Pension Deferral Extension Request.

[WorldTraveler]

If payments to pensions don't affect profits, like it comes out of thin air, then why would airlines say they need to eliminate them to be profitable? You have a lot more used car salesman in you than anything else.

+787

 

[TWU informer]

There appears to be no end to how the laws are against the working man, and yet conitue to create unfair advantages in the so-called "de-regulated" industry. There is always be some carrier with an unfair advantage over the other, and the worker bees always pay the price in the end. The most government controlled deregulation on earth.  

 

[NYer]

AAL stock was worth far less than AMR stock would have been. --AMR stock never made it to $10 a share in 2011. Considering each AMR stockholder received about 0.75 AAL shares for each AMR share ( or about $17 per share from the initial $22.55 price upon issuance of AAL shares), it seems pretty obvious they did pretty well.

I know you work OT trying to defend AA, but to somehow argue that AMR stockholders fared just fine is nothing short of foolishness. --"In fact, the price of American Airlines Group stock has climbed steadily since Dec. 9, giving the holders of AMR shares their handsome return. They wound up being given about a third of the stock in the merged company, a greater ownership stake than that of US Airways shareholders." --Dallas News, April 2014

and you might also remember that it is the employees, not the stockholders, who have to deliver the product you also seem to defend to your death.

all the benefits for the stockholders while repeatedly screwing the employees will get you - wait, wait - USAir

 

[NYer]

What was that you said to WT? Something about if one part of the post is wrong it makes the rest suspect? 
 
Beyond what minimum, the minimum set by the change in 2006 or the minimum as figured by the PBGC? Clearly the two use different assumptions, I'd rather go with what the PBGC says it needs to be fully funded.

 
The Pension Protection Act of 2006, especially the portion concerning airlines, was specifically put in place because of the PBGC and their shortfall. It allowed airlines to extend their payments in an effort to try and keep those Plans from being forced onto the PBGC and create an even bigger deficit in that particular agency.

 

[NYer]

My AA stock didn't do so great.  I ended up with fewer shares and the total is far less than what I paid for it. It may be more than it went down to bit its not more than what it cost me. 

 
You are comparing your return on the AMR stock to the price which you paid for it? Really? That's a pretty way to try and make your point even though it is not a proper representation of the actual return from the BK. What was your share value the day, or even the months, before the bankruptcy? That's the value by which you gauge your return.

 

[WorldTraveler]

AAL stock was worth far less than AMR stock would have been. --AMR stock never made it to $10 a share in 2011. Considering each AMR stockholder received about 0.75 AAL shares for each AMR share ( or about $17 per share from the initial $22.55 price upon issuance of AAL shares), it seems pretty obvious they did pretty well.

I know you work OT trying to defend AA, but to somehow argue that AMR stockholders fared just fine is nothing short of foolishness. --"In fact, the price of American Airlines Group stock has climbed steadily since Dec. 9, giving the holders of AMR shares their handsome return. They wound up being given about a third of the stock in the merged company, a greater ownership stake than that of US Airways shareholders." --Dallas News, April 2014

and you might also remember that it is the employees, not the stockholders, who have to deliver the product you also seem to defend to your death.

all the benefits for the stockholders while repeatedly screwing the employees will get you - wait, wait - USAir

since AA was circling the drain for years, how about we take your calculation of how well AA stock did before and after BK to, say, 2004 or 5 when AA supposedly restructured out of court?

 

[AA-MRO.COM]

 
You are comparing your return on the AMR stock to the price which you paid for it? Really? That's a pretty way to try and make your point even though it is not a proper representation of the actual return from the BK. What was your share value the day, or even the months, before the bankruptcy? That's the value by which you gauge your return.

 
I think he meant 9 years of contract negotiations and over that 9 years we gave back over 300 thousand dollars in pay and benefits. The company gives us a few shares like its is supposed to make up for what we gave back. No matter how much it goes up we paid for it in the long run.
Do u get it now...

 

[NYer]

since AA was circling the drain for years, how about we take your calculation of how well AA stock did before and after BK to, say, 2004 or 5 when AA supposedly restructured out of court?

 
OK. The highest it went during 2004 and 2005 was $17.12 in Jan. 27, 2004.
 
The highest it went after 2003 and before it was delisted was $40.66 on Jan. 23, 2007....during 2008 and up to the BK, it barely made it over $15.

 

[NYer]

 
I think he meant 9 years of contract negotiations and over that 9 years we gave back over 300 thousand dollars in pay and benefits. The company gives us a few shares like its is supposed to make up for what we gave back. No matter how much it goes up we paid for it in the long run.
Do u get it now...

 
That argument was made in Court by all the Unions and the Judge made it perfectly clear that this process is not about 2003 and returns were not about past losses but for the losses incurred due to the changes in the CBA while in BK.

 

[Bob Owens]

 
You are comparing your return on the AMR stock to the price which you paid for it? Really? That's a pretty way to try and make your point even though it is not a proper representation of the actual return from the BK. What was your share value the day, or even the months, before the bankruptcy? That's the value by which you gauge your return.

NOT PER THE IRS. 

 

[Bob Owens]

 
The Pension Protection Act of 2006, especially the portion concerning airlines, was specifically put in place because of the PBGC and their shortfall. It allowed airlines to extend their payments in an effort to try and keep those Plans from being forced onto the PBGC and create an even bigger deficit in that particular agency.

And with the industry likely netting over $70 billion in profits its time to get back on track and paid up. 

 

[OldGuy@AA]

And with the industry likely netting over $70 billion in profits its time to get back on track and paid up. 

Exactly