|
Originally Posted by NGINEWHOISWHAT
(Post 128743)
Jsled, I'm not trying to flame. I want to see United do great.
I was curious about debt loads from this thread and I'm posting an ariticle from 1/06 and one from 07. I think one reporter is incredibly biased, but I'm posting it for the numbers only. I know a lot can happen in a year ... .................................................. ......................... United is swimming in debt. United will exit bankruptcy saddled with about $17 billion in debt. It expects to issue about 125 million new shares under the ticker symbol UAUA. While some observers predict the stock will quickly trade higher, the opening price is likely to be about $15 a share. That gives United an equity value just shy of $2 billion and a debt-to-equity ratio of about 8.5-to-1. By comparison, American Airlines' debt ratio is deemed much too high at about 6-to-1. • United is mortgaged to the hilt. United made public relations hay this week with its announcement that it quickly secured $3 billion in exit financing. What it didn't mention was that the loan was secured with just about every asset that United owns: fleet; spare parts; Atlantic and Pacific routes; corporate headquarters building; flight simulators; accounts receivable; and even the Mileage Plus frequent-flier program. http://www.usatoday.com/travel/colum...ncatelli_x.htm http://finance.google.com/finance?q=UAUA .................................................. ..................... HEAVY DEBT. On the negative side, we're concerned that the board can change the number of authorized shares without shareholder approval, and that the board may amend the corporate bylaws without shareholder approval. There are risks to our recommendation and target price. We consider the shares to be very volatile and high risk for several reasons. First, oil prices have risen dramatically and may continue to rise, which is offsetting a lot of other cost cuts at the company. In addition, AMR has a very high debt load of about $20 billion (including operating leases) and an underfunded pension plan, both of which are likely to be a drain on cash resources over the next few years. The net pension obligation at the end of 2005 exceeded the fair value of the assets in the plan by about $3.2 billion. AMR is attempting to get its debt level down, but this won't be an easy task, in our opinion. http://www.businessweek.com/investor...612_815502.htm http://finance.google.com/finance?q=AMR .................................................. ................................. http://finance.google.com/finance?q=DALRQ For effect, I rode the short bus. Tom The Company reduced total debt, which includes the principal amount of airport facility tax-exempt bonds and the present value of aircraft operating lease obligations, to $18.4 billion at the end of the fourth quarter of 2006, compared to $20.1 billion a year earlier. In addition to $1.2 billion in scheduled principal payments that AMR made in 2006, the Company purchased $190 million of its outstanding debt and lease obligations during the year. AMR reduced net debt, which is defined as total debt less unrestricted cash and short-term investments, from $16.3 billion at the end of 2005 to $13.6 billion at the end of 2006. We should have more updated results later next month. This year should be very good for us. We are not going to dump our debt in BK, or dump our pensions on the PBGC. AAflyer |
Just curious...
Does anyone really know if there is any truth at all to the Delta buying Jetblue rumor or is it just that...a rumor? |
Originally Posted by AAflyer
(Post 132779)
We should have more updated results later next month. This year should be very good for us. We are not going to dump our debt in BK, or dump our pensions on the PBGC. AAflyer Tom |
Originally Posted by NGINEWHOISWHAT
(Post 133176)
Good for your group, AA flyer. How underfunded is your pension?
Tom I just sorted through some material.Pilot defined plan has liabilities of 2.2 Billion. Assets of 1.95 Billion giving us a funding level of 88.5%. All pension funds run at a liability of 10.1 Billion with assets of 8.5 Billion, for a funding level of roughly 85%. Total costs associated with the plan run around 400 million per year including ammortization. We paid roughly 320 million in cash last year towards all plans. Funding for the pilot plan 2 years ago was 77%, and all groups wa 75%. We have made some positive headway in debt payments and pension payments. AAflyer |
Originally Posted by AAflyer
(Post 133234)
Funding for the pilot plan 2 years ago was 77%, and all groups wa 75%. We have made some positive headway in debt payments and pension payments.
AAflyer Tom |
Originally Posted by NGINEWHOISWHAT
(Post 133237)
AAflyer, one more question. Continental has everyone beat as far as future aircraft orders and I believe they are rid of all MD's. What's the word from on high for the MD replacement? Anyword on PBS? Thanks in advance.
Tom I agree, it is ****ing everyone off. There are a lot of rumors that have been running around which are not worth anything. The big thing AMR wants to do is skip the current generation jet. the B737NG, and A320 series by all means are old technology. The new plastic 737 and 787 are future. Watch for us to do something to stop gap for the next few years and then leap into the next generation. Word has it something will be announced shortly. AMR so much has said that in their last conference call which I listened to. ( I wish I could define shortly) PBS is a hot topic. While we have furloughs on the street it is not a wise thing to do, in respect to an actual PBS I am not sure we will go that way. NWA hates and just put a contractual request to go back to paper bids, I have not heard positive things from CAL. I could see an increase in hours flown to be competitive with the other legacies and LCCs, however it would and should be tied to GROWTH! Our BOD is keeping some of this tight-lipped. Wish I could share more. I consider myself one of the few over here trying to find out information and stay informed, however it is hard to do, and changes often. Will certainly post info of value when it comes up. Best, AAflyer P.S. The rumor was over the long term replace aircraft to end up with 777,787 and plastic 737s, this could be done with a stop gap of A320s and 737NGs and some ued 767s to replace the A300s. Like I said this type of stuff us running around all the time. |
Originally Posted by AAflyer
(Post 133250)
NWA hates and just put a contractual request to go back to paper bids, I have not heard positive things from CAL. Tom |
Originally Posted by NGINEWHOISWHAT
(Post 133257)
That's the first I heard of this. Can any NW guys chime in? Thanks again, AAflyer.
Tom Take Care Tom, AAflyer |
Originally Posted by AAflyer
(Post 133250)
The big thing AMR wants to do is skip the current generation jet. the B737NG, and A320 series by all means are old technology. The new plastic 737 and 787 are future. Watch for us to do something to stop gap for the next few years and then leap into the next generation.
These are the best selling commercial aircraft in history. The 737 line (best selling aircraft eveer) has sold over 6,000 aircraft representing 1/4 of the WORLD's commercial aviation fleet. The A320 has sold around 4,000 aircraft, and these numbers continue to grow. The next generation 737/A320 will not only cover the 737 classic size airplane, but will need to fill the gap left by the 757 (or A321, 737-900) and the gap on the lower end of the market (EMB-190, CRJ-1000, A318, 737-500). This next generation aircraft will likely be the best selling aircraft in history. So this aircraft will be a key focus for Boeing and Airbus. A couple of things to point out. One, it would be beneficial for Boeing to let the 787 fly for a couple years before beginning large scale research/development of their 737 replacement. There is no doubt that this new aircraft will be made of composites. It probably will incorporate many of the other advances used on the 787. Boeing would be wise to see what/if any bugs the new 787 has, and fix them in their 737 replacement. Two, it would not be wise for either Boeing or Airbus to design their replacement model without a new generation engine. With fuel burn being an airlines primary cost, a small change in engine efficiency can do much more than massive changes in aerodynamics. There is only so much that can be improved on the aerodynamic side, but there is a lot that can be improved on the engine side. Geared engines perhaps?? This engine technology is 5-10 years down the line. I think that is when you can see this replacement jet. If you want to see some cool speculation from a recent Boeing conference, check out: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...oncepts05.html I think American is right to try and skip the current generation of 737/A320 as a massive replacement for the MD-80. Probably the best for American is to take their orders for the 737-800 that have been delayed and replace the oldest MD-80's in the fleet. I think it would be best for American to hold onto their massive fleet of MD-80's (the newest ones) for the next 6-8 years, and be the launch customer of the new generation 737/A320. |
Originally Posted by ryane946
(Post 133452)
The next generation 737/A320 will not only cover the 737 classic size airplane, but will need to fill the gap left by the 757 (or A321, 737-900) and the gap on the lower end of the market (EMB-190, CRJ-1000, A318, 737-500).
http://www.aerospace-technology.com/...s/Bombardier2/ I wonder if Boeing and Airbus are going to try and compete on the lower end of the market or if they will stick to the 737NG and 757 size aircraft. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:06 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands