Hearing On Us Airways Aircraft Leases Today

USA320Pilot

Veteran
May 18, 2003
8,175
1,539
www.usaviation.com
Hearing on US Airways' aircraft leases today

US Airways heads back to bankruptcy court in Alexandria this morning looking for some leeway on scheduled lease payments on its airplanes.

The airline wants to extend the time by which it must decide which, if any, aircraft leases to reject -- a power it has because it is under bankruptcy court protection. Ordinarily, that period would expire this week. The company has previously said it intends to maintain the size of its fleet at about 280 aircraft.

In a court filing last week, US Airways said it is "currently undergoing an extensive restructuring which may well include a rationalization of (its) fleet by rejecting or abandoning costly and/or surplus aircraft."

US Airways’ aircraft debt, EETC, and lease negotiations are being handled by John Lutz of the Seabury Group. Lutz was very successful at negotiating lower aircraft lease expenses during the company’s first trip through bankruptcy. Some of US Airways’ planes have below market value lease expenses and could be difficult to renegotiate, but the company needs to extract as many concessions as possible. I understand Lutz is playing hardball with financiers and it’s too early to tell what will be the post bankruptcy fleet plan will be, provided the company survives, but here are some key points. The current February schedule includes:

 281 mainline aircraft.

 Increased aircraft utilization equal to 27 aircraft.

 Increased aircraft utilization with average block times per day increasing 55 minutes for B737s and 95 minutes for non-B737 aircraft.

 US Airways will begin its quick turn program in February too, with the late flight target numbers being reduced by 5 minutes.

 The new schedule will implement PHL rolling hub operations, adding two CLT banks to increase the number to 10 total, basically shifting PIT flying to the new FLL Caribbean/Latin American “focus cityâ€, and more point-to-point. New key markets are DCA to ATL, IAH, DFW, CLE, DTW, & ORD.

From a pilot staffing viewpoint, the February permanent bid could be out shortly after December 1 and will have the following drivers:

 Age 60 retirements – There are 26 age 60 retirements for the remainder of 2004 and I believe 144 in 2005.

 The increased aircraft utilization will result in about 270 additional pilot positions per the new “work rulesâ€.

 Permanent Bid Closing Committee Chairman Bruce Beighlie told the MEC last summer the company was about 200 pilots understaffed, which in my opinion could be about 250 pilot under the old work rules.

 It’s my understanding the company has been receiving 6 to 10 pilot notifications of colleagues inquiring about leaving the company. The attrition could be as high as 400 pilots before the end of the year, although the number is unclear because pilot’s seeking to retire early can pull their letter the day before their scheduled retirement. This number is uncertain, but could be significant.

 For the first 10 months of 2004, the company ha saveraged about 20 pilots per month who went on LTD.

 The October 28 ALPA code-a-phone reported the Retirement and Insurance Committee reports that management has agreed to allow pilots to retire on January 1, 2005 without being impacted by the post-retirement health insurance provisions of LOA 93. This means that pilots who retire by December 31, 2004, can still retire under the pre-October 15 post-retirement health insurance provisions, which are outlined in LOA 84.

 On November 4, BOS F/O Rep Garalnd Jones wrote, "Just got a message from the NC that the company has told them that they do not plan to go after the retired pilot's medical benefits for those who are already retired and are under 65, including any pilot who retires before Jan.1, 2005. In other words, the company has no plan to use the 1114 process (same as the 1113, but pertains to retiree's benefits) while in bankruptcy to change the current benefits that our under 65 retired pilots are now receiving. Additionally, as the changeover to the LOA # 93 provisions start post Jan. 1, 2005, all pilots who retire before that date will thus be eligible for full retiree medical benefits as well," Jones said.

The October 29 code-a-phone reported ALPA and the Company met to discuss current and projected staffing needs given the new provisions of LOA 93 and the forecast flying for the February 2005 schedule. Based on the current projections for fleet size and block hours for February, the furloughs anticipated with the increased productivity provisions of LOA 93 may be minimal, if not at all. The Company and ALPA will continue to evaluate the staffing requirements, and we will provide you with those calculations as soon as they are available. These calculations and projections will be a major driver in the next permanent bid.

Regards,

USA320Pilot
 
According to the lessors and US Airways finance, there has been no talks with the lessors except GE.
 
700, you constantly try and aggrivate, agitate, and pretend your somoen in the know. Give it up man and do what you do best in the lavs!
 
Like I have said you do not know me nor where I have been nor assigned too.

But those who actually know me (not you) know that I am in the know, and just watch and see what happens.

If you say I am not in the know, prove it, yes that was a challenge issued prove it.
 
The leasing companies want their airplanes back.. They have a market for them.

Southwest was quoted as saying "We will only take additional -700 aircraft and
-300 aircraft as they become available".. Southwest will also only accept -300 aircraft with the Round Dial Analog Cockpit.. US Airways is the second largest operator of Round Dial -300's.. Do you think for one min. the leasing companies don't know this..

Ah hmmm.. Southwest will take these off of our hands to fuel growth in PHL or we can stick it out with US Airways, Southwest will get the aircraft they need for the PHL expansion. They will crush US Airways and we will be stuck with these aircraft.. Hmmmm.. Does it take a rocket scientist to figure this one out.

USA320 - Playing hardball with the leasing companies? Where on earth do you get that? What size club does US Airways have this time around? The leasing companies have the upper hand this time.. The market overseas is driving Airbus and Boeing Leases.. US Airways has nothing to play hardball with.. Nothing..

You are a dreamer in many dimensions.. On top of the company having no club to swing you have to pay these companies eventually.. You don't get the keep the aircraft, pour hours on top of hours on them and pay the leasing company or the bank nothing!! The judge is there to watch out for the creditors.. If they say they can fly their aircraft with other carriers and get paid the judge is going to have to look at that very closely.. Its their asset and US Airways is in Violation of the lease agreement. Section 1110 only buys them a little time.. Not a free ride..

Face it USA320.. Your going to be flying RJ's for MESA in less than a year and you know why.. Your going to love it.
 
USA320Pilot said:
The airline wants to extend the time by which it must decide which, if any, aircraft leases to reject -- a power it has because it is under bankruptcy court protection. Ordinarily, that period would expire this week. The company has previously said it intends to maintain the size of its fleet at about 280 aircraft.

...

US Airways’ aircraft debt, EETC, and lease negotiations are being handled by John Lutz of the Seabury Group. Lutz was very successful at negotiating lower aircraft lease expenses during the company’s first trip through bankruptcy. Some of US Airways’ planes have below market value lease expenses and could be difficult to renegotiate, but the company needs to extract as many concessions as possible. I understand Lutz is playing hardball with financiers and it’s too early to tell what will be the post bankruptcy fleet plan will be, provided the company survives...

From this layman's point of view, it cannot be a good sign that the lessors (who are creditors, by the way) are pressing the company to assume or reject the current leases. To me, it says that they feel they have more lucrative opportunities for the aircraft available, or that they feel they're going to get shafted on what they're already owed in the bankruptcy. By the same token, it says that the lessors aren't particularly interested in negotiating with the company to lower lease rates. From reading the filings, and the relevant section of the bankruptcy code, the court may not prohibit the lessors from exercising their rights after the 60-day automatic stay unless both the trustee and the lessor agree (and the court approves that agreement).

 The new schedule will implement PHL rolling hub operations, adding two CLT banks to increase the number to 10 total, basically shifting PIT flying to the new FLL Caribbean/Latin American “focus cityâ€￾, and more point-to-point. New key markets are DCA to ATL, IAH, DFW, CLE, DTW, & ORD.

I think that schedule is built on a whole lot of optimism. I doubt that the airline will have the aircraft it needs to actually meet the proposed schedule. The airline has filed a motion to reject leases on 12 737-300, 7 737-400, 3 757-200, and 3 767-200 aircraft.

 On November 4, BOS F/O Rep Garalnd Jones wrote, "Just got a message from the NC that the company has told them that they do not plan to go after the retired pilot's medical benefits for those who are already retired and are under 65, including any pilot who retires before Jan.1, 2005. In other words, the company has no plan to use the 1114 process (same as the 1113, but pertains to retiree's benefits) while in bankruptcy to change the current benefits that our under 65 retired pilots are now receiving. Additionally, as the changeover to the LOA # 93 provisions start post Jan. 1, 2005, all pilots who retire before that date will thus be eligible for full retiree medical benefits as well," Jones said.

Is this comparable to the company's assurances that they did not intend to go after the pilots' defined benefit pension plan?
 
sfb said:
I think that schedule is built on a whole lot of optimism. I doubt that the airline will have the aircraft it needs to actually meet the proposed schedule. The airline has filed a motion to reject leases on 12 737-300, 7 737-400, 3 757-200, and 3 767-200 aircraft.
[post="199280"][/post]​

And they also say in the motion that they anticipate retaining some of the aircraft after renegotiating better terms. The only aircraft in the motion that they're definitely getting rid of are a single 737-300 and a few Dash 8's.
 
Well, what they actually said was:

"To the extent that the Debtors and the respective Lessors are able to negotiate 1110 Agreements with respect to certain Leased Aircraft Equipment prior to the Rejection Date, it is the Debtors’ intention to remove such Leased Aircraft Equipment from Exhibit B."

One can read that however one wants....

Jim
 
i saw in the computer system at work today that our aircraft tail number 524 or 5 (cant remember) was flown to mia and retired. is this part of that plan that they went to court today rather than the 18th of nov?
 
justaumechanic said:
The leasing companies want their airplanes back.. They have a market for them.

Southwest was quoted as saying "We will only take additional -700 aircraft and
-300 aircraft as they become available".. Southwest will also only accept -300 aircraft with the Round Dial Analog Cockpit.. US Airways is the second largest operator of Round Dial -300's.. Do you think for one min. the leasing companies don't know this..

[post="199278"][/post]​

From www.airportplanning.com

By Michael Boyd

Hit Four: Aircraft Financing & Aircraft Values

If a major airline system goes down, plan on some fast times in the financial world. Like, anybody "holding paper" on certain types of airliners may want to consider buying a Wallpapers-To-Go franchise.

The fleets that will be grounded could cause aircraft values to fall faster than a Kerry-Edwards yard sign. No, in most cases they won't get picked up quickly by other carriers. There's been speculation that Southwest would grab US Airways' 737-300s if that airline bites the dust. Maybe. But only if the integration of those airplanes into WN wouldn't break the bank. The 737s at the two airlines might look the same. But it can take a lot of money to get them shifted from one airline to another. Cockpit and system commonality are issues. Reconfiguring aircraft cabins can be done fairly easily, unless things like galleys make it more time consuming and expensive. Then there's the issue of maintenance programs, which will almost certainly need to be "bridged" from US Airways to Southwest. Depending on the complexity, the expense could do in any airplane deal.
 
The hearing appears to be over for today.

On the motion to extend the time to assume or reject non-residential property leases to the earlier of 4/30/05 or the approval of a POR, the motion was granted. The motion was opposed mainly by various airport authorities who said that the time extension was too long. The company amended it's proposed order granting the motion to provide additional protection for the claimants.

On the motion to extend the time to assume or reject aircraft leases (section 1110), all it says is that the issue was resolved. Guess we'll have to wait till the judges order or whatever is posted to get further details.

Jim
 
BoeingBoy said:
On the motion to extend the time to assume or reject aircraft leases (section 1110), all it says is that the issue was resolved. Guess we'll have to wait till the judges order or whatever is posted to get further details.

This is completely speculation, but one possible "resolution" would be that the cure payments were made, or that the company and judge agreed that the cure payments on the leases would be treated as administrative expenses, which receive the highest priority in the event of a liquidation of the estate. But, as you said, we have to wait and see what the actual resolution was. As far as I could tell, the creditors had a strong case and weren't too keen on letting the company drag its feet for too long.
 
Head of Airbus China said yesterday that the lack of readily available A320/A319 was hurting them in Asia Pacific, and that the surplus has already been absorbed by LCC. I.E. that LCC airlines looking to expand will have to turn to B737/MD80 leases...

So, I would expect aircraft owners to get a bit tougher with US carriers for narrowbodies at least