Cosmo:
Current industry fundamentals hurt both companies.
A big difference between US Airways and United is that the Arlington-based carrier has the loan guarantee and has been able to re-negotiate terms. On the other hand, United was rejected by the board, has been unable to articulate a business plan/POR, keeps missing bankruptcy court POR deadlines, and now will have more difficulty obtaining the loan guarantee due to deteriorating fundamentals.
In fact, there are mounting reports, such as the recent Aviation Week editorial, that United will not obtain the loan guarantee again. When you consider United lost over $6 million per day in January and cannot hedge fuel, even with the uptick in summer time travel, it may be difficult, if not impossible, to convince the board that the company can obtain a 7% profit margin in 7 years.
What I find interesting is how the United posters previously objected to me posting on their board and even complained to the USAviation.com principals, but they continue to banter on the US Airways board. Somewhat hypocritical or maybe schizophrenic, wouldn't you agree?
In fact, why don't the United employees post on their board? I do not post on their board and have no interest in doing so, but that's clearly not the desire of the United employees.
Interesting...
Regardless, during the past two weeks US Airways and ALPA settled the MDA grievance and reached a new tentative accord on scope relief. These agreements enabled US Airways to obtain GECAS and ATSB support, as well as prevent S&P from lowering the credit rating. GECAS can pull the RJ financing if the credit rating is lowered to C+, thus this week's news has been good from a corporate perspective for those parties interested in the success of US Airways.
By the way, what does this discussion and the continued United employee thread hijacking have to do with EMB-170 simulators going to the Charlotte Training Center?
Separately, I once again want to go on record that I do not want to merge with United and I believe it would be in US Airways' best interests to terminate the code share agreement between the business partners and for the Arlington-based company to strike a deal with another carrier like Northwest (since this option now appears to be available).
Regards,
USA320Pilot
Current industry fundamentals hurt both companies.
A big difference between US Airways and United is that the Arlington-based carrier has the loan guarantee and has been able to re-negotiate terms. On the other hand, United was rejected by the board, has been unable to articulate a business plan/POR, keeps missing bankruptcy court POR deadlines, and now will have more difficulty obtaining the loan guarantee due to deteriorating fundamentals.
In fact, there are mounting reports, such as the recent Aviation Week editorial, that United will not obtain the loan guarantee again. When you consider United lost over $6 million per day in January and cannot hedge fuel, even with the uptick in summer time travel, it may be difficult, if not impossible, to convince the board that the company can obtain a 7% profit margin in 7 years.
What I find interesting is how the United posters previously objected to me posting on their board and even complained to the USAviation.com principals, but they continue to banter on the US Airways board. Somewhat hypocritical or maybe schizophrenic, wouldn't you agree?
In fact, why don't the United employees post on their board? I do not post on their board and have no interest in doing so, but that's clearly not the desire of the United employees.
Interesting...
Regardless, during the past two weeks US Airways and ALPA settled the MDA grievance and reached a new tentative accord on scope relief. These agreements enabled US Airways to obtain GECAS and ATSB support, as well as prevent S&P from lowering the credit rating. GECAS can pull the RJ financing if the credit rating is lowered to C+, thus this week's news has been good from a corporate perspective for those parties interested in the success of US Airways.
By the way, what does this discussion and the continued United employee thread hijacking have to do with EMB-170 simulators going to the Charlotte Training Center?
Separately, I once again want to go on record that I do not want to merge with United and I believe it would be in US Airways' best interests to terminate the code share agreement between the business partners and for the Arlington-based company to strike a deal with another carrier like Northwest (since this option now appears to be available).
Regards,
USA320Pilot
