Originally Posted by
Inside DEENA
First off, Airways would have had a hard time emerging from CH.11 without the $125Million in exit financing provided by AWAC.
Second, there was no net gain in 50 seaters; AWAC simply replaced MESA on the east coast.
And it has been referred to as 'pay to play' (doesn't make it right).
ID
It is a kind of pay to play, but it was also quite a savvy investment by the owners of AWAC, who made something along the lines of $400M return on their investment over just a couple of years.