Maybe Trump Could Help Us Get Concessions Back?

TWU informer

Veteran
Nov 4, 2003
7,550
3,731
American employees wary

A low level of debt, a high rating for maintenance and safety and solid labor-management relations all could be jeopardized in a hostile takeover of the AMR Corp., the parent company of American Airlines, analysts and labor leaders say.

Some are discounting the threat of billionaire New York real-estate developer Donald Trump in the wake of the withdrawal of his $120-a-share offer for the company Monday. But some American employees - there are 10,000 in Tulsa and another 50,000 around the world - say it's not over yet.

"We are glad he withdrew his offer, but we are afraid he

could come back with a lower offer for the company," said Ed Wilson, president of the Transport Workers Union Local 514.

"He said he wanted the airline. I think he still wants it."

Twelve days after Trump announced his intention to buy the nation's largest airline for $7.5 billion, AMR stock Monday plunged $22 to $76.50. On Oct. 5, the stock peaked at 107 1/4 per share.

"The rumor (on Wall Street) is that he's in there (Trump's 3 million shares, or 4.9 percent of the company) between

$70 and $80 per share," said Peter Adamson, an airline

analyst with Houchin, Adamson, 11 W. Fifth St.

"On the purchase of the shares, he would lose a little (at current values). I suspect he's going to wait and hope somebody else comes along - maybe the Bass Brothers."

In a letter to the Board of Directors of AMR Corp. Monday, Trump wrote: "In light of the recent change in market conditions and the huge drop in the value of the AMR Corp. stock, please let this letter represent a withdrawal of my offer to acquire AMR for $120 per share in cash.

"I am currently reviewing all my options with respect to AMR, including making another offer at a lower price, increasing my existing position in AMR, selling my AMR stock or taking any other actions that I may deem appropriate. I intend

to closely monitor developments."

Analysts in Tulsa and in New York said Trump's bid was jeopardized all along by Wall Street's perception that one of American's strengths was President Robert Crandall's good relationship with the airlines' unions.

In a time of crippling strikes at Eastern Airlines and the Boeing Co., Crandall's ability to keep wages below those

of his major competitors while retaining solid backing from workers is no small matter to be considered by those who

would finance a hostile takeover of the company, analysts and labor leaders said.

"American is the leading airline, is financially sound, and we would oppose anything that would cause great debt

- especially if they (those involved in a hostile takeover attempt) are going to ask the employees to make up the debt (with wage concessions)," said John Kerrigan, international vice president of the Transport Workers Union in New York.

"A lot of the reason for American's sound financial position is the collective bargaining agreements the company has

with the unions."

Wilson agreed.

"As far as leveraged buyouts, they are a negative function as far as the worker is concerned," Wilson said.

"They don't produce anything except debt. Instead of the company building, growing, we would be working to service the debt."

Assuming Trump's previous bid, analysts said Trump would have had interest payments of up to $750 million a year.

"That's without paying anything on the principal," said Adamson.

"Very likely he would have had to sell planes and lease them back or liquidate other parts of the company. The Sabre (computer reservation system) has a value of about $2 billion."

Thom Albrecht, an analyst with A.G. Edwards & Sons Inc., said AMR's cost structure is already lower than either NWA, the parent company of Northwest Airlines, or UAL, the parent of United Airlines.

Therefore, Albrecht said, there is less room for cutting costs after a buyout.

"AMR has already announced that it expects softer earnings in 1990 - an estimated $7.74 billion - meaning that in all likelihood that a leveraged buyout would have to be financed out of a smaller cash flow."

Combined with effective cost controls, solid union contracts, the Eastern strike and higher air fares, American's second quarter results were excellent, analysts said.

Earnings during the quarter rose 26 percent as revenues rose to nearly $2.7 billion.
 
<_<----- Just a bit of trivia for you. This was about the same time Carl Ichan (TWA) considered buying AMR!!!! :shock: Strange how things turn isn't it?
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #5
My point was that if Trump would come back with another "threat" to take over, the stocks may climb to $100 + plus per share and we could recover some, still not all, of our concessions.

$25 - $50 per share just isn't going to cover the severe losses.
 
I was a caterer back then. We had a contract with Trump shuttle, 727-100's with a casino interior. It was Eastern before that, but Pan Am was the only other real competitor in Bos-Jfk. I don't remember how long he was around.

My point was that if Trump would come back with another "threat" to take over, the stocks may climb to $100 + plus per share and we could recover some, still not all, of our concessions.

$25 - $50 per share just isn't going to cover the severe losses.
Unfortunately, I don't see it improving anytime in the next 8-10 years. As long as contracts can be thrown out on a whim this industry is not where its at.
 
My point was that if Trump would come back with another "threat" to take over, the stocks may climb to $100 + plus per share and we could recover some, still not all, of our concessions.

$25 - $50 per share just isn't going to cover the severe losses.

So you're thinkin' that maybe, just maybe, the stock would quadruple if someone (maybe the Donald) announced a hostile takeover bid??

Perhaps. Then again, the odds of either happening (hostile bid or a resulting quadrupling of stock price if one was announced) is about as likely as maintenance-free airplanes.

Could we just put a sticky at the top of the forum where everyone could agree that annual wage concessions of $1.6 billion are terrible? And that yes, we know, the stock has to hit $300+/sh for your piddly options to make up the wages lost. Mr Owens ought to put that in a signature so it shows up on all his posts instead of just most of them.

Ya know, the represented AA employees could have been given options for all of AMR's stock without covering all of the severe losses unless the stock hit about $63/sh.

And severe as the concessions were, there's no way that the company would have given the represented employees all the stock and there's an even smaller chance that the employees would have held it until it hit $58.

How do I know? Check out all the threads from a year ago where posters were proud of having dumped their options at $12-$15/sh instead of holding.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #8
How do I know? Check out all the threads from a year ago where posters were proud of having dumped their options at $12-$15/sh instead of holding.


What I remember reading was that the stock was being dumped at $12-$15/sh to pay bills.

I don't remember that "proud" part.

Maybe you could give a direct link to where you saw the "proud" part?

You've been caught BS'ing everyone here before.
 
What I remember reading was that the stock was being dumped at $12-$15/sh to pay bills.

I don't remember that "proud" part.

Maybe you could give a direct link to where you saw the "proud" part?

You've been caught BS'ing everyone here before.

Link to your allegations of BS'ing? I don't recall "being caught BS'ing everyone." Perhaps you could refresh my memory?

I'm not going to argue the point of whether the early sellers were "proud" or whether they relutantly sold to pay bills. If they weren't proud of their decision to bail out early, they wouldn't have posted their decision to bail. That's my opinion. You're free to disagree, and I'm courteous enough to refrain from saying your disagreement is "BS."
 
What I remember reading was that the stock was being dumped at $12-$15/sh to pay bills.

I don't remember that "proud" part.

Maybe you could give a direct link to where you saw the "proud" part?

You've been caught BS'ing everyone here before.

People may not have been proud to be selling but last year there was no shortage of people calling others idiots for not selling.

See post #6 which claims 10 year expiration would happen before stock hit $20

http://www.usaviation.com/forums/index.php...=19450&hl=stock

See post #4 which claims that only misguided people hold options:

http://www.usaviation.com/forums/index.php...=12641&hl=stock
 

Latest posts

Back
Top