What's new

AA headed for bankruptcy?

MCI transplant

Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2003
Messages
5,311
Reaction score
584
<_< ------- Looking more and more like TWA!!! http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/markets/markets-blog/another-airline-headed-for-bankruptcy/article2209497/?utm_medium=Feeds%3A%20RSS%2FAtom&utm_source=Report%20On%20Business&utm_content=2209497
 
<_< ------- Looking more and more like TWA!!! http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/markets/markets-blog/another-airline-headed-for-bankruptcy/article2209497/?utm_medium=Feeds%3A%20RSS%2FAtom&utm_source=Report%20On%20Business&utm_content=2209497

That's what happens to companies with the highest labor and pension obligations.
 
nothing terribly earth-shattering in the article which also seems to lack an understanding that AMR's debt can be and has been successfully restructured.. but their short-lived efforts at paying down debt has now turned into taking on debt to fund their losses.... and that debt won't go away even if AMR/AA filed for BK because it is secured by aircraft assets.
.
Even if the assets are sold and the debt is retired, it will be replaced by more expensive debt, even if it may be able to produce efficiencies.
.
and in the context of their balance sheet issues, more nimble competitors continue to chip away at AA's revenue in key business markets - because AA's cornerstone strategy is built on serving the largest and most competitive markets - which are attractive to other carriers as well.
Thus, AA's financial problems are aggravated by its inability to deliver revenue results on par with its competitors.
.
Throw in the fact that AA is not getting costs out of its operation on a systemic basis but is settling - based on the TWU agreement - for a few bones to the employees in exchange for scope relief - and the likelihood of any meaningful correction to AA's longstanding labor productivity problem is not there. Labor resolution appears to be just like the Eagle solution - expensive and not addressing the core issues until another day a long time from now.
.


All of that is a very nasty formula that is unsustainable in the long term but it doesn't mean that AA is on the verge of BK, even though more and more time to fix the problem or make any meaningful progress simply opens AA and AMR to continued criticism.
 
That's what happens to companies with the highest labor and pension obligations.
Very good...... You drank the koolaid and believe all the crap coming from managements mouth. What about the 1.6 billion per year the unions have given since 2003 ?? Please, the losses are from bAAd management decisions.
 
<_< ------- Looking more and more like TWA!!! http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/markets/markets-blog/another-airline-headed-for-bankruptcy/article2209497/?utm_medium=Feeds%3A%20RSS%2FAtom&utm_source=Report%20On%20Business&utm_content=2209497

"In that call, AMR said that it had no unencumbered assets on its balance sheet, confirming Mr. Alukos’ earlier suspicions. Yet, the company must repay about $1-billion (U.S.) in debt in 2012, followed by another $1-billion debt repayment in 2013.

Translated into the English, that means we have nothing of value left to use as collateral if we need a loan. Time to start burning the furniture. So went TWA, and Eastern, and Pan Am, and Braniff.
 
"In that call, AMR said that it had no unencumbered assets on its balance sheet, confirming Mr. Alukos’ earlier suspicions. Yet, the company must repay about $1-billion (U.S.) in debt in 2012, followed by another $1-billion debt repayment in 2013.

Translated into the English, that means we have nothing of value left to use as collateral if we need a loan. Time to start burning the furniture. So went TWA, and Eastern, and Pan Am, and Braniff.
Employees could work for free and AMR would still not show a profit!! It just goes to the oil profiteers !! ECONOMIC TREASON AT ITS BEST>
 
That is ridiculous. Are you saying that the oil companies are picking on AMR alone? All of the other airlines are managing to make a profit.
 
Very good...... You drank the koolaid and believe all the crap coming from managements mouth. What about the 1.6 billion per year the unions have given since 2003 ?? Please, the losses are from bAAd management decisions.

Unfortunately, the $1.62 billion annual concessions extracted from labor, although large and painful, weren't large enough. By time US and UA emerged from Ch 11, their labor costs were significantly lower than AA's. Then DL and NW filed and reduced their costs even below those of UA.

I agree that the losses are from poor management decisions; Exhibit A is the reluctance/refusal/moral objection (whatever it is) that Arpey has to the use of the bankruptcy code to restructure his employer. Every one of his legacy competitors has done it (some more than once). Thinking AA could go it alone without using that same cost-reduction tool was naiive.
 
Very good...... You drank the koolaid and believe all the crap coming from managements mouth. What about the 1.6 billion per year the unions have given since 2003 ?? Please, the losses are from bAAd management decisions.


Unfortunately, the $1.62 billion annual concessions extracted from labor, although large and painful, weren't large enough. By time US and UA emerged from Ch 11, their labor costs were significantly lower than AA's. Then DL and NW filed and reduced their costs even below those of UA.

I agree that the losses are from poor management decisions; Exhibit A is the reluctance/refusal/moral objection (whatever it is) that Arpey has to the use of the bankruptcy code to restructure his employer. Every one of his legacy competitors has done it (some more than once). Thinking AA could go it alone without using that same cost-reduction tool was naiive.

Unfortunately people don't understand this. The $1.6 billion wasn't enough. I don't know why people just don't want to accept the fact AA's cost in relation to its peers/competitors is just too much.

What's so difficult to understand??

I think AA should file for BK and have an "exit plan" for current management as well after they exit BK. AA does need some fresh leadership but the current leadership will be needed to guide the company through BK.
 
Exhibit A is the reluctance/refusal/moral objection (whatever it is) that Arpey has to the use of the bankruptcy code to restructure his employer. Every one of his legacy competitors has done it (some more than once). Thinking AA could go it alone without using that same cost-reduction tool was naiive.

So why is he still at the helm?
 
So why is he still at the helm?
Boren and company (BOD) are distracted by OU football.

Be real - Arpey is where he is because that's where he's wanted - probably has something to do with his daddy having been an airline executive also - perhaps favors?

Please - a CPA/MBA with a moral objection to anything that could make him/her more money? The teaching of ethics is not a strong suit of business classes.

While most of the changes to bankruptcy law in October 2005 were intended to extract more repayment from the consumer class (re: Chapter 13 or Chapter 7), nobody really knows what will take place in a business Chapter 11 filing. Before the change, the corporation got what they wanted, big bonuses all around for the ties, and a grand hosing with no grease for the workers. No body has really been able to tell me what might occur now. The rules did change but - how much and how much more latitude the BK judge may avail him/herself of is still up in the air.

Things may not be that much different but I do believe the changes derailed many corporate plans to dump obligations though the BK code. Once upon a time, news of a new corporate filing was commonplace - now, not so often. Why?

Perhaps our resident attorney could assist here.
 
If I am not mistaken, I thought D.Boren retired from the BOD. Just checked, and YES he is no longer listed.
 
So why is he still at the helm?

No idea. In July, 2010, the board promoted Horton to President, and I thought that was the signal that Arpey was done. But here we are in late 2011 and Arpey is still Chairman and CEO. Perhaps Arpey sold the board a bill of goods on the prospect that the other airlines' costs would eventually converge to equal or exceed AA's costs. Remember all the press about the billion dollars of new 3rd party revenue and the hundreds of millions of dollars of cost savings at the bases? I posted here at the time that I doubted those figures ever materialized. I think it was exaggeration. Perhaps Arpey and the board think that the market would "reward" AA for not abandoning its debts and obligations in Ch 11. Who knows?

While most of the changes to bankruptcy law in October 2005 were intended to extract more repayment from the consumer class (re: Chapter 13 or Chapter 7), nobody really knows what will take place in a business Chapter 11 filing. Before the change, the corporation got what they wanted, big bonuses all around for the ties, and a grand hosing with no grease for the workers. No body has really been able to tell me what might occur now. The rules did change but - how much and how much more latitude the BK judge may avail him/herself of is still up in the air.

Things may not be that much different but I do believe the changes derailed many corporate plans to dump obligations though the BK code. Once upon a time, news of a new corporate filing was commonplace - now, not so often. Why?

Perhaps our resident attorney could assist here.

I've said it before - nearly every airline with a cost problem (except for AA) filed prior to Oct, 2005, and thus didn't need another bankruptcy. Filing Ch 11 isn't like getting the car washed. It's expensive. And once you do it (or the second time if you're CO or US) if you did it right, you don't have much to gain by doing it again. The universe of potential airline filiers is so small that I don't see the decline in airline bankruptcies as indicating much of anything.

I disagree that there's been a dearth of corporate bankruptcies since the law was amended. GM and Chrysler filed in 2009 and are still in business. And they offloaded a lot of obligations. Tribune Company (Chicago Trib, LA Times, Chi Cubs, etc) filed late in 2008. Frank McCourt (spawn of the Devil himself) threw the Dodgers into Ch 11 earlier this year.

Frontier Airlines filed Ch 11 in early 2008 when its credit card holdbacks hit 50%, starving it of operating cash. It ended up acquired by Republic.

Others include Blockbuster, Borders, A&P, American Media (National Enquirer), Denver Post/San Jose Mercury News, WaMu, Lehman Bros, Sharper Image and others. Not all of them survived (or will survive). Of the non-survivors, their liquidation may be due to the 2005 changes in BK law. Maybe some of the businesses were dinosaurs and no longer viable no matter what was discharged in BK. Here's an article where a Skadden, Arps BK partner hints at the possibility that the 2005 changs might have played a part:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/15/business/15retail.html?pagewanted=all

According to the US bankruptcy courts (I can't imagine an incentive for them to lie about the numbers of filings), total business filings declined slowly from 2001-07 (not surprising given the relative strength of the overall economy until the 2008 meltdown) but then exploded in 2007-08. Here's the source, with a graph depicting total business and individual filings:

http://www.uscourts.gov/news/TheThirdBranch/10-11-01/Business_Bankruptcies_Stabilize_in_2010.aspx

IMO, the 2005 changes that applied to business filings were cosmetic and not all that meaningful. They were a reaction to the outrageous odyssey that was the UAL bankruptcy that went on for more than three years. But like most of what Congress does, it made for good soundbites on the news but didn't have all that much real impact. GM and Chrysler filed and emerged intact but smaller. Perhaps the 2005 changes have made execs try a little harder to fix their companies' problems outside Ch 11. That's probably good news for everyone except high-priced bankruptcy lawyers and related parasites (investment bankers, accountants, consultants, etc).
 
.
A
Unfortunately people don't understand this. The $1.6 billion wasn't enough. I don't know why people just don't want to accept the fact AA's cost in relation to its peers/competitors is just too much.

What's so difficult to understand??

I think AA should file for BK and have an "exit plan" for current management as well after they exit BK. AA does need some fresh leadership but the current leadership will be needed to guide the company through BK.
because as much as you and AA want to proclaim otherwise, AA's labor costs at the per employee level ARE NOT HIGHER... AA employee costs were cut just as much as everyone else and other carriers that are able to make a profit are paying MORE in pension costs including the DB plans still on their books.
.
The simple fact is that AA has not grown the airline in 10 years and thus has a very senior and expensive workforce and the size of the workforce is too large for the size of AA's network.
The notion that individual employee salaries need to be cut is completely false.
AA needs to use its assets more efficiently and either expand the size of the airline or reduce the workforce.
Cutting individual salaries will only alienate the 80% of the people AA needs to get the job done.
And AA has relatively little benefit to be gained from a BK filing except for to reduce labor costs which does not have to be done in BK to begin with.
AA will file when its cash gets too low and it can't refinance anymore.
Until then it will continue to limp along w/ competitors banging away at AA's core revenue.
 
Unfortunately, the $1.62 billion annual concessions extracted from labor, although large and painful, weren't large enough. By time US and UA emerged from Ch 11, their labor costs were significantly lower than AA's. Then DL and NW filed and reduced their costs even below those of UA.

I agree that the losses are from poor management decisions; Exhibit A is the reluctance/refusal/moral objection (whatever it is) that Arpey has to the use of the bankruptcy code to restructure his employer. Every one of his legacy competitors has done it (some more than once). Thinking AA could go it alone without using that same cost-reduction tool was naiive.


Management at UAL Delta are borderline Madoff ,they used BK as a tool. A money making tool for themselves....at the expense of the American Worker...These laws were not intended to pilfer employee's....No integrity in my book just plain American Greed....
The moral issue Arpey's right .... The scum bag no moral leader's of todays business will have their day with the man upstairs...
 

Latest posts

Back
Top