Mesa/aca Deal Could Involve Us Airways

[USA320Pilot]

What I find interesting is the emotion behind the keystrokes and the immediate response to my posts.

If my Wall Street "sources" were wrong, than why would all of the UA posters immediately attempt to refute my comments? Furthermore, why seek out my posts on the US board. Why not debate the issues with UKridge leading the charge on the UA board?

Why not just ignore my comments if they are truly "off the wall'?

As I have said before, a deal may or may not occur, but there is now even more reason to believe it will because the word is UA cannot obtain exit financing (per the current business plan).

Respectfully,

Chip

:blink:

 

[Fly]

As I have said before, a deal may or may not occur, but there is now even more reason to believe it will because the word is UA cannot obtain exit financing (per the current business plan).

And where would that link be "my friend"? What is the "current business plan"? Please tell. Is it similar to the "US Air road to employee demoralization and Ch 7 just around the corner" plan?

 

[LGA Fleet Service]

One thing regarding UAL's "Crown Jewel" assets I haven't seen mentioned is their usage as collateral for the DIP loan.Should the DIP lenders decide to call in their marker, (Unlikely IMO) anyone interested in them would be dealing with the financial institution that holds them,not UAL itself.

 

[airlineorphan]

Well, folks, whatever you think of Chip and his theories, the fact remains that some game is afoot. The divorce of UAL and ACA, quickly followed by an unsolicited (hostile?) takeover bid by a scoundrel like Ornstein.... All in the midst of a political and economic climate that is pressuring airlines for some sort of consolidation in order to reduce capacity.... It does sound to me like something is up.

What that something is, I don't know. I do go by two rules in reading the tea leaves of corporate maneuvering: 1) Never Ever Ever Ever believe anything management says. 2) Follow the Money!

Most of the time, that will tell you where things are going. When management was blabbling about how the merger between US and UAL was still a go back in May of 2001, I opened my Wall Street Journal (or perhaps it was McPaper-USA Today) to find a small article about how UAL had disbanded their 500 person merger integration team. When I saw that news, I knew the merger was not going through. If I'd listened to management I might have thought otherwise, but money talks, and if you want to know what the company is up to, you'd better listen for what the money says.


Money talks, B######t walks....

Anyway, whether I agree with Chip or not, I'm glad that he and others are sharing whatever speculations they have about the future direction of US, UAL, Mesa, ACA, etc. corporate strategy.

In solidarity,
Airlineorphan

 

[E-TRONS]

How about this.....Seeing how we are to become the Super-Regional carrier and that ACA and UAL are in splitsville.....Could it be possible that USAIRWAYS will become UAL's new regional partner??? :blink:

This is getting good B)

E-TRONS OUT.

 

[SilentWarrior]

E-TRONS Posted on Oct 8 2003, 01:44 PM
How about this.....Seeing how we are to become the Super-Regional carrier and that ACA and UAL are in splitsville.....Could it be possible that USAIRWAYS will become UAL's new regional partner???

This is getting good

E-TRONS OUT.

Well, The Star Alliance did not let us on board based on our "extensive" overseas market.

 

[Fly]

lol....sure would be funny to see a certain Captain flying my commuter flight up to work on the "real" planes. Ahoy Cap'n (wonder if he makes announcements to his paxs about the state of UAL also) anyone, anyone?

 

[Pacemaker]

Chip, I share your curiosity about why U would want IAD...one of our greatest problems is that our hubs' proximity to each other means we compete with ourselves for the same pax. US Airways desperately needs a hub out west but not one 90 minutes from PHL. What's your take on the interest in IAD?

 

[Cosmo]

If my Wall Street "sources" were wrong, than why would all of the UA posters immediately attempt to refute my comments?

Yet another non sequitur, eh, Chip?

Just so you understand the flaw in the logic of your quote above, the speed with which folks respond to your posts has no relationship to the validity (or lack thereof) of comments from your "secret sources." And BTW, I didn't "attempt" to refute your comments, I actually did so with quotes from Mesa's CEO as cited in yesterday's Washington Post. So if the choice is between the quoted statements of Mesa's CEO (remember, he heads a company subject to SEC regulatory oversight) in a reputable publication about Mesa's plans for ACA or your "off-the-wall" (your words, not mine) ideas based on comments from one of your "secret sources", I'll go with the CEO every time.

As I have said before, a deal may or may not occur, but there is now even more reason to believe it will because the word is UA cannot obtain exit financing (per the current business plan).

How can you continue to make statements like this without any supporting data whatsoever? What reason? Who's word? Have you even seen United's current business plan? As you can see, your unsupported statements fall apart when given serious scrutiny.

 

[767jetz]

"What I find interesting is the emotion behind the keystrokes and the immediate response to my posts."

-The arrogance of this poster ooooooozes off the screen! Oh captain, my captain... please don't flatter yourself. To think you have the ability to affect the emotions of complete strangers is rediculous. It's quite normal for people to speak passionately about things important to them. Trust me it has nothing to do with you. I will say that you have a unique corporate opinion (UCO) that is shared by almost no one. I'll give you credit for that.
__________________________________________________

"If my Wall Street "sources" were wrong, than why would all of the UA posters immediately attempt to refute my comments? Furthermore, why seek out my posts on the US board. Why not debate the issues with UKridge leading the charge on the UA board?"

-Seek out????? WTF, over? It's not exactly hard to find these outrageously opinionated and slanted posts of yours. Again, please don't flatter yourself. No one is that interested in you personally. It's just that your of-the-wall comments are easy to pick apart. Maybe it's BECAUSE almost everyone believes you and your sources are mis-informed that people refute your comments so easily and consistently.

-Here are a few rhetorical questions for you... If your sources are right, why do feel the need to convince everyone else? Especially an audience who is very skeptical of you? Why not just state it once and then come back in a year and tell everyone "I told you so?" Why the need to repeat the same thing over and over again for months, even years? Sounds to me like you're trying to convince yourself.
__________________________________________________

"Why not just ignore my comments if they are truly "off the wall'?"

-If your comments are so well informed, why the need to justify yourself? Why not just ignore those who refute your claims. (just about everyone around here?) Do you have a childish need to have the last word? (you did tell someone not to respond to your comments recently, didn't you?)
__________________________________________________


"As I have said before, a deal may or may not occur, but there is now even more reason to believe it will because the word is UA cannot obtain exit financing (per the current business plan). "

-Ahhhh... the standard disclaimer. Of course when none of this comes true, you can escape an admission of being wrong by saying, "well I said all along that it may or may not occur." Or in a more 'Chip-esque' way, "who was the first to report that a deal may or may not occur?"
___________________________________________________


"Respectfully,"

-OK. If you say so... (yeah right.)
___________________________________________________

Rhetorically,

767jetz

 

[Cosmo]

Why not debate the issues with UKridge leading the charge on the UA board?

Chip:

Well, speaking of Ukridge, perhaps you should read this thread on the United board. Perhaps United's pursuit of exit financing won't be so fruitless after all, although (to mix metaphors) it may have a French flavor.

 

[Fly]

Fly <---------------------------- Really wants to jump back into this melee but if I open my big mouth (or at least my typing index fingers) they are going to ban me for 5 days. I'd say go for it to myself, but I only work a 3 day trip this week and the withdrawals would be too severe for me. Drat! So to my colleagues (who don't have as many warnings) go forth and conquer! I'll just sit and watch.

Moderators - Is that a 5 day warning if I say anything "bad" ever again...or do I get a reprieve if I say something nice?

:cop:

 

[AAviator]

nevermind

 

[USA320Pilot]

Pacemaker:

Pacemaker said: "Chip, I share your curiosity about why U would want IAD...one of our greatest problems is that our hubs' proximity to each other means we compete with ourselves for the same pax. US Airways desperately needs a hub out west but not one 90 minutes from PHL. What's your take on the interest in IAD?"

Chip answers: Pacemaker, I agree with your sentiment and I was surprised when Siegel was quoted in the news media (following ACA's announcement that it wanted to end its relationship with United) that he was interested in the Dulles hub should United be forced to abandon the operation. US Airways needs a Midwest and West Coast hub, not another hub in the Midatlantic or the Northeast.

Furthermore, I ran into Siegel following the ACA announcement and he said he was going to talk to ACA chief executive officer Kerry Skeen about the Dulles-based regional airline joining US Airways Express, but Siegel was not optimistic a deal could be worked out due to ACA's high operating costs and the need to negotiate J4J.

Nonetheless, I was surprised when I received the email that United's unsecured creditor's committee reportedly believed it was necessary for a nominee (Jonathan Orenstein's Mesa) to make the hostile move to capture ACA and secure its RJ services for UAL's east coast operations before ACA took itself out altogether and made a restructure of UAL's east-of-Chicago network all but impossible.

Regardless, ACA is now clearly in play and this just adds another element to the unfolding industry restructuring and we will have to wait to see how things work out.

Respectfully,

Chip

 

[TheLarkAscending]

Is it possible to create a thread that Chip can post on and no one can respond? It can be the "All about Chip" thread. He can go on and on as much as he wants and the entire theme will be just what he wants and all about what he believes. There won't be anyone to refute or rebut his theories and he will be located in one specific place.

I am so thoroughly sick of every single topic turning into "All About Chip". If you could just designate one place then I'd know where to avoid.