Mda Pilot Class & Ted

[TheLarkAscending]

Probably because $2/gallon JetA is likely to bankrupt the new USAirways within a few short months unless the price drops substantially or unless LCC can attract a few hundred million to pay for gas. 

It's not so LCC can buy UAL's A320s.    That's for certain.

[post="307395"][/post]​

Your response is not filled with emotion, it is L-O-G-I-C-A-L. You will be accused of wasting both your time and valuable bandwidth, as it is in direct opposition to the cockeyed suppositions held by the resident :wacko:.

I have been told by informed people...

The Super-Secret-Imaginary-Sources! Impressive!

 

[azdryheat]

If United needed to sell aircraft to raise cash, why would they sell them to U on the cheap? Another question is why would UAL sell a part of the domestic airline that is doing the best financially, cheap? Finally I have heard that United is training 320 pilots for a January 2006 effective date and training recalled pilots for the 320. Why would this happen if they are going to be sold?????

 

[ClueByFour]

All the points listed above do not matter because United is shopping around assets.

Cite a source or retract your statements. Your word (or opinion) does not represent a credible source.

I have been told by informed people yes.

Name them or retract.

At the end of the day, you make these statements without any attribution. "Your word" has historically proven to be innacurate at best.

That said, all the relavent data points--notably that the new US just had it's credit downgraded, US is returning Airbus aircraft even as we speak, and that healthy airlines (notably AA and CO) would most certainly be able to outbid/outfinance US for ORD or DEN make your latest attempt to somehow justify the United fantasy seem even less credible than the meager speculation they actually represent.

Oh, and Parker is seeking more funds because the new and improved airline is still losing money. If you remove BK related items, UA's performance in the latest quarter trounced the new US. Reality at 11.

 

[BoeingBoy]

At the end of the day, you make these statements without any attribution.

[post="307474"][/post]​

Now Clue - you must not have been paying attention. The sources have already been divulged in this very thread.....

Because Brace sat in First Class on the Shuttle and a friend of mine, not in uniform, directly heard the conversation between Brace and another United executive.

[post="305361"][/post]​

Jim

 

[USA320Pilot]

BoeingBoy:

That was not the source on the TED report, but how would you know? However, it was the first report on US Airways rejecting United's recent corporate transaction attempt and then the Board selecting America West as its merger partner. Following the report I went searching for more information to confirm the report and then it was confirmed.

Again, if my reports like "Project Minnow" have no value than why try to discredit the messenger? Or if my reports have no value I guess when the chairman of the board provides 3 separate interviews of his interest to buy United assets for US Airways that has no value too, right?

If my reports are invalid than why not simply ignore them?

I will not publicly reveal sources and violate the trust of others. Nor will it misrepresent information like certain B737 pilots near mandatory retirement. Too bad if you do not like it, but again, if my reports have no merit then ignore them.

Regards,

USA320pilot

 

[USA320Pilot]

Just one more point...

During the past couple of years every time I published a comment about US Airways and United engaged in corporate combination talks, certain posters would dispute my comments. In fact, the same posters still do, thus would you please comment on the following news report?

How US Airways/America West merger got off the ground

The search for a deal began in the fall of 2003, when David Siegel was still US Airways' chief executive officer. Siegel had led US Airways through its first bankruptcy and wrested more than $1 billion in concessions from the company's labor unions. But even as the carrier completed a painful round of cost cuts and emerged from bankruptcy, Siegel knew US Airways was still too small and too inefficient to compete against discounters such as Southwest, which had already announced plans to start service in Philadelphia, a US Airways' hub.

Siegel was convinced that for US Airways to avoid the fate of failed carriers such as Eastern Airlines and Pan Am, both of which liquidated in the 1980s, he would have to bring US Airways' costs down further and position the airline for consolidation with another carrier. He explored several options.

Acquire United Airlines, the nation's No. 2 carrier. That option was code-named "Project Minnow," with US Airways as the small fish gobbling the bigger one.

See Story

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[ClueByFour]

Or if my reports have no value I guess when the chairman of the board provides 3 separate interviews of his interest to buy United assets for US Airways that has no value too, right?

[post="307499"][/post]​

He lost $250 million and change and bought nothing except some rather expensive golf advertising.

So much for that justification. Next?

 

[767jetz]

Siegel was convinced that for US Airways to avoid the fate of failed carriers such as Eastern Airlines and Pan Am, both of which liquidated in the 1980s, he would have to bring US Airways' costs down further and position the airline for consolidation with another carrier. He explored several options.

[post="307504"][/post]​

I still don't get it. What does this prove exactly? That Siegel was exploring options, and his fairytale wish of "swallowing" was rejected by United. And you knew about his wet dream before it was public.

OK, I get it now.

Here's a news flash... Just because someone offers to swallow, doesn't mean a transaction has or will occur.

Hey 320... why do you waste time debating if you're so sure that what you say is accurate?

Here's an idea... You put all of the "naysayers" on ignore, and you'll never have to read one opposing reply. But then again, you'd be conversing with yourself.

 

[garyjr02]

as a self proclaimed airline analyst, I would expect UA to try and expand TED and intergrate more of its operations into TED. TED, although a part of United, is ran by a couple of very smart people, who for the most part have been able to operate their little airline within an airline sucessfully. TED IS PROFITABLE, UNTIED IS NOT! Song makes money, delta doesnt. So is it any suprise that NWA is trying to introduce NewCo as a low fare subsidiary. My point is this: if United is trying to unload TED then we all know the next and last chapter in their book, is chapter 7.

 

[700UW]

All the points listed above do not matter because United is shopping around assets.
Regards,
USA320Pilot

[post="307388"][/post]​

Funny thing is UAL has not announced nor hired an investment banker to shop assets, unlike US, which did hire an investment firm to shop assets.

You are just rumor mongering, you have not provided one fact to prove your claims.

 

[Bear96]

(blah blah blah) .... I have been told with a lot of money that operation could be in ORD or DEN, assuming assets are obtained from another company or if not then STL is an option. ... (blah blah blah).

You heard it here first:

The New U is engaged in a "transaction" to purchase AA.

 

[darkclouds]

All the points listed above do not matter because United is shopping around assets. This is not the first time United ahs been in asset divestiture discussions and it's not the first time US Airways & United have held corporate transaction discussions. Thus, why be surprised or emotional...it's just business.

Again, if my comments have no value then why all of the emotion by the United employees? If it's not going to happen then why waste the bandwidth and time? After all, there is going to be no deal, right?

Will a deal happen? I do not know. Is it being discussed? I have been told by informed people yes.

In my opinion, this has more to do with US Airways' stated intention to grow the Midwest. Prior to leaving US Airways, Bruce Ashby told the ALPA MEC that a Midwest hub located between the pre-merger America West and US Airways principal operations would create 3 to 4 passenger connecting opportunities per day and cause a revenue shift from other carrier's.

Following much of the merger integration, I believe the Midwest will see expansion and possibly a Hub/Focus City. I have been told with a lot of money that operation could be in ORD or DEN, assuming assets are obtained from another company or if not then STL is an option. In my opinion, a better option for US Airways than United would be Frontier in a couple of years.

What I find interesting is that the Untied employees come out of the woodwork every time I announce a corporate transaction occur, such as when I first posted the 2000 merger was going to be announced, or the AMR carve out, or the UCT, or Project Minnow (the ICT), etc.

Meanwhile, earlier this week ALPA MEC chairman attended the Wings luncheon in New York City where Doug Parker was the guest speaker. Following the luncheon Bill came to the ALPA LGA LEC meeting and said that the new US Airways is the third best capitalized airline in the world. In addition, Doug Parker was in BOS earlier this month and told Shuttle personnel he was in town seeking a significant amount of additional money.

My question is why is Parker seeking more funds?

Regards,

USA320Pilot
 

Regards

[post="307388"][/post]​

Because its going to be flying out the door like it's a hurricane.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Because its going to flying out the door like it's a hurricane! 😛

[post="307660"][/post]​

Cash, that is.....

So far, it looks like that analysts that have updated their numbers to reflect the merger are predicting a loss of about $800 million for the 6 quarters beginning with the one just ended and going thru next year. Of course, fuel could affect that a couple of hundred million either way.

Jim

[Edit - that should be ex-special items and net reorganization items]

 

[darkclouds]

Just one more point...

During the past couple of years every time I published a comment about US Airways and United engaged in corporate combination talks, certain posters would dispute my comments. In fact, the same posters still do, thus would you please comment on the following news report?

How US Airways/America West merger got off the ground

The search for a deal began in the fall of 2003, when David Siegel was still US Airways' chief executive officer. Siegel had led US Airways through its first bankruptcy and wrested more than $1 billion in concessions from the company's labor unions. But even as the carrier completed a painful round of cost cuts and emerged from bankruptcy, Siegel knew US Airways was still too small and too inefficient to compete against discounters such as Southwest, which had already announced plans to start service in Philadelphia, a US Airways' hub.

Siegel was convinced that for US Airways to avoid the fate of failed carriers such as Eastern Airlines and Pan Am, both of which liquidated in the 1980s, he would have to bring US Airways' costs down further and position the airline for consolidation with another carrier. He explored several options.

Acquire United Airlines, the nation's No. 2 carrier. That option was code-named "Project Minnow," with US Airways as the small fish gobbling the bigger one.

See Story

Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="307504"][/post]​

320,

Why do you never apply any sort of logical timeline to your supporting arguements?


Just because someone said something in the past is not relevant today!
This is a dynamic industry...you know that...what made sense yesterday could be stupid today. With oil reaching who knows what price...the decision makers plans are evolving constantly. You view things in some frozen static world and back your explainations with info that is old....meaning its WORTHLESS!


Are you going to use the "Bronner wants to buy UAL" as a supporting statement next? Drop the old trash and find something new and relevant to back your claims!

BP 102/76

 

[767jetz]

You heard it here first:

The New U is engaged in a "transaction" to purchase AA.

[post="307612"][/post]​

I thought the same thing when I read that! Darn, you beat me to the punch...