The Future Of Ual?

[mweiss]

Yes, not only am I ‘implying’ but I am making a ‘bold ass statement’!
Furthermore, the H1B’s that did lose their positions in the Bay Area are ‘still here’!!!
(Next time you visit SFO, get you butt in a cab going to San Jose, get back to me.)

First, let me mention that my delayed response has been due to a shortage of available time. I didn't realize there was a statute of limitations on responses...

Yes, some people with H1Bs are still here. Others are legal immigrants. Believe me, I am very familiar with the Silicon Valley tech industry. But so what? They were paid the same as everyone else in the US. Why even bring them up?

So, what are you saying? On one side of your mouth you ‘imply’ that the H1B’s are making the same and from the ‘other side’ of your mouth you justify their position due to American Labor costs?

No, I'm saying that the ones in the US are paid the same. The ones overseas are not. Therefore, outsourcing overseas is less expensive than paying people in the US, regardless of citizenship.

So now we are shifting from manufacturing, to service, now to ‘intellectual’ property.
What a line of crap!

Feel free to stick your head in the sand. It won't change the outcome.

 

[767jetz]

They continue to pay their bills, and service their debt...and still managed to outperform UA.

REALLY???!

OK, how much money did AA make?

What criteria did AA outperform UA? CASM improvement? RASM improvement? DOT ontime performance? Load factors? Lost bags?

Please back up your claims with a few facts.

As for your comment "operating under protection of the Bankruptcy court, STILL can't make any money"... Do you have a clue how much of UA's loss is associated with BK costs and the write down of leases? I suggest you wait until the second half of 2004, when most cost savings of the restructuring are in effect, and BK costs and write downs are no longer a factor, to judge how well UA is doing in comparison to AA or anyone else for that matter.

 

[atabuy]

767jetz,
There is a strong posibility you are debating old posters with new idenities. The m.o. seems to be the same with no chance of changing the mindset.
If you have the time to waste, type away. I do think it is futile though.

Good luck in your endeavor.

 

[UnitedChicago]

this thread is getting tired.

 

[Andre1980]

Regardless of the intention of the original ATSB bill (which was rushed through Congress faster than just about any spending bill of similar size), there is real disagreement as to whether the government should be in the business of stabilizing old guard airlines 2 1/2 years after 9/11. Terrorism has not stood in the way of a recovery at the legacy airlines but a business model that has not transformed to adapt to the new demands of consumers certainly has. Regardless of the actions the ATSB takes, anyone at UA who thinks they will quickly become the king of the industry and take on the volume of pesky little carriers is seriously out of touch with reality. If UA has a business plan to become something decidedly different from the rest of the big 6, this is the time to bring it out. Right now, UAL has to turn a $1.4 BILLION annual operating loss - and that is of a magnitude that is still pretty near the worst performance of an airline. Until UAL proves that they have really turned things around, I won't be convinced and I will make sure my elected officials know I have no interest in helping United Airlines out of their problems.

I totally agree with world traveller. The time has come for the legacy carriers to change their game but the main problem for these airlines is the fact that they are very limited in terms of dealing with union contracts that may prevent them from doing so in a very quick and efficient manner and on top of that they are very big and that is what makes it very complex and complicated to do.

One may argue that airtan, jetblue nor southwest do not fly overseas and really was not impacted by the war but when you look at the legacy carriers for e.g. American which flies 70% of its flights are domestic and one can asssume the other legacy carriers do roughly the same percentage of domestic flying it can be argued that the airlines cannot use the war as an excuse to get funds from the government since the majority of their flights are not done to overseas markets and one can also point out that airlines take risks some of it may involve bringing out a new product, a product improvement or going into a new market but when something goes wrong in that risk should the government provide funding to help?

UAL should realise that this market and the external enviroment has become unpredictable with the wars, boomings,SARS etc and they must prepare themselves by lowering their costs more in order to withstand these pernament changes in traveller behaviour and government is getting tired of the handouts. UAL have a problem in stabalising their cash flow but one may point out that this is so because of the bankruptcy process but as far as I know the cash flow deficit for the last 2 quarters excluded the reorganisation costs and therefore should not be dismissed as such and must be addressed urgently. I find it unacceptable that a carrier that has raped their employees, leasesors and creditors billions in concessions and can't even report a positive cashflow from operations even in slow times HAS NOT DONE ENOUGH TO GET THEIR SHIP RIGHT.

AA right now has the lowest casm out of the legacy carriers and UA's casm is still quite high when those reorganisations costs are excluded and it did not get the 'luxuary' that UA is getting in Ch11 to achieve it. I am not trying to tell UAL to become like AA but to better that position even if it calls for more cuts and product differentiation. UA has a long road ahead to become the best and I wish them all the best in achieving that goal but UA has just over 3 months to think of something to help them take advantage of their time spent in Ch11.

 

[767jetz]

767jetz,
There is a strong posibility you are debating old posters with new idenities. The m.o. seems to be the same with no chance of changing the mindset.
If you have the time to waste, type away. I do think it is futile though.

Good luck in your endeavor.

I think you may be right. :huh: