UAL Takes Mesa to Court Over 10 CRJ 700's
11-24-2009, 01:07 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: N/A
Posts: 637
Originally Posted by Killer51883
although you are right that there are plenty of airplanes and crews that could help pick up the slack if something were to happen to mesa, the short term effects of all the canceled passengers would most likely destroy Airways cash flow.
Also, this article posted today.
US Airways defers delivery of 54 aircraft - Yahoo! Finance
Seems like US is trying to free up cash short term ($3.2 billion to be exact). This is probably being used to stay solvent short term, but could be used to position themselves to take over leases for smaller regional aircraft.
Sorry I'm talking about US, you can get back to UA and MESA.
11-24-2009, 07:42 PM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: blueJet
Posts: 4,516
Originally Posted by Phuz
UAUA and DAL have both been trying to rid themselves of mesa it seems, which I think might actually be less a result of poor performance (although certainly a factor) but perhaps it is more so to create problems with one of their major competitors; LCC.
11-25-2009, 07:20 AM
#14
Moderator
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B757/767
Posts: 13,088
Originally Posted by BSOuthisplace
US Airways defers delivery of 54 aircraft - Yahoo! Finance
Seems like US is trying to free up cash short term ($3.2 billion to be exact). This is probably being used to stay solvent short term, but could be used to position themselves to take over leases for smaller regional aircraft.
Sorry I'm talking about US, you can get back to UA and MESA.
11-25-2009, 06:42 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: back in the right
Posts: 406
Good way to fall asleep. I could see both sides of the argument. Typical Mesa position, Things not clearly written will be exploited. I couldn't find anything that said delivery dates couldn't be after April 30. Thanks winglet for the good find. Any idea how to pull up Mesa'a answer?
11-26-2009, 07:07 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: NOYDB
Posts: 876
Originally Posted by DashDriverYV
Good way to fall asleep. I could see both sides of the argument. Typical Mesa position, Things not clearly written will be exploited. I couldn't find anything that said delivery dates couldn't be after April 30. Thanks winglet for the good find. Any idea how to pull up Mesa'a answer?
Delivery of Replacement RJ-70s: Contractor must advise United of the
delivery date of each Replacement RJ-70 no later than 180 days before the delivery date of each RJ-70. Contractor must advise United of the delivery dates of all RJ-70s no later than October 31, 2009. Replacement RJ-70s must be delivered and ready to enter the United Express schedule on these dates.
delivery date of each Replacement RJ-70 no later than 180 days before the delivery date of each RJ-70. Contractor must advise United of the delivery dates of all RJ-70s no later than October 31, 2009. Replacement RJ-70s must be delivered and ready to enter the United Express schedule on these dates.
MAG(Lotz) advised UA on October 15th to give notice of the delivery dates. Lotz’s letter states that:
Mesa intends to place three (3) RJ-70s into service on October 15, 2010, three (3) RJ-70s into service on November 15, 2010, and four (4) RJ-70s into service on December 15, 2010. See Ex. 5.
UA not falling for it responding asking for this:
United does request that Mesa provide the following information to demonstrate its ability to meet the in-service delivery date of April 30. 2010 for these ten (10) Replacement RJ-70s. Please provide this information to United within ten (10) business days:
Firm commitment documents, such as executed lease agreements, representing the source of these aircraft (i.e., Bombardier)
Detailed production schedule if these aircraft are being sourced from Bombardier
Detailed reconfiguration schedule if these aircraft are being sourced from the secondary market. This schedule should include firm commitments for reconfiguration including seating, decor, and livery
Detailed crew training schedules.
Ex. 8.
Firm commitment documents, such as executed lease agreements, representing the source of these aircraft (i.e., Bombardier)
Detailed production schedule if these aircraft are being sourced from Bombardier
Detailed reconfiguration schedule if these aircraft are being sourced from the secondary market. This schedule should include firm commitments for reconfiguration including seating, decor, and livery
Detailed crew training schedules.
Ex. 8.
) and stated that MAG is sticking with the original delivery dates of October, November and December of 2010. UA has called their bluff and is taking them to court. If MAG couldn't provide them with proof of for April 30th 2010, they don't have proof to support those deliveries in 4th quarter of 2010. MAG has the option with Bombardier for these aircraft, but can't get the cash or loans to pay for them.
11-26-2009, 10:06 PM
#18
Go Knights Go
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: OCC/Dispatch
Posts: 261
Nothing more than a failed hail mary pass on JO et al part. Not surprised either. But as incompetent as UA mgmt appears to be they easily called bull on this one. I seriously doubt Mesa could have met the Q4 deliver sched let alone the fact they don't have money for one let alone 10 birds. This will just cost MAG money they don't have in court cost as well as lawyers.
11-27-2009, 07:18 AM
#19
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,392
Originally Posted by Releasemaster
Nothing more than a failed hail mary pass on JO et al part. Not surprised either. But as incompetent as UA mgmt appears to be they easily called bull on this one. I seriously doubt Mesa could have met the Q4 deliver sched let alone the fact they don't have money for one let alone 10 birds. This will just cost MAG money they don't have in court cost as well as lawyers.
UA is playing this smart...instead of waiting for OJ to sue them, they are getting in the first lick. They know MAG is out of money, so they probably hope to force them to blow some on legal fees they can't afford. Or they can just have their in-house clown take care of everything
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
