Bankruptcy-aa's Best Solution

Wretched Wrench

Veteran
Apr 21, 2003
1,626
12
When Bankruptcy Is The Best Solution

Richard Lehmann, Forbes.com, 09.23.05, 11:20 AM ET

The management at AMR’s American Airlines should be praying hard, since only an act of God can now save their company from an eventual bankruptcy filing. The bankruptcies by Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines on Sept. 14 were close enough to Sept. 11 to revive memories of its impact on the airline industry. More importantly, it leaves American as the only legacy carrier that has not resorted to a court ordered restructuring.


From my 25 years of involvement in and reporting on bankruptcies, as well as lifetime career in finance, I have learned a few things about when bankruptcy becomes both inevitable and even desirable. AMR (nyse: AMR - news - people ) has reached that point. One need only look back at history to see why this is so.

Legacy airlines are those that grew fat and happy during a time when the government regulated the industry, dictating fares and route competition. When deregulation came more than 25 years ago, new carriers sprang up and highlighted the structural flaws that regulation had instilled in this industry.

Peter Drucker, in his writings on management, pointed out that all industries had one--or more--of three common structural weaknesses. They were either labor intensive, capital intensive or vulnerable to the cost and supply of a key commodity. Airlines are in the unhappy situation of having all three weaknesses. With deregulation, legacy carriers found themselves with labor costs, work rules and cost structures that could not compete against new upstarts. One-by-one, Pan Am, TWA, Eastern, Braniff, United, US Air, Continental (nyse: CAL - news - people ) and a multitude of smaller players threw in the towel.

AMR, like its peers, used the threat of bankruptcy to extract wage concessions and work-rule changes from its employees--changes that would have allowed it to become more efficient and enable it to trim back unprofitable routes. This did not, however, relieve it of employee seniority costs (i.e. the higher wages earned by its more senior “last to go†employees and their higher pension costs)--costs, which an upstart carrier doesn’t have. But even after squeezing its labor force, AMR is still left with billions in debt from the hundreds of aircraft it does not want and the expensive airport gates that are being under-utilized. Only through bankruptcy can they quickly reduce this large and costly accumulated debt.

The current spike in fuel prices--the third vulnerability--became the straw that broke the camel’s back for Delta (nyse: DAL - news - people ). Escalating fuel costs have been a perennial problem for airlines, because they make many aircraft obsolete even before they are able to recover their cost through operations. This is why the upstart airlines fly the newest fuel-efficient planes, not cheap, used ones. In short, the aircraft fleets of legacy carriers are overvalued.

In the past, the practice for airlines was to wait until they ran out of cash, had big payments coming due or lost their credit lines before filing bankruptcy. Hence, by the time they filed, the companies had a huge hole in their balance sheet or a negative net worth. In Delta’s case, this hole was $7 billion before counting an additional $10 billion for unfunded pension liability; in Northwest’s (nasdaq: NWAC - news - people ) case, $4 billion before a $6 billion pension shortfall.

This means shareholders will lose everything. Their shares continue to trade on the stock exchange at some price, but this has long just been an exercise in musical chairs. Since the beginning of the year, Delta’s bankruptcy filing before year-end was widely expected because of the debt and pension payments coming due--cash payments you don’t want to make if bankruptcy is inevitable. The Northwest filing caught many by surprise. Its filing was also inevitable, but its choice to file the same day as Delta showed an uncommon degree of wisdom and a sense of history.

Congress can help this industry--having half the industry in bankruptcy, as with asbestos-exposed companies, does grab their attention. The unfunded-pension costs will all fall on the U.S. taxpayers unless they act.

Yes, AMR can survive out of bankruptcy for another year or two, but it would be a pointless exercise. Its shareholders have no future, and with its current debt load, profitability is not on the horizon. With the latest bankruptcy filings, they become the only carrier left without the competitive advantage of a lean balance sheet and a lower cost bankruptcy or post-bankruptcy environment. In short, bankruptcy gives Delta and Northwest an immediate competitive advantage over AMR and, thus, only quickens the inevitable.

AMR should go for a prepackaged bankruptcy by stopping all debt payments now. It should set a negotiating deadline and offer to pay all legal fees--with incentives for all of the attorneys--if the deadline is met. This may have appeal in the Chicago legal community, where United’s bankruptcy is winding down and fresh meat is being sought. AMR's debt is already selling at a 30% to 40% discount to its par value. Asking creditors to give up that amount voluntarily--rather than face several years of uncertainty--and then have to surrender even more should not be a hard sell, especially with a motivated bar.

With the Delta and Northwest bankruptcies, the airline industry is near an inflection point where industry-wide consolidation and restructuring is possible. AMR can either be a leader in this process or wait and become the final victim. Sometimes bankruptcy is the answer to your prayers.



http://www.forbes.com/2005/09/23/amr-delta..._inl_print.html
 
Well, some writer from Forbes says BK is the best (and only) option. Guess he's right and AMR execs are wrong. B)

One interesting quote from the article:

hundreds of aircraft it doesn't want

Which airplanes are those? If AA wanted to dump hundreds of airplanes, it could easily do so outside of BK.
 
FWAAA said:
Well, some writer from Forbes says BK is the best (and only) option. Guess he's right and AMR execs are wrong. B)

One interesting quote from the article:
Which airplanes are those? If AA wanted to dump hundreds of airplanes, it could easily do so outside of BK.
[post="304418"][/post]​

I bet that AA has a lot of aircraft that are in very restrictive lease agreements which would make it very difficult to dump them outside of C11.
 
FWAAA said:
Which airplanes are those? If AA wanted to dump hundreds of airplanes, it could easily do so outside of BK.
[post="304418"][/post]​
(pure speculation) What about the Eagle 37 & 44 seat RJs? As bad as RJ economics are, I can't imagine what they are like for RJs with less than 50 seats.
 
whlinder said:
(pure speculation) What about the Eagle 37 & 44 seat RJs? As bad as RJ economics are, I can't imagine what they are like for RJs with less than 50 seats.
[post="304438"][/post]​

I'm not sure there's all that much of a cost penalty for the 37 and 44 seaters -- there's a slight improvement when you take out the seats and related airframe. Plus, the -135 and -140 have added range vs. the -145.

If we were to dump 100 aircraft overnight, they'd be mostly 1983 vintage MD80's and possibly a few A300s, since there's still a market for used A300-600s as a freighter conversion.
 


If we were to dump 100 aircraft overnight, they'd be mostly 1983 vintage MD80's and possibly a few A300s, since there's still a market for used A300-600s as a freighter conversion.
[post="304442"][/post]​



They may want to get rid of the A-300's but nothing can take their place in our fleet. The passenger capacity and cargo capacity is currently worth its weight in gold.
 
Interesting how now all of the sudden there is talk of capacity reduction.

Delta reducing aircraft and flights.

Northwest reducing aircraft and flights.

AA, get rid of 100 aircraft.

If the ignorant airline management would have reduced capacity prior to and more so after 9/11 they could have saved themselves, and the employees a hell of alot of money, and attitude!
 
FWAAA said:
Well, some writer from Forbes says BK is the best (and only) option. Guess he's right and AMR execs are wrong. B)


[post="304418"][/post]​


Sounds just like you FWAAA :p . I don't agree with the writer from Forbes either. Bankruptcy will not happen at AA because of the TWU's willingness to give away the farm voluntarily. :down: Why have the hassle of bankruptcy when your unions will give you everything you want? :shock:
 
PRINCESS KIDAGAKASH said:
Sounds just like you FWAAA :p . I don't agree with the writer from Forbes either. Bankruptcy will not happen at AA because of the TWU's willingness to give away the farm voluntarily. :down: Why have the hassle of bankruptcy when your unions will give you everything you want? :shock:
[post="304576"][/post]​
AA's unions are not the only creditors. If AA went into bankruptcy, they could get concessions from suppliers, lenders, and lessors. They could get rid of debt and just walk away from aircraft leases that they no longer want to pay.
 
PRINCESS KIDAGAKASH said:
So now you're the bankruptcy cheerleader? :p
[post="304581"][/post]​

You go DALLAS DOLLY work that T-TOWN flower - I don't work for AMR - A year ago I would have wanted to but not today - with a forward looking picture they are not in the lead - after oct. and no BK they are at a large disadvantage - with fuel costs they could get what they gave to TWA - HMMMM that would be awful but you never know.. It is the airline industry afterall!!
 


If the ignorant airline management would have reduced capacity prior to and more so after 9/11 they could have saved themselves, and the employees a hell of alot of money, and attitude!
[post="304557"][/post]​


How come we all knew that and it took them so long to figure it out?
 
Skymess said:



How come we all knew that and it took them so long to figure it out?
[post="304597"][/post]​


Lately we have seen several examples of leadership being isolated from reality.
 
Bankruptcy costs a lot of money too, however I'm sure the legal talent will work it out. It's a new law and no precedent exists, a judge can use leeway. I still think they are going for NW at some point, but it all seems to depend on the weather.
 
mdarules said:
- after oct. and no BK they are at a large disadvantage -
[post="304587"][/post]​


What Exactly happens to the corporate bankruptcy procedure after October 17th that has everyone claiming AMR is doomed if it fails to file before then?

From what I've read the biggest changes are the eighteen month limit on exclusive rights to file a POR, and the fact that "Retention Bonuses" can only be paid if there is a concrete offer of a job for an executive outside the company.


One would think that AMR's not using the court system to basically stiff investors, leasing companies,various other stakeholders and the financial community that have invested in us would pay longer term dividends as opposed to running to the court, saying "Bankrupt" and skipping away from our obligations as so many others have done.