I'll make the statement: Based on UA's current cash position and it's operating cost in relation to it's revenue stream, the company will most likely be forced into bankruptcy in the next 6-9 months.
Those numbers again exist in a vacuum. Maybe it is youth that is making this difficult for you understand. 6-9months in airline lifespan is fairly long. Again, I don't know if UAL will be in BK or not but I think there is some things taking place to stem the possibility. Of course you would know better from reading forbes. You neglected to post this:
Response from United Airlines to My Forbes Commentary on - Shaun Rein -- Seeking Alpha
What I find ironic is that in spite of the Guitar Man and the opinion of the forbes guy, is that our LF is running higher than planned, thus attributing to some of the stock price run up. Also, don't forget that the guitar damage was caused when riding on an RJ. When you hire carriers for express operations that have nothing at stake, indifferent crews and poor infrastructure your own product suffers. This is one of the many problems RJ's have contributed to the industry.
I'm not sure I understand what the correlation is between my company's wages and your company's financial condition
No sir, I suspect you wouldn't understand. It is more endemic of the problems that exist in the industry. See the above paragraph.
.
Actually, we start getting our concessions back this October as part of the kickback negotiated, but again, short of taking a jab at me and everyone in the industry for your inability to retain scope
You seem a bit sensitive to your place in the industry. Maybe you should stop predicting the demise of the other carriers and start figuring out where the payoff is for your future in the industry. I was for retaining scope. However, our senior pilots at the time. The same ones that are going to have the throttles pulled from their tired, dead hands at 65 sold us a bill of goods. The argument from our union was that we as a corporation could either buy widebody aircraft or RJ's. We all know how that turned out.
Clearly you're unfamiliar with ALPA's merger policy, which is fundamentally built on career expectations based on ratios and company viability in relation to projected expansion. Clearly your statement illustrates that you believe that you're coming to the table as an equal, but your company's status at the time of the merger makes that determination, not your personal desires, hopes, or what you think you deserve; hence, the ALPA merger policy.
And clearly you know nothing of the fleet makeup and career expectations of the two carriers as it currently stands. If you take the airlines as they currently exist. Furloughing and removing airframes. I will not argue the merits of either carrier over the other as a going entity because I believe that only creates jabs on this board. I would hope my carrier and my future holds a job. If it doesn't then I will adapt. However, UAL does bring a significant number of widebody jobs to the mix. Both carriers have complementing route structures. CAL brings a group that has seen challenges and have overcome them. So your position is that the UAL pilots should be stapled at CAL? Maybe you should read the ALPA merger policy regarding windfalls!
One of the greatest things about your thoughts on this matter is that they will have nothing to do with the outcome IF merger were to take place. It would most like be decided by the pilot groups and if it is correct that you are a ERJ pilot then you WON'T have a seat at the table for those discussions.
L