Bankrupt United Begs for More Time
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
>>In the interest of accuracy, US carriers are required to have one additional crewmember for flights over 8 hours and 2 additional crewmembers for flights over 12 hours. The Star Alliance flight schedule shows the Chicago to Tokyo flight time as being 13:15 hours.<<
Well, they did have two captains and three first officers as I recall when I rode the jumpseat on that leg a while back when things were booming. Also, in the glory days (i.e. three years ago) United put an extra pilot onboard for Atlantic flights less than eight hours (seems like it was letter 01-14 if you want to check the hymnal). This "Atlantic Augmentation" was lost in the bankruptcy givebacks.
Well, they did have two captains and three first officers as I recall when I rode the jumpseat on that leg a while back when things were booming. Also, in the glory days (i.e. three years ago) United put an extra pilot onboard for Atlantic flights less than eight hours (seems like it was letter 01-14 if you want to check the hymnal). This "Atlantic Augmentation" was lost in the bankruptcy givebacks.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: MIDLANDS
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The choice for giving United a new brand is a really good idea.
Aircraft will only be painted when they go in for their D checks, when the aircraft have to be stripped of their paint anyway. The new livery is a lot simpler, and apparently costs a lot less to paint and to maintain. Also, Continental when they were in the middle of their turnaround programme in the 1990's "From Worst to First" decided to give a new livery to all of their planes to show that it was a new corporate philosophy at the airline, and they were here to stay.
I'm not too sure what to think about Ted. They haven't invested as heaving in Ted as Delta has at Song. There isn't all the technology and IFE that Delta's had to put in over at Song to compete with JetBlue. Instead, Ted is giving passengers a simplified United product, much like Shuttle by United, but unline S by U, the airline has the costs in line with the fares.
So, I'm not sure if the new livery & Ted are such bad ideas ...
Aircraft will only be painted when they go in for their D checks, when the aircraft have to be stripped of their paint anyway. The new livery is a lot simpler, and apparently costs a lot less to paint and to maintain. Also, Continental when they were in the middle of their turnaround programme in the 1990's "From Worst to First" decided to give a new livery to all of their planes to show that it was a new corporate philosophy at the airline, and they were here to stay.
I'm not too sure what to think about Ted. They haven't invested as heaving in Ted as Delta has at Song. There isn't all the technology and IFE that Delta's had to put in over at Song to compete with JetBlue. Instead, Ted is giving passengers a simplified United product, much like Shuttle by United, but unline S by U, the airline has the costs in line with the fares.
So, I'm not sure if the new livery & Ted are such bad ideas ...
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: California, USA
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbubba:
<<Well, they did have two captains and three first officers as I recall when I rode the jumpseat on that leg a while back when things were booming. Also, in the glory days (i.e. three years ago) United put an extra pilot onboard for Atlantic flights less than eight hours (seems like it was letter 01-14 if you want to check the hymnal). This "Atlantic Augmentation" was lost in the bankruptcy givebacks.>>
That suggests to me that there was a linecheck of the crew taking place from a Standards Captain. Even if an OE was done, UA uses one Captain and 3 type rated First Officers. That saves them from having 2 Captains unlike carriers like Northwest.
Lite:
You are absolutely right about Ted in that the startup cost was minimal. It consisted of a slightly different paint sceme, replacing the F/C seats with coach seats giving Ted more seats to sell,(with additional 4-6 inches of legroom), some inflight programming, simplified fares and tons of nearly free publicity. Will it work? Time will tell, but from day one the load factors have been in the 80-90% range. It seems to appeal to many travellers to tourist destinations.
Jim Morehead:
Your posting captures very well what is going on at the new United. Thank you very much. This article in a Chicago newspaper gives additional insight of how things are on the line.
Pilot's faith in United unshaken
http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...i-business-hed
<<Well, they did have two captains and three first officers as I recall when I rode the jumpseat on that leg a while back when things were booming. Also, in the glory days (i.e. three years ago) United put an extra pilot onboard for Atlantic flights less than eight hours (seems like it was letter 01-14 if you want to check the hymnal). This "Atlantic Augmentation" was lost in the bankruptcy givebacks.>>
That suggests to me that there was a linecheck of the crew taking place from a Standards Captain. Even if an OE was done, UA uses one Captain and 3 type rated First Officers. That saves them from having 2 Captains unlike carriers like Northwest.
Lite:
You are absolutely right about Ted in that the startup cost was minimal. It consisted of a slightly different paint sceme, replacing the F/C seats with coach seats giving Ted more seats to sell,(with additional 4-6 inches of legroom), some inflight programming, simplified fares and tons of nearly free publicity. Will it work? Time will tell, but from day one the load factors have been in the 80-90% range. It seems to appeal to many travellers to tourist destinations.
Jim Morehead:
Your posting captures very well what is going on at the new United. Thank you very much. This article in a Chicago newspaper gives additional insight of how things are on the line.
Pilot's faith in United unshaken
http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...i-business-hed
Last edited by aviator; 22nd Mar 2004 at 06:35.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Looks like there is some sort of investigation going on with the ATSB bailout loan applications. Anybody know what's up?
__________________________________________________
UAL, US Air, America West Get Subpoenas on Loan Board Matters
March 21 (Bloomberg) -- UAL Corp.'s United Airlines, US Airways Group Inc. and America West Holdings Corp. said today they received subpoenas from the U.S. Treasury Department seeking their correspondence with airline loan board members and staff.
The subpoena seeks receipts for meals, airline tickets, gifts, loans or discounts for board staff members, the New York Times reported Saturday. The subpoena didn't say why investigators want the information and five U.S. carriers confirmed receiving them, the newspaper said, without naming them.
Anne Womack Kolton, a Treasury Department and loan board spokeswoman in Washington, declined to comment today.
Congress set up the Air Transportation Stabilization Board after the 2001 terrorist attacks to decide which airlines would receive as much as $10 billion in guarantees to help the carriers recover from the effects of the attacks.
Daniel Montgomery, a former executive director of the board, is the only member mentioned by name in the subpoena, the paper said. Montgomery, who left the board in August, declined to comment to the Times. Contacted at his New Jersey home by Bloomberg News, Montgomery said he was unaware of the subpoena before the Times story and declined to comment further.
Chicago-based United Airlines, which has a $1.6 billion loan guarantee application pending before the Air Transportation Stabilization Board, received a subpoena from the Treasury Department's inspector general, said Stephan Roth, a company spokesman. ``We're cooperating,'' he said.
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...TecHQ&refer=us
__________________________________________________
UAL, US Air, America West Get Subpoenas on Loan Board Matters
March 21 (Bloomberg) -- UAL Corp.'s United Airlines, US Airways Group Inc. and America West Holdings Corp. said today they received subpoenas from the U.S. Treasury Department seeking their correspondence with airline loan board members and staff.
The subpoena seeks receipts for meals, airline tickets, gifts, loans or discounts for board staff members, the New York Times reported Saturday. The subpoena didn't say why investigators want the information and five U.S. carriers confirmed receiving them, the newspaper said, without naming them.
Anne Womack Kolton, a Treasury Department and loan board spokeswoman in Washington, declined to comment today.
Congress set up the Air Transportation Stabilization Board after the 2001 terrorist attacks to decide which airlines would receive as much as $10 billion in guarantees to help the carriers recover from the effects of the attacks.
Daniel Montgomery, a former executive director of the board, is the only member mentioned by name in the subpoena, the paper said. Montgomery, who left the board in August, declined to comment to the Times. Contacted at his New Jersey home by Bloomberg News, Montgomery said he was unaware of the subpoena before the Times story and declined to comment further.
Chicago-based United Airlines, which has a $1.6 billion loan guarantee application pending before the Air Transportation Stabilization Board, received a subpoena from the Treasury Department's inspector general, said Stephan Roth, a company spokesman. ``We're cooperating,'' he said.
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...TecHQ&refer=us
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Guarantee or not, United plans to exit bankruptcy
By Melissa Allison
Tribune staff reporter
Published June 12, 2004
United Airlines said Friday that it will exit bankruptcy this year, even if it does not receive a crucial $1.6 billion federal loan guarantee.
The airline believes it qualifies for and urgently needs the government's backing. But the carrier's restructuring plan is working, making it sufficiently strong to emerge from Chapter 11 protection even if the government says no, Chief Executive Glenn Tilton said.
"I think that the balance of the year would provide us ... with sufficient time to complete the restructuring--with or without" the loan guarantee, Tilton said in an interview with The Associated Press.
A decision from the Air Transportation Stabilization Board on United's request could come any day.
United has declined to discuss how it would emerge from bankruptcy without the guarantee. But industry sources say the process would be painful and would complicate efforts to return the nation's second-largest airline to financial health.
United parent UAL Corp. almost certainly would need an equity investor for a capital infusion in order to attract loans without government backing. One name that comes up frequently is David Bonderman's Texas Pacific Group.
Texas Pacific is known for its 1990s turnarounds of Continental and America West Airlines. The group lost out to Retirement Systems of Alabama in a bid to bring US Airways out of bankruptcy last year.
But airline investors, hardened to the realities of high fuel prices, low fares and increasing competition from low-cost carriers, are likely to demand some big changes from United if the carrier does not receive a government guarantee.
United needs about $2 billion to emerge from bankruptcy, much of it to repay its debtor-in-possession loans, which have helped support operations since the airline filed for Chapter 11 protection in December 2002. Citigroup Inc. and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. agreed to put up the money if the government backs $1.6 billion of it.
Anyone willing to invest that kind of money in United without a government guarantee not only would take a large chunk of ownership in the Elk Grove Township-based airline but likely would take another bite out of already-reduced employee wages and benefits, sources said.
United has cut its workforce by 38 percent since mid-2001 and slashed wages and benefits by roughly $2.5 billion a year in an effort to become a leaner competitor. Workers this week agreed to a cut of more than $300 million in retiree benefits through 2010.
More demands from management would not sit well with workers.
"Their employees will pout, on-time performance will suffer, but ultimately management will prevail," said one industry source. "They'll come out a whole and pretty vibrant competitor."
Such sentiment is expressed by those who believe United should be denied the loan because it needs to cut more costs, particularly in its weighty pension funds, and to pare some routes to become more competitive.
Urgency to fix now
Another industry source said it would be worse to let United limp along with a loan and possibly tumble back into bankruptcy.
"That's a much worse scenario than getting it fixed now, which may require some near-term pain," he said.
Besides operating in one of the most difficult environments in industry history, the airline is attempting to exit bankruptcy at the same time a number of its peers are in serious financial trouble.
US Airways, which exited bankruptcy last year with equity funds from Retirement Systems of Alabama, is struggling to avoid a second bankruptcy filing.
Delta Air Lines, considered the strongest U.S. carrier before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, has warned that it could be headed for Chapter 11 protection if it does not receive major concessions from workers.
And Air Canada has had trouble rounding up exit financing from its bankruptcy, losing a potential investor after labor unions refused to meet his demands for pension cuts.
Those woes would be fresh in the minds of any equity investor with its eye on United.
Rejection means `on to Plan B'
Sam Buttrick, an analyst at UBS Investment Research, took a glib view of United's situation in a report on Thursday.
After saying that United's chances of getting a federal loan guarantee are far diminished, Buttrick writes that the implications of such a rejection are "not much."
"Indeed, it would simply be on to Plan B, which would likely entail some combination of a longer stay in the protective custody of bankruptcy, redoubled cost-reduction efforts to achieve a cost structure that would attract market capital, and perhaps some modest level of network downsizing, none of which sounds all too terrible to us," Buttrick wrote.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...l=chi-news-hed
By Melissa Allison
Tribune staff reporter
Published June 12, 2004
United Airlines said Friday that it will exit bankruptcy this year, even if it does not receive a crucial $1.6 billion federal loan guarantee.
The airline believes it qualifies for and urgently needs the government's backing. But the carrier's restructuring plan is working, making it sufficiently strong to emerge from Chapter 11 protection even if the government says no, Chief Executive Glenn Tilton said.
"I think that the balance of the year would provide us ... with sufficient time to complete the restructuring--with or without" the loan guarantee, Tilton said in an interview with The Associated Press.
A decision from the Air Transportation Stabilization Board on United's request could come any day.
United has declined to discuss how it would emerge from bankruptcy without the guarantee. But industry sources say the process would be painful and would complicate efforts to return the nation's second-largest airline to financial health.
United parent UAL Corp. almost certainly would need an equity investor for a capital infusion in order to attract loans without government backing. One name that comes up frequently is David Bonderman's Texas Pacific Group.
Texas Pacific is known for its 1990s turnarounds of Continental and America West Airlines. The group lost out to Retirement Systems of Alabama in a bid to bring US Airways out of bankruptcy last year.
But airline investors, hardened to the realities of high fuel prices, low fares and increasing competition from low-cost carriers, are likely to demand some big changes from United if the carrier does not receive a government guarantee.
United needs about $2 billion to emerge from bankruptcy, much of it to repay its debtor-in-possession loans, which have helped support operations since the airline filed for Chapter 11 protection in December 2002. Citigroup Inc. and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. agreed to put up the money if the government backs $1.6 billion of it.
Anyone willing to invest that kind of money in United without a government guarantee not only would take a large chunk of ownership in the Elk Grove Township-based airline but likely would take another bite out of already-reduced employee wages and benefits, sources said.
United has cut its workforce by 38 percent since mid-2001 and slashed wages and benefits by roughly $2.5 billion a year in an effort to become a leaner competitor. Workers this week agreed to a cut of more than $300 million in retiree benefits through 2010.
More demands from management would not sit well with workers.
"Their employees will pout, on-time performance will suffer, but ultimately management will prevail," said one industry source. "They'll come out a whole and pretty vibrant competitor."
Such sentiment is expressed by those who believe United should be denied the loan because it needs to cut more costs, particularly in its weighty pension funds, and to pare some routes to become more competitive.
Urgency to fix now
Another industry source said it would be worse to let United limp along with a loan and possibly tumble back into bankruptcy.
"That's a much worse scenario than getting it fixed now, which may require some near-term pain," he said.
Besides operating in one of the most difficult environments in industry history, the airline is attempting to exit bankruptcy at the same time a number of its peers are in serious financial trouble.
US Airways, which exited bankruptcy last year with equity funds from Retirement Systems of Alabama, is struggling to avoid a second bankruptcy filing.
Delta Air Lines, considered the strongest U.S. carrier before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, has warned that it could be headed for Chapter 11 protection if it does not receive major concessions from workers.
And Air Canada has had trouble rounding up exit financing from its bankruptcy, losing a potential investor after labor unions refused to meet his demands for pension cuts.
Those woes would be fresh in the minds of any equity investor with its eye on United.
Rejection means `on to Plan B'
Sam Buttrick, an analyst at UBS Investment Research, took a glib view of United's situation in a report on Thursday.
After saying that United's chances of getting a federal loan guarantee are far diminished, Buttrick writes that the implications of such a rejection are "not much."
"Indeed, it would simply be on to Plan B, which would likely entail some combination of a longer stay in the protective custody of bankruptcy, redoubled cost-reduction efforts to achieve a cost structure that would attract market capital, and perhaps some modest level of network downsizing, none of which sounds all too terrible to us," Buttrick wrote.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...l=chi-news-hed
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vive la France et son camembert............by the way Dannon announced a surprise airplane by the end of 2007..... la pochette surprise de la mere Dennis..... Attention Boeing Boeing!!
A+
Pat
A+
Pat
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Attention Boeing...and all the ridiculous other nationalistic postings aside.....wanna be that way? One big Germany 60 yrs ago would have been better for us Americans in lots of ways....a stupid comment to match the other ones posted here....so back to the gist of things...should UAL be bailed out?..probably dont deserve it for sure but think of the people affected...so whats the answer?
