US business parter UA plans to return to basics, Business blueprint presented to creditors
- Thread starter USA320Pilot
- Start date
- Status
----------------
On 6/17/2003 5:24:08 PM TheLarkAscending wrote:
Uh oh, will you be the next one to have your name turned into the moderator for pointing out that there is a hole in that truth?
----------------
It was my observation that he posts nothing positive about UAL and actually appears to enjoy posting negative threads. If I missed a real positive thread from him about UAL please feel free to point it out to me. No attacks just observations. Thanks, SavyOn 6/17/2003 5:24:08 PM TheLarkAscending wrote:
----------------
On 6/17/2003 5:13:54 PM savyinvestor wrote:
Munn states he only posts about UAL because of its relationship with U and how it affects U. If thats the case you would think he might post some positive things about UAL for the very same reasons. It seems strange then that he seldom if evere posts anything positive. I wonder why ? Savy
----------------
On 6/17/2003 5:13:54 PM savyinvestor wrote:
Munn states he only posts about UAL because of its relationship with U and how it affects U. If thats the case you would think he might post some positive things about UAL for the very same reasons. It seems strange then that he seldom if evere posts anything positive. I wonder why ? Savy
----------------
Uh oh, will you be the next one to have your name turned into the moderator for pointing out that there is a hole in that truth?
----------------
- Thread Starter
- #63
I believe it's inaccurate to state "It was my observation that he (Chip) posts nothing positive about UAL and actually appears to enjoy posting negative threads. If I missed a real positive thread from him about UAL please feel free to point it out to me. No attacks just observations."
It is true most of the comments are negative, but isn't that to be expected for a company in bankruptcy who receives so much skeptical press? However, let’s be fair when discussing the issue because I have posted positive UA comments (although dependent upon a reader’s perspective, what may be good for the business entity may not be personally viewed as positive).
For example, the Denver Post wrote Douglas Baird, University of Chicago law professor and bankruptcy specialist, "They've done everything they absolutely had to do to stay in business. United has done all the things it had to do to have a chance." In addition, I talked about the UA & US alliance generating more than 10,000 passengers per day for each carrier.
However, let’s be honest here. The reason UA employees “shoot the messenger†is that they do not like the information and if I were in their shoes, I would not like the information either.
One colleague of mine recently said, "many observers understand how the marketplace works and how it rewards and punishes companies. It doesn't care whether or not you have a union or what its name is, it only cares how you compete." This is the issue for UA and its employees.
No mature carrier union member or management type likes what is occurring in the U.S. airline industry, but fundamentals have likely changed, forever.
Many of my posts, highlighting, and bolding of news media comments, are to support my previous comments because people like to discredit my news, opinion, analysis, and reports, which is likely an emotional response due to their FUD. That’s understandable, but I make a significant effort to support my comments with publicly available reports and will preface my opinion with the phrases “I believe†or “In my opinionâ€.
It’s nonsense for people who do not know me, to suggest I have an ax to grind or a beneficial interest in this on-going debate. As I have said before, my only interest in UA is how the company will effect US and its employees, period. If US and AA or NW had on and off again corporate transaction discussions or relationships I would be interested in that carrier and not UA, but that’s not the case.
Meanwhile, can UA survive? Absolutely. Will it? Probably, but I have reason to believe the Chicago-based company will be involved in some sort of deeper relationship with US, especially since US Airways’ chairman of the board David Bronner was interviewed by the Charlotte Observer and other news sources. Specifically, Bronner told Ted Reed of the Observer he believes that UA has a 50-50 chance of surviving. He said that if United were to sell assets, he would consider backing the purchase of some "if it would be beneficial to US Airways." Is this negative UA reporting or simply reporting a fact?
Best regards,
Chip
It is true most of the comments are negative, but isn't that to be expected for a company in bankruptcy who receives so much skeptical press? However, let’s be fair when discussing the issue because I have posted positive UA comments (although dependent upon a reader’s perspective, what may be good for the business entity may not be personally viewed as positive).
For example, the Denver Post wrote Douglas Baird, University of Chicago law professor and bankruptcy specialist, "They've done everything they absolutely had to do to stay in business. United has done all the things it had to do to have a chance." In addition, I talked about the UA & US alliance generating more than 10,000 passengers per day for each carrier.
However, let’s be honest here. The reason UA employees “shoot the messenger†is that they do not like the information and if I were in their shoes, I would not like the information either.
One colleague of mine recently said, "many observers understand how the marketplace works and how it rewards and punishes companies. It doesn't care whether or not you have a union or what its name is, it only cares how you compete." This is the issue for UA and its employees.
No mature carrier union member or management type likes what is occurring in the U.S. airline industry, but fundamentals have likely changed, forever.
Many of my posts, highlighting, and bolding of news media comments, are to support my previous comments because people like to discredit my news, opinion, analysis, and reports, which is likely an emotional response due to their FUD. That’s understandable, but I make a significant effort to support my comments with publicly available reports and will preface my opinion with the phrases “I believe†or “In my opinionâ€.
It’s nonsense for people who do not know me, to suggest I have an ax to grind or a beneficial interest in this on-going debate. As I have said before, my only interest in UA is how the company will effect US and its employees, period. If US and AA or NW had on and off again corporate transaction discussions or relationships I would be interested in that carrier and not UA, but that’s not the case.
Meanwhile, can UA survive? Absolutely. Will it? Probably, but I have reason to believe the Chicago-based company will be involved in some sort of deeper relationship with US, especially since US Airways’ chairman of the board David Bronner was interviewed by the Charlotte Observer and other news sources. Specifically, Bronner told Ted Reed of the Observer he believes that UA has a 50-50 chance of surviving. He said that if United were to sell assets, he would consider backing the purchase of some "if it would be beneficial to US Airways." Is this negative UA reporting or simply reporting a fact?
Best regards,
Chip
- Thread Starter
- #64
United CEO says business travelers top priority
Six months into its Chapter 11 reorganization, United is still tinkering with a business plan
CHICAGO (AP) - United Airlines'' main focus as it works to exit bankruptcy is on business travelers, CEO Glenn Tilton told employees this week - the latest sign the world''s No. 2 carrier doesn''t intend to become like Southwest or JetBlue.
Complete Story: [url="http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/business/6109357.htm"]http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/business/6109357.htm[/URL]
Six months into its Chapter 11 reorganization, United is still tinkering with a business plan
CHICAGO (AP) - United Airlines'' main focus as it works to exit bankruptcy is on business travelers, CEO Glenn Tilton told employees this week - the latest sign the world''s No. 2 carrier doesn''t intend to become like Southwest or JetBlue.
Complete Story: [url="http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/business/6109357.htm"]http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/business/6109357.htm[/URL]
- Thread Starter
- #65
Taipan:
I post information for those parties interesting in the success of US, no more, no less, thus my comments should remain on the US board. It’s no secret UA & US have been involved in on and off again corporate transaction and continue to integrate. In addition to code sharing, The airlines are combining facilities, working on cost reduction strategies, and new Star alliance opportunities, which provide further justification to discuss both US & UA in this forum.
Best regards,
Chip
I post information for those parties interesting in the success of US, no more, no less, thus my comments should remain on the US board. It’s no secret UA & US have been involved in on and off again corporate transaction and continue to integrate. In addition to code sharing, The airlines are combining facilities, working on cost reduction strategies, and new Star alliance opportunities, which provide further justification to discuss both US & UA in this forum.
Best regards,
Chip
Then I suggest Chip quits hiding these supposed fair and unbiased posts(aka I spent all day searching the internet for this) about United on the US Air board and bring them where they belong , look above it reads something like this Home > Airlines > US airways when it should read Home > Airlines > United
- Thread Starter
- #67
Taipan,
I was just wondering...since UA has stringent DIP financing requirements and the company is tied to US, how is today's news that for the U.S. airline industry May pricing data showed improvement, but was behind expectations, especially on the domestic front and effect UA's formal in-court restructuring?
Most observers expected the combination of pent up demand, capacity reductions and a peak leisure period would drive larger improvements; however, this was not the case.
ATA reports show unit revenue improved in May as traffic rebounded (slightly) and incremental capacity cuts remained intact.
According to an analyst report, domestic RASM improved by 1.0%, the first positive comparison since December, while System RASM improved by 1.6% following 3 months of negative comparisons. Atlantic RASM was surprisingly strong while Domestic data was a bit disappointing up 1%). The Pacific was expectedly atrocious and Latin America was relatively flat. The measured Domestic demand shortfall at 24.4%, an improvement from April, but still well off of pre-war levels.
By the way, is this only showing negative information regarding UA or is it reporting facts?
Best regards,
Chip
I was just wondering...since UA has stringent DIP financing requirements and the company is tied to US, how is today's news that for the U.S. airline industry May pricing data showed improvement, but was behind expectations, especially on the domestic front and effect UA's formal in-court restructuring?
Most observers expected the combination of pent up demand, capacity reductions and a peak leisure period would drive larger improvements; however, this was not the case.
ATA reports show unit revenue improved in May as traffic rebounded (slightly) and incremental capacity cuts remained intact.
According to an analyst report, domestic RASM improved by 1.0%, the first positive comparison since December, while System RASM improved by 1.6% following 3 months of negative comparisons. Atlantic RASM was surprisingly strong while Domestic data was a bit disappointing up 1%). The Pacific was expectedly atrocious and Latin America was relatively flat. The measured Domestic demand shortfall at 24.4%, an improvement from April, but still well off of pre-war levels.
By the way, is this only showing negative information regarding UA or is it reporting facts?
Best regards,
Chip
whatkindoffreshhell
Veteran
So posters must give up their real name to have ''courage''? Got news for you Chip, you are in the very very very tiny number of message board posters worldwide who actually post their real name. PM me if you want to know my real identity, although I don''t know how useful those details would be for this thread.
I don''t care how noble and successful your volunteer activities are sir, and I certainly don''t care how much money your wife raises. Neither does that UA767 pilot you gossiped about in that other thread.
You see UA through the USAir looking glass -- fine. I''m sure you are a fine pilot. But you are not an investigative reporter sir, only a rumor merchant.
I don''t care how noble and successful your volunteer activities are sir, and I certainly don''t care how much money your wife raises. Neither does that UA767 pilot you gossiped about in that other thread.
You see UA through the USAir looking glass -- fine. I''m sure you are a fine pilot. But you are not an investigative reporter sir, only a rumor merchant.
- Thread Starter
- #69
Whatkindofrezshell:
Whatkindofrezshell said: "Mr. Munn: you lost credibility when you posted all that personal information in the other thread. Wholly unnecessary in a misguided attempt to prove your point, and for a person who obviously knows how to use the Internet you demonstrated poor judgement."
Chip comments: With all due respect, your comments do not make sense. When people provide inaccurate information, try to discredit the sender because they do not like the message, or simply "shot the messenger", then I believe the story needs to be set straight, period. I take great exception to you or anybody questioning my character, especially since you do not have the "courage" to identify yourself.
Whatkindof, as you would say, "give it up already".
Best regards,
Chip
Whatkindofrezshell said: "Mr. Munn: you lost credibility when you posted all that personal information in the other thread. Wholly unnecessary in a misguided attempt to prove your point, and for a person who obviously knows how to use the Internet you demonstrated poor judgement."
Chip comments: With all due respect, your comments do not make sense. When people provide inaccurate information, try to discredit the sender because they do not like the message, or simply "shot the messenger", then I believe the story needs to be set straight, period. I take great exception to you or anybody questioning my character, especially since you do not have the "courage" to identify yourself.
Whatkindof, as you would say, "give it up already".
Best regards,
Chip
whatkindoffreshhell
Veteran
Mr. Munn: you lost credibility when you posted all that personal information in the other thread. Wholly unnecessary in a misguided attempt to prove your point, and for a person who obviously knows how to use the Internet you demonstrated poor judgement.
By anyone''s measure you are not fair and impartial. Give it up already.
By anyone''s measure you are not fair and impartial. Give it up already.
Chip I used to enjoy your overview of the whole industry that you used to do back in the day, and again I have not been frequenting this site like I used ,but it sure seems that your attiude towards United has took a turn for the worse/biased by scanning some of your latest post/Chip says, and I would argue that this is off topic it belongs on the United board, now I know you seem to have all the moderators letting you bend the rules but this belongs on the United board.It makes me wonder why some of the most eloquent posters aka MancityFan , and UAL777Flyer no longer ever post here? I would agree with you about one thing, I think that somewhere down the line there is a 50/50 chance of a merger between US air and United if all goes well from here on out.
TheLarkAscending
Veteran
An observation:
Everyone knows what they say about an opinion: we all have one.
Some choose to state their opinion and maintain some sense of dignity, self-respect and the respect of the others that read that opinion. Additionally, they have an innate ability to have an exchange of ideas, almost as though they were conversing back and forth on the message board. Others, however, drive home a point over and over again, ad nauseum. They're unwilling, and perhaps even unable, to see another opinion or perspective outside of their own. I liken it to someone that must absolutely adhere to a set belief. Much like a cult leader would do, repetition being the key: that if the opinion is repeated over and over enough, everyone-even the most stubborn-will relent and change (or convert). This technique not only loses the respect of the readership, but tests patience and brings the character issue into question. I believe it was written somewhere that "less is more".
I happen to agree with Whatkindoffreshell, Taipan and 737nCH11.
Everyone knows what they say about an opinion: we all have one.
Some choose to state their opinion and maintain some sense of dignity, self-respect and the respect of the others that read that opinion. Additionally, they have an innate ability to have an exchange of ideas, almost as though they were conversing back and forth on the message board. Others, however, drive home a point over and over again, ad nauseum. They're unwilling, and perhaps even unable, to see another opinion or perspective outside of their own. I liken it to someone that must absolutely adhere to a set belief. Much like a cult leader would do, repetition being the key: that if the opinion is repeated over and over enough, everyone-even the most stubborn-will relent and change (or convert). This technique not only loses the respect of the readership, but tests patience and brings the character issue into question. I believe it was written somewhere that "less is more".
I happen to agree with Whatkindoffreshell, Taipan and 737nCH11.
Taipan,
50-50 chance of a merger. I agree, but I think Chip is a little confused on who is going to be in charge of the deal.
Here is a hint. Who flies DEN-CLT? UAL. Who is taking over SNA? UAL. See a pattern here? My magic 8-ball tells me that U will slowly become UAL''s east coast regional carrier.
50-50 chance of a merger. I agree, but I think Chip is a little confused on who is going to be in charge of the deal.
Here is a hint. Who flies DEN-CLT? UAL. Who is taking over SNA? UAL. See a pattern here? My magic 8-ball tells me that U will slowly become UAL''s east coast regional carrier.
----------------
On 6/17/2003 5:33:18 PM 737nCH11 wrote:
Avek,
Was USAirways profitable when it received it's loan guarantee? Where are they hiding all that money?
----------------
On 6/17/2003 5:33:18 PM 737nCH11 wrote:
Avek,
Was USAirways profitable when it received it's loan guarantee? Where are they hiding all that money?
----------------
No, but the business plan had to indicate that the company could reach profitability using conservative financial projections. UAL, OTOH, can't seem to forecast a profit unless it fudges the numbers to the point of almost being illegal...
767jetz
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,286
- 2,779
----------------
On 6/18/2003 4:46:19 PM avek00 wrote:
UAL, OTOH, can''t seem to forecast a profit unless it fudges the numbers to the point of almost being illegal...
----------------
On 6/18/2003 4:46:19 PM avek00 wrote:
UAL, OTOH, can''t seem to forecast a profit unless it fudges the numbers to the point of almost being illegal...
----------------
And you would know this how?? Have you secretly seen the plan that no one else has? Do you have some real numbers to back up this claim? Do you have any proof at all?
No?
I didn''t think so.
Be careful of your accusations avek00.
- Status
