Npv Of Liquidated Assetts > Exp Future Cash Flows?

[funguy2]

2. atsb loan 900million ( risk to US taxpayers 0.00) a. the money does NOT come from the US government but commercial lenders and is backed by the government .

3. should UAIR fail the 900m is backked by UAIR assets.

I thought that UAIR's assets are collateral on debts other than the ATSB guaranteed loans.

The ATSB does not have first dibs on assets. However, the ATSB has protected itself well by ensuring that the company has more cash on hand than the balance of the guaranteed loans. For example, when UAIR's cash balance was going to drop below $1Bil, the amount of the loan, they had to pay down the loan. I expect this trend to continue until UAIR declares BK again or becomes profitable.

 

[700UW]

Yes the ATSB does have first dibs, the slots in LGA and DCA and other assets are collateral for the loan.

 

[usair_ ends_ with_ me]

A company is not just about it's employees, its primary fiducial responsibility is to its owners/stockholders!!

Liquidation is almost upon UAir, its up to the IAM.

I must say that in this matter,i give my full support to IAM and its dedicated workers who have done what their contract demands.
this continual disregard for all agreed to concerns by the company and most importantly;Glass and company must and will stop. :angry: :censored: :rant:

 

[Smartest Loser]

Upon exiting BK, U had to present a VIABLE BUSINESS PLAN to the judge and other stakeholders. These new & old investors in U had to sign off on this plan…!!

So, what did these investors see in this plan to make them think it would work in the first place ?? Under that plan U was to return to profitability in 2005, loans were given and U came out of BK. Here it is mid-2004 and alarm bells are sounding again, the plan U had it’s not working.

My questions is, who’s held accountable for U’s unworkable business plan in the first place..??? The courts, creditors, CEO’s…?? This needs to be addressed….!!!!

BK courts are not designed to be an economics class project. :down:

 

[delldude]

Upon exiting BK, U had to present a VIABLE BUSINESS PLAN to the judge and other stakeholders. These new & old investors in U had to sign off on this plan…!!

So, what did these investors see in this plan to make them think it would work in the first place ?? Under that plan U was to return to profitability in 2005, loans were given and U came out of BK. Here it is mid-2004 and alarm bells are sounding again, the plan U had it’s not working.

My questions is, who’s held accountable for U’s unworkable business plan in the first place..??? The courts, creditors, CEO’s…?? This needs to be addressed….!!!!

BK courts are not designed to be an economics class project. :down:

haven't you heard??
the excuse de jour this time around is the sudden and unexpected rise of LCC'S AND FUEL PRICES .
however,i feel if their high priced visionary's are worth what they pay them they would have seen these coming.
after all ,going to war in IRAQ should cause someone to expect a fuel price surge at some time.
and are you going to tell me they were that inept to not see the LCC'S coming and packing a lunch??
i feel we are much akin to mushrooms......
there seem to be many items that were negotiated into the last conncessionary contracts that were and are not being utilized now...so where does all this hoopla fall?
i believe this is just another act in the great plan...plan to pork you and i and all of our fellow workers.

 

[JFK777]

Even in the best BK plans no one was counting on oil being $40 per barrel. USAIRways needs urgent delivery of its A330-200 to add more service to Europe. SW isn't going across the pond. Also service from Phl & CLT to Tokyo should be lokked at closely, with UA and ANA as Star alliance partners connection are easy. Any thing to diversify away from short haul revenues should be goal one.