I just finished watching CNBC this morning. Michael Boyd and Julian Moltaldis were interviewed about the webcast yesterday, and whether Seigel's cost cuts were valid or hype. Both analyst cited the cuts as very necessary to stave off a very real fight for USAir's survival.
A few notes:
Michael Boyd said that he was very impressed by the fact that Seigel waived the present 4.5 mil parachute option and elected to stay the course with USAir while taking cuts himself. His opinion was that Seigel was commited to turning the airline around. He said "If USAirways can get these cost cuts, this can be a robust competitor in 18 months. The question is if labor decides to come to the party or not." In summary, Boyd's opinion was basically "it's either take the cuts or get in the unemployment line."
Julian's sentiments were very similar. Sorry, I can't remember his remarks exactly.
Now that the industry analyst's have spoken, it's time for the website analyst's to speak. I'm sure it will be more of the same trash and bash "concession stand is closed" banter, without any valid alternatives to these problems. 🙄
Regards
A few notes:
Michael Boyd said that he was very impressed by the fact that Seigel waived the present 4.5 mil parachute option and elected to stay the course with USAir while taking cuts himself. His opinion was that Seigel was commited to turning the airline around. He said "If USAirways can get these cost cuts, this can be a robust competitor in 18 months. The question is if labor decides to come to the party or not." In summary, Boyd's opinion was basically "it's either take the cuts or get in the unemployment line."
Julian's sentiments were very similar. Sorry, I can't remember his remarks exactly.
Now that the industry analyst's have spoken, it's time for the website analyst's to speak. I'm sure it will be more of the same trash and bash "concession stand is closed" banter, without any valid alternatives to these problems. 🙄
Regards