US Airways raises $189 mln, warns of costs
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #33
lynyrdskynyrd
Veteran
- Apr 22, 2005
- 1,182
- 558
The numbnuts in the media have just taken some standard SEC boilerplate and run with it. These disclaimers have been put out since the very beginning, its nothing new.
excuse me for being so optomistic but its still sinking or haven't you noticed??
its still the same old screwed up airline...stay tooned,you'll see.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
There is a large difference between the very optimistic information provided employees in the last several months, and the information required by law to be accurate.
Much tighter restrictions on what you can tell employees, and what you must tell investors.
Believe what you want to believe.
Much tighter restrictions on what you can tell employees, and what you must tell investors.
Believe what you want to believe.
SoftLanding
Senior
- Jul 25, 2005
- 255
- 1
I agree with your statement re Jerry Glass and back to the negotiating table...He probably figures he can do to the US West pilots that he so easily did to the US East pilots.
Must respectfully disagree with your statement re Doug Parker and the team, though, and your statement that they "put this transaction together".
America West and US Airways were put together by some big money people; They saw a quick buck to be made no matter who was at the helm. So far they have made out rather good, considering it's been just over six months...and the stockprice up bigtime...
SoftLanding
Dog Wonder
Veteran
I thought Jerry Glass was a consultant now. He no longer shows as an officer on the website.
aquagreen73s
Veteran
- Aug 22, 2005
- 1,979
- 1,877
Are journalists that stupid? The quotes they cite in the SEC filing are nothing more than standard plain vanilla, off-the-shelf disclaimers that go into any financial instrument. But they took those stock disclaimers and built a story by reading them literally. Holy sh*t are they stupid. Why don't they write a follow-up story about the imminent collapse of Wall Street based on the fast paced disclaimers heard at the end of the Charles Schwab commercials?
High Iron
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 495
- 0
That's hilarious, and spot-on.
USAToday....sigh. Lists, factoid graphs, boilerplate blather. McPaper indeed. Good crossword puzzle though.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
If we can shoot the messenger the bad news he reports will go away.
EricLv2Fish
Veteran
- Aug 25, 2005
- 1,171
- 5
Today the company responded. Take it for what it's worth.
> Last week, US Airways filed two separate Securities and Exchange
> Commission (SEC) Form S-3 registration statements that have drawn a lot of
> media attention. Some media reports were not entirely accurate or
> complete, so we wanted to be sure employees understood the information.
>
> The purpose of the registration statements simply was to register the
> warrants (options to buy LCC stock) and/or stock that was issued in
> transactions relating to the merger. One of the transactions involved an
> affiliate of Airbus, and the other pertained to the shares of our new
> equity investors. In both cases, the company was obligated to register the
> securities with the SEC.
>
> In each of the filings, there was a section titled "Risk Factors," which
> included statements regarding fuel-price risk, interest-rate risk,
> government-regulation risk, terrorist-attack risk, the risk of continuing
> financial losses, and more. These statements are nothing new, as they have
> been disclosed in every previous registration statement filed by the
> company. In fact, all public companies include similar language in their
> SEC filings. The purpose of these statements is to protect the investing
> public, as well as the company for potential loss of investment should
> something happen that was not in our plan (e.g. terrorist attacks,
> excessively high oil costs, stock market crash, etc.). Statements like
> these are intended to make sure that all parties involved are aware of
> such risks.
>
> One of the "risk factors" mentioned was regarding our "significant
> operating losses" in 2006. The media picked up on this information
> regarding 2006 earnings and reported that the financial outlook has
> changed. This simply is not the case. As we stated on the Q3 earnings
> results conference call, we are comfortable projecting a 2006 profit,
> excluding one-time merger related expenses.
>
> The bottom line is that the information in the registration statements is
> not "news" per se; rather it's a common disclaimer and, in the case of US
> Airways, it included information that has been disclosed publicly since
> the merger was announced in May.
>
> So why does the media pick it up and report it like it's news? Good
> question and, we confess, we aren't always sure. Sometimes it's just a
> slow news day, other times, unfortunately, reporters haven't been reading
> prospectus filings as closely as they should to recognize that this is not
> news. And even when we let them know that this information has not
> changed, they feel compelled to report it as news anyway. But that's okay;
> we'll keep working from our end to educate our media friends. And at least
> we're not Kevin and Britney or Nick and Jessica...look at what's
> considered "news" in those stories!
>
> This message was distributed to the "All Employees" distribution list in
> the Outlook Global Address List.
>
> Last week, US Airways filed two separate Securities and Exchange
> Commission (SEC) Form S-3 registration statements that have drawn a lot of
> media attention. Some media reports were not entirely accurate or
> complete, so we wanted to be sure employees understood the information.
>
> The purpose of the registration statements simply was to register the
> warrants (options to buy LCC stock) and/or stock that was issued in
> transactions relating to the merger. One of the transactions involved an
> affiliate of Airbus, and the other pertained to the shares of our new
> equity investors. In both cases, the company was obligated to register the
> securities with the SEC.
>
> In each of the filings, there was a section titled "Risk Factors," which
> included statements regarding fuel-price risk, interest-rate risk,
> government-regulation risk, terrorist-attack risk, the risk of continuing
> financial losses, and more. These statements are nothing new, as they have
> been disclosed in every previous registration statement filed by the
> company. In fact, all public companies include similar language in their
> SEC filings. The purpose of these statements is to protect the investing
> public, as well as the company for potential loss of investment should
> something happen that was not in our plan (e.g. terrorist attacks,
> excessively high oil costs, stock market crash, etc.). Statements like
> these are intended to make sure that all parties involved are aware of
> such risks.
>
> One of the "risk factors" mentioned was regarding our "significant
> operating losses" in 2006. The media picked up on this information
> regarding 2006 earnings and reported that the financial outlook has
> changed. This simply is not the case. As we stated on the Q3 earnings
> results conference call, we are comfortable projecting a 2006 profit,
> excluding one-time merger related expenses.
>
> The bottom line is that the information in the registration statements is
> not "news" per se; rather it's a common disclaimer and, in the case of US
> Airways, it included information that has been disclosed publicly since
> the merger was announced in May.
>
> So why does the media pick it up and report it like it's news? Good
> question and, we confess, we aren't always sure. Sometimes it's just a
> slow news day, other times, unfortunately, reporters haven't been reading
> prospectus filings as closely as they should to recognize that this is not
> news. And even when we let them know that this information has not
> changed, they feel compelled to report it as news anyway. But that's okay;
> we'll keep working from our end to educate our media friends. And at least
> we're not Kevin and Britney or Nick and Jessica...look at what's
> considered "news" in those stories!
>
> This message was distributed to the "All Employees" distribution list in
> the Outlook Global Address List.
>
Dog Wonder
Veteran
Polly want a cracker?
braaaack...youz talkin' to me??
Finish or Ignore
Senior
- Aug 30, 2002
- 342
- 1
Delldude is EXACTLY correct when he says this is how it starts (concessions). I do not advocate going out and rioting, but, you should be paying very close attention to the information that is being distributed by The Adobe Palace.
