Sale/leaseback Of More Aircraft

[usair_begins_with_u]

Are you that snowed over by Doug and Bruce to actually believe that this is a good thing?

 

[USA320Pilot]

Not only does the new US Airways increase its liquidity with the aircraft sale/leaseback agreements, it's my understanding new lease terms have been agreed upon to lower lease payments and permit earlier termination of some the agreements.

If necessary, US Airways could then dispose of the aircraft in question and replace them with new/larger aircraft, such as the A350, without penalty. Thus, it appears the agreements have value unbeknown to outside (or bitter) observers.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoeingBoy]

Well, what the agreement actually says is that the term on the 330's is 7 years and US has a one-time right to extend (not shorten) the term. The seven years could coincide with A350 deliveries, but those dates haven't been established yet since Airbus hasn't officially committed to the program.

If you're talking about the A319's & A320's, those leases are for at least 10 years, also with a one-time right to extend, not shorten.

Jim

 

[USA320Pilot]

BoeingBoy:

Every agreement is different, however, US Airways indicated on August 18, a couple of week's ago, "US Airways has been operating under a month-to-month agreement with Mountain Capital, enabling the company to return planes and the spare engine as it takes delivery of new aircraft."

I recongize this information was in regard to B767s, which I was referring to and I could have been more clear.

Complete Story

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoeingBoy]

My mistake, I assumed you were talking about the A319/320's and A330's that the judge approved....

As for the 767's, they were EETC aircraft "owned" by US. As such they had been on the month to month agreement that you mentioned. However, now they are leased - or will be once the money & paperwork change hands if it hasn't been accomplished. Like the A319/320's and A330, they are subject to the terms of the lease which specifies an ability for US to extend the term a month at a time for up to 48 months, but not reduce the term.

As the press release said, "US Airways has been operating under a month-to-month agreement with Mountain Capital". It did not say "will be operating on a month-to month agreement...".

Jim

 

[ringmaruf]

As for the 767's, they were EETC aircraft "owned" by US.

[post="296076"][/post]​

I think you have it backwards. The Airbii have the EETCs. The 767s were owned free-and-clear.

I will say that I agree with USA320Pilot; when I saw the lease term for the 330's, I thought that it sounds like they'll be replaced with the 350's. So much for growth aircraft.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Oh, I didn't mean to imply that I disagree about replacing the 330's with 350's, or at least the possibility. The timing will be about right assuming Airbus meets their projected timetable better than they have on the 380.

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

And I forgot to add that you're right about the 767's - they weren't financed thru EETC's. They were owned, but subject to the ATSB & Eastshore liens.

The term of the new leases is 48 months extendable for another 48 months, FWIW.

Jim