AA recalls starting to increase

[G4G5]

You guys are good, I checked The Financial Times, The WSJ, The NY Times and Business Week and all of these paid professional reporters combined came up with, you guesses it NOTHING.

Yet you want to discount sworn testimony based upon he said, she said, that their was a Boeing deal.

Get real.

I would have loved to be around when these phone calls were made.
Boeing CEO
"Hey SWA I know that you guys have penty of 737's on order and that you compete with TWA at STL but we are going to bail them out"
Or this one;
"Hey DAL, I know that you just signed an exclusive all Boeing deal and that you compete with TWA out of JFK but were going to bail them out"
Hey United, we appreciated all of the 747/777 and 767 business and we know that you compete with TWA out of LGA but were going to bail them out"

Or best of all: "Hey AA I know that you guys just signed an exclusive deal and that you have plenty of Boeing products on order and that you have a deal pending to purchase TWA but we decided that we want to get into the airline business and break up your deal"

Or is it more realistic to think that someone inside TWA, did a little financial reasearch came up with the Boeing plan only to have Boeing say, no thanks.

I know a guy who flew with the XXX or spoke with the XXX who was at a meeting and said Boeing is in the mix. Then the rumor takes on a life of it's own and people will actually go out of their way to discount the sworn Senate testimony of the TWA CEO.

What more is their to say, you have no proof but yet you beat CNBC to the exclusive bailout story that can't be found anywhere other then in the cockpit when two TWA pilots fly together.

 

[AA717driver]

Will American allow all their pilots on furlough to be stapled if they would merge or should they be included? That would staple 2000 pilots and would give the other airline a nice buffer.
Furloughed pilots do not bring any jobs, so I guess they do not count.

Marty

American would most certainly allow the furloughed pilots to be stapled.

I doubt APA would.

It'll be irrelevant if AA buys more than 50% since it would go to an arbitrator. Thanks, Kit and Claire! TC

 

[AA717driver]

You guys are good, I checked The Financial Times, The WSJ, The NY Times and Business Week and all of these paid professional reporters combined came up with, you guesses it NOTHING.

G4G5--You're equally good--and savvy. You know as well as I do that the 'public record' you searched would have no history of an offer of this type. Relying strictly on published accounts is disingenuous in this forum. Had the AA deal not proceeded beyond Bill Compton's presentation in the boardroom, it would have been relegated to word of mouth, too.

Everyone here is free to believe what they want. Again, what we believe is now irrelevant--we can only take what exists and move forward. TC

 

[AA717driver]

Icahn loaded the gun, but AA pulled the trigger.

I disagree. Icahn bled the company dry. He was offered $100M by STL to shut down the Karabu Agreement. He passed. Absent Karabu (Icahn's travel service could sell an unlimited number of TWA tickets purchased from TWA at 55% of face value), TWA would have made a profit in the late 90's.

Compton sold TWA to Carty. He was good at that.

Also, Absent 9/11, I believe there would have been few furloughs of much shorter duration. It would have been a very different outcome for most of us, IMO. TC

 

[G4G5]

G4G5--You're equally good--and savvy. You know as well as I do that the 'public record' you searched would have no history of an offer of this type. Relying strictly on published accounts is disingenuous in this forum. Had the AA deal not proceeded beyond Bill Compton's presentation in the boardroom, it would have been relegated to word of mouth, too.

Everyone here is free to believe what they want. Again, what we believe is now irrelevant--we can only take what exists and move forward. TC

TC,

You know I love ya but I can't buy this:

"The BOD, out of respect for Compton, granted his wish, gave him time and the rest is history. Compton walked away with a 7-figure payout from AA..."

What you are suggesting is that the BOD was willing to screw all of the TWA employees (which is what a sale to AA did Vs a proposed Boeing bailout with new mgt that would keep the airline independent) Just so Compton could get a 7 figure payout.

You a very intelligent guy so stop and think about it. The thought that poor Bill Compton wasn't going to get any money so we need to blow off the better Boeing deal for the worse AA deal just to get him some $$$ is a bit much to hang a hat on.

No BOD would do that. Their has to be more to the story. And that's my point, it's a story.

Their were plenty of ways to give Compton his money, consultant contracts, non compete contracts, BOD positions. Ex Vp in charge of Nothing positions. The BOD would not and legally could not (they are required to look out for the best interests of the share holders) take the weaker deal just because Bill Compton was a nice guy.

You also know that financial publications print rumors all the time. Yet know one printed this one..........

 

[G4G5]

I disagree. Icahn bled the company dry. He was offered $100M by STL to shut down the Karabu Agreement. He passed. Absent Karabu (Icahn's travel service could sell an unlimited number of TWA tickets purchased from TWA at 55% of face value), TWA would have made a profit in the late 90's.

Compton sold TWA to Carty. He was good at that.

Also, Absent 9/11, I believe there would have been few furloughs of much shorter duration. It would have been a very different outcome for most of us, IMO. TC

I agree, absent 9/11 STL would have remained as a thriving hub (and probably would have grown with the additional over flow from ORD) . AA would be using all of the newly aquired TWA route authorities out of a new JFK terminal. The TWA JFK maint and terminal would both have remained in use. But............

The Ican ticket deal was death by paper cuts for TWA. Ican just kept bleeding TWA, that's why in the end other then a hedge fund with no funds, he was one of the few willing to step up and try to keep his cash cow alive.

 

[waveflyer]

what's insane is a seniority system- that gives control over the most important aspect of our careers to backroom deals by CEO types who have no interest in the affect on our careers.

 

[stlflyguy]

Yep, the moon landing was a hoax, they are spreading chemtrails in the sky to brainwash us, OJ was innocent, the TWA acquisition was a conspiracy, blah, blah, blah.........

...your post was relevant....etc. Just trying to keep in the same vain...

stlflyguy

 

[Prog 2/2]

TC,

You know I love ya but I can't buy this:

"The BOD, out of respect for Compton, granted his wish, gave him time and the rest is history. Compton walked away with a 7-figure payout from AA..."

What you are suggesting is that the BOD was willing to screw all of the TWA employees (which is what a sale to AA did Vs a proposed Boeing bailout with new mgt that would keep the airline independent) Just so Compton could get a 7 figure payout.

No.

What he is suggesting is that Compton took the time the board gave him and did the AA deal to stave off being replaced.

The BOD did its fiduciary duty when Compton told them he had a better plan; i.e., it let him pursue it, just in case it was better than what was on the table.

Remember, one of the selling points of Compton/Carty was that the employees would be protected.

You a very intelligent guy so stop and think about it. The thought that poor Bill Compton wasn't going to get any money so we need to blow off the better Boeing deal for the worse AA deal just to get him some $$$ is a bit much to hang a hat on.

It is.

And nowhere is it mentioned that this was the motivation.

No BOD would do that. Their has to be more to the story.

We been tryin' to tell ya's!

And that's my point, it's a story.

Their were plenty of ways to give Compton his money, consultant contracts, non compete contracts, BOD positions. Ex Vp in charge of Nothing positions. The BOD would not and legally could not (they are required to look out for the best interests of the share holders) take the weaker deal just because Bill Compton was a nice guy.

I don't recall anybody saying that it was a weaker deal, or that it was motivated by any altruistic notion of rewarding Bill Compton.

The point is, that there were other options that were available and that TWA was not picked up on the courthouse steps as many at AA believe.

Compton/Carty cooked up the deal with a TWA bankruptcy as a precondition in order to shed Karabu, renegotiate lease rates, and deal with senior debt.

Compton and TWA had to make the "bankruptcy" case as plausible and believable as possible to overcome the possible anti-trust resistance, and this is where Compton made the remarks that you're quoting.

You certainly remember that the DOT/DOJ had some heartburn over the UA/US deal, and Compton was trying to get past that hurdle by portraying us as pathetically as possible.

You also know that financial publications print rumors all the time. Yet know one printed this one..........

Unless you have access to the Board minutes, I can't think of a source of documentation for you.

Suffice to say that all the employee groups had representatives on the TWA BOD, and all have the same story.

 

[G4G5]

Unless you have access to the Board minutes, I can't think of a source of documentation for you.

So if you have access to the BOD minutes then you can do a simple cut and pase of the BOD breifing on the Boeing OFFER?

Suffice to say that all the employee groups had representatives on the TWA BOD, and all have the same story.

No.

What he is suggesting is that Compton took the time the board gave him and did the AA deal to stave off being replaced.


So you are trying to tell me that the CEO has the power to cut a deal all on his own without running it by the BOD, I don't think so.


The BOD did its fiduciary duty when Compton told them he had a better plan; i.e., it let him pursue it, just in case it was better than what was on the table.

And if it wasn't? That's my point the AA deal had to be better. If as some here suggest the alleged Boeing offer was better then it would have been acceted by the BOD

Remember, one of the selling points of Compton/Carty was that the employees would be protected.

Once again, an alleged Boeing deal would have provided an influx of cash, new leadership and the continued independent operation of TWA, which would have protect all the jobs. Yet this was not accepted by the BOD? Something doesn't make sense

I don't recall anybody saying that it was a weaker deal, or that it was motivated by any altruistic notion of rewarding Bill Compton.

Read TC's post "The BOD, out of respect for Compton, granted his wish, gave him time and the rest is history. Compton walked away with a 7-figure payout from AA..."


The point is, that there were other options that were available and that TWA was not picked up on the courthouse steps as many at AA believe.

Apparently none better then AA's. Or the BOD would have been obligaated to accept it. I remember an Ican offer and an unkonwn hedge fund with no funds.


Compton/Carty cooked up the deal with a TWA bankruptcy as a precondition in order to shed Karabu, renegotiate lease rates, and deal with senior debt.

No TWA was going BK anyway and the deal was cooked up to fight off the Ican offer.

Compton and TWA had to make the "bankruptcy" case as plausible and believable as possible to overcome the possible anti-trust resistance, and this is where Compton made the remarks that you're quoting.

Don't agree, even with Compton paying down obligations instead of renegotiation. Debts had to be paid. TWA was burning through cash at a rate of how many millions per day? They just didn't have the cash flow, access to capital and assests to pull out on their own.

You certainly remember that the DOT/DOJ had some heartburn over the UA/US deal, and Compton was trying to get past that hurdle by portraying us as pathetically as possible.

No, you were pathetic and that's the point. TWA was the only major in all of 1999 not to record a profit (not just in the last couple of months when Carty and Compton started to work on a deal) Without AA their was no way that this would ever get better as long as Ican had any ties to TWA. This is what burns a lot of AA people up. The numbers were bad, they don't lie and Ican was just not going away without AA. No AA, no getting rid of Ican's cheap tickets

You also know that financial publications print rumors all the time. Yet know one printed this one..........


So if you have access to the BOD minutes then you can do a simple cut and pase of the BOD breifing on the Boeing OFFER?

My point is and many at AA are tired of hearing the Boeing bailout BS. If their was such a deal and it was better? Why no public record of it, even the slightest blurb in any finaicial publication, someone would have leaked it? They unions could have leaked it if they honestly felt it was better.

If their was such a deal in the first place.
Why did the BOD not accept it? Just telling me that they wanted to give Compton some money doesn't cut it. Their JOB is to accept the best offer

Why did Compton risk perjury when he said, " AA was the only one that came forward"?