Delta and TPG look To put bid on AMR Corp
01-12-2012, 03:46 PM
#71
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2010
Position: window seat
Posts: 12,522
Originally Posted by Jughead
Reading this makes my head hurt. Obviously writing books for law school students didn't work out for you.Simple minds are satisfied by simplistic explanations.
Or you could have just taken two lines to refute or question my concern. Nah, easier to just lob nades over the wall I guess.
My concern is excessive capacity reduction in response to a tough economy. We are cutting pretty deeply as it is and stagnating as a result. Mergers tend to result in more capacity reduction. A merger/buyout/whateveryouwanttocallit with AA will likely result in very significant capacity reduction. Yes the regionals will be hit hardest, but the new mega mainline will likely shrink too. That would arguably be the main reason why the deal was done in the first place.
The last time DL (and others) mega-culled its domestic footprint (in response to 9-11) the LCC's grew faster than Barry Bonds in his last 7 or 8 years. With the exception of SWA's big replacement order, their order books all together are stagering and almost all growth. But I'm sure if we cut capacity to the bone they will act super responsibile and in no way opportunistic or predatory. They will probably stop growing altogether to honor the sacrifice we are making for the collective industry. Because capitalizing on our reactionary shrinkage would be too "simplistic" for them to even consider.
01-12-2012, 03:47 PM
#72
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Urban chicken rancher.
Posts: 6,070
Originally Posted by eaglefly
I'd advice you to join me watching the colliding, truncated fowl and blossoming feather plume of those who haven't a clue beyond their own dreams, desires and fantasies.
It's actually a classic comedy and worthy of observence......well, I'm out of beer nuts and my beverage is low, so back to the kitchen to refill for the next entertaining act of "The flying Saps".
It's actually a classic comedy and worthy of observence......well, I'm out of beer nuts and my beverage is low, so back to the kitchen to refill for the next entertaining act of "The flying Saps".
01-12-2012, 03:49 PM
#73
Can't abide NAI
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Douglas Aerospace post production Flight Test & Work Around Engineering bulletin dissembler
Posts: 11,989
Originally Posted by galaxy flyer
While we're being pedantic, sentences shouldn't end in prepositions. So,
Complete idiots, but watching and listening to them is a blast.
GF
Complete idiots, but watching and listening to them is a blast.
GF
Make sense, do I, Captain Galaxy Flier?
01-12-2012, 04:17 PM
#74
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Originally Posted by Carl Spackler
If you're going to call people "complete idiots", you really should learn how to spell.
Carl
Carl
Clearly, you're not of that stock.
01-12-2012, 04:19 PM
#75
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Originally Posted by RJtrashPilot
In his defense, he spelled "too" correctly, he just had the wrong "to" in there.
It's a little pet peeve of mine also. Too, to, two. Your, you're, yore. Then, than. Their, there, they're. Who's, whose.
It's a little pet peeve of mine also. Too, to, two. Your, you're, yore. Then, than. Their, there, they're. Who's, whose.
)..........well, there you go.
01-12-2012, 04:21 PM
#76
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Originally Posted by galaxy flyer
While we're being pedantic, sentences shouldn't end in prepositions. So,
Complete idiots, but watching and listening to them is a blast.
GF
Complete idiots, but watching and listening to them is a blast.
GF
01-12-2012, 04:22 PM
#77
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by Raging white
You've mentioned getting rid of SLC if we gain new Western US assets. Don't you think there's enough value in keeping it?
01-12-2012, 04:24 PM
#78
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by dragon
What are the rules with CH11 now regards with and without DIP?
WIthout it, and the offer of a asset sale on the table, it does not matter what the changes are, the creditors do not have to agree to the terms AMR puts forth.
In the end if nothing happens, CH11 just got a lot less beneficial for AMR. This started before their plans were approved by the creditors. RA learned from Parker's mistakes.
01-12-2012, 04:28 PM
#79
Happy to be here
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: A-320A
Posts: 18,563
Originally Posted by eaglefly
The secured creditors are more protected and knew the possibility of AA's impending BK and that includes both Boeing and Airbus who STILL went ahead with AA orders. They KNOW AA is viable with proper restructuring with debt. The unsecured creditors include two banks, two vendors and three unions and these groups don't have the leverage to force mergers or liquidations. AA has a two-month period before any bids might come forward and a 180-day period of exclusivity wherby as long as they have internal financing, they retain control. The key is to A. Make the RIGHT decisions as you only get one shot and then B. Exit in a healthy and competitive state before others can get their foot in the door.
AMR didn't seek DIP because they didn't need it. That is one reason they filed earlier then expected - maximum cash, maximum control to exit in minimum time.
Revenue can be dealt with once costs are corrected and being immeadiately bigger isn't required. Jet Blue and Alaska are two examples of that. Yes, AA has to decide what they intend to be and a merger (in whole or part) may indeed be a part of the future, but first things first.
AMR didn't seek DIP because they didn't need it. That is one reason they filed earlier then expected - maximum cash, maximum control to exit in minimum time.
Revenue can be dealt with once costs are corrected and being immeadiately bigger isn't required. Jet Blue and Alaska are two examples of that. Yes, AA has to decide what they intend to be and a merger (in whole or part) may indeed be a part of the future, but first things first.
Yes they did not file for DIP, but that also means that the cash burn is all internal. The creditors list is a lot longer than the few you mentioned. Do not forget the airports and leasing companies to name a few. I do not recall AMR finalizing their gate deal in DFW either. I may have missed that.
In the end even if AMR can avoid a asset sale or a hostile takeover, the price of being a stand alone just went up, a lot.
01-12-2012, 04:29 PM
#80
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Originally Posted by DAL73n
One thing to realize is that AA does not have oversized labor costs in relation to the rest of the industry so cutting back those contracts is not going to be enough to get them back to profitability. An AA merger/buyout would be a disaster for the pilots involved (doesn't matter DAL, USAir , etc) and an asset sale would be a disaster for AA pilots. APA has not helped its pilots by it's negotiating strategy that has not made any headway with the NMB. Good Luck AA/APA - you're going to need it. Bankruptcy judges will do whatever is presented that makes sense for an economically viable entity while doing its best to make sure all players (taking in account the laws of secured vs unsecured creditors among other things) "contribute" to the restructuring.
The APA has had two leaderships in the recent past and has since changed from the "line in the sand" philosophy to one less contentious and was making strong headway in negotiations. The rest of the industry should also realize that the more AMR carves out of its pilots, the more pressure their own management will be under to match that.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
