Doogie "shellacked" during Senate hearings...

[delta777]

Yawn :down:

Get real, the "bondholders," you speak of are the same bunch from the "unofficial committee" that wanted to take the original lowball offer, they've proven they're only in it for a quick buck, which is why the "Official Creditors Committee" has all but told them to go piss in the wind. As i've stated ad nauseam, they hold appx. the same amount of claims as DALPA holds, $2.1-2.3 Billion, so they effectively cancel one another out.

The ones who truly wield the big stick are those on the Official Creditors Committee, which include Boeing, Coke, PGBC, DALPA, and United Technologies.

Of course the airports are gonna be pissed, we're rejecting leases, something US Airways/America West were extremely good at, after all, they filed a combined 3 times.

Doogie just doesn't get it, the first offer was laughed at by the creditors, which is why he upped it significantly after meeting Bethune, who essentially told him to play his best hand. The response from the creditors? Nothing, it didn't warrant one. So much for ralphcramden's "due diligence" claim.

Would somebody please tell those bedwetters in Tempe to give up and save what little dignity they have left? Your 10 767-200's and 9 A330's won't cut it, sorry.

 

[wings396]

US Airways' hostile takeover bid for Delta ran into a hostile audience Wednesday on Capitol Hill, where The Arizona Republic writes that CEO "Doug Parker was shellacked in a Senate hearing on airline mergers that turned into a US Airways/Delta showdown." The paper adds that the "the committee chairman joked at one point about keeping distance between the dueling CEOs on the panel." The Atlanta Journal Constitution went so far as to say the panel was "sympathetic" to Delta's stand-alone cause. "One senator after another expressed serious doubts about industry consolidation, saying they feared a loss of service to smaller markets. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who chairs the aviation subcommittee, even floated the possibility of imposing more regulations to boost service to small communities," the Journal-Constitution writes.

"The industry is far too changed and far too global for us to return to a completely regulated environment. However, I am becoming increasingly convinced that some regulation may become an option to make sure small communities are not harmed by consolidation," Rockefeller said. The committee's tone was also noted by the Republic, which says the group "fired questions and concerns at [US Airways'] Parker about promises of no layoffs, no problem handling more debt and no fare gouging; the merger's impact on smaller cities; the wisdom of doing a deal when his company is still digesting the America West/US Airways merger; the hostile nature of the deal; the overlapping routes; why, in fact, US Airways needs a merger if it is financially healthy and Delta is on the mend."

The paper also says the hearing "got testy a couple of times." Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss., chimed in: "This merger causes me concerns, and I just want to get that on the record." USA TODAY writes that US Airways' Parker was "the only witness to support the deal, [saying] it would strengthen both carriers. He testified that strong network airlines ‘are the best hope for small communities' because discounters such as Southwest Airlines generally don't serve those airports."

Oh Please, all of these expert opinions from a bunch of Bafoons that can't even agree on how to run this country. :blink:
How about they spend some more of their time on something other than a friggen proposed Airline merger.. Healthcare perhaps, or maybe even a solid plan to secure our borders.
Once again I will ask, where were all of these concerned government officials when big oil companies and utilities were merging???
Keep these jackasses out of the Airline consulting business, will Ya... :huh:

 

[Itestwell]

Oh Please, all of these expert opinions from a bunch of Bafoons that can't even agree on how to run this country. :blink:
How about they spend some more of their time on something other than a friggen proposed Airline merger.. Healthcare perhaps, or maybe even a solid plan to secure our borders.
Once again I will ask, where were all of these concerned government officials when big oil companies and utilities were merging???
Keep these jackasses out of the Airline consulting business, will Ya... :huh:

No no, they are too worried about what the flight schedules in Charleston, WVA and Columbia, SC will look like after merger.....

 

[Travelpro72]

Honestly....

 

[USA320Pilot]

Yesterday's Senate hearing had normal political overtones, but one key point often times over looked was a comment from the U.S. government's Executive Branch.

Accoding to the Arizona Republic, "An encouraging sign at the hearing, for those in favor of mergers, were the comments of Andrew Steinberg, an assistant secretary with the U.S. Department of Transportation. He repeatedly downplayed the doomsday scenario Delta was trying to paint, although not commenting specifically on the proposed Delta/US Airways deal. "There's no one-size-fits-all way to view airline mergers," he said. "I think we have to keep an open mind to any and all proposals."

If the creditors committee sides with US Airways and the fact Congress has no say on whether or not the proposed deal will proceed, I believe Steinberg's comment above is an important point to consider.

See Story

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoeingBoy]

Do you have an idea of how many pilots were new hires?

I guess that technically there weren't new hires since they already worked for US Group. They were the CEL pilots that got to MDA directly from PSA/PI. Don't have a number, though.

I think I said additioanl furloughs. Why double-count previously furloughed people?

Additional to what? They had a job at US and they lost it. I don't know how you define "furlough", but that fits about anyone elses definition. They got furlough benefits and rights. But I guess if you got downsized out of your job, you'd just consider it "reverting to a previous status" and expect no furlough benefits or rights...

By exclusive markets I mean non-stop service. Have PHX-CLT, PHX-DCA fares risen dramatically and solely as a result of the HP/US merger?

You asked if they've raised prices in "exclusive" markets. Nothing like changing the question trying to get the answer you want. Now you're asking the impossible to answer question, at least for anyone outside yield management. Can you prove that there have been no fare increases due to the merger?

Fares have gone up - it's just impossible to prove or disprove that it's due to the merger. Comparing average fares from 3Q05 (last quarter before merger) to 2Q06 (last available):

CLT-LAS $199 > $232
PHL-MCI $181 > $237
PHL-PHX $158 > $246

The E-170 options were not converted to E-175 and sold to Republic, but rather converted to E-190's and brought to the mainline.

Actually, you're sorta wrong. The 30 Republic 175's were part of the original US 170 order and the 190's are part of the original 170 order. The only thing that unknown (at least publicly) is whether the orders were just transferred to Republic or "sold" to them since there's no way to know what if any consideration US got for transferring those orders. That's irrevelant, though. It remains a fact that the only post-merger orders are the 7-8 A321's. Everything else was from a pre-merger order - even the A350 order was placed pre-merger.

During BK, those provisions could have been eliminated, but weren't.

In theory, yes. In practice, it wouldn't have been so easy since the changes in the contract had already been approved by the judge and the contract assumed. They were able to talk the MEC into voluntarily reducing the profit sharing by at least 1/3 - after all, why should the company pay out more profit sharing for the West pilots when they can just get the East folks to give some up and share the remainder.

Any more "truths" you want exploded?

Jim

 

[EricLv2Fish]

CLT-LAS $199 > $232
PHL-MCI $181 > $237
PHL-PHX $158 > $246

Jim, I'm not disputing your post. I would like to point out to those up in arms about consilidation and fare increases how riduculous their cries are.

CLT-LAS...232 bucks, price to drive at least 360 bucks if your a penny pincher...not to mention at least 3 hard days of driving, a sore back, and feeling like you still moving for 24-48 hours. Bout the same for PHL-PHX. So go ahead...complain about the fare increases

 

[BoeingBoy]

I don't disagree, Erik - especially since those are average O/W fares that US charged, so some were less. But the issue (and question) was about fare increases, not whether the fares were realistic or not.

Jim

 

[Barbell]

average O/W fares that US charged

Kim, I mean Jim,

Stop reading my spreadsheets! I've got enough to worry about without people looking over my shoulder.

Now, where's that one that shows how much money we can save by keeping the seats from reclining? Oh, here it is, right next to the one about what to do with all that extra overhead bin space to the left up front on the newly-refurbished-to-be-more-spacious A320s...

B)

 

[ClueByFour]

On the fares: as Parker and the analysts like to point out all the time, RASM is rising faster than ASMs are shrinking.

Ergo sum, US is raising fares. Again, I'd love to be senator for a day.

 

[FM2436]

"One senator after another expressed serious doubts about industry consolidation, saying they feared a loss of service to smaller markets. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who chairs the aviation subcommittee, even floated the possibility of imposing more regulations to boost service to small communities," the Journal-Constitution writes.

Rockefeller's comments, and those from others like him, really irk me sometimes. They present Southwest and jetBlue as the business plan every airline should follow then express concern that a merger may result in the possible loss of airline service into smallville America. If Senator Rockefeller wants to re-regulate the industry by imposing more regulations to boost service into small communities, then do so and require all airlines (including Southwest and jetBlue)to buy a fleet of no less than 60 dash-8-200s and each airline connect a minimum of 50 smaller non-hub airports (> than 50,000 annual enplanements) into that airline's major hubs.

 

[singh4us]

US Airways' hostile takeover bid for Delta ran into a hostile audience Wednesday on Capitol Hill, where The Arizona Republic writes that CEO "Doug Parker was shellacked in a Senate hearing on airline mergers that turned into a US Airways/Delta showdown." The paper adds that the "the committee chairman joked at one point about keeping distance between the dueling CEOs on the panel." The Atlanta Journal Constitution went so far as to say the panel was "sympathetic" to Delta's stand-alone cause. "One senator after another expressed serious doubts about industry consolidation, saying they feared a loss of service to smaller markets. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, who chairs the aviation subcommittee, even floated the possibility of imposing more regulations to boost service to small communities," the Journal-Constitution writes.

Ouch :down:

Hindsight: Did they mean "shellacked" (slang) meaning "very drunk" or "shellacked" meaning "badly beaten"??? :blink:

 

[barbeetantrums]

Hindsight: Did they mean "shellacked" (slang) meaning "very drunk" or "shellacked" meaning "badly beaten"??? :blink:

Badly beaten AND drunk!