700UW said:
Jim,
You as an outsider do not know everything that has transpired at US. The RSA and its chosen corporate raiders have done more harm to employees then any previous executives and management in the 16 years I have been here.
[post="176382"][/post]
No, but what I do know is that all things considered, the Retirement System of Alabama is one of the best (if not THE best) managed retirement systems in the nation. What could the RSA possibly gain from "raiding" US Airways? In the total RSA picture, the US Airways investment is negligible (less than 1% of total assets). Destroying US Airways would only guarantee that the RSA would lose its entire investment.
Personally, I think Dr. Bronner made two mistakes. First, the fact that he invested at all in a failing business--not being tacky, just looking at the facts. Second, he deferred to the "airline professionals" as far as the on-going management of the company.
I agree that he probably doesn't understand that the airline business is, in fact, a different sort of animal, and that he assumed that an airline can be run like any other company. But, he wouldn't be the first to make that mistake now would he?
Given the management that US Airways has and has had over the past 5-10 years, can you honestly say that things would be different today whether the $240 million had come from the RSA, the PTA, or the BSA?
If not, tell me exactly what the RSA has done in the time since they invested in US Airways (less than 2 years IIRC) that has brought your airline to its current state. Not what Siegel, or Lakefield or any of the other CCY denizens has done. What has RSA done?