Us Airways And United "fight Over Air Wisconsin"

[Rico]

Why do you have to be so hard on the guy, he afterall was correct about the possible sale of MDA.

I will give him credit, that is a lot tougher to predict what will happen than it is to sit back and just naysay anything that does...

Fact is, that negotiations like the ones behind this deal are fluid, and as such what was "on" one day, is "off" the next.

So if I have to choose between reading A320's predictions, and your personal attacks, I would rather read what he has to say. Afterall, this is just a discussion board, not the nightly news (so take things with a grain of salt and keep a sense of humor). Unless you are willing to step up with some decent info/reasoned rebuttle to add to the discussion (like say Jim, for example), then why bother posting at all...?

Lighten up.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Why do you have to be so hard on the guy, he afterall was correct about the possible sale of MDA.

I will give him credit, that is a lot tougher to predict what will happen than it is to sit back and just naysay anything that does...

[post="255977"][/post]​

Since 320 himself couldn't produce a link about what he said that regarding MDA would you like to?

The only thing I could find was this:
(QUOTE(USA320Pilot @ Mar 11 2005, 02:58 PM) I understand the potential to sell MDA assets, PSA, and Piedmont has been reduced)
320 comments

It up to you to choose what to read but I won't stop posting just so you don't have to choose. You neglected to mention his personal attacks. I do take things with a grain of salt but I believe in being truthful and others responsibility to be truthful.

Predicting is real easy when you use the shotgun fortune cookie approach too by the way.

Why? Because I can just like you. No I won't lighten up and yes I have sense of humor among other things. <_<

 

[funguy2]

Why do you have to be so hard on the guy, he afterall was correct about the possible sale of MDA.

You are right rico, USA320Pilot was right. But I also get the impression, and his admission, that he is revealing information (or alluding to information, hence revealing) that is proprietary to USAirways and its partners. Now, I like to hear the rumor as much as anyone else here, but I just think that behavior is wrong. If USA320Pilot said, "My opinion is that X could happen based on my extensive knowledge of the industry and some common sense, supported by this piece of public information," that would be one thing. However, what he says is that, "I have insider information, and I won't reveal the source of the inside information, but here is the inside information." Its hard to respect a guy who posts or alludes to what I perceive as almost every bit of confidential information he is given. Not trying to be harsh here, just explain my thoughts.

I will give him credit, that is a lot tougher to predict what will happen than it is to sit back and just naysay anything that does...

Fact is, that negotiations like the ones behind this deal are fluid, and as such what was "on" one day, is "off" the next.

Yes, and that is partially the point. Any deal has a 50/50 chance at happening. However, USA320Pilot often words his posts as: "This will happen, by the power of God himself" when the reality is probably that its a 50/50 chance, like with any yes/no question. Sure would be nice is the conversation was framed that way.

Also, when one side of the debate reports everything with "rose-colored" glasses, its awfully hard for the otherside to be anything better than a "nay-sayer". I like to think I am balanced, although I'll admit to one bias: The industry cannot survive the way it is today. Something must give way. If oil prices drop to $30/bbl and all the airlines could survive on that, then that would be great. However, it would also be unlikely. Thus something else has to happen for this industry to sustain itself. Most likely - a reduction in capacity, given repeated and failed attempts to materially increase fares, and successful cost reduction programs where the costs reduced - labor - are replaced by new costs - fuel and security. So I think capacity in this industry must be reduced. That is a process that, based on history since 1978, almost always results in the catostrophic failure of at least one industry player. I see nothing to change that trend in this industry downturn than the previous ones (although this industry downturn seems remarkably different... But only time will tell).

So if I have to choose between reading A320's predictions, and your personal attacks, I would rather read what he has to say. Afterall, this is just a discussion board, not the nightly news (so take things with a grain of salt and keep a sense of humor). Unless you are willing to step up with some decent info/reasoned rebuttle to add to the discussion (like say Jim, for example), then why bother posting at all...?

Well... this brings to mind two points:
1. I really like sfb's (I think, if I'm wrong, correct me) tagline, which goes something like: Internet chat rooms are for the exchange of ideas, almost any will do. I actually try to use that notion when I post. I assume if you've found US Aviation.com and taken the time to register for the forums, and have enough interest to read them, then you can probably find most of the news sources which get posted here. In fact, most url's posted here, I've usually read before logging on to US Aviation.com. Therefore, I find the "strategic analysis threads generally good discussion, but also a lot of space, time, and bandwith repeating what others have already said.

2. I would like to think that 8 of 10 times, I have reasoned rebuttle. Also, I believe that credibility is important. But in a debate like forum like this, it is up to the debators to establish their own credibility, and note when others are not credible. Think of a courtroom. The defense has to point out whether or not the prosecution says something that is not credible. Otherwise, it is allowed to stand when it should be.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

You are right rico, USA320Pilot was right. 

[post="256103"][/post]​

Show us where he said it please. Please show us where he said he had insider info on the sale.

Actually most of his messages/predictions are posted in a generic shotgun fortune cookie type format.

 

[funguy2]

Show us where he said it please. Please show us where he said he had insider info on the sale.

Actually most of his messages are posted in a generic shotgun fortune cookie type format.

[post="256107"][/post]​

Post number 36 of this thread:

"Who first said that MDA was not being merged into the mainline because its assets could be sold?

...

Guess what, I did not get that information from a public report."

USA320Pilot has also made repeated references to discussions and meetings he has with company leaders, union leaders, financial analysts, and investment bankers. All of whom probably have a vested interest in keeping confidential information confidential.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Post number 36 of this thread:

[post="256111"][/post]​

He said that after the fact... you know the monday morning quarterback thing? I submitted proof he had said it was unlikely to happen. Can you show me were he said it would happen before the actual PR came out?

I asked him and others to show me the post but no one yet has produced it. If he going make a claim lets see it the proof.

 

[USA320Pilot]

UVN:

I first learned that MDA could be sold, and PSA and Piedmont too, last spring from both company and ALPA sources. I now understand GECAS influenced both the Air Wisconsin and Republic transactions, which is probably why Bruce Lakefield told the MEC last week that the financier talks to senior management every day (about the company's new business plan).

This all started last spring because GECAS wants to further diversify its US Airways risk, while simultaneously boosting the Arlington-based company, which is why ALPA had no option but to ratify LOA 91.

Moreover, LOA 91 specifically discusses the sale of MDA and PSA that was contemplated as early as last year, with ALPA agreeing to forgo some rights in the event either of these two operations are sold.

Again, do some homework for a change and look back through my posts. I have been talking about the sale of MDA assets, PSA, and/or Piedmont for about one-year, which is why it was included in the labor agreements. Maybe you should do a little more research instead of simply "bashing" people.

At least Funguy2 looks at some public reports.

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

P.S. Do not be surpirsed if PSA and Piedmont are sold, with one possible suitor Mesa.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

[post="256127"][/post]​

I don't believe anything you say. You have no respect no dignity no credbility. I want the proof otherwise you are all hotair.

My homework consisted of giving your latest quoye regarding MDA and you had backpeddled. I proved what you said.

Again 320 on it

(QUOTE(USA320Pilot @ Mar 11 2005, 02:58 PM) I understand the potential to sell MDA assets, PSA, and Piedmont has been reduced)

 

[funguy2]

He said that after the fact... you know the monday morning quarterback thing? I submitted proof he had said it was unlikely to happen. Can you show me were he said it would happen before the actual PR came out?

I asked him and others to show me the post but no one yet has produced it. If he going make a claim lets see it the proof.

[post="256113"][/post]​

reread rico's post and my reply about "on" and "off" deals. That probably explains the "waffling".

 

[USA320Pilot]

According to US Airways senior management and parties involved in the proceeding, "This is an Air Wisconsin-United struggle. We need our competitive information protected and are taking the proper steps to do so."

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[whlinder]

According to US Airways senior management and parties involved in the proceeding, "This is an Air Wisconsin-United struggle. We need our competitive information protected and are taking the proper steps to do so."

[post="256134"][/post]​

Source, or something you overheard?

 

[eolesen]

Your expections [Republic won't make the short list] wouldn't be met - Republic (in the form of their Chataugua division) is already flying UA express service with Emb-170's and adding planes as fast as they can get them.

Jim

[post="255801"][/post]​

Depends on how you look at it. Republic/Chickentaqo has a valid contract for some UAX flying, but they're also competing to pick up the flying now awarded to ZW.

Given UA's reaction to the ZW-US agreement, It would be foolish to think that UAL wou'd be in a hurry to reward Republic for taking part in the bailout of US Airways.

If Mesa jumps on the bailout bandwagon as well, UAL will have a very tough decision to make -- reward one of the US Airways financiers, or bring Independence back into the UAX family...

 

[USA320Pilot]

Funguy2:

There was no “wafflingâ€￾; it is called fluid negotiations changing every day because what may be true today may be invalid tomorrow, especially with multiple parties involved in the talks. The Air Wisconsin agreement, along with greater MESA interest in investing in US Airways and/or acquiring PSA (which still may occur), reduced the risk of selling MDA assets.

But when Wexford Capital and Republic felt they could be left out of US Airways Express network, with Mesa about to invest in the company, Bryan Bedford saw the risk to Republic, thus his renewed interest in acquiring MDA and expanding the breath of his airline. Moreover, Bedford is a leading candidate to become US Airways’ next CEO and that may have entered into his thought process too.

Bruce Lakefield has a “very strong handâ€￾ with respect to the “fee for serviceâ€￾ contracts and is using his leverage on a daily basis to change the new paradigm. Negotiations have been fluid and are on-going, with regard to the final portion of the POR now being drafted for US Airways’ exit from bankruptcy.

I guess you would have to know people involved in the discussions to learn about this, instead of only doing public research.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoeingBoy]

Former ModerAAtor,

Point taken. One thing for sure, it'll be interesting to see how all this plays out.

Jim

 

[funguy2]

If Mesa jumps on the bailout bandwagon as well, UAL will have a very tough decision to make -- reward one of the US Airways financiers, or bring Independence back into the UAX family...

Or perhaps an easy choice to make if suddenly a bunch of Mesa aircraft become available... Perhaps this turns into a Mesa v. FlyI dogfight?