Sink
Three points in one post.

1) We may have another option with the project if CAL and UAUA merger. The will have to give up real estate

2) Bought what we could of T-4 and now waiting on the bonds to be drawn up for sale. ( raising the funds)

3) JFK is a mess with all of those PPL trying to go to Europe. No reason to focus on it.

According to the commercials for Ramsey that I hear down here let me change my font and type to reflect his way of talking:

DO NOT CO-SIGN!!!

ACL, I DIDN'T QUOTE YOUR POST AFTER SHIZNITS BUT DIDN'T RA SAY SOMETHING THERE AT THE END ABOUT USING THESE TWO 777S FOR LATER FINANCING? IF SO, IS THAT AS COLLATERAL OR SOME OTHER BROADER FINANCING PROGRAM, LIKE A LEASE BACK?

DO NOT LEASE BACK!!!

I guess blaring violin music was chosen because the "Best of American Idol" isn't available or appropriate. If it was me it'd be Dwight Sings Buck or the Black Crowes. Check in next month as my music tastes change. :D


Anybody sell their stock at $14.90? i.e. $2 ago as it's at $12.90 now? :( Its okay, I'm a long haul investor.

Page 3-16 (PWA Sect. 3.I.)shows that we will see profit sharing based from dollar zero and up. If there is a PTIX profit, we get paid. See page 3-2 (PWA Sect. 3. A. 10.)lines 13 through 22 to see what constitutes PTIX for the pilots....Spoiler alert: it doen't include writedowns for "one-time/special items"!!

Knowing your contract is fun!


Less debt expense paid to banks increases DAL revenue/profit.
Less debt allows DAL to act more freely to increase its business and withstand downturns.
More cash in the bank gives us something to "point at" in negotiations.

This will only strengthen our position to ask for more, A LOT MORE come 2012.

ftb:

Bastian did say they could be included in a future financing package.

There may be other angles. I think Boeing was instrumental in helping us with negotiating financing previously. With the 787 issue, maybe we want to hold these two for future, more comprehensive negotiations that might include Boeing?

RA made a comment a bout "liking 0%" WRT to a modified agreement with AMEX, which sounded like it would throw more cash our way, in a way that was not prejudicial to us. Sound slike we're getting to use some money for free.

But for what (cue in ACL)?

I can't begin to understand the finance involved, but it appears to me we're definitely getting better at negotiating debt financing.

cool, thanks for the info

RA stated that we are now in the business of paying cash for our jets. This is good because the main reason we are where we are is margins went to heck, and we financed everything we have. We leveraged the company to the point that we could not weather a downturn outside of court protection.

There will be another downturn and by paying off debt we will have less in the way of debt service commitments next time around. Add that to a diversified route network, and property owned outright, we can one claim the depreciation on said asset, and two not pay this money out when we do not have it.

In regard to labor or US, they know we are not that nearsighted nor that dim witted to look at the bottom line. Even if the MEC signed off on it, I do not see the rank and file playing with the bait.

We shall see what happens, and the playbooks all have the typical moves, but simply put, we as the pilots have a significant investment in this corporation. The execs know this, and from the conversations I have had, are aware that we are wanting a return.
Of course the proof is in the pudding, but I think that it is no secret that we want restoration on many levels. Time will be the story teller, but as Sailing points out if you use history as a litmus test, this contract should be the best in the history of this group.

Of course, we need to define "best," as that is open to interpretation.

Interesting Shiznit.

As to the last sentence, I fear it could be upended somewhat by AMR and CAL in their contract talks. Its worth keeping an eye on.

1) We made Boeing whole in 1113C. They know this and are not playing by the rules when it comes to these 787.

2) See post above about Debt Service and building a war chest. (We will need it) This industry sucks :D

3) See number one and realize that we just too money out of Boeing's pocket by not financing these jets though their financing arm.

4) Future financing of these jets will be at a great interest rate, and as I pointed out above it is wise to have assets you can finance in a downturn to generate cash.

5) WRT AMEX, you know why.

Right. But I don't know if aircraft qalify as "one-time/special" expenses. That's basic "CAPEX", for an airline, isn't it?

I wonder if your post needs to be "unscrambled" and read like this:
More CAPEX reduces Delta profit (not revenue),
There is not net effect on debt, because we don't know how lenders view this cash payout.
Less cash in the bank results, leaving us less to "point at" in negotiations.
This will only weaken our position to ask for more in 2012, if we don't see throught it.

I don't claim I understand everything at play here, but your read of this cash payment doesn't completely make sense t me.