I''m glad to see Bags voting yes. After hearing his unhappiness for a long time, hearing Bags in an upbeat mood is a good sign. I guess he has had a spiritual awakening.
I''ve changed my mind, voting YES
- Thread starter Hopeful
- Start date
----------------
On 4/6/2003 1:16:03 PM xlurker wrote:
I think you may have contradicted yourself.
You say labor costs affect airlines differently. Before you said those costs affect all of them equally at the same time.
You cannot compare labor costs with fuel costs.
Fuel costs change daily. The change is EXACTLY the same to every airline. Everyone can adjust the prices of tickets accordingly. On a daily basis.
----------------
I believe I stated that labor costs affect each airline differently based on their type of operation. They do however affect airlines in general the same way. They have maintenance that is required only at different times and under different programs. Fuel is a constant.On 4/6/2003 1:16:03 PM xlurker wrote:
I think you may have contradicted yourself.
You say labor costs affect airlines differently. Before you said those costs affect all of them equally at the same time.
You cannot compare labor costs with fuel costs.
Fuel costs change daily. The change is EXACTLY the same to every airline. Everyone can adjust the prices of tickets accordingly. On a daily basis.
----------------
----------------
On 4/6/2003 9:41:05 AM AA80Driver wrote:
Bob,
I agree with most of what you''ve posted and I think we can all come to the same conclusion on the situation. This TA and the situation we''re in sucks. There''s no other way to put it. However, what I''m trying to point out is that the alternative in BK will be worse. Look at what is happening to our bretheren at UAL and U.
I want to defend my profession, but we''ve got no options right now that will produce a better result than ratifying this TA. And yes, these agreements all expire on the same date, at the same time in 6 years. How''s that for leverage...all your labor contract being emendable at the same time.
Also, we have no leverage when the company is in this financial condition. The time to fix this is when they''re making money...then we''ll have some leverage. Right now about all we can accomplish be voting no is throwing away everything in the hopes that Carty might be removed in BK. And you know what, if he is, he''ll just retreat to his newly purchased 4.7m chalet in Whistler and regroup. I can gaurantee you that his pain won''t be the same as ours.
I''m reluctantly voting YES and I''m mad as hell about it.
----------------
On 4/6/2003 9:41:05 AM AA80Driver wrote:
Bob,
I agree with most of what you''ve posted and I think we can all come to the same conclusion on the situation. This TA and the situation we''re in sucks. There''s no other way to put it. However, what I''m trying to point out is that the alternative in BK will be worse. Look at what is happening to our bretheren at UAL and U.
I want to defend my profession, but we''ve got no options right now that will produce a better result than ratifying this TA. And yes, these agreements all expire on the same date, at the same time in 6 years. How''s that for leverage...all your labor contract being emendable at the same time.
Also, we have no leverage when the company is in this financial condition. The time to fix this is when they''re making money...then we''ll have some leverage. Right now about all we can accomplish be voting no is throwing away everything in the hopes that Carty might be removed in BK. And you know what, if he is, he''ll just retreat to his newly purchased 4.7m chalet in Whistler and regroup. I can gaurantee you that his pain won''t be the same as ours.
I''m reluctantly voting YES and I''m mad as hell about it.
----------------
If you are reluctant its because you have good cause to be. How do you know that BK will be worse. USAIR went into BK with all their concessionary agreements in place and got more. UAL is still an open book. So far its mecahanics have taken less of of cut than we have, a lot less.Bankruptcy is not good but avoiding it is not worth ANY price and this deal is too much. Maybe for you it will be ok. As older guys retire you can move up and continue to see your pay go up. I do not have that option. I''m at the top. I can only go down. This contract will take me down to around $43,000 by 2009. That is unacceptable.If this contract does pass I''m certain that it will follow Pan AM. Pan Am paid thier workers crap in their final years. You had very old guys that would not do much, they were just bidding their time till retirement and very young guys who were just there till something better came along. Thats how it will be at AA. The mechanics will not care. "They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work". They will show up and do as little as possible and the airline will lose far more than they are saving in wages. Its like buying the cheapest parts for your car, the savings are often more than offset because of the lack of quality. You should not abuse something that you need to rely on, this proposal is an abuse of the workers.
I have heard more bully tactics from RV4 on this website than I have ever heard from the company. Why even respond to him? The best advice is make an informed opinion! Read the TA''s before you vote. Read the UAL TA''s, read stock analyst''s reports, but make your own decision to vote, Do not base your vote on what someone who is angry tells you. For my FA coworkers, remember if one contract gets voted down they all do, so be informed. Whay would honestly be better? UAL made their mind this weekend not to let the BK court decide for them, decide for yourself. I habe not decided yet, (since the TA is not out yet what gives?), but I will only after careful consideration of all scenarios.
----------------
On 4/6/2003 1:16:03 PM xlurker wrote:
Fuel costs change daily. The change is EXACTLY the same to every airline. Everyone can adjust the prices of tickets accordingly. On a daily basis.
----------------
On 4/6/2003 1:16:03 PM xlurker wrote:
Fuel costs change daily. The change is EXACTLY the same to every airline. Everyone can adjust the prices of tickets accordingly. On a daily basis.
----------------
Airlines pay sharply different prices for fuel. AA''s fuel bill for operating TWA was some $80 million per year less than what TWA was paying before the acquisition, due to more favorable contracts.
MK
----------------
On 4/6/2003 8:37:22 AM Hopeful wrote:
AA lost an additional $1 Billion Dollars absorbing and operating TWA.
----------------
On 4/6/2003 8:37:22 AM Hopeful wrote:
AA lost an additional $1 Billion Dollars absorbing and operating TWA.
----------------
So you''d have two months or so more cash left. The main problem would still be here, and so will TWA''s contributions, some day.
MK
----------------
On 4/6/2003 8:37:22 AM Hopeful wrote:
AA lost an additional $1 Billion Dollars absorbing and operating TWA.
----------------
So you''d have two months or so more cash left. The main problem would still be here, and so will TWA''s contributions, some day.
MK
AA paid nearly $1 billion to buy TWA. AA has lost $5.3 billion in the 2 years since the aquisition. 20% of that would be about $1 billion. So the cost of this mistake has been about $2 billion and counting. AA also took on about $3 billion in debt and leases. If they had not made this mistake, they would have about 3/4 of a year more breathing room. Who knows what could happen in 3/4 of a year? The war could be over. Fuel prices could decline. USAir or United could liquidate. Who knows? Carty inflicted this wound on AMR, and it could prove to be fatal. It has already severed the loyalty of many many AAer''s.
On 4/6/2003 8:37:22 AM Hopeful wrote:
AA lost an additional $1 Billion Dollars absorbing and operating TWA.
----------------
So you''d have two months or so more cash left. The main problem would still be here, and so will TWA''s contributions, some day.
MK
AA paid nearly $1 billion to buy TWA. AA has lost $5.3 billion in the 2 years since the aquisition. 20% of that would be about $1 billion. So the cost of this mistake has been about $2 billion and counting. AA also took on about $3 billion in debt and leases. If they had not made this mistake, they would have about 3/4 of a year more breathing room. Who knows what could happen in 3/4 of a year? The war could be over. Fuel prices could decline. USAir or United could liquidate. Who knows? Carty inflicted this wound on AMR, and it could prove to be fatal. It has already severed the loyalty of many many AAer''s.
For RV4
I aam not a "nothing we can do employee" I realize there will be changes. I have and will take an active part when I can. Everyone involved in the indusrty should. But there are a lot of jobs at stake and on group should not dictate that others will lose out. Some of these posts sound like more socialist than democrat or republican. Just an obsevation. What is better, "full pay to the last day" or a negotiated adjustment to keep a business profitable and the most employed? The market will drive service businesses, this isn''t a boom economy now, choose carefully, we are not the only ones in this boat. And nobody is being forced to stay at any aviation job. I want the airlines to make it through this, become involved.
I aam not a "nothing we can do employee" I realize there will be changes. I have and will take an active part when I can. Everyone involved in the indusrty should. But there are a lot of jobs at stake and on group should not dictate that others will lose out. Some of these posts sound like more socialist than democrat or republican. Just an obsevation. What is better, "full pay to the last day" or a negotiated adjustment to keep a business profitable and the most employed? The market will drive service businesses, this isn''t a boom economy now, choose carefully, we are not the only ones in this boat. And nobody is being forced to stay at any aviation job. I want the airlines to make it through this, become involved.
----------------
On 4/7/2003 9:17:11 PM bagsmasher wrote:
AA paid nearly $1 billion to buy TWA. AA has lost $5.3 billion in the 2 years since the aquisition. 20% of that would be about $1 billion. So the cost of this mistake has been about $2 billion and counting. AA also took on about $3 billion in debt and leases. If they had not made this mistake, they would have about 3/4 of a year more breathing room. Who knows what could happen in 3/4 of a year? The war could be over. Fuel prices could decline. USAir or United could liquidate. Who knows? Carty inflicted this wound on AMR, and it could prove to be fatal. It has already severed the loyalty of many many AAer''s.
----------------
Bags, get you numbers straight.On 4/7/2003 9:17:11 PM bagsmasher wrote:
AA paid nearly $1 billion to buy TWA. AA has lost $5.3 billion in the 2 years since the aquisition. 20% of that would be about $1 billion. So the cost of this mistake has been about $2 billion and counting. AA also took on about $3 billion in debt and leases. If they had not made this mistake, they would have about 3/4 of a year more breathing room. Who knows what could happen in 3/4 of a year? The war could be over. Fuel prices could decline. USAir or United could liquidate. Who knows? Carty inflicted this wound on AMR, and it could prove to be fatal. It has already severed the loyalty of many many AAer''s.
----------------
The cash outlay was less than $700 millions. Then there was $2.8 million worth of assumption of the renegotiated, i.e., cheaper, airplane lease obligations. Those are ongoing monthly expenses as the planes are flying and generating income. In the past two years, AA has been flying these planes and carrying passengers who pay for the dubious pleasure. The STL hub has been financially competitive with ORD and DFW. Let''s not forget WorldSpan, of which AA obtained a 26% share as part of the purchase. It was just sold for a reportedly $1 billion, of which AA will receive $260 million, that figure does not take into account the income which was generated by it in the last few years.
Get your facts right before whining.
Bagsmasher:
Even though you and I have butted heads in the past, I am pleased to see that you have taken a rational and reasonable examination of the facts and have come to a conclusion that is correct for you. I hope that all the other employees do the same.
Don''t buy anyone''s fear tactics, company or union or rabid bombthrowers on a bulletin board... decide for yourself!!!!!!
TANSTAAFL
Even though you and I have butted heads in the past, I am pleased to see that you have taken a rational and reasonable examination of the facts and have come to a conclusion that is correct for you. I hope that all the other employees do the same.
Don''t buy anyone''s fear tactics, company or union or rabid bombthrowers on a bulletin board... decide for yourself!!!!!!
TANSTAAFL
Bags, get you numbers straight.
"The cash outlay was less than $700 millions. Then there was $2.8 million worth of assumption of the renegotiated, i.e., cheaper, airplane lease obligations."
Maybe it was less than $700 million. Add all the expenses and training in the integration, and I''m sure you are pushing $1 billion. Renegotiated leases are not cheaper when those junk planes are parked in the desert.
"Those are ongoing monthly expenses as the planes are flying and generating income. In the past two years, AA has been flying these planes and carrying passengers who pay for the dubious pleasure."
So far TWA has nothing but added to AMR''s losses, so don''t give me that crap about generating income.
"The STL hub has been financially competitive with ORD and DFW."
I''ve heard you TWAer''s say this time and time again, but no one has ever backed it up with facts. When AA finally shuts it down, we will all know the facts.
"Let''s not forget WorldSpan, of which AA obtained a 26% share as part of the purchase. It was just sold for a reportedly $1 billion, of which AA will receive $260 million, that figure does not take into account the income which was generated by it in the last few years."
I hope you are right, let''s see, pay $1 billion, take on $2.8 billion debt, lose another $1 billion operating it for 2 years, and get $260 million back when Worldspan sells. I guess you are right, the TWA aquisition was a good deal for AA.
Get your facts right before whining
"The cash outlay was less than $700 millions. Then there was $2.8 million worth of assumption of the renegotiated, i.e., cheaper, airplane lease obligations."
Maybe it was less than $700 million. Add all the expenses and training in the integration, and I''m sure you are pushing $1 billion. Renegotiated leases are not cheaper when those junk planes are parked in the desert.
"Those are ongoing monthly expenses as the planes are flying and generating income. In the past two years, AA has been flying these planes and carrying passengers who pay for the dubious pleasure."
So far TWA has nothing but added to AMR''s losses, so don''t give me that crap about generating income.
"The STL hub has been financially competitive with ORD and DFW."
I''ve heard you TWAer''s say this time and time again, but no one has ever backed it up with facts. When AA finally shuts it down, we will all know the facts.
"Let''s not forget WorldSpan, of which AA obtained a 26% share as part of the purchase. It was just sold for a reportedly $1 billion, of which AA will receive $260 million, that figure does not take into account the income which was generated by it in the last few years."
I hope you are right, let''s see, pay $1 billion, take on $2.8 billion debt, lose another $1 billion operating it for 2 years, and get $260 million back when Worldspan sells. I guess you are right, the TWA aquisition was a good deal for AA.
Get your facts right before whining
FWAAA,
Maybe AA should have done all the things you said. Most of them benefited it''s employees. The TWA aquisition has severed AA loyalty, as well as severed the jobs of most TWAer''s. That soon may be ALL TWAer''s. It was a bad thing, and should never had been done.
Anyway, I am done. I don''t care. It is over. Thanks AA.
Maybe AA should have done all the things you said. Most of them benefited it''s employees. The TWA aquisition has severed AA loyalty, as well as severed the jobs of most TWAer''s. That soon may be ALL TWAer''s. It was a bad thing, and should never had been done.
Anyway, I am done. I don''t care. It is over. Thanks AA.
----------------
On 4/7/2003 9:17:11 PM bagsmasher wrote:
----------------
On 4/6/2003 8:37:22 AM Hopeful wrote:
AA lost an additional $1 Billion Dollars absorbing and operating TWA.
----------------
So you''d have two months or so more cash left. The main problem would still be here, and so will TWA''s contributions, some day.
MK
AA paid nearly $1 billion to buy TWA. AA has lost $5.3 billion in the 2 years since the aquisition. 20% of that would be about $1 billion. So the cost of this mistake has been about $2 billion and counting. AA also took on about $3 billion in debt and leases. If they had not made this mistake, they would have about 3/4 of a year more breathing room. Who knows what could happen in 3/4 of a year? The war could be over. Fuel prices could decline. USAir or United could liquidate. Who knows? Carty inflicted this wound on AMR, and it could prove to be fatal. It has already severed the loyalty of many many AAer''s.
----------------
Throughout the late 1990''s, AA repurchased nearly $2 billion worth of its own stock from stockholders because the Board of Directors thought AA had plenty of cash on hand.On 4/7/2003 9:17:11 PM bagsmasher wrote:
----------------
On 4/6/2003 8:37:22 AM Hopeful wrote:
AA lost an additional $1 Billion Dollars absorbing and operating TWA.
----------------
So you''d have two months or so more cash left. The main problem would still be here, and so will TWA''s contributions, some day.
MK
AA paid nearly $1 billion to buy TWA. AA has lost $5.3 billion in the 2 years since the aquisition. 20% of that would be about $1 billion. So the cost of this mistake has been about $2 billion and counting. AA also took on about $3 billion in debt and leases. If they had not made this mistake, they would have about 3/4 of a year more breathing room. Who knows what could happen in 3/4 of a year? The war could be over. Fuel prices could decline. USAir or United could liquidate. Who knows? Carty inflicted this wound on AMR, and it could prove to be fatal. It has already severed the loyalty of many many AAer''s.
----------------
They were right.
Subsequent events make me wish that they had not done that. AA would still have about $2 billion in cash if they hadn''t given it back to stockholders.
During the late 1990''s, AA paid out almost $2 billion in profit sharing to the employees. Seemed like the right thing to do at the time.
Subsequent events make me wish they hadn''t given this money to the employees.
If AA had held onto the money, AA would have nearly $2 billion more in cash right now.
During the late 1990''s, AA purchased billions of dollars worth of new airplanes. AA paid cash for many of them.
If they hadn''t bought all those new planes, AA would have lots of extra cash in the bank right now.
Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda.
What the hell difference does the acquistion of TWA make now?
Stop living in the past and look at the very real possibility that AA will not survive.
Anyway, even if AA had all that extra cash lying around, it would have merely postponed the inevitable.
The other day with snow in ORD and T storms at DFW I had a number of passengers going through STL whose routing had been changed. STL saved the day for a lot of people. That''s why AA wanted another hub, and it''s working.
But I haven''t seen anyone publish dollar figures on what is saved when a pax is rerouted LGA-STL-OMA instead of LGA-ORD-OMA.
MK
But I haven''t seen anyone publish dollar figures on what is saved when a pax is rerouted LGA-STL-OMA instead of LGA-ORD-OMA.
MK
I couldn''t bring myself to vote "YES". I voted "NO" today. I am sick of the threats from Carty about layoffs. Maybe what this Company needs is a massive restructuring through BK.
