Us Airways' Ills Loom Large For Alabama Retirees
- Thread starter USA320Pilot
- Start date
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
Folks,
Article reads again: `"We've gone from operating at a $300 million deficit to operating at a $90 million deficit in one year,'' said Bronner. ``That's good progress. Now we're concerned with the LCCs'' --low- cost carriers -- ``operating in our area. We have to come up with a strategy.''
PITbull comments: This is how inept Dr. Bronner is with his statements above.
"Good progress"? , he states. How much of that decrease in deficit is THROUGH OUR CONCESSIONS ALONE?????
"Have to come up with a strategy?" If this isn't the saddest statment, and I wasn't on the inside of this thing....it would be way too comical!
These guys are friggen idiots by the dozen. Get rid of the union busters. Don't need them now. Replace them with management that know how to address the business -end revenue equation.
HELLLOOOOOOOO! CHANGE THE STRUCTURE! TOILET YOUR BUSINESS PLAN!
Article reads again: `"We've gone from operating at a $300 million deficit to operating at a $90 million deficit in one year,'' said Bronner. ``That's good progress. Now we're concerned with the LCCs'' --low- cost carriers -- ``operating in our area. We have to come up with a strategy.''
PITbull comments: This is how inept Dr. Bronner is with his statements above.
"Good progress"? , he states. How much of that decrease in deficit is THROUGH OUR CONCESSIONS ALONE?????
"Have to come up with a strategy?" If this isn't the saddest statment, and I wasn't on the inside of this thing....it would be way too comical!
These guys are friggen idiots by the dozen. Get rid of the union busters. Don't need them now. Replace them with management that know how to address the business -end revenue equation.
HELLLOOOOOOOO! CHANGE THE STRUCTURE! TOILET YOUR BUSINESS PLAN!
robbedagain
Veteran
- Oct 13, 2003
- 11,125
- 2,676
Are we going to beat the crap out of SW in PHL with the 50 seat RJs or the 37 seat Dash-8s or a mix of both? as far as I know I think that SW, given time, will make
PHL look a lot like BWI, only by next Christmas!
PHL look a lot like BWI, only by next Christmas!
By the Statements made and the actions taken, We all can see that Alabama Dave is running this company. It is very sad that at this point that the Dave's dont have a Viable Business Plan. Bottom line is if Siegel is gone, only another YES PUPET will be brought in. As far as PHL, I think our employees might welcome LUV with open arms...............NOT!!!! It will be very interesting to say the least. I think WN management has made the right choice to dedicate a fleet of aircraft just for PHL. Only time will tell.
crazyincanton
Advanced
- Jan 10, 2003
- 151
- 1
Bronner's comment: "We have to come up with another strategy" reminds me of Wolfe telling Congress that he didn't have a plan "B" if the u and ua merger didn't go through. Unbelievable. And these guys are supposed to be businessmen? Where do we get these people? If strategy #1 (whatever that was) didn't work, why is solution # 3 still more labor cuts? HELP!!
crazyincanton
crazyincanton
OP
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- May 18, 2003
- 8,175
- 1,539
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #23
767jetz:
767jetz said: "Of course they are going to say that. Do you think they are going to publicly come out and say, 'We screwed up'."
Chip comments: Sort of like United management isn't it. Last summer when United was "bumping up" against violating the DIP terms, United management basically said everything was fine. But, at the last Omnibus hearing the company's attorney told the court they nearly violated the DIP covenants. In fact, when I said the news inside of ALPA EF&A was that United was close to violating the DIP financing agreement, not to mention when Daune Woerth told the US Airways MEC the same thing, you and others strongly criticized me.
Now we find out ny information was true. How can that be?
Well the news now is that due to Tuesday's decision by the Senate to not provide pension legislative relief, the word is United will have to termiante at least the pilots pension plan and maybe other employee groups as well, if the company is going to emerge. In addition, the Dulles news is only getting worse. By the way, because United still has enormous challenges to emerge, I understand the UCT is still being discussed in addtion to an AF-KLM type of deal and a merger.
Regards,
Chip
767jetz said: "Of course they are going to say that. Do you think they are going to publicly come out and say, 'We screwed up'."
Chip comments: Sort of like United management isn't it. Last summer when United was "bumping up" against violating the DIP terms, United management basically said everything was fine. But, at the last Omnibus hearing the company's attorney told the court they nearly violated the DIP covenants. In fact, when I said the news inside of ALPA EF&A was that United was close to violating the DIP financing agreement, not to mention when Daune Woerth told the US Airways MEC the same thing, you and others strongly criticized me.
Now we find out ny information was true. How can that be?
Well the news now is that due to Tuesday's decision by the Senate to not provide pension legislative relief, the word is United will have to termiante at least the pilots pension plan and maybe other employee groups as well, if the company is going to emerge. In addition, the Dulles news is only getting worse. By the way, because United still has enormous challenges to emerge, I understand the UCT is still being discussed in addtion to an AF-KLM type of deal and a merger.
Regards,
Chip
767jetz
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,286
- 2,779
Welcome back Chip. I see you conveniently avoided answering some direct questions in regard to some of your incorrect statements on another thread.Chip Munn said:
Here we go again. It's amazing how you twist the facts to fit your unique view of the world.
Let me clarify some facts for you and those that are still following this saga:
Your comments about UA violating DIP covenants and your quote of Duane Woerth came well AFTER the fact. When you made those statements, it was AFTER the period when UA thought it was in danger, AFTER UA said it would stay in BK until '04, and AFTER UA's revenue picture started it's dramatic turn around. So please don't try to now fool everyone into thinking you are some great analyst with keen insight and reliable sources. What you are actually doing is refering to ANOTHER instance that you were wrong. (Of course you will never admit that.)
Secondly, It was me who clarified for all that UA's initial desire to emerge by December '03 was not the good news many thought it was, and that staying in BK until '04 was actually preferable, for the very reasons that were recently disclosed in court. Gee... how can that be? So don't try to steal credit for that either.
Thirdly, you have once again made statements about UA's pension situation that you know nothing about. JUST SO EVERY ONE IS CLEAR ON THIS: There has been no indication that UA will terminate any pension plans. Chip stop trying to spread fear into the employees of UA, the way you do to your own fellow employees. It's no wonder you are so disliked by your co-workers. Show us ONE credible source for your claim. Just ONE. (And I don't mean some newspaper article, or one of your consistently wrong usual sources.) How about someone inside United.
Fourthly, don't you understand sarcasm? The comment I made about "public consumption" was intended to show what a hypocrit you sound like when applying one standard to UA and another to US.
Finally, why won't you respond to the question about how you and your sources were SO WRONG in predicting that UA would lose $400 Million in Q4 not including banckruptcy costs? You tried to avoid that by quoting #'s that did include BK costs. But when we pointed out your exact words, you suddenly dropped the subject. Are you afraid it might prove how often you and your sorces are wrong?
Hmmmmmm.....
To all the other fine USAir folks:
I'm sorry that one of your captains is so obsessed with this topic. As long as he continues his attempts to spread his misinformation, there are those of us who feel obligated to refute him.
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
"Nearly," "almost," "maybe," coulda shoulda woulda...Chip Munn said:
But didn't. (At least not yet.)
So I guess UAL management has been right so far, and you, who repeatedly predicted UAL would be violating the DIP covenants starting in October, have been pretty consistenly WRONG.
Right?
But I can understand your jealousy and anger in hindsight in regeretting leaving UA (despite your protests to the contrary-- the Captain doth protest too much!). especially now when U management is oiling you up to get you ready to take yet ANOTHER round of concessions while things are relatively peaceful for the moment here at UA. I'd be mad at the world if I were in your shoes too.
Knock knock Chip... from behind you sitting in your Captain's seat... Dave is on the jumpseat again saying "Let me in yet again!"... but this time he's not about to whisper more sweet nothings into your ear about taking over the world... rather... BOHICA! (Look! This time it's a nice big pointy WN 737 about to penetrate your nice, exposed, vulnerable, er, hub sticking out there like that. Ouch... look at the size of that thing... that's gonna hurt!)
But don't shoot the messenger for pointing out the obvious to you. I just calls 'em as I sees 'em. And if it makes you feel better to deflect your hurt and anger from being betrayed by the Daves (yet AGAIN-- you'd think you would have wised up by now but I guess some people take longer than others to get it) and from what you are going through at U to keep crapping on the UAL people, hey go ahead; we've got big shoulders and are always willing to help our colleagues out. We know what it is like to go through tough times. But somehow we have been able to deal with it without dumping on others.
Back on topic.
It appears that Bronner is using U to benefit other portions of the RSA portfolio by using a portion of the airline's advertising budget and aircraft to benefit Alabama.
How many flights have been added to Birmingham, Huntsville, Mobile, and Montgomery since Bronner took over the reins of U?
The employees of U need to be concerned that Bronner will squander U assets to the benefit of Alabama businesses. This is looking like a Lorenzo-type tactic where, instead of draining one airline to the benefit of another airline, Bronner is shifting U's resources to benefit Alabama tourism and Alabama aircraft maintenance facilities.
I would suggest that U employees stop wasting time engaging this cockamamy UCT/ICT concept and concentrate the immediate threat to U.
It appears that Bronner is using U to benefit other portions of the RSA portfolio by using a portion of the airline's advertising budget and aircraft to benefit Alabama.
How many flights have been added to Birmingham, Huntsville, Mobile, and Montgomery since Bronner took over the reins of U?
The employees of U need to be concerned that Bronner will squander U assets to the benefit of Alabama businesses. This is looking like a Lorenzo-type tactic where, instead of draining one airline to the benefit of another airline, Bronner is shifting U's resources to benefit Alabama tourism and Alabama aircraft maintenance facilities.
I would suggest that U employees stop wasting time engaging this cockamamy UCT/ICT concept and concentrate the immediate threat to U.
ClueByFour
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,566
- 37
Well, yeah, because United did not violate their DIP convenants, despite you, Woerth, and the tooth fairy swearing up and down that it was going to happen.Chip Munn said:
