Dave Siegel - Potomac Officers Club
- Thread starter Zeus
- Start date
USflyboi: My Name is NOT KITTY!!!!!!!!! Please read ktflyhome!!!!!!! Maybe if you would read things you would not get so mixed up. : :huh:
It's pretty obvious Dave is shaping our mainline system to complement the United system so the combination can compete with the other “BIG TWOâ€. He’s converting most of our east coast domestic system to express and moving the Boeing and Airbus equipment to long haul routes like the Caribbean etc. The big question now is who and how many of us make it to the combine mainline and how many will have to find a new career path when expressed….. Based on his remarks he obviously thinks the reservation dept is over paid … look out INT, PIT.
pitguy
Veteran
Magsau:
Magsau said: "If I posted information that you felt was detrimental to you and your company would you dare defend that? If I posted as fact or insider information that certain portions of your company were going to be sold, that your company was not going to meet its financial covenants etc. and you had first hand knowledge that this was bogus, would you sit idly by and not retort?"
USA320Pilot comments: Magsau, what I post is accurate. Could it change? Absolutely. For example, who publicly reported before it was announced the previous United - US Airways merger, the AMR carve out, the AMR ambivalence, the 21-day Hart-Scott-Rodino Act notice, the domestic alliance, the Star alliance, and many, many more items?
Moreover, maybe a corporate transaction could just save United Airlines and its employees jobs by creating a stronger company, especially since the company continues to financially hemorrhage.
(See Story)
Historically mature industries have consolidated as a means to lower costs by creating economies of scale. Furthermore, the United E&FA Department (prior to September 11) told the United board the combined business entity would add additional incremental revenue of $1.6 to $1.9 billion per annum. The business opportunity between the two companies is compelling and without such a deal, neither carrier may survive.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
Magsau said: "If I posted information that you felt was detrimental to you and your company would you dare defend that? If I posted as fact or insider information that certain portions of your company were going to be sold, that your company was not going to meet its financial covenants etc. and you had first hand knowledge that this was bogus, would you sit idly by and not retort?"
USA320Pilot comments: Magsau, what I post is accurate. Could it change? Absolutely. For example, who publicly reported before it was announced the previous United - US Airways merger, the AMR carve out, the AMR ambivalence, the 21-day Hart-Scott-Rodino Act notice, the domestic alliance, the Star alliance, and many, many more items?
Moreover, maybe a corporate transaction could just save United Airlines and its employees jobs by creating a stronger company, especially since the company continues to financially hemorrhage.
(See Story)
Historically mature industries have consolidated as a means to lower costs by creating economies of scale. Furthermore, the United E&FA Department (prior to September 11) told the United board the combined business entity would add additional incremental revenue of $1.6 to $1.9 billion per annum. The business opportunity between the two companies is compelling and without such a deal, neither carrier may survive.
Respectfully,
USA320Pilot
The poster here brings a new meaning the term long suffering, as we all suffer listening to the same mantra..... 
Who knows, maybe Jetblue or LUV will buy both U and UAL out, and give everyone a big fat raise to make restitution for working at U under duress for years on end.
Who knows, maybe Jetblue or LUV will buy both U and UAL out, and give everyone a big fat raise to make restitution for working at U under duress for years on end.
ClueByFour
Veteran
Yeah, but you have been off on the UA bankruptcy items any number of times, and in fact misrepresented the latest hearing and the judge's ruling, as refuted by the poster you quoted.USA320Pilot said:
He's got a point.
Clue:
Clue said: "Yeah, but you have been off on the UA bankruptcy items any number of times, and in fact misrepresented the latest hearing and the judge's ruling, as refuted by the poster you quoted."
USA320Pilot responds: Clue, with all due respect, I disagree with your comment above. However, if I have been wrong in the past, I always admit my mistake.
Regards,
USA320Pilot
Clue said: "Yeah, but you have been off on the UA bankruptcy items any number of times, and in fact misrepresented the latest hearing and the judge's ruling, as refuted by the poster you quoted."
USA320Pilot responds: Clue, with all due respect, I disagree with your comment above. However, if I have been wrong in the past, I always admit my mistake.
Regards,
USA320Pilot
Now Now, if this was a truthful statement, you would need a dozen pages of: I was wrong, I was wrong, I was wrong, I was wrong........USA320Pilot said:
Cosmo
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 840
- 0
Regarding the judge's tone at the United bankruptcy hearing in relation to extending the carrier's period of exclusivity to file a POR, you were clearly proved wrong by magsau who, unlike you, actually attended the hearing. Why can't you just admit it?USA320Pilot said:
Wow, the word "denial" doesn't even begin to describe the way you think!
Similar threads
- Traveler
- American Airlines
