Us Airways Ends With You

[EyeInTheSky]

US Airways Ends With You
Opinion · September 13, 2004


So long, US Airways.

Now that the nation's seventh-largest carrier has filed for bankruptcy protection a second time in as many years, many industry-watchers give it only a few months before it liquidates.

Even David Bronner recently predicted it wouldn't be saved from Chapter 11, and he ought to know. He's the airline's chairman.

But while most of the pundits are fixated on the reasons for US Airways' likely demise, one question has gone largely unasked: Who is going to pay for this failure?

Certainly, its employees will.


Read the rest here http://www.elliott.org/vault/oped/2004/usairways.htm

 

[MrAeroMan]

Factually it's a pretty inaccurate commentary.

 

[E-TRONS]

Now that the nation's seventh-largest carrier has filed for bankruptcy protection a second time in as many years, many industry-watchers give it only a few months before it liquidates.

Even David Bronner recently predicted it wouldn't be saved from Chapter 11, and he ought to know. He's the airline's chairman.
*******************************************************************

First off, Why is it a so little recalled fact that Continental filed multiple bankruptcies?? Look at them today. One of the top 100 companies to work for. Could it ever happen here?? Who knows but stanger things have happened.

Secondly, Bronner is a fool. He has hurt this airline more than anything with his arrogant liquidation threats. Yes, he is the chairman of a rigged BOD but is an idiot as far as public relations and labor relations go.

The threats have been called and now what tune are they singing to the judge?? "It is not the intention of this management to liquidate the company." Well how about that??

Big and spoiled rich Bronner....arrogant mouth of the south <_< :down:

 

[AtlanticBeach]

There has been a long and stormy relationship between the writer and US Airways. That includes a rumor that the writer blames a member of management for his firing from prior employment.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Factually it's a pretty inaccurate commentary.

[post="179465"][/post]​

MrAeroMan, what parts are wrong? Enlighten us...

 

[EyeInTheSky]

There has been a long and stormy relationship between the writer and US Airways. That includes a rumor that the writer blames a member of management for his firing from prior employment.

[post="179474"][/post]​

AtlanticBeach, Oh THAT. Funny thing is Chris Elliott is now writing for the New York Times; a big step up from PRAVDA, oh I mean, USA TODAY.

 

[LGA Fleet Service]

The Grey Lady isn't what she used to be.

 

[jimntx]

There has been a long and stormy relationship between the writer and US Airways. That includes a rumor that the writer blames a member of management for his firing from prior employment.

[post="179474"][/post]​

Where did the rumor come from? Vietnam Swift Boat Veterans for Truth? :huh:

 

[MrAeroMan]

MrAeroMan, what parts are wrong? Enlighten us...

[post="179475"][/post]​

First off he says the employees willingly gave up the 1.9 billion dollars in concessions. Anyone that was there knows there was nothing willing about it. They were faced with giving or going belly up so it wasn't like they said here is 1.9 billion dollars for you just because we like you. The CWA vote only passed by five votes for crying out loud.
Secondly, he says the taxpayers are on the hook for the ATSB loans. While that is technically correct what he fails to say is those loans are backed by assets the company put up as collateral. He says the taxpayers will be out the money when that is not the case. If it goes to Chapter 7 liquidation then the ATSB loans will be repaid with proceeds from the sale of the collateralized assets.
Thirdly, he quotes a 264 million dollar figure given to UAIR by the feds. Again, technically that is true but a large part of that money was for reimbursements for security that was mandated by the feds and that is not mentioned in there anywhere.
Lastly he states that the taxpayers will be paying for it's complete failure to operate a competitive business. Again, partly true but only in as the part where the bailout money was given to airlines after 9/11. That money was not only given to UAIR, it was also given to every airline so what is his point?

Seems as though he's got a pretty dull axe to grind.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

The Grey Lady isn't what she used to be.

[post="179485"][/post]​

It's "Old Grey Lady" and sure Jason Blair gave it a black-eye (no pun intended). I read NY Times for news, USA TODAY for laughs.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

MrAeroMan, that's emotion talking. The facts are what they are and while the commentary is harsh, there's nothing "factually" wrong with it. In fact, being a regular reader of Chris Elliott, he's actually being "kinder and gentler" to US Airways than past columns. That's just my opinion though...

 

[MrAeroMan]

It's pretty misleading imo.

 

[nycbusdriver]

I believe America West also survived two bankruptcies, and now they are a force to be reckoned with.

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Where did the rumor come from? Vietnam Swift Boat Veterans for Truth? :huh:

[post="179488"][/post]​

It's true read here http://elliott.org/blog/2003/12103.htm; you have to scroll down a bit. This isn't some "Swift Boat" thing .

 

[EyeInTheSky]

It's pretty misleading imo.

[post="179498"][/post]​

You've gone to stating the article is "factually incorrect" to "misleading." MrAeroMan you're always preaching about 'facts' on this forum, so why can't you take factual criticism of the company? I am not trying to be a jerk for asking this. I am just trying to understand your see-saw here. Is this a CCY thing?