Which is why it would be smart of airways' management team to start preparing a contingency plan should this happen. Wait, now that I think of it words like, "smart", and "preparing" are not words heard often in conjunction with airline management.

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.

Key word is "with timely notice". I doubt the judge will consider "after ual notified mesa of terminating the contract" as "timely notice".

Maybe they finally learned their lesson when Republic used all that DAL and UAL money to pull USAir back from the brink in 2005?

Seems like LCC continues to burn the furniture, starting with selling some of their E190's.

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?

Do you provide anything useful to this site or do you just type first and think later?

Carry on.

The contract is pretty straight forward on the time line.

180 days from October 31st is contract expiration on April 30th 2010.

MAG(Lotz) advised UA on October 15th to give notice of the delivery dates. Lotz’s letter states that: All dates are more than 180 days from notice. When the contract expires the ammendment expires with it. As long as those a/c are placed into service before contract expiration, those ac transfer over to the 70 seat contract which expires in 2018. UA sent a letter to Lotz (MAG) stating what that MAG is violating the terms of the contract; and that UA will not honor it unless they put those a/c into service before April 30 2010. Lotz then responded back asking UA to reconsider and changed the delivery date to April 30th for all 10 a/c.
UA not falling for it responding asking for this:
Lotz sent a response on November 3rd; rescinding their notice of delivery date of April 30th 2010(Couldn't provide the proof UA wanted!) 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.

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

the bankruptcy clause in their contracts is not working in their favor. If they wanted to reorganize and stay viable they would need to go bankrupt but they cant without losing all of their contracts.