AA applies for Delta's Seattle-Haneda slot

[ThirdSeatHero]

I'm still not sure of the mechanism that  TW employees used to acquire the aircraft but they did in fact own sizable portions of the company as a result of their concessions.

again, however, they did not acquire the aircraft out of gratitude but because the company could not meet the promises it made.

those employees did not voluntarily acquire the aircraft.

DL employees did in fact voluntarily buy the Spirit of Delta.
 

 
You are wrong, the question is do you have the integrity to admit it?
 
If provide a document from TWA that clearly states "voluntary contributions" as it relates to this aircraft, will you finally admit you are wrong?
 
No attempts to re-qualify,  you will make a simple 1 line post admitting you were wrong about the TWA employees/Wings of Pride, nothing more.

 

[WorldTraveler]

I asked for that paragraphs ago. and said if I saw that TW employees contributed specifically to that aircraft and not as part of labor concessions, I would acknowledge that.

care to provide it?

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

I asked for that paragraphs ago. and said if I saw that TW employees contributed specifically to that aircraft and not as part of labor concessions, I would acknowledge that.

care to provide it?

 
From the SkyLiner - TWAs Employee Newsletter - Wings of Pride rollout
 
Click to enlarge the picture and read the notation.
 
http://www.twahistory.com/2007/04/29/twa-skyliner-september-1994/

 

[WorldTraveler]

thanks ... but it was leased, not bought.

my statement is correct.

 

[jcw]

So when any company acquires an asset via a lease it's not real
 
So that plane was a mirage to TWA

 

[WorldTraveler]

no one said it isn't real. it is just not BOUGHT.

And if you can show me that the TW employees paid the lease for the equivalent time period that it would have taken to buy the aircraft, then you would prove your point.

it was a sacrifice and I was not aware that TW employees did that.

but TW had already been thru one BK by the date of the article mentioned and was in the process of another.

TW employees had already endured cuts. the lease involved swapping concessions whether the article says so or not.

and since TW did not exist for little more than 5 years later, the cost to the employees did not amount to the same amount as if the aircraft had been purchased.

again, a valiant effort by TW and I did learn something.

but it wasn't the same type of deal as the Spirit of Delta.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

thanks ... but it was leased, not bought.

my statement is correct.

 
I knew you wouldn't disappoint
 

 
those employees did not voluntarily acquire the aircraft.

 
That statement is wrong - period. They most certainly did voluntarily acquire the aircraft.
 
Further, the entire kickoff to this little sleigh ride was you touting the dedication of Delta employees .....
 

 
DL people are fiercely loyal to the company and believe that they are different than their competitors.

DL pilots have long been accused of being aloof to other pilot groups.

There is an aircraft sitting in a museum in ATL that was bought with voluntary employee payroll deductions. No other example exists at any other large airline in the world.

DL throws itself behind its people and its people throw themselves behind the company. It is a formula that has worked and continues to work.

 
You were WRONG, and almost immediately you were corrected with the "Wings of Pride" pic.
 
TWA employees were also fiercely loyal to their company
 
TWA employees through voluntary contributions made the acquisition of that MD-80 possible
 
All day you've been hammering the "voluntary contribution" drum
 
Only now that you see the TWA employees were indeed just as dedicated as Delta now you want to try and appear less-wrong by crying it was only leased.
 
 
You are utterly devoid of integrity, and your sorry reputation on this and other websites is well earned.

 

[700UW]

We all know the DL employees were forced to payroll deduct for the plane.
 
A good friend of mine's dad was the Station Manager in TPA, and explained it all to us.

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

it was a sacrifice and I was not aware that TW employees did that.

but TW had already been thru one BK by the date of the article mentioned and was in the process of another.

TW employees had already endured cuts. the lease involved swapping concessions whether the article says so or not.

and since TW did not exist for little more than 5 years later, the cost to the employees did not amount to the same amount as if the aircraft had been purchased.

again, a valiant effort by TW and I did learn something.

but it wasn't the same type of deal as the Spirit of Delta.

 
 
OMG you are a sad little man.
 
First its ....
 

 
it was a sacrifice and I was not aware that TW employees did that.

 
Then after being "not aware" ... you switch to
 

 
TW employees had already endured cuts. the lease involved swapping concessions whether the article says so or not.

 
HOW DO YOU KNOW IF YOU FREELY ADMIT YOU WERE NOT AWARE???

 

[WorldTraveler]

most airline employees are intensely loyal to their employers

some are intensely loyal to their previous employer even when their carrier is acquired in a merger.

There has been enormous sniping between merger groups from both sides of any merger.



I'm not sure if you are ex-TW but I certainly felt sadness as I looked at the picture and remember what TW people went thru to save the company.

it was a valiant fight and I commend them (you?) for their efforts.

but they didn't BUY the airplane. that was exactly the terminology I used.

it is not a lack of integrity to note that TW employees did in fact pay the lease on an aircraft but did not buy it.... and couldn't have come close to buying it given that the company was gone little over half a decade after the aircraft was christened.

again, great effort and I learned.

but my statement IS indeed correct based on the information that has been provided.

here is what I said originally:

There is an aircraft sitting in a museum in ATL that was bought with voluntary employee payroll deductions. No other example exists at any other large airline in the world.

and DL employees were free to not give to the Spirit campaign. there are many who did not and continued to work at DL and obtain promotions.

it was indeed voluntarily.

 

[IORFA]

I get it now. You people just like to screw with the little idiot. Otherwise I have no idea why you people go back and forth with the mentally deranged imbecile.

 

[LD3]

Who really cares.... what's this have to do with the topic????

 

[WorldTraveler]

funny thing is that I say the same thing about youse guys.

it was cheaper than a movie ticket.

the best part of this evening's entertainment is that FWAAA - who usually does have a pretty good sense of the business aspects of the industry - affirmed once again that he doesn't think that AA will get the award.

I agree with him.

so who is screwing with who now?

 

[ThirdSeatHero]

And the re-qualifying continues .....
 
Yes, your first statement said "bought" but that was not your focus - as your subsequent posts clearly show ....
 

 
Did TW employees buy that aircraft with their own payroll deductions. If I am wrong, I'll be happy to admit it.

 

 
tell me the story of that aircraft.

was it paid for by employee payroll deductions?

 

 
not employee payroll deduction

 

 
AA employees did not pay for the plane with their own money.

 

 
can I see the story? employee payroll deductions?  


I can't see the titles but I believe it says "sponsored by the employee owners..."

true? if so, then TW and UA owned the company - and they also lost their shirts in the process. they didn't specifically pay for the plane. they bought the company and they did it to as the price of concessions.

DL employees bought the Spirit of Delta because DL DID NOT impose the cuts that other carriers were making post PATCO strike.

 

 
again, an aircraft paid for by employee ideas is NOT the same thing as one bought by employee payroll deductions.

 
 
You weren't drawing a distinction between bought or leased, you were trying to put Delta employees above all others because they "voluntarily" contributed, and you clearly believed that no other airline had.
 
When you were confronted with TWA/Wings of Pride you tried to pass it off as a concession, and now when I provide clear evidence it was "voluntary contributions" you fall all over yourself trying to be less-wrong.
 
First it was ..."I was not aware that TW employees did that."
 
Then after admitting you didn't know, suddenly your certain that ...." the lease involved swapping concessions whether the article says so or not."
 
 
 
Keep making it up as you go.

 

[WorldTraveler]

just because I did not repeat bought and employee deductions every time did not mean my focus changed one iota.

clearly this is a raw nerve for you.

I am not underestimating the contribution TW people made or what they endured for far too long.

or the treatment they received when they came to AA.

but my statement as originally made is still correct.

thank you for informing me about TW's employees' efforts toward that aircraft.

by the way, where it that aircraft today? was it taken over by AA?