If Airways vanishes?

Ukridge

Senior
Aug 27, 2002
354
0
Seems to be quite in vogue lately to divide assets among the victors. Before one starts to salt the fields of Carthage (United in this case) may I ask the contrapositive of what USAirways employees are wondering: What if it is Airways that is the one to liquiadte and not United? I pull out my not for air or sea navigation map of the former colonies and see the Pittsburgh and Philidelphia are not that far from Washington. Would not United benefit from some of the pressure being removed from its transatlantic routes? Would not an immediate removal of that capacity assist in relaxing the capacity problems just a little? It seems that every drop in the capacity can only help the end revenue projection of the other carriers. Either way, lives would be impacted for the worst. The rich will get richer and the poor poorer and everyone will prade around in great glee shouting that the system worked. What will your esteemed president say when your unemployment rate shoots above 7%?
Note to the unitiated. A literary device called irony and sarcasm were employed in this post - read it in that light
 
Airways WILL NOT vanish. They have come too far and sacrificaed too much. If such a horror were to happen, UAL would probably leave ACA to handle IAD and move mainline ops to PHL, as it is the #1 O/D city on Airways map.
 
Fear sensitizes.

US Airways employees have had to suffer rampant what-if speculation about a breakup ever since the airline declared Chapter 11. There were some very dark days for employees, and it probably didn't make things easier seeing other airline aficionados/employees licking their chops over the spoils. I observed some bristling, but I think most employees realized that it is just human nature to speculate. Either that, or they were simply too depressed to react.

It now appears as if US Airways may very well emerge from Chapter 11 this month. The existence of a "What parts of UAL will end up with USAir?" thread could be viewed as one of the very first signs that the clouds are lifting, and US Airways employees are finally allowing themselves to hope. I doubt the intent is to grave-dance. When you've been through the wringer, it is impossible not to develop empathy.

United employees--rather than taking understandable offense--might view the thread in question in a hopeful light: as dark as things may sometimes appear, it is possible to emerge from seemingly intractable circumstances.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #4
atc - Your post was probably one of the most reasoned and empathetic that I have read on these forums. You probably noted from my sarcastic overtones that I tire of some of the infighting I witness when I think the emphasis should be on level and serious debate. With the inordinate stress that employees, of all work groups, at all airlines, are suffering I can fully understand some "blue skying" as a way to find some hope.
I wish all of you at your respective carriers the very best of luck.
 
Good People of UA,

I being a U employee....cannot help but laugh at the prospects of us buying any part of your esteemed airline. I also do not believe UA is going to liquidate either.

I do have my concerns..out of respect for how you folks will emerge from BK....as much as I have concerns about my own airlines issues and prospects....but I do believe we shall both survive....and hopefully gain great benefit from our established code share aggreement.

Don't take the nay-sayers too much to heart.....Dr. Bronners (RSA)....comments about looking at possibly buying some of your assets , was every bit of an ill timed..and ill concieved statement....as was his threats of U's liquidation prior to the peak holiday travel season was to us.

Yes....U's employees are looking at the light at the end of the tunnel....but they never lose sight of the length of the tunnel either. Everytime with think we have crested the hill , yet another issue materializes . You folks will see much of the same.....take it in stride.


 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/9/2003 7:41:49 PM AOG-N-IT wrote:

Good People of UA,

I being a U employee....cannot help but laugh at the prospects of us buying any part of your esteemed airline. I also do not believe UA is going to liquidate either.

I do have my concerns..out of respect for how you folks will emerge from BK....as much as I have concerns about my own airlines issues and prospects....but I do believe we shall both survive....and hopefully gain great benefit from our established code share aggreement.

Don't take the nay-sayers too much to heart.....Dr. Bronners (RSA)....comments about looking at possibly buying some of your assets , was every bit of an ill timed..and ill concieved statement....as was his threats of U's liquidation prior to the peak holiday travel season was to us.

Yes....U's employees are looking at the light at the end of the tunnel....but they never lose sight of the length of the tunnel either. Everytime with think we have crested the hill , yet another issue materializes . You folks will see much of the same.....take it in stride.


AOG-N-IT for the defense
----------------
[/blockquote]
Well let's see, United is denied 388mil due it by the IRS (probebly needed to meet march or april DIP targets)and now no more restrictions from employee owners on divestitures(sunset clause below 20%)!!!

Tilton wants LCC, unions dating TPG who says chop 20-25% size. Hemmm, could Tilton say have it your way we need the money, sell LHR for say 500mil.

Who would be the likely purchaser?

AA, no they already have LHR from purchase from TWA/ ichan days.

DAL, no they would face a regulatory hurdle as they are already the biggest carrier over the north atlantic.

CO or NW, well they are already tightly hitched to DAL with that recent code share.

Ah yes USAirways, already a code share partner of United, soon to be in the Alliance with Lufthansa and the rest, why not keep the money in the groups pocket.

But where to get the money for such a purchase? RSA (Dave Bronner) already says he will gladely purchase if it will be advantageous to his stock in USAirways!!

Oh, don't forget who will have a stake in USAirways prosperity. Good ole uncle sam himself( the same one who approves or disapproves routes of international carriers)!!

Just my take, any thoughts??
 
You can no longer just "sell" a route goverened by Bermuda II. UA can not just put LHR on the block. The brits put in regulations after Pan Am did the very same thing, which they did not want to happen. I will try to find some of the documentation I read on this for posting. Needless to say, any airline that wished to acquire UA's LHR slots would face significant regulatory hurdles from the UK govt, not to mention the intense lobbying from Virgin and BA/AA trying to prevent it. Tony Blair is currently in no position politically to push a favor thru for the good ole US of A either.

British Midland would be a more likely candidate to get those slots imho, as they have been begging to get into LHR and are of course, still a Star Alliance member. This would keep it in the family so to speak, and have a much greater chance of regulatory approval by the UK.

My 2Cents
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 3/10/2003 4:58:42 AM GGpillow wrote:


You can no longer just "sell" a route goverened by Bermuda II. UA can not just put LHR on the block. The brits put in regulations after Pan Am did the very same thing, which they did not want to happen. I will try to find some of the documentation I read on this for posting. Needless to say, any airline that wished to acquire UA's LHR slots would face significant regulatory hurdles from the UK govt, not to mention the intense lobbying from Virgin and BA/AA trying to prevent it. Tony Blair is currently in no position politically to push a favor thru for the good ole US of A either.

British Midland would be a more likely candidate to get those slots imho, as they have been begging to get into LHR and are of course, still a Star Alliance member. This would keep it in the family so to speak, and have a much greater chance of regulatory approval by the UK.

My 2Cents
----------------
[/blockquote]
I believe the US gov would want something in return? It negotiated x amount of routs from USA to LHR. If these slots were sold to a non USA company they surly would'nt be put in service to the USA!!

To that end the value of the LHR slots is only in their use an not sale.
 
The slots are LHR slots, not route authorities, the UK can do as they see fit, the US would without a doubt protest, but I don't know what good it would do them given the constraints of BII. I suppose they could limit BA's authorities to from the US, but that would start down a rather precarious path of one upmanship that neither we or the UK probably are interested in.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #10
GGPillow wrote: "The slots are LHR slots, not route authorities, the UK can do as they see fit, the US would without a doubt protest, but I don't know what good it would do them given the constraints of BII. I suppose they could limit BA's authorities to from the US, but that would start down a rather precarious path of one upmanship that neither we or the UK probably are interested in."

Do you think the US government would protest? More jobs would be shipped to this side of the pond and there would be the resultant loss of employment in the former colonies. If one of your predatory CEO campaign donation chieftans could make a buck then the administration would think this would be a good thing and protest would be muted.
 
A good point, and, in all honesty, I am not sure the US govt would file a protest on their own, perhaps if their was a US carrier pushing for it, a standard "form" protest would be filed. Either way, I don't think a US protest of that would have any effect. Their is so much going on right now that I doubt very much that anyone is willing to expend any political capital for a few slots at LHR.
 
Don't worry folks. The only airline that is "going out" is Iraqi Airlines. Load factors and in-flight drink sales should be way up by summer.

JMHO
 
Back
Top