Boeing

gaucho99

Senior
Dec 21, 2006
462
18
With all the discussion back and forth between people on both sides of the merger issue, ( most who will have no say so anyway ) what do you imagine the creditiors are thinking?

I've never really seen a breakdown on who are the larger creditors and who are smaller ones. I imagine Boeing is a pretty large creditor and I can see them going either way.

1. DL has been loyal to them for years, while US and HP have leaned toward Airbus in recent years. They might side with DL for their loyalty and punish US for deserting them. Even if they feel the US offer is better, they might reward DL for being loyal and vote with DL and their stand-alone plan.

2. On the other hand, Boeing might look at this as a means to hook the largest US airline into an exclusive contract to fly their planes only. They could vote for the US merger option with the stipulation that the new DL will sign an exlusive agreement to purchase or lease only Boeing Aircraft in the future, thereby eliminating a big customer of Airbus.

How big of say will Boeing have in this? I've heard conflicting reports anywhere from they are a small player to they can almost decide this on their own.
 
How big of say will Boeing have in this? I've heard conflicting reports anywhere from they are a small player to they can almost decide this on their own.
The Boeing representative is the Chairman of the creditors committee. They are not the largest unsecured creditor however. If my memory serves me correctly they are number three. I think the pension board and the Delta Pilots are larger.

In any case, some one fairly close to what is going on has indicated that Boeing is firmly in the DL camp. Please keep in mind that this is heresay only, but does make sense.

In any case, if the committee does favor DL, US does not have a chance. The first key will be whether US is granted a look at DL's books. The committee hired Bethune to protect themselves should they decide not to grant doogie his goal of reviewing this sensative information. If the decision is to deny the request, you can consider this deal dead.
 
You can get a list of claims filed (just leave everything blank) or search for claims meeting specific criteria (including by name of claimant) here.

If you search for Boeing's claims, you'll see that they filed unsecured claims for about $36.5 million - small potatoes when the estimate is that there'll eventually be about $15 Billion of unsecured claims allowed.

Some say that Boeing's position as head of the unsecured creditor committee gives them leverage, or at least influence. While the committee in effect speaks for the unsecured creditors and therefore has some influence on the judge, I don't know how much sway Boeing itself has.

Jim
 
You can get a list of claims filed (just leave everything blank) or search for claims meeting specific criteria (including by name of claimant) here.
Greetings from TUP, the birthplace of Elvis..... :p

Thanks for the link. I was just too tired and lazy to look it up.

And you know how much I hate Barbie Jets.....well I've found something worse. 10 hours driving in a 10ft U-Haul truck. Less room than a RJ-145 and NO recline at all. Just image flying over the pond and back in one of those.... :eek:

At least the airport has free internet.....
 
On the other hand, Boeing might look at this as a means to hook the largest US airline into an exclusive contract to fly their planes only. They could vote for the US merger option with the stipulation that the new DL will sign an exlusive agreement to purchase or lease only Boeing Aircraft in the future, thereby eliminating a big customer of Airbus.

This is an interesting thought. However, courts in the European Union ruled that the exclusivity agreements signed by Boeing and American, Delta, and Continental were anticompetitive and illegal. Boeing and its "exclusive" airlines mutually decided that it would be easier to void the contracts than fight a costly legal battle with Airbus and face possible sanctions in the EU. All three carriers maintained gentleman's agreements with Boeing for preferential delivery positions and pricing.

So the question for Boeing, if this is indeed a factor in their decision, would be whether or not they trust Parker and his team enough to have a handshake agreement with them.
 
You can get a list of claims filed (just leave everything blank) or search for claims meeting specific criteria (including by name of claimant) here.

If you search for Boeing's claims, you'll see that they filed unsecured claims for about $36.5 million - small potatoes when the estimate is that there'll eventually be about $15 Billion of unsecured claims allowed.

Some say that Boeing's position as head of the unsecured creditor committee gives them leverage, or at least influence. While the committee in effect speaks for the unsecured creditors and therefore has some influence on the judge, I don't know how much sway Boeing itself has.

Jim


Unsecured Creditors:
(not necessarily in order of largest claim)

PBGC
ALPA
Bank of New York
Boeing
Coca-Cola
Fidelity Advisor Series II
Fidelity High Income Fund
Main Stay High Yield Corp. Bond Fund
Pratt & Whitney
US Bank National Association
US Band and Trust
Some law firm (Atkin/Gump) was appointed as chair of committee, not Boeing.

Alice Cramden
 
Boeing is walking a fine line with US Airways AND Delta for various reasons. Not the least of which is USA's search for replacement aircraft for the 737-300/400s.

Boeing makes a wrong move and it's Airbus for sure.

A320 Driver B)
 
After reading the reorganization plan from DAL (www.deltadocket.com)

What ever happens, it is a win-win for Boeing. There is such a strong global demand, Boeing will not have a problem finding a buyer/leasor for their product.
 
Boeing makes a wrong move and it's Airbus for sure.

A320 Driver B)
One could argue that the other way around....

US already has Airbus orders - A319, A320, A321, A330-200, and A350 - with the next deliveries starting next year. Meanwhile, Boeing has already turned down a request from WN to accelerate deliveries into the 2008 timeframe.

So what will US do? Go with Boeing to get their support for the merger (and cancel the Airbus orders just renegotiated) or stick with Airbus?

US makes a wrong move and it's possibly merger off for sure....

Jim
 
Some law firm (Atkin/Gump) was appointed as chair of committee, not Boeing.

Alice Cramden

Alice,

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld was retained by the official unsecured creditors committee on November 10, 2005. However, it was never appointed as chair of the committee. In fact, I don't even think Akin Gump is a listed creditor.

Rather, the media has reported on various occasions that Boeing is the chair of the committee... most likely because they have been creditors to several bankruptcy estates.

While it is true that Boeing has some power in the committee, it is not really because it is chair of the committee, but rather, because it has significant experience in airline bankruptcies and is a credible voice among the other creditors.
 
They might side with DL for their loyalty and punish US for deserting them.

Punish who?

Schofield was the one who cancelled the Boeing orderand P****d them off in the first place. Where is Butch?

Gone.


Then Steven Wolf was the one who brokered the Airbus deal. Where is he?

Gone.

How about Gangwal? Where is he?

Gone.

Segal?

See ya.

SO in other words, Boeing has to go through FOUR CEO's prior to Parker in order to blame someone for the Boeing feud.

Believe me, Boeing holds no ill will towards Parker.
 
Boeing is doing what it deems best for Boeing to do. Boeing has a chance to keep all it's DL business and gain LCC business.

Let's face it, does anyone really think that if DL comes out as a stand-alone company that it will make deals with Airbus just to show it's anger at Boeing?
 
What ever happens, it is a win-win for Boeing. There is such a strong global demand, Boeing will not have a problem finding a buyer/leasor for their product.

Over the holidays I was speaking with an executive of Boeing. She was a junior level executive, but an executive nonetheless. We spoke a little about the DL bankruptcy and the US bid. Towards the end of the conversation we talked exclusively about the concerns of Boeing regarding the potential merger.

Basically, she relayed that the Boeing execs are not worried either way. She suggested that the market in the United States is nearly fixed in revenues and that the profits in these markets are growing stagnate (easily predicted). In essence, she thinks that the revenues would be similar regardless of the outcome of the DL/US debacle.

Moreover, she mentioned that Boeing is very concerned about the global market, particularly Asia, because those markets have been the subject of much competition. She added that Boeing should grab a strong hold on the Asian markets that may yield higher revenues than the US markets (obviously PR talk).
 
Alice,

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld was retained by the official unsecured creditors committee on November 10, 2005. However, it was never appointed as chair of the committee. In fact, I don't even think Akin Gump is a listed creditor.

Rather, the media has reported on various occasions that Boeing is the chair of the committee... most likely because they have been creditors to several bankruptcy estates.

While it is true that Boeing has some power in the committee, it is not really because it is chair of the committee, but rather, because it has significant experience in airline bankruptcies and is a credible voice among the other creditors.
--------------------------------------------------------
Gilding the Lily,

You are correct, Akin Gump, in fact is not a creditor. I knew that. Sometimes the media gets things wrong, maybe they are wrong about Boeing as the chair. ( I couldn't find information about it in the court documents)

In my opinion, Boeing has a lot of inside information, in other words, a conflict of interest. They know the deals they have made with LCC,LUV, NWA, you name the airline. I agree they know more than most about market share.

Creditor committee needs someone head of the creditors committee that doesn't have a conflict of interest in the airline industry. But it doesn't really matter, Boeing can call the shots anywhere they sit at the table, they have their fingers in all the "pies". Think I will buy more stock in Boeing, it's a winner anyway I look at it. Ka-Ching!
Alice
 
Creditor committee needs someone head of the creditors committee that doesn't have a conflict of interest in the airline industry. But it doesn't really matter, Boeing can call the shots anywhere they sit at the table, they have their fingers in all the "pies". Think I will buy more stock in Boeing, it's a winner anyway I look at it. Ka-Ching!
Alice


Alice,

No offense; but I think you are wrong. Akin Gump is simply a law firm EMPLOYED by the creditor's committee. It is not a member of the committee and, as such, cannot therefore be the chair of the committee. The courts have settled this issue: "Law firm representing creditor is not eligible to be member of creditors' committee."

Second, there is a general requirement that the committee members be "non-conflicted." But the requirement is easily met because it basically requires that the committee be composed of persons whose only relationship to debtor is that of creditor. Obviously, Boeing has met the "conflict-of-interest" requirements for the committee because the court already approved of the committee. Beyond that, there are no additional "conflict-of-interest" requirements for a chair of the committee. Actually, the bankruptcy statutes do not even really mention the chair of the committee, but rather, discusses the law as applied to the committee as a whole. See 11 U.S.C. 1102 & 1103. There are requirements regarding a fiduciary duty to other creditors; but that is not really pertinent here.

If there happens to be a creditor on the committee that has an interest adverse to another creditor, often that other creditor will be put in another committee so that it can receive adequate representation.

I think you may be confused about the laws regarding law firms employed by the committee. Regarding law firms employed by the committee, they cannot have an interest adverse to the case; but those do not apply to the actual committee members. Obviously, the creditors have an interest adverse to the debtor... they are owed money and they want to be paid!

Under the law, A committee of creditors appointed shall ordinarily consist of the persons, willing to serve, that hold the seven largest claims against the debtor of the kinds represented on such committee. Of course, the number 7 is a guideline and is why the trustee was able to originally request 9 members be in the committee.

Thus, to summarize... the law firm cannot be the chair of the committee. It has to be a current member of the committee, which narrows it to 9 members. Knowing that, I think that the media may be accurate in its statements regarding Boeing. However, it is on no consequence, as the chair is really only there to maintain order. Boeing's real power comes from what I mentioned earlier: because it has significant experience in airline bankruptcies and is a credible voice among the other creditors.

Perhaps I should invest in Boeing as well!!!