BK exit plan filed

[Redbone]

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070112/northwest_b...uptcy.html?.v=6

 

[exnw]

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070112/northwest_b...uptcy.html?.v=6

Once again the employees get screwed. Stock from 1993
paycut is worth zero and unsecured debt unions received
in recent contracts will be issued in stock for the
new NW. Some things never change.

 

[finman]

Once again the employees get screwed. Stock from 1993
paycut is worth zero and unsecured debt unions received
in recent contracts will be issued in stock for the
new NW. Some things never change.

That brings up a question I've been meaning to ask. When NWA stock was trading in the $60's, and series C stockholders had the option of cashing in their stock and nearly doubling their concessionary investment, were the unions encouraging their members to sell their stock? What did the union do, if anything, in a financial advisory role at the time?

I'm not being accusatory, or assuming people should have known at the time that the stock price would tank from there, but I was just curious as to how much advice was given at the time.

I guess in my view, NWA did honor their committment on the stock deal. The IAM had the best of both worlds, a preferred stock (unsecured loan) that was convertible to common stock. Obviously, NWA couldn't make good on that loan when it became due (NWA was not legally allowed to make the payments), and the IAM members got their 12% dividend instead, as the agreement warranted.

I hear a lot of complaining about how all of that played out, but it seems to me that all people involved had every opportunity to cash in long before it became due in 2003. I think you can only place the blame for losing out on the original value of that stock squarely on the shoulder of the individual who held that stock until the end. It appears the union made two mistakes. One was passing on the special conversion option in 1994, which would have turned every preferred share into 1.91 common shares (rather than the original 1.36 conversion). The other was not encouraging their members through reminders, or some other avenue, that while the stock was trading higher than their break-even value, they should consider cashing in.

 

[jenny@nw]

I guess in my view, NWA did honor their committment on the stock deal.

They did not. Didn't you learn anything in Accounting 101?
They declared the price and now they didn't want to pay.
Nice being a Delaware corporation, isn't it?

 

[exnw]

That brings up a question I've been meaning to ask. When NWA stock was trading in the $60's, and series C stockholders had the option of cashing in their stock and nearly doubling their concessionary investment, were the unions encouraging their members to sell their stock? What did the union do, if anything, in a financial advisory role at the time?

I'm not being accusatory, or assuming people should have known at the time that the stock price would tank from there, but I was just curious as to how much advice was given at the time.

I guess in my view, NWA did honor their committment on the stock deal. The IAM had the best of both worlds, a preferred stock (unsecured loan) that was convertible to common stock. Obviously, NWA couldn't make good on that loan when it became due (NWA was not legally allowed to make the payments), and the IAM members got their 12% dividend instead, as the agreement warranted.

I hear a lot of complaining about how all of that played out, but it seems to me that all people involved had every opportunity to cash in long before it became due in 2003. I think you can only place the blame for losing out on the original value of that stock squarely on the shoulder of the individual who held that stock until the end. It appears the union made two mistakes. One was passing on the special conversion option in 1994, which would have turned every preferred share into 1.91 common shares (rather than the original 1.36 conversion). The other was not encouraging their members through reminders, or some other avenue, that while the stock was trading higher than their break-even value, they should consider cashing in.

I can only speak for myself. I had about 410 shares of
NW stock. I did sell about a total of 200 shares. I sold
3 seperate times between 58-61 per share. The other
shares I held were ineligible to be sold at that time.
There was a time frame in which shares could be sold.
Obviously I would have sold all at 60 per share if I
could.

The IAM did not come out directly to advise whether to
sell any shares. We as employees should have known and
had the opportunity to sell our investment.

By the time my 207 shares were eligible to be sold the
value was way down. I decided to wait and see what
happened. When the stock is selling at 10.00 you always
believe things will get better.

I as well as most employees were told by NW that the
guaranteed price was in the 40's. Why would you sell
at 25 percent of the value.

Now, former IAM members will be receiving new NW stock
for the unsecured claim. Unfortunately the whole process
starts all over again.

 

[tech2101]

I can only speak for myself. I had about 410 shares of
NW stock. I did sell about a total of 200 shares. I sold
3 seperate times between 58-61 per share. The other
shares I held were ineligible to be sold at that time.
There was a time frame in which shares could be sold.
Obviously I would have sold all at 60 per share if I
could.

The IAM did not come out directly to advise whether to
sell any shares. We as employees should have known and
had the opportunity to sell our investment.

By the time my 207 shares were eligible to be sold the
value was way down. I decided to wait and see what
happened. When the stock is selling at 10.00 you always
believe things will get better.

I as well as most employees were told by NW that the
guaranteed price was in the 40's. Why would you sell
at 25 percent of the value.

Now, former IAM members will be receiving new NW stock
for the unsecured claim. Unfortunately the whole process
starts all over again.

Same here. I sold every eligible share at 59+. I then sold all the rest at about $9. All of mine was gone before we went on strike. I would never listen to any advice given by the IAM. Remember, they told all the UAL members who got sucked into the ESOP scam that they would all become millionaires 😉

 

[Don Smith]

Same here Tech...I sold all that they would allow me at $59 a share. I was told that the rest would have the $33 per share guarantee when nwa would buy us out...POOF! "We can't do that...the law won't allow us." I really blame the union leadership at the IAM for this gigantic snafu. The IAM lawyers weren't smart enough to see through and into the future that nwa had this escape clause? I always thought and still do, that nwa was greasing the IAM leadership and their lawyers pockets too. I'm absolutely certain they were all slapping themselves on their backs behind closed doors the day we agreed to that concession in 93. Not only for the 12% across the board cuts but for the far bigger savings they would realize in the stock "SWINDLE".

Same here. I sold every eligible share at 59+. I then sold all the rest at about $9. All of mine was gone before we went on strike. I would never listen to any advice given by the IAM. Remember, they told all the UAL members who got sucked into the ESOP scam that they would all become millionaires 😉

 

[Redbone]

Same here Tech...I sold all that they would allow me at $59 a share. I was told that the rest would have the $33 per share guarantee when nwa would buy us out...POOF! "We can't do that...the law won't allow us." I really blame the union leadership at the IAM for this gigantic snafu. The IAM lawyers weren't smart enough to see through and into the future that nwa had this escape clause? I always thought and still do, that nwa was greasing the IAM leadership and their lawyers pockets too. I'm absolutely certain they were all slapping themselves on their backs behind closed doors the day we agreed to that concession in 93. Not only for the 12% across the board cuts but for the far bigger savings they would realize in the stock "SWINDLE".

That's the problem with letting them get away with one swindle....they ALWAYS come back for MORE!

Every Union on this property should have taken this group to the mat with all legal means available.

 

[groundcontrol]

That's the problem with letting them get away with one swindle....they ALWAYS come back for MORE!

Every Union on this property should have taken this group to the mat with all legal means available.

I agree totally.. Problem is the Unions are all stand alone, absolutely no comradely what so ever.

United you stand, devided you fall. The Company knows this and uses it to their advantage.