![]() |
Originally Posted by chrisreedrules
(Post 1940428)
And at the same time, all of the partners they fly for simply can not allow that feed to disappear quickly. The contracts will remain mostly intact I would think.
Skywest to United: 90 days. American to Envoy: how long to spin up 30 700's? Envoy to American: as soon as you stop giving them to PSA Delta to Express Jet......you get the idea |
Originally Posted by BoilerUP
(Post 1940254)
Lots of talk of bankruptcy for a company that still generated a profit...
When has that EVER mattered???? NWA Cargo, making TONS of money that they needed to hide to justify the BK. AAR, now AAG, had $5billion in cash and declared BK, while shuffling profits off to subs like eagle. Did it simply to get out of aircraft leases. It happens Every.SIngle.Day in US Corporate America. Its a shell game. Parent company shows loss while cash position INCREASES. |
Originally Posted by gojo
(Post 1940325)
Hmmm, how quickly one forgets about American's financial status when they filed
The companies debt liabilities exceeded their liquid and non-liquid assets. The company was insolvent. Same thing happened to PNCL Corp. RAH is not insolvent. In fact they has positive cashflow and are still, as of now, reporting EPS 4 cents. Minute, yes, but still solvent. |
Originally Posted by ThreeStripe
(Post 1940552)
United to Skywest: how long to spin up 30 more E175's?
Skywest to United: 90 days. American to Envoy: how long to spin up 30 700's? Envoy to American: as soon as you stop giving them to PSA Delta to Express Jet......you get the idea BB better get it done. |
True, I just picked three carriers at random to prove a point.
|
Originally Posted by SmitteyB
(Post 1940606)
Hmmm, AMR Corp was in a perpetual cycle of quarterly losses.
The companies debt liabilities exceeded their liquid and non-liquid assets. The company was insolvent. Same thing happened to PNCL Corp. RAH is not insolvent. In fact they has positive cashflow and are still, as of now, reporting EPS 4 cents. Minute, yes, but still solvent. Debt exceeding assets doesn't always make a company insolvent... being unable to pay debt obligations does that. AMR was not close to defaulting on any debt. |
Originally Posted by bonesbrigade
(Post 1940615)
My point being that it is easy for a company of that size to show a loss... they were showing a loss while at the same time increasing their cash horde.
Debt exceeding assets doesn't always make a company insolvent... being unable to pay debt obligations does that. AMR was not close to defaulting on any debt. |
Originally Posted by billyho
(Post 1940609)
You forgot PDT. They're about to double in size and could easily change over from 145's to 175's.
BB better get it done. |
Originally Posted by TurbineTime
(Post 1940621)
Not going to happen. From what Ive been hearing, PDT is having a hard time even getting its 145 program signed off by the feds. PDT has always operated turbo props and the jet is clearly a big hurdle to overcome, and thats not a knock against them, just a big task. I know you're a pretty hard cheerleader for PDT, but try to stick to reality.
There's no hard time. Another class of 20 is on its way. You really think we are having a tough time. Just wait and see. I forgot PSA had a hard time going from 25 Props😜 |
you saying pdt has their own e145 sim, where?
these pilots in training that you say 25/20 for what aircraft the e145, where they going to do ioe? for that matter, where is the sim to be used? all pdt has done is announce the base for the e145, as far as i know. just as psa, your operation will su ck for the next five years. pdt, psa and envoy are not the prodigal children rather the bastards of aag. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:23 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands