|
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1899625)
AZ was only ever I think around 2% of the JV. In any case, that was EASKs. We gave up the astonishingly bad deal of a 3 year bottomless pit agreement with a 1 year cure period and they still couldn't even honor that deal. But now we will let them fly any plane against any plane and call it even, and we fly on average smaller planes that they do.
50/50 block hours when we're currently doing 67/33 is a huge loss regardless of what happens to AZ. anyway, ask the reps. i think its a good question to ask more about. |
Originally Posted by APCLurker
(Post 1899628)
Thanks for the info.
1.1 Billion over the life of the contract for us (from your chart), versus 5 BILLION in the stock buyback. 1/5 th. the amount........ I'm curious how dalpa justifies 1.1 billion over the course of the entire contract in light of a $5 Billion buyback. Unbelievable. Wait, what was the question? |
Originally Posted by Professor
(Post 1899620)
Reference my post above, its not as bad as you think. In fact its a pretty good solution to the JV numbers.
|
Originally Posted by formerdal
(Post 1899608)
OK, so what is it today? How much of a reduction does this TA allow?
Something else I have to find out before I set my hair on fire. |
Originally Posted by GunshipGuy
(Post 1899179)
^^^^^^^ my sentiments exactly!!!!!!
|
Originally Posted by gloopy
(Post 1899632)
Because buybacks at peak value deep into a bull run have never amounted to anything other than a short term pump and dump effect for those few people paid with stock and flippers/short term players with zero loyality to a company or its stock.
Wait, what was the question? LOL.....no kidding. :D |
Originally Posted by APCLurker
(Post 1899628)
Thanks for the info.
1.1 Billion over the life of the contract for us (from your chart), versus 5 BILLION in the stock buyback. 1/5 th. the amount........ I'm curious how dalpa justifies 1.1 billion over the course of the entire contract in light of a $5 Billion buyback. Unbelievable. The NMB won't hold your view. |
Originally Posted by Sounds
(Post 1899639)
The NMB won't hold your view.
And even being parked is only if we're being "unreasonable" in what we're demanding. Not accepting concessions isn't being unreasonable. Keep current book and ask for lower raises and we won't be parked, we'll just have to wait out the typical 3 or so year timeline for bad faith company playbook negotiations. But all under current book with no concessions, huge PS and way more widebody JV jobs. |
Originally Posted by Sounds
(Post 1899639)
What other industry even considers giving profits like this to employees? Serious question here. What other industry values the employees over shareholders? Certainly not many. In my eyes you're comparing economic relations apples with labor relations oranges.
The NMB won't hold your view. |
Originally Posted by Sounds
(Post 1899639)
What other industry even considers giving profits like this to employees? Serious question here. What other industry values the employees over shareholders? Certainly not many. In my eyes you're comparing economic relations apples with labor relations oranges.
The NMB won't hold your view. I could not care less how the NMB holds my view. I am fine living with our current contract versus giving up more scope for flying we already own, sick leave changes, a reduction in profit sharing, the 75% LCA flying, the JV changes etc. etc.. And I don't expect 5 billion in parity. But it isn't even close. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:00 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands