Search
Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

Mesa's Future

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-28-2008, 10:44 AM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: 737 Right
Posts: 955
Default

Originally Posted by stinsonjr View Post
Similiar to a loan convenant with a bank - does this exist in the regional world, and if so, I wonder if Mesa's balance sheet is getting close to triggers?
I don't know for sure, but I doubt that contracts between regionals and mainline contain such covenants. However, the financial condition of a regional may influence their ability to acheive other contractual metrics (such as dispatch reliability and on-time performance).
waflyboy is offline  
Old 01-28-2008, 10:49 AM
  #12  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,488
Default

Originally Posted by stinsonjr View Post
Regional Question:

When mainline carriers contract with a regional to provide feed, are there specific reasons that the mainline carrier can void the contract? My thinking is that like certain financial instruments, if xyz goes below abc then you cash us out. Do the mainline carriers state "if your balance sheet looks a certain way, and your potential liabilities exceed your net worth, we can void the contract and go with another regiona in better financial shape"? Similiar to a loan convenant with a bank - does this exist in the regional world, and if so, I wonder if Mesa's balance sheet is getting close to triggers?

I know there are specific operational performance requirements, and there might be financial items also.

The bigger issue with finances is the FAA...121 airlines must maintain adequate financial reserves or the Fed will pull their ticket. The reasons are obvious...a broke airline is not likley to do Mx correctly, and may take other operational shortcuts.

I suspect that mesa has aleady qualified for contrat termination on operational performance issues with UAL (and maybe Airways) based on the fact that other regionals had to cover their UAL flying last year. But it would be hard to fire any large regional right now...no one else can take on a sudden large amount of flying due to pilot shortages.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 01-28-2008, 11:04 AM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: 7ER B...whatever that means.
Posts: 3,967
Default

Originally Posted by stinsonjr View Post
Regional Question:

When mainline carriers contract with a regional to provide feed, are there specific reasons that the mainline carrier can void the contract? My thinking is that like certain financial instruments, if xyz goes below abc then you cash us out. Do the mainline carriers state "if your balance sheet looks a certain way, and your potential liabilities exceed your net worth, we can void the contract and go with another regiona in better financial shape"? Similiar to a loan convenant with a bank - does this exist in the regional world, and if so, I wonder if Mesa's balance sheet is getting close to triggers?
I'm fairly certain most contracts with mainline carriers use performance thresholds as their benchmark for what constitutes unsatisfactory performance or breach of contract.
freezingflyboy is offline  
Old 01-28-2008, 11:06 AM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: 7ER B...whatever that means.
Posts: 3,967
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
I know there are specific operational performance requirements, and there might be financial items also.

The bigger issue with finances is the FAA...121 airlines must maintain adequate financial reserves or the Fed will pull their ticket. The reasons are obvious...a broke airline is not likley to do Mx correctly, and may take other operational shortcuts.

I suspect that mesa has aleady qualified for contrat termination on operational performance issues with UAL (and maybe Airways) based on the fact that other regionals had to cover their UAL flying last year. But it would be hard to fire any large regional right now...no one else can take on a sudden large amount of flying due to pilot shortages.
CAL has the option to pull another 52 airplanes from their CPA with XJT in January of 2009 I believe.
freezingflyboy is offline  
Old 01-28-2008, 11:08 AM
  #15  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,488
Default

Originally Posted by freezingflyboy View Post
CAL has the option to pull another 52 airplanes from their CPA with XJT in January of 2009 I believe.
I had heard that. I suppose they might do it if they want to eliminate 50-seat flying.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 01-28-2008, 11:13 AM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Speedbird172's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: B6 CA
Posts: 582
Default

Originally Posted by H46Bubba View Post
Have they gotten any of those Delta -900's? I heard someone say they saw a couple sitting over on the line in CLT. They were supposed to start flying them back in August.
Pretty sure those are up here in JFK flying under the Freedom name.
Speedbird172 is offline  
Old 01-28-2008, 11:28 AM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JetJock16's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: SkyWest Capt.
Posts: 2,963
Default

Originally Posted by stinsonjr View Post
Regional Question:

When mainline carriers contract with a regional to provide feed, are there specific reasons that the mainline carrier can void the contract? My thinking is that like certain financial instruments, if xyz goes below abc then you cash us out. Do the mainline carriers state "if your balance sheet looks a certain way, and your potential liabilities exceed your net worth, we can void the contract and go with another regiona in better financial shape"? Similiar to a loan convenant with a bank - does this exist in the regional world, and if so, I wonder if Mesa's balance sheet is getting close to triggers?
Mesa had to pay UAL $30M, for missing 07 performance numbers, last Jan and will probably have to do this Jan for 07.
JetJock16 is offline  
Old 01-28-2008, 11:52 AM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,808
Default

Originally Posted by JetJock16 View Post
Mesa had to pay UAL $30M, for missing 07 performance numbers, last Jan and will probably have to do this Jan for 07.
And didn't United only profit $20 Mil last year? Wow...
ExperimentalAB is online now  
Old 01-28-2008, 11:55 AM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JetJock16's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: SkyWest Capt.
Posts: 2,963
Default

Originally Posted by ExperimentalAB View Post
And didn't United only profit $20 Mil last year? Wow...
Thanks Mesa!
JetJock16 is offline  
Old 01-28-2008, 11:56 AM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: 7ER B...whatever that means.
Posts: 3,967
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777 View Post
I had heard that. I suppose they might do it if they want to eliminate 50-seat flying.
Assuming 50-seat flying doesn't disappear completely in the next 2 years and CAL decides to release those airplanes, I wouldn't be surprised if those airplanes find their way into an agreement with UAL, USAir or Delta.
freezingflyboy is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
sharksrock
Hangar Talk
8
01-27-2008 10:49 AM
nwa757
Regional
18
01-15-2008 10:41 AM
pilotss
Regional
31
10-05-2007 03:37 AM
grant123
Major
12
09-04-2007 09:23 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



Your Privacy Choices