GenX

From yahoo finance

9:25 am Delta Air Lines: Provides June, long-term Outlook in Slide Show (DAL) :

Says on track to produce record earnings cash flow in 2015.
Approaching $4 bln long term adjusted net debt target (Goal is to achieve by 2017).
JunQ forecasts-
Operating Margin 15.5-16.5% (Prio 16-18%);
Fuel Price $2.40-2.45 (Prior $2.35-2.40);
Nonoperating Expense approx $120 mln;
Passenger unit revenue change y/y Down 4-5% (guided for this on Tuesday);
CASM ex fuel Y/Y Flat (Prior Flat to up 1%);
System capacity y/y +3% (Reaffirm);
Free Cash Flow approx $1.5 bln; Cash returned to shareholders $1 bln.
Says 2H15 all in fuel price will be down 25% y/y; Bulk of 2015 hedge losses booked in 1H15..
EPS goal (2015-17) is +15% growth; Free Cash Flow Goal is $4-5 bln long term; Expects to produce over $20 bln in FCF from 2015-17.

9:25 am Oxford Lane Capital prices its 1.8 mln share public offering of common stock at $15.65/share, for expected gross proceeds of $28.2 mln (OXLC) : Co plans to use the net proceeds of this offering for acquiring investments and/or for general working capital purposes, which may include the payment of operating expenses, including advisory and administrative fees and expenses.

gloopy

Yes that would still be a concession.

First of all, if the company has the market need for 100 additional airplanes, they will get those airplanes regardless of us allowing more "large RJ's" or not. Not to mention that by growing the 90 seaters at DCI even more, we would be weakening our future foundation of our newest smallest fleet.

Secondly is how on earth would we write the concession to guarantee that these new 100 "hundred seaters" (how classic is that rumor anyway) wouldn't be partial to full replacement airframes eventually anyway? Park a dozen of the oldest original 320's and several dozen MD's and cover the lift with the new lower paying jets and keep the extra concessionary 90 seater RJs. Now that's winning.

Also, the 50 fewer DCI airframes would likely be most or all 50 seaters that are on the way out regardless and that they can't staff anyway.

Pilot concessions don't buy aircraft. If we'd fall for that, then they should have locked it down by floating this proposal a year or so ago and rolling the widebody order into it as well. Would we have fallen for that too? Scope concessions don't buy aircraft.

p3flteng

Yes...that is a concession. If the company wants more 100 or 76 seat jets, let them use the current scope agreement, we do not need to erode the bottom of our list by allowing more outsourcing.

Check Essential

The financials look healthy. They can afford to give us a good contract.

However,
It definitely appears that they plan to shrink the airline.
Especially international capacity. But we already knew that.

Now it looks like they aren't going to fight for domestic market share either.

Slide 7 says they are "reassessing domestic capacity levels for the fall - current bias is for a downward revision".

http://ir.delta.com/files/Conference...001_t25a0p.pdf

RonRicco

Since the I have not seen anything that has stated that the special MEC meeting is over, I am guessing that we are extremely close to a TA with the negotiators working closely with the MEC to figure out how to divide up the last few pieces of the pie. I bet there is a lot of debate amongst the members on which pet issues should be discarded in attempt to gain a substantial majority.

Just guessing as a communication void will always try to be filled.....

gloopy

What do you mean pet issues to disgard? Pet concessions I could see. I think full company provided transportation to and from EWR in all situations is 100% fair, as is hotels for new hires even though neither would help me. Both are flat out the right thing to do period.

brakechatter

Agreed. Two things are very telling: JV settlement without details, which had always been stated would be settled outside section 6, lack of a simple communication stating the meeting is over with the entire meeting being conducted in closed session. Perhaps even today.

Scoop

I am personally against any relaxation on Scope but do agree that reasonable people may disagree on whether the above is a concession or not. I would put your above scenario more in the compromise category than concession.

What I would label as clearly concessionary includes but is not limited to:

Increased seat locks of any kind.
Increased restrictions regarding sick leave.
First Officers losing the ability to Bid with LCA.
Loss of payback days for reserve Green-slips.

Speaking of seat locks - I could not find any mention of them in the contract comparison. Based on informal questioning of AMR and UAL Pilots it appears we are currently very similar to AMR, but already much more restrictive regarding seat locks than UAL. I really hope we do not concede any more in this regard.

Scoop

Purple Drank

Is sailingfun really entertaining the notion of outsourcing 100 seaters?

NERD

Announced at the investor conference RA "we have an agreement with our partners at Dalpa. The agreement is cash positive for the company. With a combination of a reduction in profit sharing, more productivity(made possible by all pilots flying 90 hrs per month due to no pilots ever calling in sick because the harassment we provide is not worth it, no pilots double dipping by flying with LCAs and longer training freezes) we were able to give them a 4/8/3/3 contractual pay raises. I would like to especially thank our(excuse me, Dalpas) subject matter experts that put together the wonderful spreadsheets that showed the obstinate reps the perilous position that Delta would find itself in if the pilot contract was a win for the pilots. Going forward this contract will allow Delta to give more back to our owners(mutual funds, hedge funds and of course me and my team), gamble more on fuel hedging, and invest in foreign airlines so we can provide the Delta holding company with less expensive international lift"