January 31 Airline News

[nycbusdriver]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/31/2002 6:15:10 PM rf1r wrote:

First of all, there are no (landing) "slots" to buy at ORD or DEN (except for some international rights as you indicated), rather it would be another airline assuming UAL's leases and operations at these airports. ----------------
[/blockquote]





ORD is a slot controlled airport. And given the number of slots held by UAL at ORD, they are a significant asset.

 

[Busdrvr]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 1/1/2003 827 AM nycbusdriver wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/31/2002 6:15:10 PM rf1r wrote:

First of all, there are no (landing) "slots" to buy at ORD or DEN (except for some international rights as you indicated), rather it would be another airline assuming UAL's leases and operations at these airports. ----------------
[/blockquote]





ORD is a slot controlled airport. And given the number of slots held by UAL at ORD, they are a significant asset.





----------------
[/blockquote]

Actually, I think ORD is no longer slot controlled.

 

[Pacemaker]

We have been waiting for this since the day UAL formerly bailed on the merger a year-and-a-half ago. Each time a new twist, a new theory, is put forward in an attempt to keep pace with current events, then quietly discarded and replaced by a new one.

Still waiting.

Chip, let me save you the trouble of a reply:

"Pacemaker, your comments are not accurate and I assure you these issues are being discussed in the halls of Crystal City and at the highest levels of the ATSB, DOT, and Congress"

 

[LGA Fleet Service]

[BR][BR]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]chipmunn wrote: [BR][BR][BR]If UA is forced to sell assets to fund on-going operations, would it be better to sell the assets to your domestic alliance business partner, to recapture revenue per the alliance and strengthen your business plan and POR, or to sell the assets to your competition with no revenue benefit?[BR][BR]----------------[BR][BR][FONT size=1]If I'm not mistaken,a signifigant portion of the assets are pledged as collateral to the banks that provided the DIP financing.[BR]With that in mind, the decision to sell assets in all probability will not be with alliances in mind.Banks are about maximizing the return oninvestment,nothing more.If a competitor can pay the asking price,the bank holding the assets in question will sell them.[BR][BR][/FONT][BR][BR][/BLOCKQUOTE]

 

[flythewing]

Heinrich wrote:

TO CONTINUE with speculation.


Speculate for a second that USAir survives but United does not. IN say, 8/03, United liquidates. What do you think the chances are that USAirways could go in and say, buy out the slots out of Denver and use Denver as a hub out to the west coast. Or Chicago. And buy slots to the Orient. And Japan. Where would the money come from? I doubt the US Government would let American or Delta expand further.


What do you think?


**********
HA HA HA HA. My spleen. That was a rich one. Thanks. HA HA HA

 

[delldude]

saw in the news yesterday,a bunch of companies such as disney and a few others took investments in live aircraft some years back now are faced with HUGE write downs in the 40-50 million dollar range.[BR] another spin off of airline woes.

 

[pk45cu]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/31/2002 1:39:52 PM PineyBob wrote:

6. Just FYI, in most airlines employee wages and benefits are the single BIGGEST line item after aircraft leases. So actually this debacle can be laid squarely at labor's feet at UA.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Labor costs are the #1 line item in costs, at around 35-45%.

Leases come later down the list, after fuel. The cost of aircraft is divided between the Rentals and the Depreciation lines. The rentals line will be larger for airlines - like US - which lease most of their fleet.

 

[chipmunn]

As in any Chapter 11 reorganization, the debtor (the company) and the unsecured creditors committee have significant input into the Plan of Reorganization. UAL has publicly said it will become a smaller airline and may sell assets.

My point is US has the financing through the ATSB or RSA to acquire assets and the company's continue to deepen their relationship. The code share begins on January 7, US will formally join the Star alliance in 2003, and the two companies are beginning to combine facilities (for example, in May 2003 US will acquire two SEA gates and will move from the South Satellite to UA's North Satellite terminal).

If UA sells assets, all things being equal, it would be better for UA and its employees to sell the assets to their business partner where they could obtain incremental revenue for years to come in the domestic alliance.

This would give US a significant advantage in an asset bidding war, which the debtor, the creditors, and the court would clearly see the benefits because the deal would continue to strengthen versus weaken the reorganized Chicago-based airline.

Chip

Go Ohio State Buckeyes and Cleveland Browns!

 

[delldude]

[H2] chip......[BR] steelers by 10[/H2]