C
chipmunn
Guest
[A href=http://quote.bloomberg.com/fgcgi.cgi?T=marketsquote99_news.ht&s=APZD5cxQ1VVMgQWly]http://quote.bloomberg.com/fgcgi.cgi?T=marketsquote99_news.ht&s=APZD5cxQ1VVMgQWly[/A]
OP
chipmunn
Guest
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #2
The pension fund's request to take Texas Pacific's place in the auction violates US Airways' right to reorganize free from creditor interference and is procedurally deficient, the airline said in court papers filed today.
Alabama is attempting to intrude upon the airline's plan formulation process by seeking an order from this court that would force to abandon (the airline's) current plan negotiations and enter into negotiations with the state pension fund, US Airways said in the filing.
Under the bankruptcy laws, companies in Chapter 11 have the sole right for the first 120 days of the case to advance a recovery plan free from outside interference.
Alabama is attempting to intrude upon the airline's plan formulation process by seeking an order from this court that would force to abandon (the airline's) current plan negotiations and enter into negotiations with the state pension fund, US Airways said in the filing.
Under the bankruptcy laws, companies in Chapter 11 have the sole right for the first 120 days of the case to advance a recovery plan free from outside interference.
OP
chipmunn
Guest
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #3
Expect more TPG news.
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,566
- 37
[blockquote]
----------------
On 9/24/2002 9:44:22 PM chipmunn wrote:
Under the bankruptcy laws, companies in Chapter 11 have the sole right for the first 120 days of the case to advance a recovery plan free from outside interference.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Interesting. So what happens after 120 days?
Moreover, one might argue that Alabama's bid is more like triple that of TPG, since they were (or perhaps still are) owned like 300 million, right?
Would TPG probably be better in terms of a going concern? Perhaps, but one might make the case that the good ole' boys are owed a shot.
(FWIW, I hope that TPG gets the nod, but it would be nice to see them kicking in more than the price of a couple of jumbos for the rights....)
----------------
On 9/24/2002 9:44:22 PM chipmunn wrote:
Under the bankruptcy laws, companies in Chapter 11 have the sole right for the first 120 days of the case to advance a recovery plan free from outside interference.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Interesting. So what happens after 120 days?
Moreover, one might argue that Alabama's bid is more like triple that of TPG, since they were (or perhaps still are) owned like 300 million, right?
Would TPG probably be better in terms of a going concern? Perhaps, but one might make the case that the good ole' boys are owed a shot.
(FWIW, I hope that TPG gets the nod, but it would be nice to see them kicking in more than the price of a couple of jumbos for the rights....)
JFK Fleet Service
Veteran
TPG will juice up the numbers just like AMR did when other bids surfaced on TWA.
IMHO...TPG needs to Up the Antie I'm very much of the opinion that they are asking for way too much Vs. the actual risks they are taking. I think they should be allowed to match or exceed The Alabama Funds offer...but No additional percentages of the company should be offered in return to any bidder. I think the TPG is the best deal for U regarding thier history and resources...but we can't give this company away for pennies on the dollar. I have also thought that all of the employee concessions should have been tied to a return to profit Bounce-Back of sorts. I appreciate the risk that any investor is willing to make on us...but we need something in return for the investment we have made too. I'm sure with all the votes having passed , that this scenario is nothing but a dream. So, not giving away anymore of the store than needed , is all we can hope for.
Just as I figured, Dave got a deal with TP, otherwise it naturally flows that he takes the twice as much offer from the pension people.
We been had. He sweet talked alot of you people to give big concessions and now he wants to take less of an offer from an investor. Since he took money from us it is only fair that he tell TP See ya unless they can clean their offer up to something sensible.
We been had. He sweet talked alot of you people to give big concessions and now he wants to take less of an offer from an investor. Since he took money from us it is only fair that he tell TP See ya unless they can clean their offer up to something sensible.
OP
chipmunn
Guest
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #8
There is reason to believe the comments in this thread are inaccurate. TPG may be the winner, but things are changing.
Chip
Chip
Chip, I hope things are changing? I do believe that the TPG is the best group to align ourselves with , based on thier track record...but $200M for 38% of the company..and seats on the BOD too? That figure has never made any sense at all to me. The Unions have given back way more than that in concessions...and there is no language protecting us beyond our gutted contracts for the next 6.5 years. I'm sure you ALPA types have protected yourselves better than the IAM failed to do with us..or any of the other labor groups for that matter. Don't take this as Pilot bashing..Your Union just seems to negotiate smarter than the rest. I fail to see where the IAM negotiated anything beyond a board seat for themselves. I'm hoping that Judge Mitchell will force competative bidding....and I hope that the TPG will see the need to match or exceed the best offer made. The origional offer is looking worse by the day. Hopefully we can pull-down a bigger offer...with a lessor percentage of the company being offered up to the winning bidder. I'm affraid they are the only ones that will profit from our restructuring...and we will be left holding the bag (An Empty Bag)
OP
chipmunn
Guest
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #10
[BR][STRONG]US Airways Opposes Request By Alabama Retirement Systems [/STRONG][BR][BR][A href=http://www.quicken.com/investments/news/story/?story=NewsStory/dowJones/20020925/ON200209251124000597.var&p=UAWGQ]http://www.quicken.com/investments/news/story/?story=NewsStory/dowJones/20020925/ON200209251124000597.var&p=UAWGQ[/A][BR][BR]The (Retirement Systems of Alabama) improperly and impermissibly is seeking this court's imprimatur to substitute the RSA's business judgment concerning the debtors' plan sponsor for that of the debtors, US Airways said in a filing late Tuesday with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Alexandria, Va.[BR][BR]U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Stephen S. Mitchell is scheduled to consider the matter Thursday (September 26).
UAL777flyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 730
- 0
Just because some entity gives a higher offer doesn't mean their offer is in your best interests, nor does it mean they have a better plan for long-term success.
ua767fo,
...Lets be prudent, get the company on its feet and live to fight another day...
U is already under the restructuring process...could u be referring to UAL; be advised that Mr. Munn seems to get extremely irritated(along with others) when individuals from other airlines post to (t)his bb: the caveat to that statement being, unless your opinion mirrors theirs.
...Lets be prudent, get the company on its feet and live to fight another day...
U is already under the restructuring process...could u be referring to UAL; be advised that Mr. Munn seems to get extremely irritated(along with others) when individuals from other airlines post to (t)his bb: the caveat to that statement being, unless your opinion mirrors theirs.
