Retirement Systems of Alabama
- Thread starter tug_slug
- Start date
This just in..... Looks like Bronner (?) succeeded in some sort of power play.... Hmmmmmmmm....
Thoughts?
-Airlineorphan
Reuters
Alabama fund wins over half US Airways board seats
Thursday December 5, 6:25 pm ET
NEW YORK, Dec 5 (Reuters) - Bankrupt US Airways Group Inc. (OTC BB:UAWGQ.OB - News) has agreed to let its lead investor, an Alabama pension fund, fill more than half of the airline's board seats once it emerges from bankruptcy, the fund's chief executive said on Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Retirement Systems of Alabama will take seven of US Airways' 13 board seats instead of the five seats agreed on earlier, David Bronner, the head of RSA, said in an interview.
In exchange, the pension fund for Alabama teachers and state workers has offered to put up $75 million, if needed, to help US Airways secure a $900 million federal loan guarantee, Bronner said.
US Airways' request for financial aid from a government board, in the form of a 90 percent guarantee on a $1 billion loan, has has been granted conditional approval. But a condition of the board's willingness to back airline loans is that they must secure the last 10 percent in backing themselves.
US Airways and RSA modified their agreement during a meeting that stretched into Wednesday evening, after Bronner and the airline's pilots separately expressed concern US Airways was having problems meeting the terms of the deal.
Thoughts?
-Airlineorphan
Reuters
Alabama fund wins over half US Airways board seats
Thursday December 5, 6:25 pm ET
NEW YORK, Dec 5 (Reuters) - Bankrupt US Airways Group Inc. (OTC BB:UAWGQ.OB - News) has agreed to let its lead investor, an Alabama pension fund, fill more than half of the airline's board seats once it emerges from bankruptcy, the fund's chief executive said on Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Retirement Systems of Alabama will take seven of US Airways' 13 board seats instead of the five seats agreed on earlier, David Bronner, the head of RSA, said in an interview.
In exchange, the pension fund for Alabama teachers and state workers has offered to put up $75 million, if needed, to help US Airways secure a $900 million federal loan guarantee, Bronner said.
US Airways' request for financial aid from a government board, in the form of a 90 percent guarantee on a $1 billion loan, has has been granted conditional approval. But a condition of the board's willingness to back airline loans is that they must secure the last 10 percent in backing themselves.
US Airways and RSA modified their agreement during a meeting that stretched into Wednesday evening, after Bronner and the airline's pilots separately expressed concern US Airways was having problems meeting the terms of the deal.
- Thread Starter
- #18
Bronner is agreeing to give U more money for additional seats on the board.
Correct me if Im wrong (Im sure someone will ) but if Bronner thought for one minute his initial investment was in jeopardy he surely wouldnt take the chance to offer U more money for seats on a board that may not exist due to labor problems.
Its obvious Dave's game plan is falling right into place, the question now is, how is his game plan going to affect the employees?
Correct me if Im wrong (Im sure someone will ) but if Bronner thought for one minute his initial investment was in jeopardy he surely wouldnt take the chance to offer U more money for seats on a board that may not exist due to labor problems.
Its obvious Dave's game plan is falling right into place, the question now is, how is his game plan going to affect the employees?
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/5/2002 5:56:59 PM tug_slug wrote:
Bronner is agreeing to give U more money for additional seats on the board.
Correct me if Im wrong (Im sure someone will ) but if Bronner thought for one minute his initial investment was in jeopardy he surely wouldnt take the chance to offer U more money for seats on a board that may not exist due to labor problems.
Its obvious Dave's game plan is falling right into place, the question now is, how is his game plan going to affect the employees?
----------------
[/blockquote]
Bronner is definately making some serious moves. 7 0f 13 Seats on the BOD...That pretty much puts all the Union held seats in check. This also gives them the right to rid U of anyone that happens to dis-agree with thier approach to things.
Imagine if you will a scenario where Bronner does exercise his control of things...and Acft Maintenance shifts to AL. This will bring havoc to CLT and PIT...just like Dave layed waste to TPA. Keep in mind, this is a possibility , NOT FACT, but speculation has it , as a viable option in Bronner's eyes. Such action will destroy the system we have in place with 2 major distribution centers supporting the two remaining heavy maintenance bases. This will also disrupt the Acft's flowback into the system from two of it's major hubs.
Before you say AOG "knock off the speculation"!!.....keep this in mind. Bronner is not out to mearly recoupe the investment he's made in U , He's out to make a killing for his beloved fund...and he's equally interested in bringing jobs to the land of Forest Gump (Alabama)..which he's on record for saying so in most direct terms.
Nobody knows exactly what direction things will take?....everything is up in the air but our profits. Who knows, maybe the CCY crowd could be parking thier cars at the Honorable George C. Wallace Corporate Center someday? Stranger things have happened....So to rule out anything would be crazy or blind to the possibilities.
----------------
On 12/5/2002 5:56:59 PM tug_slug wrote:
Bronner is agreeing to give U more money for additional seats on the board.
Correct me if Im wrong (Im sure someone will ) but if Bronner thought for one minute his initial investment was in jeopardy he surely wouldnt take the chance to offer U more money for seats on a board that may not exist due to labor problems.
Its obvious Dave's game plan is falling right into place, the question now is, how is his game plan going to affect the employees?
----------------
[/blockquote]
Bronner is definately making some serious moves. 7 0f 13 Seats on the BOD...That pretty much puts all the Union held seats in check. This also gives them the right to rid U of anyone that happens to dis-agree with thier approach to things.
Imagine if you will a scenario where Bronner does exercise his control of things...and Acft Maintenance shifts to AL. This will bring havoc to CLT and PIT...just like Dave layed waste to TPA. Keep in mind, this is a possibility , NOT FACT, but speculation has it , as a viable option in Bronner's eyes. Such action will destroy the system we have in place with 2 major distribution centers supporting the two remaining heavy maintenance bases. This will also disrupt the Acft's flowback into the system from two of it's major hubs.
Before you say AOG "knock off the speculation"!!.....keep this in mind. Bronner is not out to mearly recoupe the investment he's made in U , He's out to make a killing for his beloved fund...and he's equally interested in bringing jobs to the land of Forest Gump (Alabama)..which he's on record for saying so in most direct terms.
Nobody knows exactly what direction things will take?....everything is up in the air but our profits. Who knows, maybe the CCY crowd could be parking thier cars at the Honorable George C. Wallace Corporate Center someday? Stranger things have happened....So to rule out anything would be crazy or blind to the possibilities.
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 12/6/2002 2
03 AM AOG-N-IT wrote:
[P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR][/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]He's out to make a killing for his beloved fund[BR]
[P][/P]----------------[BR][BR][BR][STRONG][FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3]then investing their money in an airline in the current environment is suicidal.[/FONT][/STRONG][/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR]On 12/6/2002 2
03 AM AOG-N-IT wrote: [P]
[BLOCKQUOTE][BR]----------------[BR][/BLOCKQUOTE][BR][BR]He's out to make a killing for his beloved fund[BR]
[P][/P]----------------[BR][BR][BR][STRONG][FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3]then investing their money in an airline in the current environment is suicidal.[/FONT][/STRONG][/BLOCKQUOTE]
[P][/P]
- Thread Starter
- #21
"then investing their money in an airline in the current environment is suicidal".
Fork I agree with you on this one. Bronner has made some excellent business decisions but he's also made some very shall we questionable ones as well.
AOG,
When I posted the question I was speaking in terms of the immediate furture.
Fork I agree with you on this one. Bronner has made some excellent business decisions but he's also made some very shall we questionable ones as well.
AOG,
When I posted the question I was speaking in terms of the immediate furture.
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/5/2002 5:56:59 PM tug_slug wrote:
Imagine if you will a scenario where Bronner does exercise his control of things...and Acft Maintenance shifts to AL. This will bring havoc to CLT and PIT...just like Dave layed waste to TPA.
----------------
[/blockquote]
As a mechanic, my reply to Mr Bronners wish to bring jobs to Alabama is to sing:
Sweet Home Alabama
----------------
On 12/5/2002 5:56:59 PM tug_slug wrote:
Imagine if you will a scenario where Bronner does exercise his control of things...and Acft Maintenance shifts to AL. This will bring havoc to CLT and PIT...just like Dave layed waste to TPA.
----------------
[/blockquote]
As a mechanic, my reply to Mr Bronners wish to bring jobs to Alabama is to sing:
Sweet Home Alabama
AOG,
Another view of the RSA angle is that the object is for all the heavy to be done in BHM which complements the N/S feed for the majority of the U operation. You just move the Southern terminus from CLT to BHM.
Having spent "considerable" time in area, it would be preferrable to other "garden spots" where heavy mx is done. The cost of living is less and some of the better areas can be bought into at a discount from the areas U currently occupies.
The real question(s) are:
1) why RSA wants control of the BOD, is it for growth or for the spin-offs?
2) do the prospects for U result in the employees getting a "reasonable" return for the sacrifices they are being asked to make?
Another view of the RSA angle is that the object is for all the heavy to be done in BHM which complements the N/S feed for the majority of the U operation. You just move the Southern terminus from CLT to BHM.
Having spent "considerable" time in area, it would be preferrable to other "garden spots" where heavy mx is done. The cost of living is less and some of the better areas can be bought into at a discount from the areas U currently occupies.
The real question(s) are:
1) why RSA wants control of the BOD, is it for growth or for the spin-offs?
2) do the prospects for U result in the employees getting a "reasonable" return for the sacrifices they are being asked to make?
