Eye On The Competition

[BoeingBoy]

The CLT Gate leases are exclusive between US and CLT aviation dept, no creditors are entitled to them.

[post="253954"][/post]​

There's not a list of specific gate leases that are collateral for the ATSB-backed loan (at least that I've seen), but this is from the section describing the various collateral for the loan....

"Airport Gate Leaseholds. The Debtors have leasehold interests in approximately 290 gates in 14 cities. These airport gate leaseholds, which are intangible assets that may be sold, purchased, and traded, generally, fall into one of three categories: (1) exclusive, which grants the airline complete control over the gate leasehold; (2) preferential, which grants the airline control over the gate when the airline is operating at the airport but not when the gate is vacant; and (3) common, pursuant to which the airport has control of the gate, with the airline having a right to use the gate when vacant, subject to similar rights of other airlines with respect to the use of the gate."

Jim

 

[sfb]

Rico-

The one thing is that AWA doesn't have the cash to do this on their own. They'd need to have someone with deeper pockets to bankroll the whole thing (since they need to conserve cash what with ATSB loan repayments coming due every six months). And even then, I'm not sure AWA would want to get bogged down in all of US Airways' various issues.

 

[ClueByFour]

Well, I was thinking that for the small sum of 125Mill AWAC placed themselves near the front of the line when it came to U assets if things go sour, if AWA kicked in too, that might place them in line near the front too...

Certainily would be smarter than waiting until afterwards, and then having to get involved in some bidding war (ala ATA's MDW stuff)

[post="254083"][/post]​

What is left (of value) after the ATSB is paid?

And with that thought in mind, the ATSB is going to auction the really good assets in any case. If I remember right, that is basically limited to BOS/DCA gates and slots and LGA slots (since I believe CO gets first crack at the terminal).

And, as has been pointed out, AWA is almost doing okay and has their own ATSB concerns to worry about.

If Mesa is really saying they won't be extorted (and it sure sounds that way), it looks like U's chances of extorting any more of the regionals is becoming slim.

 

[BoeingBoy]

While I'm certainly not privy to any of the affiliate agreements, I still find it hard to believe that the AWAC agreement will allow much, if any, leverage over a carrier like Mesa.

I've already mentioned the fact that United is bidding out AWAC's flying, not Mesa's. As someone (my apologies to whoever did, but I'm not up to digging it out now) correctly pointed out, the apparent fact that UA's deal with Mesa is cheaper than their deal with AWAC doesn't mean that US's deal with Mesa isn't more expensive than our new deal with AWAC.

However, BTS does quarterly reports on individual carrier financial results in addition to the quarterly listing of carriers by criteria such as CASM, RASM, revenue, etc. As I said somewhere before, the numbers for Mesa are somewhat sketchy since they haven't been that big for that long and the BTS only looks at the bigger carriers in each catagory. But their numbers suggest that Mesa's unit operating costs are about 10% lower than AWAC's. If that's correct, paying Mesa an 8% profit (though this isn't exactly how it works) is still cheaper than paying AWAC to breakeven (which I doubt the AWAC agreement contemplates).

If anyone wants to look over the BTS data on both Mesa and AWAC, here's the link. Both are included in the quarterly reports for "Passenger National Group Carriers".

Airline Financial Review

Jim

 

[justaumechanic]

It is called leases, which US has the exclustivity on.

[post="253951"][/post]​

Do you think that the Airport can't break a lease as well!!

Oh we are in Chapter 11 so we can do what we want and you have to
take it.. Yeah right..

Clt would be smart to give Southwest, AirTran and JetBlue anything
they want.. AmericaWest as well.. Tell US Airways "TAKE US TO COURT"..

Chapter 7 is the only place US Airway is headed.. If Air Wis had not
provided the 75mil up front in the deal US would have shut down two
weeks ago..

THATS A FACT MR USA320.

US was in violation of loan covenants with GE and
the ATSB.

JetBlue plans on starting the JFK - BOS Shuttle.. They are going to pound it
into US and DL..

 

[usairways85]

Just a note, Jetblue does not intend to start the JFK-BOS shuttle for at least a year. It will have no immediate effect on the US or DL shuttle.

 

[Flying Titan]

BOS-ROC, IAD, SYR, and BUF are also likely once Jetblue receives the 190's. Sounds like an attack on US.

[post="254050"][/post]​

Quite possible. These used to be pretty strong routes. Now, it seems US is begging for someone to come in and take these routes away. All of the BOS to upstate NY routes have high fares and service continues to be drawn down - many of these flights are now served with Dash-8s and B1900s. Put in a couple of daily flights on shiny new E190s w/ leather and little TVs and watch the markets grow again, but not for US. We can all see it coming, but where's the pro-active move by US to defend its turf? This is a perfect example of a case where a relatively easy fix now could fend off the competition and stimulate new traffic - some 50-seat RJs and a more moderate fare structure - but it seems US will wait until after the B6 attack is underway and then the fight will be much harder to win.

 

[Rico]

Shhhhh, do not intrude upon his delusional and paranoid fantasies with the facts.

 

[WNjetdoc]

All the unions had a contract between them and U however that didn't seem to work out so well. Im wondering if CLT can do what they want with the gates, just like almost every airline is doing with their contracts with their employees? Just my 2cents.

The CLT Gate leases are exclusive between US and CLT aviation dept, no creditors are entitled to them.

[post="253954"][/post]​

 

[mweiss]

Im wondering if CLT can do what they want with the gates, just like almost every airline is doing with their contracts with their employees?

[post="254264"][/post]​

Not without some significant fiscal liability. The reason the contracts with employees are changing is pretty simple...the airlines are threatening the employees with Chapter 7, or with §1113. CLT has no such leverage over US.

Now, US could try to renegotiate the leases with CLT, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see CLT simply agree to tear up the contract, shift US to month-to-month, and enter into a long-term lease with an LCC.

 

[dash8ter]

It's possible, though, that Mesa could make good on this threat even with US Airways still operating.  I suspect that the leases on most or all gates on the D and E Concourses at CLT are not exclusive-use given that DOT has frowned upon those arrangements in recent years.  Consequently, it's plausible that Mesa could indeed start its own operation at CLT in competition with US -- and that would probably hurt US as much or more than it would hurt Mesa.

[post="254062"][/post]​

In CLT - Gates on the D, E, and some on the A concourse are airport controlled - US pays per use. If flying through CLT - look for the jetways that say "Charlotte Douglas International Airport" on the sides instead of an airline name. These are airport owned gates and I would venture to guess that US Airways does not have exclusive use of them all.