NW omits Discolsure Statement from Plan of Reorganization

[Gilding the Lily]

Last Friday, NW filed a bare-bones Plan of Reorganization. Not only was its POR lacking, it was not accompanied by the usual Disclosure Statement. Without the Disclosure Statement, we are in the dark as to valuation, business strategy, financial projections, and the percentage of new stock that will go to the creditors.

The omission is definitely raising my eyebrows. Obviously, management is playing the "need more time" card. The question is... why does management need that additional time? Is it to continue/enter merger discussions or is it to fine-tune the financial details/projections to all but guarantee support from the voting creditors?

Filing the plan without the Disclosure Statement is nearly pointless... in other words, what good is it to file a plan when you don't even have the details to fulfill that plan? At best, it can be considered an insufficient piece of paper that simply shows that a little progress has been made. Management has until February 15 to file the Disclosure Statement... to show what real progress has been made.

In my mind, this omission is a signal that NW anticipates that something big (beyond a potential US/DL deal) is going to occur that would partially impact the details contained in the Disclosure Statement. Catch my drift?

 

[FWAAA]

Don't worry - it just means that some number-crunchers and legal parasites in Fort Worth haven't yet finished their part of the statement.

 

[Redbone]

Don't worry - it just means that some number-crunchers and legal parasites in Fort Worth haven't yet finished their part of the statement.

What does AA's massive debt load have to do with NW?

 

[FWAAA]

What does AA's massive debt load have to do with NW?

That's a good one!

I'm familiar with your inability to correctly interpret AMR's financial statements re: total long-term debt, but I will try to help educate you with this one snippet:

The Company reduced total debt, which includes the principal amount of airport facility tax-exempt bonds and the present value of aircraft operating lease obligations, to $18.4 billion at the end of the fourth quarter of 2006, compared to $20.1 billion a year earlier. In addition to $1.2 billion in scheduled principal payments that AMR made in 2006, the Company purchased $190 million of its outstanding debt and lease obligations during the year. AMR reduced net debt, which is defined as total debt less unrestricted cash and short-term investments, from $16.3 billion at the end of 2005 to $13.6 billion at the end of 2006.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070117/daw009.html?.v=90

Net debt of $13.6 billion and total 2006 revenue of $22.6 billion. Massive? Sounds manageable to me.

 

[Redbone]

That's a good one!

I'm familiar with your inability to correctly interpret AMR's financial statements re: total long-term debt, but I will try to help educate you with this one snippet:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070117/daw009.html?.v=90

Net debt of $13.6 billion and total 2006 revenue of $22.6 billion. Massive? Sounds manageable to me.

I stand corrected...and bravo AA! At least somebody in this business knows how to pay their bills.

 

[NewHampshire Black Bears]

I stand corrected...and bravo AA! At least somebody in this business knows how to pay their bills.

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Bravo Redbone,
Your learning fast, that FWAAA, knows his AA #### !!!!!!!!

He's weakness is on Labor/Union issues, ...BUT...Everything else, he's "dead on the money"

(I gave up arguing with him, a couple of years ago)

NH/BB,s

 

[Redbone]

///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Bravo Redbone,
Your learning fast, that FWAAA, knows his AA #### !!!!!!!!

He's weakness is on Labor/Union issues, ...BUT...Everything else, he's "dead on the money"

(I gave up arguing with him, a couple of years ago)

NH/BB,s

Actually, I only trust a company's SEC reports. I don't give too much stock in some one's recall. It doesn't take Einstein to cut and paste a 10 k. AA's only recently came out. That is why I stand corrected.

And for what it's worth...I'm not a fast learner as I am just an experienced airline person of some 25 years. I have visited this board many times periodically over the years... I just take a break for a few years and forget my handle.

 

[etops1]

this is just my specualtion and my opinion only. i truly beleive that if usairways is succesfull in aquiring delta . doug parker will pursue northwest airlines. in doing this he has eruope ,south america, the carribean, and asia. truly becoming the largest airlines. would the doj nix it? who knows but there is no overlap with it. you might say then why not just go after nw?. well in going after delta you eliminate a competitor and you have acces to the europoean market and wide body a/c you could not achieve on your own. now, by getting dal you have accsess to that and then going after nw you get the asia routes. i think the 2 dougies have already been talking. remember parker use to work for nw . i swear i would not put it past them. this is just my opinion and my speculation. i could be totally wrong. beleive me stranger things have happened.