U Signs Lease For 10 Pit Gates
- Thread starter DCAflyer
- Start date
oldiebutgoody
Veteran
- Aug 23, 2002
- 2,627
- 945
You seem pretty confident that they haven't negotiated something else? Also, why would just one airline be involved? There is plenty of room for more, and it just means more competition and lower prices for PIT customers. It appears to me that either UAIR management has no idea what they want to do in PIT, or, they have a plan and it doesn't include a major mainline hub in PIT. Knowing this team it's probably the former.Beckles said:
EyeInTheSky
Veteran
ClueByFour, I think Chiames is more like 'Comical Ali'. Remember him? Somehow I think a similar 'fate' is in order for Comical Chiames.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
The only reason WHY PA Delegation is not agressively seeking other air carriers to come in and take the gates, is LABOR. BELEIVE IT OR NOT, LIKE IT OR LUMP IT, IT'S ALL ABOUT LABOR AT THIS POINT. $500 bILLION COST REDUCTION WILL HAVE TO TRANSLATE INTO A "MAINLINE" HUB STATUS. I know this for a fact. If U is not interested, don't waste anyones time, just pack up.
USAirways has the ear of the Delegation ONLY BECAUSE OF THE 8,000 JOBS IN PITTSBURGH. Without that cavieaut, there would not be any incentive to "piss" around waiting to accomodate U and deal with the shananigins of this mangment.
If a "main line " deal can't be had, there will be no cost saving further to U, and the negotiations will fall to the way side.
USAirways has the ear of the Delegation ONLY BECAUSE OF THE 8,000 JOBS IN PITTSBURGH. Without that cavieaut, there would not be any incentive to "piss" around waiting to accomodate U and deal with the shananigins of this mangment.
If a "main line " deal can't be had, there will be no cost saving further to U, and the negotiations will fall to the way side.
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,566
- 37
No other tenant cancelled the leases and attempted to hardball the ACAA with a "economic impact study" and then asked the state to raise hotel and car taxes.Beckles said:
It's a subsidy, plain and simple. To call it anything else is spin at best, and Baghdad Bob at the other end of the spectrum.
It's also not going to happen.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
Etops,
U accepted 10 gates and committed to those 2018 . Other airport facilities leased for three years but either party can terminate this after 12 months.. The other 40 gates are still being operated by U at a Premium lease 20% higher. If U does not negotiate to commit to those gates, or some part of, in the very near future, Pittsburgh will agressively look for another carrier to come in and take those gates. Once they have the carrier(s) to commit, those gates, USAirways will lose the option to operate them after the September extention.
U accepted 10 gates and committed to those 2018 . Other airport facilities leased for three years but either party can terminate this after 12 months.. The other 40 gates are still being operated by U at a Premium lease 20% higher. If U does not negotiate to commit to those gates, or some part of, in the very near future, Pittsburgh will agressively look for another carrier to come in and take those gates. Once they have the carrier(s) to commit, those gates, USAirways will lose the option to operate them after the September extention.
However this shakes out in the future?...at least take this one as a short-term win of sorts.
It's better to have at least 1 years notice (3 if possible) to prepare for the eventualities in life. This does not mean that future cuts are not in the cards...but it has to be a glimmer of hope for awhile...yet nobody is immune in this enviroment
I'm very happy for the PIT gang....hopefully things can drastically change for the better...and all parties can benefit in the long term.
The only downside I see in this deal is the 20% premium on the 40 short-term gate leases. That premium is going to have to be made up somewhere?...and history shows who's backside that will come out of....and this time it will not be the ATSB or the local government footing the bill. I see it as having greater potenial for ankle grabbing time again for labor.
It's better to have at least 1 years notice (3 if possible) to prepare for the eventualities in life. This does not mean that future cuts are not in the cards...but it has to be a glimmer of hope for awhile...yet nobody is immune in this enviroment
I'm very happy for the PIT gang....hopefully things can drastically change for the better...and all parties can benefit in the long term.
The only downside I see in this deal is the 20% premium on the 40 short-term gate leases. That premium is going to have to be made up somewhere?...and history shows who's backside that will come out of....and this time it will not be the ATSB or the local government footing the bill. I see it as having greater potenial for ankle grabbing time again for labor.
28yearsnojob
Advanced
- Jan 2, 2004
- 203
- 0
:down: This is what we paid top management with 2 billion in concessions
for , what a joke the new stock holders just got what the old stock holders had
BULL
for , what a joke the new stock holders just got what the old stock holders had
BULL
I would say that statement holds true for U's very existence and no hub or facility is really safe being part of this company. What we have is another very small reprieve with nothing really settled and no real secured future. Working at U one either decides to accept the fact that there is zero security or if they can’t handle it make moves to other opportunities where the term security exists. This outfit turns on a dime with nothing that surprises me in the least anymore. Roll with it or bail ship is the mantra.AOG-N-IT said:
