No Airline Aid in Emergency Spending Plan

[Bob Owens]

----------------
On 3/25/2003 6:29:28 PM MissAAmerican wrote:

----------------
On 3/25/2003 1107 AM Wild Onion wrote:

Secondly, as an AA employee, I wouldn''t mind seeing UA fail. It''s nothing malicious toward UA, it''s just that I would see the relative strength of AA improve dramatically.

----------------​

Be careful what you wish for as AA is currently looking for DIP financing and has not been successful. There is always the possibility that AA would skip Chapter 11 and go right into Chapter 7. Whatever happens will negatively impact my family.

AA Flight Attendant (married to UAL pilot)

----------------​

Shouldnt you be Mrs or Ms American then?

 

[MissAAmerican]

----------------
On 3/26/2003 5:24:39 PM Bob Owens wrote:

----------------
On 3/25/2003 6:29:28 PM MissAAmerican wrote:

AA Flight Attendant (married to UAL pilot)

----------------​

Shouldnt you be Mrs or Ms American then?


----------------​

Mr. Owens....I didn''t know we had to explain our names.....but here goes. Most female flight attendants have at one time or another answered to the name of "O Miss". I am a flight attendant for American, which loves to double the "A" in any program they roll out to the employee''s (you know AA as in American Airlines). Last, flight attendants are perceived as the "glamour" gals and guys (when we aren''t thanking you for trash) because we are usually the main passenger contact. Thus the play on the "glamour" role of MissUSA, MissAmerica, Miss Colorado, Miss Teen Whatever, etc... And yes I wear my wedding ring on my trips. Any thing else?

 

[iflyjetz]

----------------
On 3/26/2003 1051 AM eolesen wrote:

Sure it did. You just have to look back a bit further from Dec 91 and Jan 91 respectively.

DL benefitted the most from both Pan Am''s and Eastern''s demise.

Without Pan Am needing cash to stay alive, they never would have gotten the foothold they currently have in Europe and they were able to further cement their domination of ATL. They also wouldn''t have gotten the Shuttle.
----------------​

Eoleson, your memories of the benefits to Delta are revisionist history. Delta''s CEO at the time, Ron Allen, purchased Pan Am''s European routes for a large chunk of change ... somewhere north of $1 Bil, as I recall. The purchase nearly drug Delta into chapter 11. To older heads at Delta, Allen is revered alongside Lorenzo. Ask anyone who''s been at Delta longer than 10 years.
As for the advantages of the shuttle, that operation has been a money loser for more years than its been profitable. That goes for every carrier running an east coast shuttle.

And I''d be careful of rooting for UAL going chap 7. There are far too many rumblings that AMR may end up being the capacity reduction that the industry needs.
AMR''s acquisition of TWA has been a huge drag on the company. The integration has been expensive, and the net result has been to dump nearly everything acquired. I fully expect to see AMR drop STL as a hub; it is lousy in terms of O&D and has, at best, poor facilities. I won''t even address the lack of multiple runway ops during inclement weather. And how well do AMR and ex-TWA employees play together?
Step back for a moment and evaluate each company''s route structure. UAL wins hands down. When lining up DIP financing, the financiers are looking at ROI. While UAL has a significant number of warts, the pilots have rolled over and given management just about every concession that they want, including a six year contract, which will allow UAL to reapply for the ATSB loan.
How''s that Chinese proverb go ... ''Be careful what you wish for, it may happen.'' You are wishing for a large major to go chap 7 to reduce excess capacity. It may very happen; however, it may not be the airline that you hope for.

Play nice and prepare for the endless speculation that those of us at USAirways and United have endured.

Tailwinds,
Iflyjetz
(er, Iflewjetz; furloughed UAL pilot)

 

[Rational Thought]

----------------
On 3/25/2003 8:05:16 AM MiAAmi wrote:

Isn''t it funny how a couple of years ago Bush stated that he wouldn''t let any union strike at the airlines, "Because of the economic effect to the country". Well I guess if they all go bankrupt and thousands of workers are on the street that must be better for the economy! I can''t wait to vote this clown out of the white house.

----------------​

Nice thought, but logically in error.

A strike removes capacity immediately, CH11 does not. The planes still fly. The passengers still move. That is the difference between the two scenarios and why your comment makes no sense. I know that this distinction is not one you enjoy or fits nicely in your mind, but it is the truth.