Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major
Interesting read on UA & US >

Interesting read on UA & US

Notices
Major Legacy, National, and LCC

Interesting read on UA & US

Old 11-12-2008, 07:03 AM
  #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
GuppyPuppy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: JetRight, JetLeft
Posts: 760
Default Interesting read on UA & US

As the third quarter earnings season got under way, some of the results from a varying number of airlines was not totally surprising given that most had to contend with much higher fuel prices than we’re seeing today.

What is surprising, however, is how United Airlines continues to bleed money and somehow miraculously stay afloat. Of particular concern is just how this carrier, with no orders for newer, fuel efficient airplanes like the 787 Dreamliner or A350XWB, can hope to continue to be a viable business without such investment.

Critically, just why are some financial institutions negotiating and re-negotiating outstanding finance obligations when its evident that since United left the safe embrace of Chapter 11, the carrier has still not managed to turn itself around.

Let’s be brutally honest - the third quarter numbers from United were abysmal.



Image copyright/owned by FleetBuzz Editorial.com

CEO Glenn Tilton is widely referred to as an oil industry man, yet his acumen for hedging United’s fuel bill leaves something to be desired. Given the financial woes sweeping across the globe, a $779m loss is simply shocking. What’s even more frightening is that $519m relates to hedging contracts for fuel. Sure, oil prices have come down, but that’s no excuse for such an awful quarterly result.

After over six years at the helm of United, you could probably forgive Tilton about not knowing how to run an airline given that it took him some 30-odd years to establish his position at Texaco (known now as ChevronTexaco).

One pilot at a major US carrier spoke of his utter bemusement at such numbers.

“You gotta wonder what they were doing with their hedging program that could result in their losing such an enormous sum.“

And you know what, he’s dead right.

Just who are these institutions that are essentially bankrolling a business that turns in a loss for the year (so far) of $940m and still expects to pay off its debts now that its not in Chapter 11?

The recent buzzwords of “irresponsible lending” springs to mind, particularly when carriers would have died had they operated anywhere else in the world where the likes of Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection doesn’t exist.

The extent of United’s woes are deeper than the company will let on or admit.

Pilots have even started their own campaign to get CEO Tilton removed (although I’ll argue forever and a day why this move wasn’t started sooner).

Click here to see their website.

“How is it that an oil man such as Glenn Tilton can’t figure out how to stem losses from hedging jet fuel?” asks Captain Steve Wallach who is chairman of United’s Chapter of the Air Line Pilots Association.

The most crucial aspect of the pilots campaign to remove Tilton can be found on the aforementioned site on by two entries posted here and here.

Instead of holding himself accountable, Glenn Tilton continues to blame external factors while creating additional wealth for himself.

Were you or I forced to declare bankruptcy, there’d be little to celebrate. Not so for the Tilton regime at United. Glenn Tilton alone received almost $40 million in bonus money. Senior managers protected the enhanced income of other senior managers, while telling us that the airline had to remain revenue neutral, and that our customers needed to bring $5 for a sandwich on a six hour flight. It’s amazing they could say it without blushing. By the way, most other airlines leaving bankruptcy managed to do so without writing big bonus checks to their senior managers.
With system capacity being cut across the board in the United States, older mainline jets leaving the national fleet being replaced by newer Airbus A320’s and Boeing 737’s, United has nothing to offset its capacity cuts or to lower its fuel bill by utilising newer airplanes, given that its remaining Airbus orders will be nullified.

In reporting its third quarter results, US Airways too had an astonishing loss of $865m, of which an eye-watering $488m consisted of badly hedged fuel costs. As oil prices climbed over the $100 a barrel mark in April 2008 and continued to rise to its peak of around $147 in July, quite why the likes of United and US Airways failed to hedge their bets more accurately is a testimony as to why the US airline industry doesn’t just need capacity cuts to survive - it needs casualties, and legacy carriers such as these inefficient two are justifiably prime candidates to bite the dust sooner, rather than later.

“We do think that the airline industry has been given a significant reprieve from the dangerously high oil prices, and the recent declines likely mean the airlines won’t lose an astronomical amount of money in this downturn,” said analyst Robert Stallard in a recent research note.



Image courtesy of Airbus

Clearly, United is the exception to this rule and certainly, the pilots at the carrier are validated when they say that management overhaul is now necessary for survival.

US Airways itself has committed to a partial fleet renewal with a dubious A350XWB order to replace the ageing A330 fleet, but whether it can ride the storm until late next decade to take delivery of those jets is anyone’s guess given that it recently deferred delivery of the first example until 2015 (p56).

Take note of the ambiguous wording relating to Airbus effectively paying US Airways to commit to the A320/A330/A350XWB order, knowing full well this ailing carrier can’t afford it.

“In exchange for US Airways’ agreement to enter into these amendments, Airbus advanced US Airways $200 million earned in consideration of aircraft deliveries under the various related purchase agreements. “

(Makes you wonder why United can’t then salvage its soon-to-be-cancelled order with Airbus for its A319’s/A320’s…)

OPEC’s recent production cut means that in the effort to bolster prices back up towards, if not beyond the $100 a barrel mark, it will almost certainly guarantee another round of quarterly losses for inept run airlines like United and US Airways.

Neither carrier has anything to be proud of.

In fact, these legacy carriers highlight perfectly just why the industry needs a wide-ranging fallout of big names to further enhance the drive for efficiency and prudence - two key attributes neither Tilton or Parker know much, if anything about.

Both carriers have been on death row for too long and quite frankly, they both need to be put out of their (and passengers) misery.

If woeful fuel hedging policies don’t kill off United, then Tilton’s “strategy” at turning the airline around certainly will.

Take note, Parker.
GuppyPuppy is offline  
Old 11-12-2008, 07:17 AM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,539
Default

Why are financial institutions still bank rolling United?


Because they have the most potential out there.

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/ma...-infusion.html

Read this post... No, seriously, read this post!
iahflyr is offline  
Old 11-12-2008, 09:58 AM
  #3  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: The Beginnings
Posts: 1,317
Default

What a train wreck. That article was painful to read.

Fortunately for every failing business out there, the "lets bail out everything" express is moving along just fine.
deltabound is offline  
Old 11-13-2008, 05:27 AM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
contrail67's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 737
Posts: 590
Default

Originally Posted by GuppyPuppy View Post
As the third quarter earnings season got under way, some of the results from a varying number of airlines was not totally surprising given that most had to contend with much higher fuel prices than we’re seeing today.

What is surprising, however, is how United Airlines continues to bleed money and somehow miraculously stay afloat. Of particular concern is just how this carrier, with no orders for newer, fuel efficient airplanes like the 787 Dreamliner or A350XWB, can hope to continue to be a viable business without such investment.

Critically, just why are some financial institutions negotiating and re-negotiating outstanding finance obligations when its evident that since United left the safe embrace of Chapter 11, the carrier has still not managed to turn itself around.

Let’s be brutally honest - the third quarter numbers from United were abysmal.



Image copyright/owned by FleetBuzz Editorial.com

CEO Glenn Tilton is widely referred to as an oil industry man, yet his acumen for hedging United’s fuel bill leaves something to be desired. Given the financial woes sweeping across the globe, a $779m loss is simply shocking. What’s even more frightening is that $519m relates to hedging contracts for fuel. Sure, oil prices have come down, but that’s no excuse for such an awful quarterly result.

After over six years at the helm of United, you could probably forgive Tilton about not knowing how to run an airline given that it took him some 30-odd years to establish his position at Texaco (known now as ChevronTexaco).

One pilot at a major US carrier spoke of his utter bemusement at such numbers.

“You gotta wonder what they were doing with their hedging program that could result in their losing such an enormous sum.“

And you know what, he’s dead right.

Just who are these institutions that are essentially bankrolling a business that turns in a loss for the year (so far) of $940m and still expects to pay off its debts now that its not in Chapter 11?

The recent buzzwords of “irresponsible lending” springs to mind, particularly when carriers would have died had they operated anywhere else in the world where the likes of Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection doesn’t exist.

The extent of United’s woes are deeper than the company will let on or admit.

Pilots have even started their own campaign to get CEO Tilton removed (although I’ll argue forever and a day why this move wasn’t started sooner).

Click here to see their website.

“How is it that an oil man such as Glenn Tilton can’t figure out how to stem losses from hedging jet fuel?” asks Captain Steve Wallach who is chairman of United’s Chapter of the Air Line Pilots Association.

The most crucial aspect of the pilots campaign to remove Tilton can be found on the aforementioned site on by two entries posted here and here.

Instead of holding himself accountable, Glenn Tilton continues to blame external factors while creating additional wealth for himself.

Were you or I forced to declare bankruptcy, there’d be little to celebrate. Not so for the Tilton regime at United. Glenn Tilton alone received almost $40 million in bonus money. Senior managers protected the enhanced income of other senior managers, while telling us that the airline had to remain revenue neutral, and that our customers needed to bring $5 for a sandwich on a six hour flight. It’s amazing they could say it without blushing. By the way, most other airlines leaving bankruptcy managed to do so without writing big bonus checks to their senior managers.
With system capacity being cut across the board in the United States, older mainline jets leaving the national fleet being replaced by newer Airbus A320’s and Boeing 737’s, United has nothing to offset its capacity cuts or to lower its fuel bill by utilising newer airplanes, given that its remaining Airbus orders will be nullified.

In reporting its third quarter results, US Airways too had an astonishing loss of $865m, of which an eye-watering $488m consisted of badly hedged fuel costs. As oil prices climbed over the $100 a barrel mark in April 2008 and continued to rise to its peak of around $147 in July, quite why the likes of United and US Airways failed to hedge their bets more accurately is a testimony as to why the US airline industry doesn’t just need capacity cuts to survive - it needs casualties, and legacy carriers such as these inefficient two are justifiably prime candidates to bite the dust sooner, rather than later.

“We do think that the airline industry has been given a significant reprieve from the dangerously high oil prices, and the recent declines likely mean the airlines won’t lose an astronomical amount of money in this downturn,” said analyst Robert Stallard in a recent research note.



Image courtesy of Airbus

Clearly, United is the exception to this rule and certainly, the pilots at the carrier are validated when they say that management overhaul is now necessary for survival.

US Airways itself has committed to a partial fleet renewal with a dubious A350XWB order to replace the ageing A330 fleet, but whether it can ride the storm until late next decade to take delivery of those jets is anyone’s guess given that it recently deferred delivery of the first example until 2015 (p56).

Take note of the ambiguous wording relating to Airbus effectively paying US Airways to commit to the A320/A330/A350XWB order, knowing full well this ailing carrier can’t afford it.

“In exchange for US Airways’ agreement to enter into these amendments, Airbus advanced US Airways $200 million earned in consideration of aircraft deliveries under the various related purchase agreements. “

(Makes you wonder why United can’t then salvage its soon-to-be-cancelled order with Airbus for its A319’s/A320’s…)

OPEC’s recent production cut means that in the effort to bolster prices back up towards, if not beyond the $100 a barrel mark, it will almost certainly guarantee another round of quarterly losses for inept run airlines like United and US Airways.

Neither carrier has anything to be proud of.

In fact, these legacy carriers highlight perfectly just why the industry needs a wide-ranging fallout of big names to further enhance the drive for efficiency and prudence - two key attributes neither Tilton or Parker know much, if anything about.

Both carriers have been on death row for too long and quite frankly, they both need to be put out of their (and passengers) misery.

If woeful fuel hedging policies don’t kill off United, then Tilton’s “strategy” at turning the airline around certainly will.

Take note, Parker.
Why would they need to order new aircraft when the merger partner CAL already has them on order...100 Boeing A/C 777,787,737's. Flame all you want, but that is what is going on.
contrail67 is offline  
Old 11-13-2008, 06:08 AM
  #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
WarEagle28's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 185
Default

Originally Posted by contrail67 View Post
Why would they need to order new aircraft when the merger partner CAL already has them on order...100 Boeing A/C 777,787,737's. Flame all you want, but that is what is going on.
I'm still semi-reluctant, however, I believe contrail is correct. It seems to be the calm before the CAL/UAL merger storm. Here's Delta/NWA annoucing massive expansions to include replacing some RJ routes with mainline equipment and neither CAL/UAL announcing anything. Together CAL/UAL have cut 10,000 jobs and reduced capacity by 10-12%...they made their respective airlines "MERGER READY"...their routes don't overlap, their hubs are extremely good for the most part, Continental has the 100 aircraft on order, United has the cash 3.9 Billion to CAL 2.9 billion. United's bankruptcy plan was based on $50/barrel oil (Currently $55/barrel). Both CAL/UAL will have to dehedged and take a loss because of poor fuel hedging (above $120/barrel for both), however, with the cash on hand between the two, now might be the time to support the bankruptcy model. I know there's alot more to it than just this, but...I think something is coming...JMO

WarE
WarEagle28 is offline  
Old 11-13-2008, 06:33 AM
  #6  
seeing the large hubs...
 
iaflyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 73N A
Posts: 3,700
Default

Yes, they may be interested in a merger, but the administration is going to change and the Obama administration may not be that excited about a merger between two large airlines.
iaflyer is offline  
Old 11-13-2008, 06:50 AM
  #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
WarEagle28's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 737 FO
Posts: 185
Default

Originally Posted by iaflyer View Post
Yes, they may be interested in a merger, but the administration is going to change and the Obama administration may not be that excited about a merger between two large airlines.

I agree...it'll be more difficult, but...if they can convince the administration and the public that jobs won't be lost and over the long-term jobs will be created...I think it would happen. IMO there'll be 3 global carriers left standing after all is said and done: Delta(Delta/NWA), United(CAL/UAL) and American(American/US Air). Do I want to see it...if no jobs are lost and both pilot groups get a better contract and all furloughees come back when the deal is closed...then yes.
WarEagle28 is offline  
Old 11-13-2008, 10:06 AM
  #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
contrail67's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: 737
Posts: 590
Default

Originally Posted by iaflyer View Post
Yes, they may be interested in a merger, but the administration is going to change and the Obama administration may not be that excited about a merger between two large airlines.
If they announced it before the changing of the guards in DC would it technically be under present administration?...not sure. Grandfathered in...kinda like Delta and NWA did during their bankruptcy stuff BEFORE the rules changed. I do know that United announced that they look for the anti-trust approval by the end of the year. It is interesting how DAL/NWA did this stuff during the merger and if UAL/CAL are in the works how they are doing it before a merger.

Last edited by contrail67; 11-13-2008 at 10:09 AM. Reason: none
contrail67 is offline  
Old 11-13-2008, 10:29 AM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,333
Default

GuppyPuppy - how about some links?
⌐ AV8OR WANNABE is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Lowtimer77
Hangar Talk
19
11-13-2008 02:54 PM
Trippster
Hiring News
9
10-24-2008 07:22 AM
nicholasblonde
Regional
27
08-31-2008 07:55 AM
HazCan
Cargo
24
08-27-2008 04:57 AM
DLax85
Cargo
4
08-04-2008 07:07 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices