The chart also labels that same line "total liabilities." As I said earlier they need to change the note on the right side that says total debt, and make it comport with the line's label that clearly says total liabilities. If they don't, it allows people like you to deflect and focus on it as opposed to the actual numbers.

But speaking of lies, was it a lie when you said this:

I have never posted anything proclaiming business acumen. I asked you to prove your claim. You ignored it. Just sayin.

Carl

O.....K..... :rolleyes:

IRS Form 990 is not an "obscure" form. It's straight forward and a pretty easy read. I would post the PDF here if I knew how to do that. It very clearly shows ALPA's finances for 2013.

So you're saying DPA should file a form 990 even though they are exempt from doing so? Interesting position, but a deflection from the point.

Carl

The reference wasn't veiled but very much in your face.

Nor was it unforced ... Do you really think he didn't walk into the interview with that as a potential talking point?

And the non-apology was typical of today's politicians: "I am sorry if you were offended" is not the same as "I am sorry for what I said, it was wrong."

It appeared to me as a cheap attempt as patriotism, combined with a deflection of the ME carriers' talking point that most US airlines have survived only through our bankruptcy laws that allow a company to keep operating when they should really liquidate their assets and close their doors. Don't our bankruptcy laws provide a competitive disadvantage to the companies in the same business that did not go bankrupt?

In addition, doesn't our government provide (smaller) subsidies in the form of paying full priced airfare for tickets for military, government, etc., and requiring them to fly on US airlines, even though a cheaper foreign option exists? Don't many US airlines get government subsidies in the form of CRAF payments or military charters?

It seems to me it was a giant misstep from an otherwise very good and smart businessman.

Actually, total dues were $126,873,236 which contributed to its total revenue for 2013 of $134,650,739.

I'm not saying it, ALPA said it in their IRS form 990. And you agree by what I've bolded above. The actual number was $128,199,211.

Negative. 2013 total liabilities were $128,199,211 and for 2012 it was $76,858,098. An increase of $51,341,113 in total liabilities from 2012. Again, this is from ALPA's filing of IRS form 990 for 2013 and is exactly what DPA posted to the dollar.

There's nothing obscure about IRS form 990. It's required for organizations like ALPA. The numbers DPA posted are correct to the dollar.

Again, the line is correctly labeled as total liabilities. It's the note on the right that calls it total debt that needs to be corrected...because it allows the deflectors to deflect.

If the audit shows any difference from the form 990 that ALPA filed, it'll be the IRS logging in to see the audit...not just ALPA members.

DPA didn't interpret the form 990, they simply posted it in its entirety. Nothing mysterious about it.

Carl

Atlanta KCM
 

Since the "cheese grater " is no longer an option, where is KCM in ATL when I arrive International on the F concourse?
thx.

I think Anderson's comments were appropriate and accurate. The money and support for 9-11 came from citizens of those countries. Even today, money is still flowing to terrorist organizations from those nations. When those governments, of which the airlines are a direct arm, point their finger at us in the wake of those attacks and suggest that we should have done nothing, that we should have let a vital industry collapse because of an unimaginable scenario... is indeed IRONIC. That's all he said. Period. Excuse us for being offended at that suggestion. And if saying that offends the dictators of those nations... Tough!

Don't try to paint it as racist or xenophobic, it's not. It's an appropriate response to an offensive and callous accusation. No apology was owed them and frankly I'm suprised they even offered one.

Our bankruptcy laws are not the issue. They are not unique in the world. They are transparent and accepted as part of the global market. Illegal subsidies are not. Not in any industry with a trade agreement which prohibits it.

Our military utilises the private sector for many needs. This reduces the burden on the taxpayer and is legitimate and also not prohibited by trade agreements.

Cricket,

I gave you more credit than this. The whole where did the terrorists come from aside, as a former pointy end of the spear guy, surely you understand the importance of the CRAF to US security strategy and of the US airlines in general to the US economy.

Run on sentence aside, I get your freshman (mis)understanding of bankruptcy laws and the sense that weak companies should disappear...that's only part of the story. When Delta went bankrupt, I held a similar belief...I said often, it sucks to be us. I got hired at FedEx and as a DE capt at emirates, but for me, decided that if Delta went under, my flying days were over. So, I understand what you are saying, but given time I believe your opinion will change. All of this is however, beside the point.

Mideast carriers continue to have a competitive advantage over all US carriers. The playing field isn't level. I don't know if your comment was more of a cheap shot at RA or if you were serious. Despite how it can be portrayed on these boards, we don't have a "cult of Herb" for RA here. He's a solid CEO, easily the best since I've been here, but he's just a man.

Since I don't recall the word terrorism used in Richard's quotes, that's why I think it correct to describe it as veiled (no pun intended...sort of :D)

No I do not. He's a very savvy political guy and this was an impolitic thing to say strategically. It was absolutely true, just wrong for promoting the strategy.

True dat.

Facts are not 'cheap patriotism' there ace. I'm a little surprised you would say something like that given your avatar.

That's why it was a strategic error despite it being factually correct. It allowed the ME3 to deflect and play the emotional damage card.

Your thesis would be correct if certain companies were prohibited from filing for bankruptcy. Alaska chose not to file, therefore the competitive disadvantage was one specifically chosen by Alaska.

Two things here. Military charters are competitively bid based on cost plus contracts. Foreign carriers are generally shut out of that process, not because they might be cheaper, but because an Egypt Air suicide pilot could kill more troops on a military charter than a year on the battlefield. Again, I'm surprised at the comment from you. Would think you'd know better.

It was just a misstep. Appreciate your concern.

Carl

The audit shows Net Assets of $24 million not $16 million that's why I think your guys are using the 990 wrong. You already know what that "asset" is. It's the MCF.

Obviously the MCF has declined since 2007 not only because airlines have been using it but because it has become a litigation target for law firms like Seham looking for a big payday. The lawyers got a third off the top of the TWA "payout" before anyone else did. The MCF in it's heyday was a warchest to fight the likes of Ichan and Lorenzo. It's not needed any more and has become a true liability and not an asset. The hit to the bottom line was the $26 million payout to the TWA case. The update conveniently forgot that the rest was paid out of insurance and quite a bit smaller than the $1.2 billion you predicted.

The MCF paid out $8.5 Million to CAL; $10.6 Million to UAL; $63.3 Million to EAL; $8.4 Million to TWA; $4.8 Million to NWA; $6.1 Million to DAL in about 12 years. It did what it was supposed to. In a post-consolidation airline industry the funds will be raised out of assessments when needed and not stockpiled collecting dust.

We've had a dues decrease from Herndon and a $7 million dollar dues refund from our MEC because the union isn't broke and doesn't have a financial problem. My reps told me we resubmitted to have the dues decrease voted on again this year and that the goal is to go lower every year. The association is not operating in debt or in a deficit and making up charts won't change that fact.

No. What I said was that I was unable to find out why the DPA is exempt because the finance logs for the DPA are incomplete for 2013, 2014 and 2015. I can't verify that they didn't meet the threshold for filing. Just like I can't find proof that ALPA filed a hardship in the 990. The only place I can find that is where Tim wrote it.

The DPA founded itself on financial transparency. It stopped doing the finances in 2012 around November, 2014 around February and hasn't started 2015 at all. There is no way for a member to see what the money has been used for since late 2012. If I read the tax form correctly, he's only exempt because the donations are too low on an annual basis but I can't tell from the financial reports. They are incomplete or don't exist at all.

Look I know the last update said they are doing it all in their free time but they also asked for money so that the work can get done. There are over two years of DPA finances unaccounted for while you trot around the publicly filed documents that the DPA claims are "hidden."

Nonprofits are not supposed to hold a lot of assets and ours isn't broke nor is it in debt to the tune of $126 million and before you focus on the last update they used the same debt in place or payables (liabilities) in the other articles about this in previous years.