Mda Pilot Class & Ted

[Fly]

Why????

Better question; why don't you ever read the answers we post? You keep asking and everyone keeps answering. Can you read?

I know it's a sad day for you today USA320nevergonnaflya47pilot, but get over it.

United OBVIOUSLY doesn't want an equity partner to come in and tell United how to run their business. Why would you want that unless you had NO options (ala US Airways)

We are coming out! Now what are you going to do with your time?

 

[USA320Pilot]

Fly:

I do not read many of the posts because they're uninformed and inaccurate. They're filled with emotion versus fact.

With the exception of the 2000 merger, AMR carve out, and 21-day Hart-Scott-Rodino Act notification, I never said any of the other corporate transaction events would occur.

In regard to other corporate transaction discussions, I said the parties were talking about US Airways obtaining some United assets, such as the UCT & ICT (Porject Minnow), which US Airways' former chairman indicated in the news media.

This had nothing to do about me, since I have made a lot more money at US Airways than I would have at United, and I have said all along that I believed United would emerge from bankuptcy.

Meanwhile, I understand United remains in discussion about asset divestitures.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[UALDC767]

I'm talking unrestricted cash only - you know, the cash that UA can use (restricted cash is held to secure workers' comp obligations, credit card holdbacks, etc). That restricted cash remains restricted cash - exiting Ch 11 won't change that. It's basically unspendable.

The current unrestricted cash is about $1.9 billion. Much of that is owed to the DIP lenders (we can debate how much later after we get better numbers). Using my earlier $1.7 billion amount, only $200 million of that $1.9 remains after the DIP loans (and other amounts paid to exit BK) are paid. That leaves $1.3 billion of the $3 billion exit financing. $1.3 billion (remaining exit financing) plus $200 million of unrestricted cash equals $1.5 billion of unrestricted cash. Not as great as it sounds.

I may have overstated the current DIP balance - it may be closer to a billion or a billion three, not $1.7 billion. But we also have to add various amounts that are required to be paid to exit, and dunno how much those are right now.

Don't get me wrong - it is great news - much better than the gloomy alternatives that could have happened - but the new LCC has a pretty big bankroll right now too, and JetA continues to be very expensive, even as crude prices fall.

[post="309531"][/post]​

I am by no means saying UAL is safe...but yes we are slowly backing away from the cliff versus running towards it.


But again, you are confusing numbers/loans.....if UAL were to pay the DIP from their current cash balance then yes, they would have $200 million left over but then add the new $3 billion loan.....gives $3.2 billion cash.

You are double paying the DIP from cash on hand AND from the new Loan....so UAL would be paying 3.4 billion back, not 1.7 (or whatever that number may be)

DC

 

[767jetz]

A bigger question is why was there no new equity investor and why is United taking on more debt?

[post="309538"][/post]​

DUH!!!????

Geee... why do people go to the bank for car loans and mortgages instead of a loan shark?

I wonder.

 

[767jetz]

Meanwhile, if my comments on UAL shopping assets have no value then why all of the emotion and constant rebuttal? Something to think about...

[post="309538"][/post]​

If the rebuttals have no value then why do you continue to come back with a counter-rebuttal? Why waste time debating if you are so sure you are right? Why the need for the last word? Why keep repeating yourself like a broken record? Definitely something to think about.

As for the emotion demonstrated on your part, one just needs to click on "replies" next to each thread to see the proof. With you posting far more than the next closest poster (almost twice as much), it is clear that you sir are the one overcome with emotion. Your defensiveness is the tell-tale sign.

People rebutt what you say becaue you are so often uninformed and simply wrong.

 

[767jetz]

Better question; why don't you ever read the answers we post?

[post="309543"][/post]​

Don't worry Fly. He does indeed read what everyone writes. Every word. It is a narcissistic personality trait to know what people are saying about you. He couldn't stand not knowing, otherwise he would just put everyone on "ignore."

He claims not to read other people's posts so he can escape accountability and avoid questions when people point out his inaccuracies. It is actually a very simplistic defense mechanism.

If he didn't read all the posts, how would he even know people are posting "emotional" "rebuttals?" He even seems to keep track of what time people post their rebuttals, and what profession our spouses are in! (I wonder if he remembers that my wife is in the enforcement division of the SEC?) What a clown! Who does he think he is fooling?

 

[Bear96]

Fly:

I do not read many of the posts because they're uninformed and inaccurate. They're filled with emotion versus fact.

[post="309552"][/post]​

Well ... OK. We'll accept that as your opinion.

But Fly's point was this: You keep asking why people bother to respond to your silly posts. And people keep answering this question of yours in their own posts.

But now you are admitting you don't even bother to read the answers to the question you keep asking. So it seems like you should either: (A) actually read the answers, or (B) stop asking the question.

Otherwise you'll just go round and round with your strange logic forever until you finally spin yourself out.

 

[FWAAA]

I am by no means saying UAL is safe...but yes we are slowly backing away from the cliff versus running towards it.
But again, you are confusing numbers/loans.....if UAL were to pay the DIP from their current cash balance then yes, they would have $200 million left over but then add the new $3 billion loan.....gives $3.2 billion cash.

You are double paying the DIP from cash on hand AND from the new Loan....so UAL would be paying 3.4 billion back, not 1.7 (or whatever that number may be)

DC

[post="309555"][/post]​

D'OH!!!

You're right. I apologize.

Never Mind.

 

[UALDC767]

D'OH!!!

You're right. I apologize.

Never Mind.

[post="309602"][/post]​

FWAAA........no worries B)

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/051006/united_airlines.html?.v=6

It says the DIP loan is $1.3 Billion. But in the Wall Street Journal article is says, after all loans are paid off and the cost for exiting are factored in, UAL will have $2.7 billion in the bank. Not sure if thats unrestricted or not.

Also what is the potentail for the restricted cash requirements to become smaller? Would the restricted requirement not be less, at least regarding the Credit Card holdback, once UAL emerges since we are not as big of a credit risk? Just theorizing.

DC

No wonder I didnt do so well in accounting...too many damn numbers to keep track of.

 

[FWAAA]

]
It says the DIP loan is $1.3 Billion. But in the Wall Street Journal article is says, after all loans are paid off and the cost for exiting are factored in, UAL will have $2.7 billion in the bank. Not sure if thats unrestricted or not.

Also what is the potentail for the restricted cash requirements to become smaller? Would the restricted requirement not be less, at least regarding the Credit Card holdback, once UAL emerges since we are not as big of a credit risk? Just theorizing.

[post="309610"][/post]​

Good point about the restricted cash - perhaps UA can gain access to some of that upon emergence in February or so.

So I take it you don't put much stock in the cockamamie theory that UA is shopping TED or its Pacific Ops?

Then again, if UAL could convice LCC to pay a few billion for TED, that would be quite an opportunity! The old USAir has done plenty of stupid things before, so maybe the new LCC will continue that tradition.

 

[TheLarkAscending]

I do not read many of the posts because they're uninformed and inaccurate. They're filled with emotion versus fact.
:blink:

You most certainly need a class in logic, because you're slaying yourself with your very own words. :wacko: If you haven't "read many of those posts", how would you actually know whether they're uninformed, inaccurate, filled with emotion, or factless?:unsure: There, sir, lies the rub. Then we could also venture down the lane of honesty, the avenue of integrity and a whole road map detailing a host of other platitudes you've often accused others of lacking .... quite entertaining!

 

[ClueByFour]

A bigger question is why was there no new equity investor and why is United taking on more debt?

Uhh, because they got a bank to loan them money. Hey--how did life under Bronner work out for you? Getting paid more? Better bennies? Correct predictions?

Seeing none of the above, I'm sure that the average airline is running out for an "equity investor."

With the exception of the 2000 merger, AMR carve out, and 21-day Hart-Scott-Rodino Act notification, I never said any of the other corporate transaction events would occur.

And how many of the ones that you said would occur actually happened?

(I hear the crickets chirping even now)...

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Fly:

I do not read many of the posts because they're uninformed and inaccurate. They're filled with emotion versus fact.

With the exception of the 2000 merger, AMR carve out, and 21-day Hart-Scott-Rodino Act notification, I never said any of the other corporate transaction events would occur.

In regard to other corporate transaction discussions, I said the parties were talking about US Airways obtaining some United assets, such as the UCT & ICT (Porject Minnow), which US Airways' former chairman indicated in the news media.

This had nothing to do about me, since I have made a lot more money at US Airways than I would have at United, and I have said all along that I believed United would emerge from bankuptcy.

Meanwhile, I understand United remains in discussion about asset divestitures.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="309552"][/post]​

Nice cheap shot. Give it up already, you're boring the crap out of us.

 

[UALDC767]

Good point about the restricted cash - perhaps UA can gain access to some of that upon emergence in February or so.

So I take it you don't put much stock in the cockamamie theory that UA is shopping TED or its Pacific Ops?     

Then again, if UAL could convice LCC to pay a few billion for TED, that would be quite an opportunity!  The old USAir has done plenty of stupid things before, so maybe the new LCC will continue that tradition.   

[post="309612"][/post]​

What theory? I thought it a done deal since you-know-who deemed it as such, since we are all just peons with inaccurate, uniformed know nothing opinions.

Personally, since I am a pack rat......I have no desire to sell anything to anyone. Plus being junior means I would suffer from any downsizing.

Well maybe we can sell Doug Hacker to LCC....

On a happier note UAL announced that they will be recalling a minimum of 20 pilots a month for 2006 with a bottom goal of 300 pilots returning. That coincides nicely with selling parts off don't you think?

DC

 

[700UW]

I do not read many of the posts because they're uninformed and inaccurate. They're filled with emotion versus fact.
Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="309552"][/post]​

No differant then your posts, you have not provided one fact, all you post is "I heard", nothing more then just a rumor monger.