With A Flunky Judge Like This...

[aafsc]

If NW has a market cap of around $450 million, AA could purchase it because AA has about $3 billion in cash. It can also raise money by selling all or parts of AE and they have a few assets left they can sell. They can also raise unsecured capital (although it would be expensive in terms of interest). But the problem would be that AA would acquire ALL of NW's obligations (debt, A/C lease payments etc.). AA would not be able to select what assets and liabilities it would take like they did at TWA. Looking at NW's balance sheet, one can see that they have a negative net worth. Plus there would be the costs associated with integrating the two carriers to say nothing of the workforces.

 

[North by Northwest]

If NW has a market cap of around $450 million, AA could purchase it because AA has about $3 billion in cash. It can also raise money by selling all or parts of AE and they have a few assets left they can sell. They can also raise unsecured capital (although it would be expensive in terms of interest). But the problem would be that AA would acquire ALL of NW's obligations (debt, A/C lease payments etc.)[from NxNW:the BIGGER problem would be NWA poison pill, nor could AA currently afford a purchase of Northwest]. AA would not be able to select what assets and liabilities it would take like they did at TWA. Looking at NW's balance sheet, one can see that they have a negative net worth. Plus there would be the costs associated with integrating the two carriers to say nothing of the workforces.

[post="278254"][/post]​

I agree...Ditto for NWA cash on hand $2.1 Billion and clear ownership of 350 aircraft (could be used to raise cash for the purchase), and AA's current market cap. of $2.1 billion. Looking at AA's balance sheet, one can see that they have a negative net worth, but assuming AA's$ 29 billion in debt would be alot.

However, SW would not be faced with those issues with a purchase of AA. A clear profit could be made acording to the forumla suggested by LGA and yourself. Quite an attractive investment if sold off in parts...esp. eagle.

 

[Fly]

If you love intelligent debate, then why do you find it impossible to post any? Your only defense is to insult the poster.

It clearly looks like UAL will be emerging from bk this fall, just about the time that NW finds itself on the doorsteps of the judge. While you will be drowning in bk, UAL will continue to offer the outstanding service AND amenities that NW has chosen to do away with. Perhaps this is why S&P cut their debt rating.

Go ahead North...fire away more insults, it doesn't change the facts.

The only traditional or "legacy" carrier at the top of the ratings was United.

The complete AQR ranking for the 16 largest airlines for 2004:

1) Jet Blue
2) AirTran
3) Southwest
4) United
5) Alaska Airlines
6) America West
7) Northwest
8) American
9) Continental
10) ATA
11) Delta
12) US Air
13) American Eagle
14) SkyWest
15) Comair, and
16) Atlantic Southeast.

 

[jimntx]

North by Northworst:

You love to make United the scapegoat for your own misery. There is nothing inherently wrong with a company the size of United Airlines using the legal means available to any corporation to re-organize.

[post="278051"][/post]​

To say that because it is legal makes it "inherently [not] wrong" is a misstatement of the most egregious sort.

There was a time that segregation was legal. Was it right? Women were denied the vote legally? Was it right? Slavery was legal. Was there "nothing inherently wrong" with it?

There is a telling difference between "Michael Jackson (or OJ or whoever) has been found not guilty" and saying that "Michael Jackson is innocent." By the same token, stating that some action is legal does not equate to that action is the right thing to do or ethical.

 

[Fly]

So your suggestion would be to go out of business and make it easier on the remaining airlines? Is that "ethical" to the 60,000 employees?

 

[jimntx]

So your suggestion would be to go out of business and make it easier on the remaining airlines? Is that "ethical" to the 60,000 employees?

[post="278269"][/post]​

Talk about twisting other people's words. Did I say a word about United going out of business? You made a crack about "intelligent debate." I was just disputing the statement that because it is legal there is "nothing inherently wrong" with what United is doing. One does not equal the other.

You imply that the alternative to bankruptcy is to go out of business. If the only way for ANY company to stay in business is to stay under the protection of the bankruptcy court, then yes, it should go out of business.

However, I disagree with NBNW that United going out of business will materially help NWA or AA or CO. The void would be filled domestically by LCCs more than likely. And, our good Republican Congress would act quickly to allow foreign airlines to take up the International slack rather than let CEOs lose their ability to vacation in Bali or their wives to shop in Hong Kong.

The excess capacity in the airline business will not be solved--except short term--by any of us going out of business. Boeing and Airbus have not stopped building new aircraft, and not all the newbuilds are replacements for old equipment. They will make sure that there is a market for new aircraft whether they are "needed" or not.

 

[North by Northwest]

Do they drug test you guys?? Run into the ground if NW goes BK? LMAO....duh It's sad to see a grown man cry.....so stop.

[post="278200"][/post]​

Does this ring a bell FLY? Does that sound like a insult to you?

I think it is great that Ual's service has improved dramatically.. My issue is that my wages must be reduced to compete with two major carriers in BK whom because of BK have a cost advantage over non BK carriers, therefore creating downward pressure on the wages of non BK carriers.

I take my hat off in praise of American Airlines for attempting to save it's employees pensions. THAT... in all it's glory is worth bragging about!!!!

 

[North by Northwest]

So your suggestion would be to go out of business and make it easier on the remaining airlines?  Is that "ethical" to the 60,000 employees?

[post="278269"][/post]​

Fly...was it "ethical" for you (UAL) to currently enjoy the previous ride based on Pan Am going out of business. Was that ethical for the 27,000 Pan Am employees? With out Pan Am's (too bad Pan Am didn't get the help from the U.S. government that it gave the other carriers. It would have been the most powerful airline on the planet) routes Ual would have been roughly the size of U (domestically). Ual owes it's global reach to the failing of Pan Am (whom sold it's assets to pay it's bills and fund it's pensions [as much as it could] it didn't take the thief's way out...yet you have no issue with the ethics of them having failed which allowed Ual to prosper and then steal from vendors and employees pensions in BK?

 

[Fly]

The difference: Pan Am put those items up for the highest bidder.....they weren't stolen (as you are implying) In that deal, United also took flight attendants to equal the positions needed to work those trips. Pan Am sold all its decent flying which is why they went out of business. United has not sold the 'gems' which is why we will be here for the long haul.

Fyi - AA began the downturn on wages and benefits by voting YES...before everyone. So go ahead, give them your approval if you want.

 

[FWAAA]

Fly...was it "ethical" for you (UAL) to currently enjoy the previous ride based on Pan Am going out of business. Was that ethical for the 27,000 Pan Am employees? With out Pan Am's (too bad Pan Am didn't get the help from the U.S. government that it gave the other carriers. It would have been the most powerful airline on the planet) routes Ual would have been roughly the size of U (domestically). Ual owes it's global reach to the failing of Pan Am...yet you have no issue with the ethics of them having failed which allowed Ual to prosper?

[post="278288"][/post]​

Excellent point. Rather than foisting its pension obligations onto the PBGC while keeping its valuable assets, UAL should have been liquidated. Inevitably, the auction for its valuable assets would have raised substantial amounts of money (probably from AMR, CO or DL) which should have then been contributed to its pension funds at liquidation.

Maybe the (short term) reduction in domestic capacity would have helped the remaining airlines, maybe not. But the PBGC would have received more $$$ than it did.

Now Fly will hurl all sorts of invective at me. 😀 😀

 

[magsau]

NBNW,

I certainly hope you enjoy pinning the blame for you problems on UA. Because truth be known the people at UA could care less if there was a NWA. We have done what we have had to do to keep the airline aloft. In the meantime you have done what you can to make yours fail. Sure will be interesting in the coming months. In the meantime you are working for a blip on the industry radar.

So please grind your axe. Just don't be surprised when no one notices you left the dance.

 

[FlyUs]

Was it not you who claimed WN, the "LCC shark" would get PO'ed over the Wright battle and simply buy AMR to end the matter once and for all?(SW would LUV to have Dallas ALL TO THEMSELVES)

WN could purchase EVERY legacy carrier in the United States and still have several billion dollars left after doing so.Why exactly would they do that(for the SAME reason you speculate that almighty AA could buy NW (prepackage BK deal was it) because of it's "market cap") grasshopper? 🙄

No, I cant argue with logic like yours because you are the message board (dear LGA, you are the message board commentor full of BS who gets upset when he gets fired back at " I want my mommy") equivalent of an eight year old putting his fingers in his ears and going "Nah Nah Nah Nah I can't hear you!" when you read something you dont like(alittle familiar) , and going off the reservation spewing nonsensical crap (like your[LGA] hypothitical BS). (I am an eight year old ...Because I don't agree with someone telling me how they could "carve" up my airline cause they don't like how we operate. You are right about one thing...SW could buy your a$$ as an appitizer)

You came over here with one reason...NOT to add anything FACTUAL. You can't stand it cause you are not the big bad a$$ you think you are in the business. Don't like what I say over here keep your "hypothiticals" directed to AA.

You call me a whacko, yet you rail about United "Stealing Money" and call them "Gangreen" and a "Cancer" that should be eradicated and call for their liquidation. :blink: (and this is un true...how?)

Look in the mirror before you start tossing the whacko comments around...

[post="278205"][/post]​

LGA,You got THAT right grasshopper!
"I merely pointed out it would be ironic if that were to happen to you after all of your crowing about NWAC being so big and bad ass" (and how is AA being taken out by SW different? Can they not afford you? Would they not LUV to have Dallas all to themselves? Would they not make a handsome profit selling off LHR/ South America? Would that not leave them #1 domestically? I see...YOUR reasoning only applies to NW cause you can't stand how they operate and that they have survived. Gotcha! Now go let mommy wipe your tears.)Actually...I pointed out that NWA was a survivor (based on skill). I believe it was you that "crowed" about how Bad A$$ AA was and alluded to it's almighty power by taking over a bankrupt and helpless TWA. Now stomp your feet wacko and don't break the mirror.

[post="278240"][/post]​

Are you sure you're not Yosemite Sam???

 

[North by Northwest]

NBNW,

I certainly hope you enjoy pinning the blame for you problems on UA.  Because truth be known the people at UA could care less if there was a NWA.  We have done what we have had to do to keep the airline aloft.  In the meantime you have done what you can to make yours fail.  Sure will be interesting in the coming months.  In the meantime you are working for a blip on the industry radar. 

So please grind your axe.  Just don't be surprised when no one notices you left the dance.

[post="278321"][/post]​

Get out of BANKRUPTCY alive...than you can pretend that you are important and should be taken seriously as an airline. "A blip on the radar" Ual isn't even ON THE RADAR! (snicker)

"Just don't be surprised when no one notices you left the dance."

You mean the way Ual has been treated? (snicker) Your sad self importance is only important to your creditors.

 

[North by Northwest]

"Are you sure you're not Yosemite Sam??? "


My cover has been blown!!! 🙄 😀 :eye: 🙂

 

[LGA Fleet Service]

[I believe it was you that "crowed" about how Bad A$$ AA was and alluded to it's almighty power by taking over a bankrupt and helpless TWA.

[post="278240"][/post]​

No, I said "Prepackaged section 363 bankruptcy ala AA/TWA", I did not crow about AA being bad ass,nor did I say anything about stomping TWA into the ground.


You can't respond to any posters comments without going into hysterics and tossing personal insults around and thats fine, it makes you and your foaming at the mouth postings irrelevant to any discussion at hand.


To everyone else at NWAC, good luck.