Is USAirways hostile takeover Of AA for Real?
- Thread starter PITbull
- Start date
-
- Tags
- a clever ruse
- Status
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #572
I've participated in airline chat forums to know that, just like in politics, if you can't contribute anything meaningful to the discussion, attempting to defame the other party is the next best option.
I'll be happy to let history judge what I say on these forums - regardless of whatever connection I have to the airline industry - or perhaps none at all.
Can I deduce that you don't have anything more to contribute to the discussion regarding AA and US, which is the topic of this discussion?
Given that the FAs of AA will make critical decisions in the next few hours that could affect their future as well as AA's - and the pilot drama will continue to play out for a few more weeks - this is an absolutely critical period for AA.
I will stand by my belief that if the pilot contract is abrogated, the chances of AA emerging as a standalone company diminish greatly.
And if that happens, then there will be a host of events that will begin to occur that likely will result in an outcome far different than the vast majority of people on this and other discussion boards as well as in the media believe will occur.
That is the critical issue... nothing more, nothing less.
I'll be happy to let history judge what I say on these forums - regardless of whatever connection I have to the airline industry - or perhaps none at all.
Can I deduce that you don't have anything more to contribute to the discussion regarding AA and US, which is the topic of this discussion?
Given that the FAs of AA will make critical decisions in the next few hours that could affect their future as well as AA's - and the pilot drama will continue to play out for a few more weeks - this is an absolutely critical period for AA.
I will stand by my belief that if the pilot contract is abrogated, the chances of AA emerging as a standalone company diminish greatly.
And if that happens, then there will be a host of events that will begin to occur that likely will result in an outcome far different than the vast majority of people on this and other discussion boards as well as in the media believe will occur.
That is the critical issue... nothing more, nothing less.
wings396
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,672
- 1,122
There is a difference between a chat forum and a short story. Maybe if you weren't so arrogant with most of your postings, you wouldn't get defamed so often. I have been on here just as long as you, and can only recall ONE other member coming to you aide. That alone should send you a pretty strong message in itself.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #574
I'm not looking for approval from what I post nor does it matter to me if anyone defends me.
If the point of any discussion is to exchange ideas that have some semblance of truth, then I want my work to be judged on that basis, not how popular I am or how many toes I step on in the process.
I write professionally. It is no struggle for me to whip out a 5 minute response in these posts.
The world doesn't need people who cower under the threat of saying something wrong or in only saying what makes other people happy.
The world needs people who know the difference between what is right and what is not and aren't afraid to take a stand.
---
The simple fact is that you didn't like what I said about US 7 years ago regarding US' takeover attempt of DL yet I noted the key issues which determined the outcome of the case, in which US was sent packing.
Now, 7 years later and another takeover attempt with a different cast of characters, and we're locking horns again - and I will still be happy to weigh what I have said based on the outcome.
You clearly are threatened by what I have to say - and fixated on me as a person as well by bothering to cite my name in your signature of every post.
If your ideas and your belief that US will succeed in acquiring AA become true, then you will be exonerated.
In the meantime, recognize that this is an open forum and there are people who just might have more knowledge of some things than you. I don't speak on topics that I don't know but when I do speak, the chances are pretty good I know what I am talking about.
Also recognize that no matter how much skin you might have in the outcome of this situation, there are considerations at play in AA's case that you either don't want to acknowledge or perhaps even know exist.
I wish you and your colleagues at US the best as I do the employees of AA. But from the minute they filed, I made clear that the highest priority and my greatest desire was for them to successfully restructure.
If they are unable to do that, then there are a host of options that come into play.
You need to be prepared that no matter how much you like or dislike it, your desires may or may not come true.
For now, AA's future. perhaps more so than for any other airline in recent history, lies in the hands of its employees... and I can only hope they make the right decision not only for themselves but for all of the people who will be impacted by their decisions.
What you or I say pales in comparison to the magnitude of the decision AA employees make or the impact it will have.
If you could stop spending so much time worrying about me or whether I turn out to be right or not, you might be able to see the real issues at hand.
If the point of any discussion is to exchange ideas that have some semblance of truth, then I want my work to be judged on that basis, not how popular I am or how many toes I step on in the process.
I write professionally. It is no struggle for me to whip out a 5 minute response in these posts.
The world doesn't need people who cower under the threat of saying something wrong or in only saying what makes other people happy.
The world needs people who know the difference between what is right and what is not and aren't afraid to take a stand.
---
The simple fact is that you didn't like what I said about US 7 years ago regarding US' takeover attempt of DL yet I noted the key issues which determined the outcome of the case, in which US was sent packing.
Now, 7 years later and another takeover attempt with a different cast of characters, and we're locking horns again - and I will still be happy to weigh what I have said based on the outcome.
You clearly are threatened by what I have to say - and fixated on me as a person as well by bothering to cite my name in your signature of every post.
If your ideas and your belief that US will succeed in acquiring AA become true, then you will be exonerated.
In the meantime, recognize that this is an open forum and there are people who just might have more knowledge of some things than you. I don't speak on topics that I don't know but when I do speak, the chances are pretty good I know what I am talking about.
Also recognize that no matter how much skin you might have in the outcome of this situation, there are considerations at play in AA's case that you either don't want to acknowledge or perhaps even know exist.
I wish you and your colleagues at US the best as I do the employees of AA. But from the minute they filed, I made clear that the highest priority and my greatest desire was for them to successfully restructure.
If they are unable to do that, then there are a host of options that come into play.
You need to be prepared that no matter how much you like or dislike it, your desires may or may not come true.
For now, AA's future. perhaps more so than for any other airline in recent history, lies in the hands of its employees... and I can only hope they make the right decision not only for themselves but for all of the people who will be impacted by their decisions.
What you or I say pales in comparison to the magnitude of the decision AA employees make or the impact it will have.
If you could stop spending so much time worrying about me or whether I turn out to be right or not, you might be able to see the real issues at hand.
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
i think we all will see in a few weeks regarding what aa says about a merger but i dont think it will be a shocker if they announce a merger with us
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #576
Given that there is probably no executive compensation that will be given in the event of an asset sale, I am quite certain AA mgmt would prefer to pursue a US merger if a standalone plan doesn't work.
It is also likely that BA is willing to invest in AMR to try to block other deals that might involve DL - they have indicated as much that they would.
It all still comes down to what the creditors accept - and just because mgmt pursues one option doesn't mean the creditors will ultimately support it.
But it is also true that the chances of AMR initiating a merger while AA is in BK are slim to none- the creditors simply are not going to increase their risks by engaging in a merger initiated by the debtor.
It is possible that US could move forward with plans to launch a bid for AA, but the final determination of whether the creditors accept a US merger will depend on other offers that will arise - and the creditors will not accept the first offer than comes along.
Outside of BK, a company can make that decision as long as they have done their homework to justify to the shareholders why they have made that decision; inside of BK, the creditors will require that every available option be considered.
I wish you and your AA colleagues the best in the weeks and months ahead.
It is also likely that BA is willing to invest in AMR to try to block other deals that might involve DL - they have indicated as much that they would.
It all still comes down to what the creditors accept - and just because mgmt pursues one option doesn't mean the creditors will ultimately support it.
But it is also true that the chances of AMR initiating a merger while AA is in BK are slim to none- the creditors simply are not going to increase their risks by engaging in a merger initiated by the debtor.
It is possible that US could move forward with plans to launch a bid for AA, but the final determination of whether the creditors accept a US merger will depend on other offers that will arise - and the creditors will not accept the first offer than comes along.
Outside of BK, a company can make that decision as long as they have done their homework to justify to the shareholders why they have made that decision; inside of BK, the creditors will require that every available option be considered.
I wish you and your AA colleagues the best in the weeks and months ahead.
wings396
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,672
- 1,122
I'm not threatened by you in any way, so get over yourself. I along with everyone else on here know that what you think and post means ZERO when it comes down to it. I'm flattered that you can reach back 7 years to remember what I had to say at that time.
Be Careful What You Wish For.
Veteran
- Dec 23, 2006
- 2,269
- 571
Thats a pretty bold statement from someone who has no verifiable inside information to this possible merger.
wings396
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,672
- 1,122
I'm sure that you can read between the lines with that statement. Translation, Delta will offer Big $$$ so they can have MIA and DFW, and leave the leftovers for anyone else that may want them. Then Delta will achieve true World Domination, and he will sit at his computer pounding his chest laughing, and left to live the rest of his sad little life knowing that he was right, and that Delta is King forever. Perhaps he will even take a job on the ramp with them to kill his time since there will be nothing more for him to post on here.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #581
I am not afraid to let the process play out the way it will.
What I object to now, objected to 7 years ago, and will continue to object to is the notion that US can save airlines much larger than itself who in fact have far better financial fundamentals than US, and better track records with respect to working with labor as well as in obtaining the benefits from the mergers and asset acquisitions in has engaged in.
Given that pilot labor issues are the biggest issue that AA has to confront, the notion that US is going to solve the problem when it is farther from solving its pilot integration than any other workgroup should tell anyone who wants to think how US is going to be viewed by the creditors.
Although you would like to frame this conversation as a Delta vs US conversation, the simple fact is that DL is the only other network airline that has made any comment whatsoever that they MIGHT be interested in parts of AA.
There is absolutely no doubt that UA would be more than willing to open its checkbook for the MIA hub - they just can't be taken seriously regarding DFW.
I can guarantee you that AS and B6 would be more than happy to take over any of AA's domestic hubs - but they will not take over the entire airline and may not even choose to branch into international flights, leaving that to someone else.
58 pages after this thread started with real questions as to the value US could bring to AA, there are still US people who are unwilling to admit that there just might be other options including a standalone AA that are better for AA's longterm interests.
The simple fact is that US is but one of a number of options - and may not even be the first choice of many people, including the creditors and a majority of the employees.
Let us not forget that AA's unions signed no binding agreements with US and did not even consult their membership as to whether they even want a US merger.
What is far more apparent is that AA's labor groups have spoken with US in order to attempt to improve the agreement they might get with AA mgmt, out of anger and frustration with AA mgmt.
There is nothing - absolutely nothing - at this point to indicate that AA's creditors or labor groups believe that a US merger is in their best interest.
Given that the pilots remain the only group that is really at play, it makes even harder to believe that US can make a bid that can bring AA's pilot pays up to levels of DL and most likely UA whose hourly rates are 25% more than AA's current rates - and even more above US'.
The creditors including the other employee groups will consider all factors - but it was highly premature 9 months ago to believe that US is the best solution for AA - and it still is today - no matter how badly it hurts some people to hear that.
And once again, given that the TWU and APFA members have approved their contracts, without an agreement from the pilots, the APA could find itself in the position of being the only labor group at AA that might not retain a seat on the UCC or gain a significant amount of equity in AMR's reorg plan.
What I object to now, objected to 7 years ago, and will continue to object to is the notion that US can save airlines much larger than itself who in fact have far better financial fundamentals than US, and better track records with respect to working with labor as well as in obtaining the benefits from the mergers and asset acquisitions in has engaged in.
Given that pilot labor issues are the biggest issue that AA has to confront, the notion that US is going to solve the problem when it is farther from solving its pilot integration than any other workgroup should tell anyone who wants to think how US is going to be viewed by the creditors.
Although you would like to frame this conversation as a Delta vs US conversation, the simple fact is that DL is the only other network airline that has made any comment whatsoever that they MIGHT be interested in parts of AA.
There is absolutely no doubt that UA would be more than willing to open its checkbook for the MIA hub - they just can't be taken seriously regarding DFW.
I can guarantee you that AS and B6 would be more than happy to take over any of AA's domestic hubs - but they will not take over the entire airline and may not even choose to branch into international flights, leaving that to someone else.
58 pages after this thread started with real questions as to the value US could bring to AA, there are still US people who are unwilling to admit that there just might be other options including a standalone AA that are better for AA's longterm interests.
The simple fact is that US is but one of a number of options - and may not even be the first choice of many people, including the creditors and a majority of the employees.
Let us not forget that AA's unions signed no binding agreements with US and did not even consult their membership as to whether they even want a US merger.
What is far more apparent is that AA's labor groups have spoken with US in order to attempt to improve the agreement they might get with AA mgmt, out of anger and frustration with AA mgmt.
There is nothing - absolutely nothing - at this point to indicate that AA's creditors or labor groups believe that a US merger is in their best interest.
Given that the pilots remain the only group that is really at play, it makes even harder to believe that US can make a bid that can bring AA's pilot pays up to levels of DL and most likely UA whose hourly rates are 25% more than AA's current rates - and even more above US'.
The creditors including the other employee groups will consider all factors - but it was highly premature 9 months ago to believe that US is the best solution for AA - and it still is today - no matter how badly it hurts some people to hear that.
And once again, given that the TWU and APFA members have approved their contracts, without an agreement from the pilots, the APA could find itself in the position of being the only labor group at AA that might not retain a seat on the UCC or gain a significant amount of equity in AMR's reorg plan.
diamondcutter
Veteran
- Apr 11, 2007
- 640
- 618
Are you just scared that a combined AA/US would be the number 1 airline on the entire east coast? Trumping DL , if this happens you might just implode ! Can't wait for the long winded reply on this one.
I can't tell exactly what you're saying above, due to the poorly written sentence, but if you're writing that DL's pilot payrates are 25% ahead of AA's pilot payrates, that would be incorrect. If you're saying that UA's pilot payrates are 25% more than AA's rates, that's nonsensical, as AA's rates are higher than UA or CO. Of course, AA's rates are at least 25% more than US rates. DL's rates are more than 25% more than US rates and UA/CO rates are ahead of US rates.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,662
- Banned
- #584
May I suggest that you focus a little less time trying to proofread other people's grammar and a little more attention looking at the details which are pretty readily available and which do indeed show the hurdle that faces not only an AA-US merger but even an AA standalone plan in the eyes of AA pilots.
Let me recommend the site www.airlinepilotcentral.com. It has all kinds of information including pilot rates, retirement plans, mandatory retirements etc.
And, yes, I did exaggerate but only if you believe that AA is going to give its pilots an 8.5% raise in the next 4 months since DL agreed to a raise of that amount with its pilots, followed by 3% in the next 2 years.
Based on that raise, DL's 738 topped out captain will make 22.8% more than AA captains at the same place on the scale. If you look at the 777 rates, the difference becomes 24.4%.
Factor in 320 rates for US east pilots and the difference below DL is 58%.
DL pilots asked for WN rates and they will get them in the next couple years.
Every other network airline pilot group says they hold DL pilot rates as the standard which they expect they should be paid - and that includes AA pilots.
UA hasn't released the contents of its proposed agreement but UA/CO pilots had the same expectations regarding DL rates - and rumors that are dribbling out are that UA agreed to rates very close to DL's.
I haven't read any post by an AA pilot that thinks their wages should stay flat while DL's rates continue to rise; and fewer still don't believe they should move toward DL pilot rates.
If you factor in the difference that AA would have to pay to bring its pilots up to DL rates, AA would need to shell out hundreds of millions of dollars more every year - probably well over a half billion.
If you factor in the increases needed for US pilots to be brought up to DL rates, it could easily add another several hundred million.
If you think Parker can persuade AA pilots to agree to fly for him for the same rates they will get to fly for AA, you are seriously mistaken. If you think they will settle for US rates if other options are on the table, possibly including DL, you again are seriously mistaken.
Now you and all the others that assumed that AA and US would create their own merger plan without considering the rates that it would take to bring AA and/or US pilots up to what are now industry standard rates might want to check w/ the pilots first.
You and the US fan club might also want to huddle around the idea that DL and UA both might have signed pilot wage rates in part specifically to put pressure on AA's reorganization plan as well as on AA/US' ability to pull off a merger.
DL and UA BOTH are happy to have AA pilots demanding higher pay rates.
All the business that AA has taken from UA might quickly come back to UA if AA's pilots decide they aren't interested in flying for term sheet rates.
If AMR's creditors say they cannot offer more money now, why do you or anyone else think they will agree to pay raises in a few months (assuming AA still wants to get out of BK) for 25% (ok 23-24%)?
As much as you and the US fan club don't want to admit it, the airline industry is highly competitive. If DL can pay its pilots 25% more than AA's and 50% more than US', then they will use that as leverage to put pressure on DL.
IF UA can now finally decide they need to pay DL rates, then to expect AA pilots to fly for 25% less than AA, DL, and WN, could indeed result in the AA pilots deciding to just shut the place down and go elsewhere, including selling off AA in pieces.
DL and UA know full well the opportunity they have to cripple AA and to ensure it cannot successfully restructure - and at the same time to make sure the pilots see no desire to work w/ UA if there are other options on the table.
The creditors are not foolish enough to agree to a merger in which the AA pilots will make far less than industry standard knowing the same labor discord that has crippled AA for years has the potential to wipe out their investment in fairly short order.
An AA standalone plan will not happen nor will an AA/US merger occur unless those pay differences between AA and US pilots compared to DL, UA likely proposed, and WN are significantly closed.... and if that happens then the entire business plan that Parker put together in his head will probably come unraveled.
Denying that reality or mocking someone that brings those realities to light only highlights how poorly some people here understand the strategy that is involved in the airline industry.
Let me recommend the site www.airlinepilotcentral.com. It has all kinds of information including pilot rates, retirement plans, mandatory retirements etc.
And, yes, I did exaggerate but only if you believe that AA is going to give its pilots an 8.5% raise in the next 4 months since DL agreed to a raise of that amount with its pilots, followed by 3% in the next 2 years.
Based on that raise, DL's 738 topped out captain will make 22.8% more than AA captains at the same place on the scale. If you look at the 777 rates, the difference becomes 24.4%.
Factor in 320 rates for US east pilots and the difference below DL is 58%.
DL pilots asked for WN rates and they will get them in the next couple years.
Every other network airline pilot group says they hold DL pilot rates as the standard which they expect they should be paid - and that includes AA pilots.
UA hasn't released the contents of its proposed agreement but UA/CO pilots had the same expectations regarding DL rates - and rumors that are dribbling out are that UA agreed to rates very close to DL's.
I haven't read any post by an AA pilot that thinks their wages should stay flat while DL's rates continue to rise; and fewer still don't believe they should move toward DL pilot rates.
If you factor in the difference that AA would have to pay to bring its pilots up to DL rates, AA would need to shell out hundreds of millions of dollars more every year - probably well over a half billion.
If you factor in the increases needed for US pilots to be brought up to DL rates, it could easily add another several hundred million.
If you think Parker can persuade AA pilots to agree to fly for him for the same rates they will get to fly for AA, you are seriously mistaken. If you think they will settle for US rates if other options are on the table, possibly including DL, you again are seriously mistaken.
Now you and all the others that assumed that AA and US would create their own merger plan without considering the rates that it would take to bring AA and/or US pilots up to what are now industry standard rates might want to check w/ the pilots first.
You and the US fan club might also want to huddle around the idea that DL and UA both might have signed pilot wage rates in part specifically to put pressure on AA's reorganization plan as well as on AA/US' ability to pull off a merger.
DL and UA BOTH are happy to have AA pilots demanding higher pay rates.
All the business that AA has taken from UA might quickly come back to UA if AA's pilots decide they aren't interested in flying for term sheet rates.
If AMR's creditors say they cannot offer more money now, why do you or anyone else think they will agree to pay raises in a few months (assuming AA still wants to get out of BK) for 25% (ok 23-24%)?
As much as you and the US fan club don't want to admit it, the airline industry is highly competitive. If DL can pay its pilots 25% more than AA's and 50% more than US', then they will use that as leverage to put pressure on DL.
IF UA can now finally decide they need to pay DL rates, then to expect AA pilots to fly for 25% less than AA, DL, and WN, could indeed result in the AA pilots deciding to just shut the place down and go elsewhere, including selling off AA in pieces.
DL and UA know full well the opportunity they have to cripple AA and to ensure it cannot successfully restructure - and at the same time to make sure the pilots see no desire to work w/ UA if there are other options on the table.
The creditors are not foolish enough to agree to a merger in which the AA pilots will make far less than industry standard knowing the same labor discord that has crippled AA for years has the potential to wipe out their investment in fairly short order.
An AA standalone plan will not happen nor will an AA/US merger occur unless those pay differences between AA and US pilots compared to DL, UA likely proposed, and WN are significantly closed.... and if that happens then the entire business plan that Parker put together in his head will probably come unraveled.
Denying that reality or mocking someone that brings those realities to light only highlights how poorly some people here understand the strategy that is involved in the airline industry.
signals
Veteran
Yeah that is going to happen
US's track record on mergers leaves even the novice saying, here they go again
- Status
Similar threads
