Yes, I agree. Which is why I asked captain tony to provide the sec filing of this happening. When a CPA is renegotiated, they must file it with the sec for all the investors to see. I don't believe that has happened. And is why I asked him to provide the proof if it had because I haven't found it.

Took you a while for you to come up with that. Moving the goal post once again. How many times is that? Four?

It doesn't matter if Expressjet is a subsidiary. If Inc renegotiated any CPAs of their subsidiaries, it would be such a material significance to require them to file it with the sec. Especially if you are talking about the removal of the first right of refusal clause in replacing the 145s. That was the WHOLE reason for inc buying XJT, to get incumbency in order to he the j side track to replace/add larger aircraft.

If it was just that easy to hide information from investors by creating subsidiaries, then they wouldn't have filed the ASA they negotiated with DAL. I have that one as well if you want me to quote it as well. Are you going to say that ASA is not a subsidiary now and do it doesn't count!

This isn't rocket science. It's more common sense than anything else.

By the way, you can find profit of each subsidiary if you read the 10K.

 

You can go to An airline industry leader » SkyWest Airlines and see the press release that DL/SKW put out... All i am pointing out is moving forward, "inc" is going to do what is best for the company. Both sides... Only the CEO's BOD know ultimately what the cost breakdowns are and how to shuffle things around, to get things in line.. Good luck to us all...

 

Ok, I said I agreed. All I'm saying is that they haven't renegotiated the CAL CPA because there is no sec filing informing the investors. But yeah, they can mutually agree to change it on a daily basis. That's true if all contracts.

 

I'll take your moving the goal posts again comment as your way of conceding that I'm right.

 

Take it however you wish. Fact remains that the right of first refusal clause is in the CPA.

 

Sounds like they "Refused"....

 

Does the right of first refusal apply to SkyWest Inc, or Expressjet?

 

Thats the real question!!! And will never know the real answer.. The reality of it is it won't matter. "Inc" will do what they need to do...

 

That is part if the CPA between UAL and ExpressJet. Of course, its Inc that makes the decision to match any bid or not. But the T&PA specifies that aircraft subject to ASA and XJT's CPAs must stay and be operated by each respective side.

Don't tell me you are going to play the captain tony game as well? The answer has already been know. They are in the documents stared above.

And YES, we all know that UAL and INC can mutually decide to shred all existing CPAs and negotiate all new CPAs that say that all aircraft go to an alter ego and ExpressJet gets nothing. But there is language in the T&PA for that also.

 

Page 49 of the Skywest Inc 2012 10K breaks down the profit/loss or each subsidiary. They've been required to publish this information by the sec for a while now. But I'm sure you already knew that.

Anyway, page 11 of the se report makes reference to the CAL CPA with the same exact date of the CPA I've been quoting from.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/793733/000104746913001174/a2212817z10-k.htm

That's actually a possibility. We don't know yet. And probably won't know until UAL has allocated all the 76 seaters and they are replacing the 220 expiring aircraft from the CAL CPA. The other 22 145s and 9 135s don't count as they are under the UAL CPA that doesn't have any replacement rights.