US Airways CEO: Not Upping Delta Offer

[BoeingBoy]

US Airways CEO: No Increase to $8.4B Delta Offer Right Now

Jim

 

[flyingcat]

"US Airways has no intention right now to increase its $8.4 billion offer...."

🙄

 

[Gilding the Lily]

"US Airways has no intention right now to increase its $8.4 billion offer...."

🙄

I bet US will change its tune once it is able to file its POR. Right now, US cannot say that it will increase its offer because it would undermine its position that DL has severely overestimated the value of a "stand-alone" carrier.

While US will likely modify its offer if it files a plan, I do not expect the changes to be drastic, as US has already determined a ball-park range of value for DL.

 

[metopower]

I bet US will change its tune once it is able to file its POR. Right now, US cannot say that it will increase its offer because it would undermine its position that DL has severely overestimated the value of a "stand-alone" carrier.

While US will likely modify its offer if it files a plan, I do not expect the changes to be drastic, as US has already determined a ball-park range of value for DL.

Sorry to show my ignorance of the bankruptcy laws. Can a non recognized party submitt a por without support of the court? I thaught that only recognized parties could submitt plans.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Sorry to show my ignorance of the bankruptcy laws. Can a non recognized party submitt a por without support of the court? I thaught that only recognized parties could submitt plans.

The court allows a "party-in-interest" to file a plan after certain things have happened... one of them being the tolling of the exclusivity period. The term "party-in-interest" is not defined; but it includes, and not limited to the debtor, the trustee, a creditors' committee, an equity security holders' committee, a creditor, an equity security holder, or any indenture trustee. Importantly, a party-in-interest has been held not to include an entity interested in purchasing the debtor's assets. Although I am not certain, I would guess that US has figured this out already. They can, among other things, purchase a small claim to become a creditor... or they can have a creditor do a lot of the leg work themselves (not usually recommended though).

If US was to purchase a claim... it should do so before February 1st.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Gilding,

Interestingly, Bethune filed an amended affidavit today. Without comparing with the one filed originally, I didn't notice any significant difference except that his employment contract wasn't attached and the list of interested parties was significantly longer.

Just about any airline more than a few people would know is now on the interested parties list, including US Airways.

Jim

 

[NYCDelta]

Gilding,

Interestingly, Bethune filed an amended affidavit today. Without comparing with the one filed originally, I didn't notice any significant difference except that his employment contract wasn't attached and the list of interested parties was significantly longer.

Just about any airline more than a few people would know is now on the interested parties list, including US Airways.
Jim

What does that mean exactly? I've tried to read up on the Delta docket website-but keep nodding off.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Gilding,

Interestingly, Bethune filed an amended affidavit today. Without comparing with the one filed originally, I didn't notice any significant difference except that his employment contract wasn't attached and the list of interested parties was significantly longer.

Just about any airline more than a few people would know is now on the interested parties list, including US Airways.

Jim

Yep, I noticed that Jim. I didn't find anything too controversial about it. But he did decide to disclose that he was the CEO of CO (surprise surprise), but more importantly, he disclosed that he still "consults" Aloha Airlines. This could be a factor when the Judge determines whether to approve the retention of Bethune. I doubt, however, that it would prevent him from advising the creditor's committee though.

Also, a "party-in-interest" in regards to Bethune's affidavit to be retained by the creditor's committee according to 11 USC 328 is different than a "party-in-interest" in the context of filing a POR according to 11 USC 1121. Bethune is simply listing all the potential "conflict-of-interests" that could be present if he had a relationship with that "interest." If it is shown that Bethune is not a "disinterested" party, he will not be paid. Although there will be some overlap between Bethune's list of parties-in-interest and the "parties-in-interest" that may file a POR, the latter "parties-in-interest" list should be considerably shorter.

 

[BoeingBoy]

That would certainly explain the amended affidavit. As I remember, the "parties of interest" list attached to the original didn't have all the airlines on it and may have been the "qualified to fila a POR" list.

Jim