Back in 2003 management claimed that they were "on the steps of the court" ready to file for C-11 if the unions did not agree to massive concessions despite the fact that they had over $1billion in cash. Well here we are 9 years later and after four years of dragging their feet we find that management is once again saying they are broke, only now they had $4 billion in the bank.
Back in 2003 the company claimed that despite the massive $1billion reserve of cash they were technically bankrupt because of a covenant they had on a loan that stipulated that they maintain a cash balance of more than $1billion or the lender could call in the loan. How much was the loan for? $800 million. Admittedly $200 million may be thin nowadays, doesnt seem that long ago that Crandal claimed that with a War Chest of just $500 million he could beat a pilots strike.
Back in 2003 I thought it was a scam, a company looking to feign financial distress agrees essentially to borrow and pay interest on money they cant use. Not only that but tie up an extra $200 million to boot! Then have the company use the fact that they are approaching an unrealistic threshold of always having over a billion in cash to squeeze concessions from their workers under threat of a "technical" bankruptcy.
Well here we are 9 years later and despite having $4 billion in cash management is claiming they are broke again, how much you want to bet that once again they have this huge sum of cash tied up in covenants of convienience?
Back in 2003 the company claimed that despite the massive $1billion reserve of cash they were technically bankrupt because of a covenant they had on a loan that stipulated that they maintain a cash balance of more than $1billion or the lender could call in the loan. How much was the loan for? $800 million. Admittedly $200 million may be thin nowadays, doesnt seem that long ago that Crandal claimed that with a War Chest of just $500 million he could beat a pilots strike.
Back in 2003 I thought it was a scam, a company looking to feign financial distress agrees essentially to borrow and pay interest on money they cant use. Not only that but tie up an extra $200 million to boot! Then have the company use the fact that they are approaching an unrealistic threshold of always having over a billion in cash to squeeze concessions from their workers under threat of a "technical" bankruptcy.
Well here we are 9 years later and despite having $4 billion in cash management is claiming they are broke again, how much you want to bet that once again they have this huge sum of cash tied up in covenants of convienience?