AA moves to reject leases on six more MD-80s and 11 757s

[FWAAA]

Yes that was me, I had forgot about that. That was from a Panasonic Rep.

http://airlineforums.com/topic/51871-first-757-to-outsourced-mro/page__view__findpost__p__859263

104 mods reduced to 64? A reduction of 40 . . . Coincidentally, of AA's 124 total 757s, 40 of them are leased (31 operating leases, nine capital leases). I assume (but don't know whether) that the 18 75Ls are owned, not leased.

AA might not get rid of all 40 immediately, but they're probably short-timers. In the filing in the OP, AA has already filed to reject 11 of them - expect to see filings to reject another 29 in coming days.

 

[damajagua]

Well, if we were like some who work for AA and posted here, we'd be denying that AA had filed to reject these leases. There's a fair amount of denial residing here. 😀

In October, before the Ch 11 filing, AA said it would retire "up to" 11 757s in 2012. I'm thinking that the total will actually be higher now that AA is in bankruptcy.

LOL
You are so right. Rock Solomon running for APFA president is campaigning telling people that AMR
bankruptcy is not real. Talk about denial.

 

[damajagua]

From corporate comunications
"American wants to get out of leases on 18 aircraft, most of which are parked in the desert, according to a court filing made on Friday"

I wonder how many aircrafts that are currently in service
AA plans to ground?

 

[American6]

American will eventually dump all It's MD aircraft. They are being replaced by the A320, A320neo (future aircraft), and according to some source Embraer E-Jets like the E170

 

[damajagua]

American will eventually dump all It's MD aircraft. They are being replaced by the A320, A320neo (future aircraft), and according to some source Embraer E-Jets like the E170

According to airbus that order is on hold.

 

[eolesen]

Airbus's loss. Boeing will gladly fill the void to keep AA all-Boeing.

 

[FWAAA]

Not to be hyper-technical, but once AA filed for Ch 11, it had the power to reject any or all executory contracts, including contracts for new planes.

The counter-parties to those contracts have no such power - the power to cancel is one-sided with the debtor (AA). So of course Airbus can no longer treat contracts with AA as firm until AA affirms those contracts. Same with Boeing, although I read that AA and Boeing didn't get far enough along on their huge order for even AA to treat those orders as firm. Only this year's 30-some 738s are firm as AA recently got court approval to continue those purchases.

This is similar to the treatment of the 787-9 orders that AA placed in 2008; because of AA's one-sided ability to cancel those orders that is part of AA's long-term contract with Boeing (even before the Ch 11 filing), AA has called the order for 42 787-9s "firm" yet Boeing has been unable to do so until AA notifies Boeing that it will take delivery. Since 2008, AA has described this right to cancel in its SEC filings - it's contingent on agreeing with the pilots on a payrate for the 787-9s.

IIRC, NW took delivery of previously-ordered widebodies (A330s?) during its bankruptcy, so I suspect that AA will get court approval for the new planes and that the creditors committee will not object once AA lays out the fuel and maintenance savings of scrapping the MD-80s and various others (762s, some 757s and maybe some of the oldest 763s).

 

[BoeingBoy]

Since there's no way that AA can replace all the older less fuel efficient planes in it's fleet within the next 12-18 months (without shrinking drastically) I suspect that a lot of effort is going into rescheduling lease expiration's/mortgages to better match delivery schedules in addition to reducing lease/mortgage costs. When a lessor/note holder is looking at a choice between taking back a plane with limited options for leasing/mortgaging it somewhere else or working with AA to keep the plane flying, the lessors/note holders can be pretty cooperative.

Jim

 

[Veritas]

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner.

Since there's no way that AA can replace all the older less fuel efficient planes in it's fleet within the next 12-18 months (without shrinking drastically) I suspect that a lot of effort is going into rescheduling lease expiration's/mortgages to better match delivery schedules in addition to reducing lease/mortgage costs. When a lessor/note holder is looking at a choice between taking back a plane with limited options for leasing/mortgaging it somewhere else or working with AA to keep the plane flying, the lessors/note holders can be pretty cooperative.

Jim

 

[Buck]

Since there's no way that AA can replace all the older less fuel efficient planes in it's fleet within the next 12-18 months (without shrinking drastically) I suspect that a lot of effort is going into rescheduling lease expiration's/mortgages to better match delivery schedules in addition to reducing lease/mortgage costs. When a lessor/note holder is looking at a choice between taking back a plane with limited options for leasing/mortgaging it somewhere else or working with AA to keep the plane flying, the lessors/note holders can be pretty cooperative.

Jim

As well as the re-engine program on the 737's. There must be a point where the company will not take a aircraft without the new engine configuration, as far as the fuel cost savings the company is always looking for.

 

[American6]

I think AA could use a can of this?

That is fake, you can't remove an aircraft by using this can. You have to dismantle it using tools, not a spray can. Still kinda funny though!

 

[BoeingBoy]

You have to dismantle it using tools, not a spray can.

Actually, all AA needs is a pen to sign the section 365 filings that the lawyers write. Dismantling a plane doesn't remove it since the parts are all still there and the lease/mortgage payments still need to be made.

Jim

 

[Buck]

Actually, all AA needs is a pen to sign the section 365 filings that the lawyers write. Dismantling a plane doesn't remove it since the parts are all still there and the lease/mortgage payments still need to be made.

Jim

Then our government can buy them from the owner sell them to a leasing company and lease them back?

 

[BoeingBoy]

I guess that the government could do that. I don't see it happening, though. I expect that the majority of lessors/mortgage holders will agree to concessions.

Jim

 

[enough already]

That is fake, you can't remove an aircraft by using this can. You have to dismantle it using tools, not a spray can. Still kinda funny though!

Oh, wow! I'm glad you explained that... :-/