A Transaction of Mutual Necessity

FDJ2

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
3,908
Total Time
10000+
A Transaction of Mutual Necessity-Boyd
Skywest Buys ASA: Keeping The Mother Ship Afloat

How to describe it?

Lenders of last resort? Or, maybe, it's the equivalent of borrowing from the kids to make the house payment, in order to keep a roof over their heads.

Pretty much, that's a couple of ways of describing the rationale behind Delta's sale of ASA to Skywest.

The deal is aimed at mutually-assured benefits for all sides.The deal gives Delta some $300 million in immediate cash, and some breathing room. It also helps keep Delta - which is critical to Skywest's future - afloat. Simply put, if DL were to go away, the loss of this revenue stream to Skywest could possibly be lethal, or at the least very damaging to Skywest's P&L.

Skywest: Choosing Between Two Unpleasant Options. Some silly media stories notwithstanding, it must be remembered that companies like Skywest are not airlines anymore. They are in a much tougher business, which is selling capacity and crew time to major airlines. It's a segment of the industry that's already over-populated with players and with small jets. A culling of the herd is inevitable.

Clearly, Skywest doesn't want to be a cull-ee. This means that in doing this deal, Skywest has made a calculated decision between two tough options. One option was to sit still in a situation where Delta, one of its major customers (and one of its major revenue streams) could file Chapter 11, allowing it to do additional take-it-or-leave it cram-downs on Skywest, a la United. Or, the other option was that Skywest could buy ASA, engineering the deal to give Delta much-needed cash, along with some safeguards for Skywest should DL ultimately file bankruptcy.

Option One was out of the question. But the downside of Option Two was Skywest ending up with a whole additional fleet of RJs (plus some turboprops) in a segment of the industry that is facing one whale of a shake-out in the not too distant future. Nevertheless, the second option was less odoriferous.

Bottom line: the deal is one aimed at trying to buttress mutual survival for both Delta and Skywest. Delta gets cash and time. Skywest, a major vendor to Delta, has a less problematic future as well.

ASA: The Red-Headed Stepchild. That leaves Skywest the owner of ASA, an operation that is as fundamentally different from Skywest as a coal barge is from a luxury cruise ship. On the surface, ASA just brings problems to the Skywest table.

Skywest is arguably one of the best-managed corporations, let alone best-managed aviation companies, in the country. Despite the strains of growth over the past three years, it has managed to maintain a culture of clean airplanes, good service, and rational management. The fact that the company remains entirely non-union is a testament to its leadership. Employees seek out union representation when they feel they have legitimate doubts about some aspects of how their airline is run. These, apparently, are not a large part of the work environment at Skywest.

ASA, on the other hand, has been, to put it mildly, service-challenged. Small communities throughout the South over the years have a wide range of stories they can relate regarding service quality that at times could only be described as rivaling that of Aeroflot. Concourse C at ATL (the part occupied by ASA) was at one time a living case study in customer service that was "on-automatic," which for all intents and purposes indicated that ASA management had been on a permanent leave of absence. It's possible that Delta has historically lost revenue on the basis of some consumers simply refusing to fly a DL itinerary that involved ASA.

But this is another positive part of the Skywest buy. It's highly likely that Skywest will install new infrastructure and, hopefully, new key members of management at ASA. The result could be improved service, increased brand loyalty for Delta, and a stronger competitive position.

More Shake-Outs To Come For Small Jet Providers. The hard economic fact is that small jet ("RJ") operations are going to face increasing economic pressures, both from higher fuel costs as well as from the continuing squeeze on revenues driven by competing small jet providers vying to sell services to major carriers. (Witness the recent shifts of aircraft by Air Wisconsin, and the Mesa/Delta deal - both left somebody else out in the cold.) Then consider the inevitable continuing efforts on the part of major carriers to pay their SJPs (and all of their other vendors) less for their services, and we have a picture that's a whole lot less rosy than some on Wall Street would have us believe about "regional airlines."

Delta paid a reported $700 million for ASA, and sold it for what will ultimately be just over $400 million.

Do the math. RJs and RJ-providers are not a growth industry.

 

strega7

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2002
Posts
225
Total Time
7500+
But the downside of Option Two was Skywest ending up with a whole additional fleet of RJs
Good thing the debt for 40 of those RJ's is staying with Delta.
 

spinproof

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Posts
774
Total Time
noneya
Lifting a published article and not giving credit by whom it was written is a copyright law infringment.

I guess the last line made your day!
 
Last edited:

Well-hung Start

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Posts
69
Total Time
noon
LOL....Coal Barge!

I can't breath I'm laughing so....

I fly a friggin' coal barge!!! 10 days off, too!

And that "C" Concourse case-study thing........HAHAHAHAHAH!.....The Wendy's in Concourse "C" is a case study in what's wrong with Atlanta.

'scuse me while I fart................
 

On Your Six

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2004
Posts
4,509
Total Time
9,500
strega7 said:
Good thing the debt for 40 of those RJ's is staying with Delta.
Are you sure about that? I bet you that in a bankruptcy, those RJs would be parked if Delta retains title and debt expense. A lot of pilots would be impacted negatively if that happens...
 

strega7

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2002
Posts
225
Total Time
7500+
Yes parking them (40 ASA CRJ's) would hurt the pilots flying them. But SkyWest would not be saddled with their debt. Helps the company but could screw almost 400 CRJ pilots. I hope it (DAL CH11/reduced DCI flights) does not happen.
 

Medeco

SQUIB
Joined
Sep 12, 2002
Posts
1,064
spinproof said:
Lifting a published article and not giving credit by whom it was written is a copyright law infringment.

I guess the last line made your day!

What are you talking about?

Try reading the top line again and you will see BOYD


Geez some of you guys are fast to point and start senseless arguments.

Did I miss the sarcazm in your post or something?

BOYDS article is pretty dang accurate, I just wish the leaders of ASA and SKYWEST would have it taped to their desk as motivation for change in a positive way, but i digress.

Medeco
 

spinproof

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Posts
774
Total Time
noneya
Medeco said:
What are you talking about?

Try reading the top line again and you will see BOYD


Geez some of you guys are fast to point and start senseless arguments.

Did I miss the sarcazm in your post or something?

BOYDS article is pretty dang accurate, I just wish the leaders of ASA and SKYWEST would have it taped to their desk as motivation for change in a positive way, but i digress.

Medeco
Obviously you know nothing about copyright law...in which case by mearlie mentioning "Boyd" does not give anyone reading the article a clear understanding as to where it was "lifted' and its aurthor! I do agree it is a senseless argument and yes there is sarcasm intended.
 
Last edited:

Medeco

SQUIB
Joined
Sep 12, 2002
Posts
1,064
spinproof said:
Obviously you know nothing about copyright law...in which case by mearlie mentioning "Boyd" does not give anyone reading the article a clear understanding as to where it was "lifted' and its aurthor! I do agree it is a senseless argument and yes there is sarcasm intended.
Besides you, who here is concerned about copywrite law on some webboard?

Whatever.


Medeco
 

Dangerkitty

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Posts
1,353
Total Time
8700
spinproof said:
Lifting a published article and not giving credit by whom it was written is a copyright law infringment.

I guess the last line made your day!
I hope you are not a Copyright attorney on the side! If he were to copy the article and then SELL it for a profit that would be Copyright Infringement.
Cutting and pasting an article on a message board and not giving credit to the author is NOT Copyright infringement. I guess it could be considered plagerism but since most of us are out of college now I dont think that that would be of much concern.
 

spinproof

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Posts
774
Total Time
noneya
Dangerkitty said:
I hope you are not a Copyright attorney on the side! If he were to copy the article and then SELL it for a profit that would be Copyright Infringement.
Cutting and pasting an article on a message board and not giving credit to the author is NOT Copyright infringement. I guess it could be considered plagerism but since most of us are out of college now I dont think that that would be of much concern.

WRONG ! By not giving proper credit infers the writer is the author which is infringement if in fact he is not! Profit has nothing to do with copyrights! Cutting and pasting is in itself a copyright infringment if in fact proper credit is not given the author and source!
 

Dangerkitty

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Posts
1,353
Total Time
8700
spinproof said:
WRONG ! By not giving proper credit infers the writer is the author which is infringement if in fact he is not! Profit has nothing to do with copyrights! Cutting and pasting is in itself a copyright infringment if in fact proper credit is not given the author and source!
You just described and defined plagiarism. Go to www.dictionary.com and find out for yourself.

Furthermore you can find the in's and out's of Copyrights at www.copyright.gov

See below.

PUBLICATION

Publication is no longer the key to obtaining federal copyright as it was under the Copyright Act of 1909. However, publication remains important to copyright owners.

The 1976 Copyright Act defines publication as follows:


"Publication" is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending. The offering to distribute copies or phonorecords to a group of persons for purposes of further distribution, public performance, or public display constitutes publication. A public performance or display of a work does not of itself constitute publication.



NOTE: Before 1978, federal copyright was generally secured by the act of publication with notice of copyright, assuming compliance with all other relevant statutory conditions. U. S. works in the public domain on January 1, 1978, (for example, works published without satisfying all conditions for securing federal copyright under the Copyright Act of 1909) remain in the public domain under the 1976 Copyright Act. Certain foreign works originally published without notice had their copyrights restored under the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). Request Circular 38b and see the "Notice of Copyright" section of this publication for further information.


Federal copyright could also be secured before 1978 by the act of registration in the case of certain unpublished works and works eligible for ad interim copyright. The 1976 Copyright Act automatically extends to full term (section 304 sets the term) copyright for all works, including those subject to ad interim copyright if ad interim registration has been made on or before June 30, 1978.


A further discussion of the definition of "publication" can be found in the legislative history of the 1976 Copyright Act. The legislative reports define "to the public" as distribution to persons under no explicit or implicit restrictions with respect to disclosure of the contents. The reports state that the definition makes it clear that the sale of phonorecords constitutes publication of the underlying work, for example, the musical, dramatic, or literary work embodied in a phonorecord. The reports also state that it is clear that any form of dissemination in which the material object does not change hands, for example, performances or displays on television, is not a publication no matter how many people are exposed to the work. However, when copies or phonorecords are offered for sale or lease to a group of wholesalers, broadcasters, or motion picture theaters, publication does take place if the purpose is further distribution, public performance, or public display.



Publication is an important concept in the copyright law for several reasons:
  • Works that are published in the United States are subject to mandatory deposit with the Library of Congress. See discussion on "Mandatory Deposit for Works Published in the United States."
  • Publication of a work can affect the limitations on the exclusive rights of the copyright owner that are set forth in sections 107 through 121 of the law.
  • The year of publication may determine the duration of copyright protection for anonymous and pseudonymous works (when the author's identity is not revealed in the records of the Copyright Office) and for works made for hire.
  • Deposit requirements for registration of published works differ from those for registration of unpublished works. See discussion on "Registration Procedures."
  • When a work is published, it may bear a notice of copyright to identify the year of publication and the name of the copyright owner and to inform the public that the work is protected by copyright. Copies of works published before March 1, 1989, must bear the notice or risk loss of copyright protection. See discussion on "Notice of Copyright" below.
 
Last edited:

capt. megadeth

Metal Momma!
Joined
Oct 12, 2003
Posts
2,898
Total Time
>4999
FDJ2 said:


Do the math. RJs and RJ-providers are not a growth industry.

The fukin airlines are NOT a growth industry
 

spinproof

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Posts
774
Total Time
noneya
"Publication" is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending. The offering to distribute copies or phonorecords to a group of persons for purposes of further distribution, public performance, or public display constitutes publication. A public performance or display of a work does not of itself constitute publication.
Originally Posted by spinproof
WRONG ! By not giving proper credit infers the writer is the author which is infringement if in fact he is not! Profit has nothing to do with copyrights! Cutting and pasting is in itself a copyright infringment if in fact proper credit is not given the author and source!


...and your point is....? No copyright has been established because it hasn't been filed with the proper authorities...? The writer hasn't been payed for his work?

Copyright is established by article ,author, date FIRST published. I'm afraid you've lost me on the rest and the point you are trying to reach.
What is incorrect in what I've expressed?
 
Last edited:

Dangerkitty

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Posts
1,353
Total Time
8700
spinproof said:
...and your point is....?
My point is that you have no idea what you are talking about. You keep defining plagiarism not copyright infringement.

Do you dabble in Copyright laws in your off time? I doubt it. If you are so concerned about all this why dont you go to www.aviationplanning.com and talk to Michael Boyd himself.
 

spinproof

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Posts
774
Total Time
noneya
Great! Thanks for setting me straight!:rolleyes:
 

spinproof

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 19, 2002
Posts
774
Total Time
noneya
....now back to my original "Jab"...so FDJ2 you're (got to be careful here)"plagiarizing" Your hero's thoughts as if they were your own!!!! Oh how original it is of the both of you:rolleyes: !

RJ's bad!!! Bad RJ's!!! Bad, Bad RJ's!!
 

General Lee

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Posts
20,442
Total Time
A lot
Is he calling me a "hero" again? I can only sign sooo many autographs (on Ebay also--$50 each). No, I don't hate RJs, and I think they have a place in this industry, but they aren't what Fred Greed thought they would be--a panacea for this industry. Businessmen don't really need "frequency" as much as the want lower prices. With lower prices, RJs become too expensive to operate---and larger planes with more seats are needed to compete. We "had" more RJs than anyone (maybe Expressjet was bigger..?), and we also have the largest losses ($10 billion in 5 years). Not all of that can be contributed to mainline pilot wages---like everyone would think. Sending RJs up against Airtran and Jetblue was not smart.(also the DFW RJ hub against AA)


Bye Bye--General Lee
 

FDJ2

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
3,908
Total Time
10000+
spinproof said:
Lifting a published article and not giving credit by whom it was written is a copyright law infringment.
I guess you didn't read "Boyd" next to the title of the article.

Ready, shoot, aim.
 

FDJ2

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 9, 2003
Posts
3,908
Total Time
10000+
spinproof said:
....now back to my original "Jab"...so FDJ2 you're (got to be careful here)"plagiarizing" Your hero's thoughts as if they were your own!!!! Oh how original it is of the both of you:rolleyes: ! /QUOTE]

Spin, you're an idiot. First you claim copy right infringement then try to spin yourself out of it. You finally admit your an idiot on copy right law, but now you claim plagiarism. Typical. I never claimed this was my work, the author's name is displayed at the top of the article. I guess you'd just rather attack me then deal with the issues set forth in the article.
 
Top