ABX Air Declares DHL in Fault of Agreement

[LarryinTN]

If they move charters to CHI then they have to pay 100% of the overhead. How is that better than DHL paying some of the overhead costs for ABX?

 

[erichartmann]

LOL........nice eric cartman. Getting your hopes up?

Nope.

Just trying to figure out what may be going on and what the possible impacts could be.

 

[erichartmann]

Yep. But it's done. It's just a question of what the final cost for DHL will be.

Done deal but not paid for. Nice deal if you get it I guess.

Seems to me I heard or read somewhere that posession is 9/10ths of the law. If DHL/DPWN still has the money...

 

[hvydriver]

Done deal but not paid for. Nice deal if you get it I guess.

Seems to me I heard or read somewhere that posession is 9/10ths of the law. If DHL/DPWN still has the money...

No, I meant it's a done deal. It's just a matter of them reporting the total cost. The only one left they are paying on is Polar. Don't misunderstand me. I don't take any false security from them owning 49%. After all, we used to be 100% owned. You see where that got us. They could sell it off tomorrow.

 

[b707guy]

deleted

 

[shooter]

If they move charters to CHI then they have to pay 100% of the overhead. How is that better than DHL paying some of the overhead costs for ABX?

Oh I agree with that. But Hete is planning on growing business. If we are already at or even just close or over the 10% threshold, then grown for ABX is done unless its DHL growth.

That what the basis for my question to see what you guys think.

 

[LarryinTN]

If we are already at or even just close or over the 10% threshold, then grown for ABX is done unless its DHL growth.

Why? CHI would have to pay 100% of the overhead for any growth at CHI. DHL is still, and will continue, paying much of the overhead costs for growth at ABX, just not all of it as they had in the past.

 

[abxaviator]

Why? CHI would have to pay 100% of the overhead for any growth at CHI. DHL is still, and will continue, paying much of the overhead costs for growth at ABX, just not all of it as they had in the past.

The question is, how are the overhead costs handled after reaching the 10%? For example, if the Company adds a new flight, is ALL associated overhead paid by ABX et al or is an incremental portion still paid by DHL? If the former, it follows that ABX would place the flight where the costs would be lowest. Of course this is a very simplistic example.

To me, of greater import is learning what DP plans to announce in January.

 

[shooter]

Why? CHI would have to pay 100% of the overhead for any growth at CHI. DHL is still, and will continue, paying much of the overhead costs for growth at ABX, just not all of it as they had in the past.

okay, so like what abxaviator said, the amount over the 10% is what we need to know, right? If the costs over the 10% DHL volume is say 2% paid to DHL for 11-15% and 3% 16-20% over and so on, right? That makes sense if so. Somehow I get it mixed up that at the 11% mark, ABX would have to pay 100% of the costs for the overhead. Don't know how I got that screwed up, but I did.

Thanks for the feedback and I agree about January. Some changes are coming then, wonder if the grape vine will hint at what it would be.

 

[abxaviator]

Listen to what Dr. Zumwinkel has to say starting about 17 minutes in.


http://download.world-television.com/dpwn/20071108/dp_ak_qanda_081107.mp3

 

[Batfish]

If they move charters to CHI then they have to pay 100% of the overhead. How is that better than DHL paying some of the overhead costs for ABX?

Unless I misread it, DHL is only paying the overhead on DHL flying not the charter stuff. They don't pay the overhead on that regardless. So if ABX wants to grow they need to do it outside their current company. Someone correct me if I read it wrong.

batfish

 

[abxaviator]

Yes, that is wrong. As long as revenues from no-DHL sources do not exceed 10%, DHL was picking up the tab.

 

[shooter]

Listen to what Dr. Zumwinkel has to say starting about 17 minutes in.


http://download.world-television.com/dpwn/20071108/dp_ak_qanda_081107.mp3

The Q&A that struck me the hardest was from John Allan at the end of the press conference (not the investors' conference if you are wanting to listen).

QQ- I have a question on the US. John Allan you said that you are looking very hard at what you can do in the US. You have a relatively broad foundation there. Are there any considerations possibly to stop doing certain business there? Domestic Air, Domestic Ground maybe? Are there maybe some things you want to discontinue? Regarding under performing businesses, you said that you bought two small express companies in Holland and Belgium and they were competitors. Are there maybe other sales of under performing businesses planned in other parts of the group? Another question on transparency for investors follows.

John Allan- As far as the US is concerned, of course we have some highly successful businesses in the United States. The Logistics business in the US are market leaders with great performance. So the US in not all (pause) a problem. We have been very open and I think realistic with you today in saying that we are working very hard to work out the best way forward for our US Express Business. It is important to us. Um, but you know we are not going to make predictions and give guidance that we are not capable of meeting. As far as the options that we would consider, in order to address that, I think you know there are no sacred cows in our business. Um, ahh, we are prepared to look at you know all sorts of different options. The challenge really is what is best for the business and what is best for our share holders. And we will take whatever time period is necessary to make sort of calm deliberate judgments about that. But with the emphasis being that can we re-start the rather encouraging recovery we saw over a period of about 9 months from the autumn of last year to the early summer of this year. As far as the rest of the group is concerned you know we regularly review our portfolio to ensure that we don’t hold businesses that may be more valuable outside. Earlier this year we sold a business from the logistics division (name inaudible), a business which was really a recycling business. We determined that we did not contribute any particular value to that business but that it would be more attractive and valuable outside the group. Therefore we sold it. And this is not something that happens in a dramatic way. We just regularly review our portfolio and it may be that there will be some smaller businesses that we ultimately conclude that should not be part of our group. Answer to regional EBIT and transparency follows.

 

[Batfish]

Yes, that is wrong. As long as revenues from no-DHL sources do not exceed 10%, DHL was picking up the tab.

WOW! Thanks for the correction, it clears up the confusion. batfish

 

[Bitter]

hey shooter, what struck you the hardest, from what John Allan said?

Call me dumb, all I got, was, change is in the wind, and no one is invulnerable!

Who is the sacred cow?

Any speculation on what will be announced in January?

 

[shooter]

hey shooter, what struck you the hardest, from what John Allan said?

Call me dumb, all I got, was, change is in the wind, and no one is invulnerable!

Who is the sacred cow?

Any speculation on what will be announced in January?

oh wow, I don't want to read too much into this. But when you look at the 2Q reports, they had a boost in stock prices due to the rumor that UPS was looking at a "partnership" of sorts with DHL. And when they start asking questions about selling off portions of the US market like the "Domestic Air" or ground, it makes me nervous. They said the Domestic ground was growing at about like 15% I think they said. And International from the US market is growing strong as well. But the Domestic Air........not so good. Would they outsource US air? who knows, but I don't trust them. They don't even pay their bills to contractors.

 

[thestable1]

Do you think ABX is going to wait until Jan to get new hires up and running? Don't bother saying it . . . I know all of us that have applied should think very hard about coming over there right now. Ok that said what about that court case with the KIX domicile, when is that?

 

[shooter]

hey! whats for lunch? I'm outie..........

(thought I would lighten the mood in this thread!)

 

[LarryinTN]

If they add flying to one of the CHI carriers then they're paying 100% of the overhead costs. If they add charter flying to ABX then they're paying up to 100% of the overhead costs. It's either a wash (100% vs. 100%) or it's a slight advantage to ABX.

I think that they'll put new hires into class as soon as they get the background checks done. They have plenty of 767 and DC9 class seats open that could take new hires if they are available in time.

 

[xspud]

Do you think ABX is going to wait until Jan to get new hires up and running? Don't bother saying it . . . I know all of us that have applied should think very hard about coming over there right now. Ok that said what about that court case with the KIX domicile, when is that?

RE New hires: LJ's right, I agree they'll go ahead and bring people in as soon as the info is in. There's a DC9 class scheduled for Dec 10, I think there's another 767 class in Dec, also. A new hire would only go to the 767 if they were going to KIX, people have standing bids in for 767FO ILN. I wouldn't expect any other classes until January.

RE KIX: There's a court hearing Nov 26-27.

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

oh wow, I don't want to read too much into this. But when you look at the 2Q reports, they had a boost in stock prices due to the rumor that UPS was looking at a "partnership" of sorts with DHL. And when they start asking questions about selling off portions of the US market like the "Domestic Air" or ground, it makes me nervous.

Ummm...this is a gentleman's forum, Mr. Shooter. We don't discuss that subject in here.

It leaves a very bitter taste in the Kool-Aid.

 

[erichartmann]

okay, so like what abxaviator said, the amount over the 10% is what we need to know, right? If the costs over the 10% DHL volume is say 2% paid to DHL for 11-15% and 3% 16-20% over and so on, right? That makes sense if so. Somehow I get it mixed up that at the 11% mark, ABX would have to pay 100% of the costs for the overhead. Don't know how I got that screwed up, but I did.

Thanks for the feedback and I agree about January. Some changes are coming then, wonder if the grape vine will hint at what it would be.

I'm not real sure I understand what you are trying to say. I think the question is:

What does ABX pay once the outside business exceeds 10% of DHL's business. I've seen the answer somewhere (I think) but don't remember it. It could be that ABX pays 100% of the overhead on the outside business once the revenue exceeds 10%, or it could be they pay the overhead only on that portion which exceeds the 10%.

I think the answer was 100% of the overhead on the outside business once the 10% was exceeded. If that is the case then we can look for ABX Air (as opposed to ABX Holding) to make an effort to keep charter business below the 10% threshold. DHL will, in turn, try to lower the threshold as much as possible. Hence the current disagreement. Whatever the 10% turns out to be, everything over that amount will go the CHI.

 

[flyinboxes]

Ummm...this is a gentleman's forum, Mr. Shooter. We don't discuss that subject in here.

It leaves a very bitter taste in the Kool-Aid.

Sell it ....who cares.

 

[Reebo]

Buy more Frozen Orange Juice!

Waiting on the crop report from Beeks

 

[shooter]

I'm not real sure I understand what you are trying to say. I think the question is:

What does ABX pay once the outside business exceeds 10% of DHL's business. I've seen the answer somewhere (I think) but don't remember it. It could be that ABX pays 100% of the overhead on the outside business once the revenue exceeds 10%, or it could be they pay the overhead only on that portion which exceeds the 10%.

I think the answer was 100% of the overhead on the outside business once the 10% was exceeded. If that is the case then we can look for ABX Air (as opposed to ABX Holding) to make an effort to keep charter business below the 10% threshold. DHL will, in turn, try to lower the threshold as much as possible. Hence the current disagreement. Whatever the 10% turns out to be, everything over that amount will go the CHI.

I agree if it's 100% once over 10%.

 

[TWA]

At ILN, DHL owns the airport and buildings, but ABX handles all of the airfield operations, sort, and GSE, right? So, if ABX wanted to, they could essentially pull the plug on the entire ILN operation? Just tryin to make sure I completely understand the situation there. Thanks.

 

[HeavyjetDC8]

Contracts notwithstanding, ABX could pull the plug in several ways. Which would shut down DHL their biggest customer, which would leave ABX aircraft without freight so in turn effectively shutting down ABX. Mutually assured destruction - similar to throwing hydrogen bombs at each other. See avatar.

 

[Cargoav8or]

Contracts notwithstanding, ABX could pull the plug in several ways. Which would shut down DHL their biggest customer, which would leave ABX aircraft without freight so in turn effectively shutting down ABX. Mutually assured destruction - similar to throwing hydrogen bombs at each other. See avatar.

Shuts down ABX Air, not ABX holdings, who happens to be purchasing another company who owns 2 airlines (CCl/ATI), guaranteeing the top survives.

"During the third quarter of 2007, DHL informed ABX Air that it intended to take over management of its South Bend, Indiana regional hub and its Columbus, Ohio, logistics center, currently managed by ABX Air. Management of the South Bend hub was transferred to DHL on November 3, 2007. The Columbus center transition will be completed on January 1, 2008."

Looks a little one sided to me, and were not fairing any better. But hey who needs to work together you fellers got it figured out. The 76 will save the day, right?




:uzi: Ain't this industry grand.

 

[erichartmann]

Contracts notwithstanding, ABX could pull the plug in several ways. Which would shut down DHL their biggest customer, which would leave ABX aircraft without freight so in turn effectively shutting down ABX. Mutually assured destruction - similar to throwing hydrogen bombs at each other. See avatar.

What really matters in fighting a nuclear war is not whether or not it can be won, but whether or not you think it can be won. If you believe you can survive and are willing to take the damage to destroy your enemy....

 

[erichartmann]

Shuts down ABX Air, not ABX holdings, who happens to be purchasing another company who owns 2 airlines (CCl/ATI), guaranteeing the top survives.

"During the third quarter of 2007, DHL informed ABX Air that it intended to take over management of its South Bend, Indiana regional hub and its Columbus, Ohio, logistics center, currently managed by ABX Air. Management of the South Bend hub was transferred to DHL on November 3, 2007. The Columbus center transition will be completed on January 1, 2008."

Looks a little one sided to me, and were not fairing any better. But hey who needs to work together you fellers got it figured out. The 76 will save the day, right?




:uzi: Ain't this industry grand.

You have been told what's needed to engender that cooperation. I don't see much point in cooperating if that cooperation ultimately spells my doom. Sort of like the frog giving the scorpion a ride...