the planes.  But they had no maintaince costs as the aircraft were under warrantee.  Once that expired they had to start paying for the maintaince themselves (which is now) and thus you are seeing their profits start to trend down.  If the fuel and pricing stays status quo, they (JB) will join the ranks of the rest of the losers 

[post="247592"][/post]​

ummmmm.......ok! BUT, I didn't say that, did I? I just was replying to what Eagle said, which was (because you seem to have trouble reading)

"As much as I would not mind it, how do you think other airlines would react to doing future business with Boeing if it was bankrolling United.'

I was just saying that no airline would make issue about Boeing 'bankrolling' United. (just as they didn't about Airbus bankrolling JetBlue)

If you would just read what is being quoted and posted, you'd save tons of $ on heart pills and therapy. Be well.

 

[jbguppy]

As much as I would not mind it, how do you think other airlines would react to doing future business with Boeing if it was bankrolling United.

[post="247368"][/post]​

A lot of those other airlines have exlusive contracts with Boeing....

JBG

 

[aafsc]

A lot of those other airlines have exlusive contracts with Boeing....

JBG

[post="247700"][/post]​

To get European Union approval for the boeing/McDonnell Douglas merger, the Europeans demanded that the "exculsive" clause be dropped from the contracts between boeing and the airlines that had these contracts. Boeing asked the airlines if they could delete this from the contract and the airlines did not object. So it was done.