GM & Ford Flight Departments 86'd

[Regul8r]

Hey Reg,

Drink another cup of coffee and re-read. We are driving at the same point. driving/airlines = bad idea.

I agree, Spooling, I should have prefaced my post that I was expanding on yours.

I also agree with what others have said on here about the media being the real culprits who lit the wick on this one. In an ideal world, a politician could have thrown in back in the face of the media by offering a pragmatic explanation of the need for the jets and the benefits provided not only to the crews, but the direct and indirect support personnel.

 

[Mr.B]

Hey Reg,

Drink another cup of coffee and re-read. We are driving at the same point. driving/airlines = bad idea.

Driving/airlines=REALITY ....DB

These aholes should be riding Greyhound.

 

[Publishers]

The media is guilty of this???? Get a grip. These companies have huge PR departments and are supposed to know how to sell something, maybe even a car once in awhile. Someone should have been down at the airport throwing their bodies in front of the Gulfstream when these executives were departing.
It was dumb on any front for the perception is the reality. I was looking at buying a Saturn when my lease is up and I hear the same people say they are thinking of dropping the line. Makes me want to go out and get one right away.
Yes it is terrible that there is personal fall out from all this. A hell of a lot more people are impacted by what is going on than these pilots and their families. They at least have a transferable skill unlike many in that business.
The media, I don't think so , it was business suicide.

 

[Regul8r]

Driving/airlines=REALITY ....DB

These aholes should be riding Greyhound.

Wouldn't that drive their productivity lower?

 

[plunger]

If they hook up with a fractional, if they're worth their salt, they'll make taking the pilots part of the deal. Who knows. Maybe that's just wishful thinking. I know GM has 2 newhires, and I don't know if the female has Netjet mins. Still can't believe this has happened to them. Give it a couple years and they'll probably start off with a Hawker or something along those lines and the planes will be back; it's simply a matter of time.

Just goes to show how the industry works. I find it mind boggling that a new hire in one of these departments wouldn't have 2500hrs. I would imagine these they could fill a closet with resumes of people with 10's of thousands of hours with more types than you could count on both hands.

 

[LRvsH25B]

I may be biased, but the Big Three didn't have a plan to pay the government 8% on their money like the banks did.

You may be biased? Well what exactly is it going to take for you to get soundly on the biased bandwagon???? Considering where you work, it's my opinion you should get biased real quick and propa' like!

They just showed up in 3 Gulfstreams, sat there with blank faces when grilled by some clowns in congress, and eventually threw flight departments (and countless others really) under the bus. It showed the utter lack of leadership in the automakers, and it has quickly become corporate aviations worse day in history.

I'd like to thank these CEOs for that stellar performance.

I think talking about a lack of leadership may not be the best road to go down. What about Sandy? Sec. Rubin? Would you call them allowing Citi to get so tied up into the sub-prime market leadership? Afterall, it's what's going to potentially bring their company down. Sandy got the boot, I know, but where is your outrage there? Bob Rubin presided over the United States' longest period of sustained economic growth, so he knows what he is doing. It happened on his watch, so allowing this to happen to such a large company with so much on the line is sh!t that I'm paying for at this point. I know he was not the CEO, but look, like Colin Powell, if you don't like what's going on and you know it's wrong, resign, and Rubin didn't do that. Leadership, no, not all all. Pure Greed? You bet. And Citi is not alone in this, all the large banks did it, well, except for Bank of America. Their CEO was smart enough to stay away from it and fired several people for insisting BOA was missing out on a "niche" in the market. Trying to make money off of people who don't pay their bills in the 1st place is high risk, and failure is what these banks deserve for being so greedy; but you see, we can't let them fail because of the collateral damage that would cause. Their too big to fail, and that is the whole problem here.

The Big three have been broken for a long time, they also don't have trillions in assets like the banks. MANY banks have already been allowed to completely fail or forced into mergers by the Fed. I think much of the concern is what does Detroit have for a plan and why isn't Chpt 11 and restructuring an option?

You are right, 100%. The big 3 has been broken for quite some time. Arrogance. They "know" that car buyers want, so they don't need the input of people who actually buy the cars. That type of input is stuff only the Japs need.

Here is where you and I are going to start to differ; while the banks do have trillions in assets, the automakers do as well. Their workers. Let the Big 3 go out of business and when the unemployment lines overflow, you'll find out exactly what trillions in assets looks like. It'll cost us all. This bailout will look like a drop in the bucket compared to the economic impact failure of the 3 will bring with it. What is the plan of the Big 3 you ask? I'll ask what is Citi's plan? I've heard nothing. You see, the white collars didn't have to go before Congress and explain that. AIG and Citi have not had to disclose what their plan is to the Lawmakers. The trillions that the banks have in assets, well, this whole ordeal lets you know the banks need to be spilt up. They are too big to fail. They had trillions in assets, and they fukced that up. They don't deserve to be so big; they were too irresponsible (greedy) with the assets they did have. They pissed off the chance to be trusted with so much. I suspect Obama's administration will fix all of that.

As for Chapter 11/restructuring, you must be kidding. Chapter 11 would give them the right to no longer honor their contracts, including Warranties. A recent survey taken confirmed 80% of car buyers would not buy cars from a company in Bankruptcy. You wouln't either, nor would I. We'd be fools to do it. Fools. I can remember people saying the airlines would NEVER take the pensions of retired pilots. never say never Mr. UAL/DAL. Warranties would eventually be worthless and we both know that.

None of this is good for corporate aviation..I agree, the media has no clue...but the 2 (banks and auto makers) are not even remotely similar - as battered as both are right now.

Agreed, but while the industries are different, the solutions to helping them out of their current situations are very similar. If you take a shower before work, you're already well on your way to getting the help you need. If you have to take a shower when you get home from work, you're still waiting to hear if you are going to get a bailout.

So what are these 2 and likely other companies going to do? close departments, spend MORE money chartering or fractional, lay off more pilots, then eventually rebuild a department later on when public outcry ceases? - in the mean time many of us in aviation may likely just take it in the a$$....

Go ahead and bend all the way over so they can jam it all the way up there. Good luck to you out there as I suspect you're going to need it when some dipsh!t reporter gets bored enough and does a little digging.

Finally, I think I met you out in Driggs, ID back in '02. You dropped off Sec. Rubin who was going "fly fishing" with my boss at the time. The other pilot I was with didn't know who he was, so I had him pull out a $20, and told him the guy's signature down there is the guy he was shaking hands with 3 minutes ago. He was pretty impressed at that point.

Seriously, hope this all pans out well for you.

 

[icefr8dawg]

And the irony in it all, they went from 91 dept to charter clients now. The only thing that's going to change is the asset side of the balance sheet folks. Shame that the cost was two entire flight departments.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

You may have the wrong guy/department in mind, and I have never been to Driggs....PM and I'd be happy to share further, off the public board.

anyhow - you can certainly see AIG/CITI/JPMC/BOA etc plans in detail - just google them. Nobody who has gotten (been asked to take) TARP money is under some secret cloak. Money is not being given out to pay for retirees health care or to fund a few more months of a dead product line, its being given out to try and get the credit markets unfrozen (the root of issues now?)

My point only was that there is a huge difference between a loan which makes the gvt (you?) 8% interest and eventually preferred stock in a company as opposed to a company looking for 3 more months worth of union payrolls all the while they cant move product - largely because the credit market is frozen.

I cant defend any CEO in this country, nor any bank, nor any 40K/yr worker with a 400K balloon mortgage and a 60 inch plasma bought on home equity. Who is to blame? its easy to point at the CEO who rides in "luxury" I guess. Whats the flavor of "greed" (as you said often)...is it the perks of being a CEO or is it greed to have a house, car, and TV you cant afford?

People are walking away and stiffing banks left and right on houses, cars, and credit cards because they have no value in them, they didnt earn any of it. But the view is "I'll get back at that evil CEO who lent me money" "I dont ride in a private jet" - its a serious moral breakdown all around IMO.

Its gotta be "someone elses" fault.....that seems to be the flavor of the day on the nonstop breaking news networks....and contrary to what they say - I know where many of us work these are not just royal barges - but closely monitored and accounted for tools - and that seems to not get through to many out looking for someone to blame..

 

[SansPlane]

Truly moronic comments blaming the media. I mean truly “freaking” idiotic and uninformed comments. There were some pretty determined people who a little over 200 years ago thought this was important enough an issue to include it in a little document you may have heard of. A somewhat well known judge said it this way: “Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.”

We can agree to disagree on many things but this is not one of them. And you are entrusted to fly? WOW! Surely you think the FAA could do a better job if no one was allowed to report or blog or post about them or their actions.

Now that I have taken a breath, this is not a defense of poor journalism but then again, who is the judge of that?

 

[SansPlane]

You are right, 100%. The big 3 has been broken for quite some time. Arrogance. They "know" that car buyers want, so they don't need the input of people who actually buy the cars. That type of input is stuff only the Japs need.

Not to be on LR’s back today but a guy by the name of Ford is credited with the following: “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

 

[JumpJetter]

Boyd nailed it.

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Verdana]Hot Flash [/FONT]-[FONT=Tahoma, Verdana, Lucida] Monday, December 1, 2008[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]The New Symbols of Evil -
Business Jets - Threatening Humanity[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]When you're afraid to state and defend the truth, good and right always lose. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]It is particularly so when the fear is based on being politically-incorrect. Deal with it: political correctness is nothing more than mob mentality - disagree, and at the least you will be shouted down in one form or another, and at worst burned at the political stake. It's marginally less extreme than how terrorists treat infidels, but the core concept is the same: disagree with the dogma, and you will be punished. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Never was this more clearly demonstrated than in the case of the Big Three auto executives who showed up in the Marble Playpen, a.k.a. Congress, to plead their case for a federal bailout. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Forget Lack of Consumer Credit. The Media Found The Real Problem. The hearings were embarrassing. The CEOs looked like Team Nebbish From The Planet Motown. But the real story came later. A vigilant TV network correspondent discovered, no doubt after five minutes of earnest research and a cab ride to Reagan National, that the CEOs, coming to Washington to ask for taxpayer money actually flew, yes!, private jets![/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]The outrage! They're losing billions, and they have the fat-cat crust to fly in private corporate jets down to Washington to beg for money! The fat pigs! They could have flown commercial, just like the rest of us! Congress, don't give 'em diddly.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]And that became the fodder for every indignant talk show host on the air. Nobody dared ask any questions. It was now dogma, and don't argue: These CEOs are pigs who have killed off their companies, then run to Washington in luxurious private jets asking for our hard-earned dollars. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Well, here's a flash for the intellectual fundamentalists who are so righteously calling for these CEOs' heads, based on the mob-belief that they sipped champagne and smoked Davidoff 25s on the way to Washington, while the rest of us were having our toiletries examined in the TSA line at DCA: Those executives did the right thing. They should have taken those corporate aircraft to Washington.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Of course, based on their prior decision to be congressional punching-bag photo-ops, we can bet that they won't stand up for themselves. But here's a letter that one or all of these CEOs should have written to Congress, but won't.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Dear Senator Snort:[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]I understand there is considerable uproar about my mode of transportation when I came to Washington to testify in regard to the challenges facing my company and the US auto industry in general.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]It is completely accurate that I utilized a business jet owned by my company. It is also accurate that this mode of transportation is more expensive than commercial flights would have been. I can understand the public perception, particularly in light of how the story was spun in the media.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Let me provide you with some facts.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]First, we have a corporate flight department because in many instances it allows us to move our people far more efficiently than commercial air. Time in our business can be critically expensive.When we need to move a team of production engineers from Lansing to our plant in Shreveport to fix a line problem, commercial flights would take all day - or, depending on the time the failure takes place, more than a day. Our corporate flights would be less than 3 hours to get to the site and begin to fix the problem.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]In my case, yes, I did utilize corporate aviation assets to get to Washington. I fully intend to do so again should a similar event arise. To do otherwise would be irresponsible to my shareholders, employees and investors. I report to them, not to gadfly reporters, or to inept agenda-laden "environmentalists" who would be happy to see us all live in nice clean caves. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]As you must certainly know, this is a crisis for my firm and the entire US auto industry. Immediate attention is needed, including my full-time efforts on the matter. You seem to forget that the rapid rise in gasoline prices - brought on, I may add, by Washington's continued lack of cohesive energy policy - caused a corresponding decline in demand for substantial parts of our product line. Then credit dried up over the past year, again reducing auto demand. Our product line wasn't the proximate problem. Your lack of energy policy and sloppy oversight of the financial industry led us to this. [/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]As for the "big SUVs" you tend to vilify, here's a flash for you, Senator: we were building those because that's what the public wanted. There has not been a single Chevrolet Suburban sold at the point of a gun. At least not in this country. Another flash, Senator: amid your adulation for Japanese companies supposedly only building small cars, you've missed the facts. Until very recently, these companies were scrambling to put up factories in Texas and Mississippi to build large trucks and SUVs. But in regard to the current crisis, let's get it straight: demand has fallen over 30% - and there's no company that can easily or quickly adjust.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Back to the corporate jet. I have a company in crisis and must be in touch at all times. On the corporate jet I have communication with all parts of my company at all times. I conduct business while on that airplane. This being a crisis, I find that is far more effective than being out of pocket, lining up at Detroit Metro, waiting in line at the TSA that you toss money at regardless of its effectiveness, then waiting again to board the flight. Then there is the sloppy air traffic control system you inflict on the public, which requires airlines to fly in excess of the time they really need to, and gives me a 20% chance of not arriving on schedule, anyway.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]This is a crisis. I had a meeting with you and your committee that was crucial to my company. Use of the corporate jet was necessary and the best use of my time. Again referring to the ATC system you seem to tolerate, it was the best use of your committee's time too, assuring I would be there when the hearings started.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Funny, but I don't seem to have been able to find your outrage on others' use of private jets. Take Robert Rubin - he's the guy that got paid over $100 million by Citi Group just before it tanked and congress, almost without a peep, bailed it out for $200 billion - far more than my industry is looking for. (How many manufacturing jobs does Citi provide, by the way?) I'm sure Mr. Rubin is using private jets for some of his transportation needs. After all, isn't he also an advisor to the President-Elect?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]You're calling my use of a corporate jet "hypocrisy" - yet I cannot locate any such outrage on your part regarding Ai Gore's continued used of such aircraft. And isn't he the one constantly babbling about "carbon footprints" and "global warming" and other not-to-be-questioned voodoo?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]I regret the media circus. I regret the situation my industry is in at the moment. But we need to focus on solutions and on facts, not innuendo. This corporate jet thing is nonsense. I will use the resources I have to make my company as efficient as possible. The corporate flight department is part of those resources.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Sincerely[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Auto Industry CEO[/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]Make no mistake: corporate and business aviation are now in the cross-hairs of a new administration that has a ready ear to people who want it cut or eliminated, on the basis of it being "elitist" or "environmentally-irresponsible." [/FONT]​

[FONT=Tahoma, Ariel, Lucida]It's going to be an interesting four years. So, where's the NBAA when we need them?[/FONT]​

 

[gret]

Ford's 2008 Proxy-

Company Aircraft: During 2007, Mr. Mulally was required to use our aircraft for all business and personal air travel for security reasons. The family and guests of Mr. Mulally were allowed to accompany him on our aircraft. In addition, in order to ease the burden of Mr. Mulally moving to Southeast Michigan and away from his family in Seattle, Washington, the Compensation Committee clarified that his arrangement covers travel by his wife, children, and guests on Company aircraft for personal reasons without him at Company expense, at his request.
​

For Mr. Mulally the amount shown includes $752,203 for personal use of Company aircraft
​

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

When we need to move a team of production engineers from Lansing to our plant in Shreveport to fix a line problem, commercial flights would take all day - or, depending on the time the failure takes place, more than a day. Our corporate flights would be less than 3 hours to get to the site and begin to fix the problem.

I doubt production engineers use the corp jets....


Seems the Big Three should have hired a gov't bail out Consultant....

or at least read "Gov't bailout for Dummies" Chapter 5- don't use the Corpjet for the day of beg.

 

[BoilerUP]

I doubt production engineers use the corp jets....

I wouldn't be so sure about that...

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

I wouldn't be so sure about that...

All right... what do you got?

 

[CopilotDoug]

It's not out of the realm of possibility. There are instances where a company charters an aircraft for a single mechanic to go off in the field somewhere to fix a problem. I have flown them.

 

[LRvsH25B]

Not to be on LR’s back today but a guy by the name of Ford is credited with the following: “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

Sans, think nothing of it. I can take it. I will say that quote was pretty good. I'll shut up now. Thanks for lookin' out!

 

[LRvsH25B]

Ford's 2008 Proxy-

Company Aircraft: During 2007, Mr. Mulally was required to use our aircraft for all business and personal air travel for security reasons. The family and guests of Mr. Mulally were allowed to accompany him on our aircraft. In addition, in order to ease the burden of Mr. Mulally moving to Southeast Michigan and away from his family in Seattle, Washington, the Compensation Committee clarified that his arrangement covers travel by his wife, children, and guests on Company aircraft for personal reasons without him at Company expense, at his request.​

For Mr. Mulally the amount shown includes $752,203 for personal use of Company aircraft​

That is truly dispacable. Disgusting. It's one thing if he worked for Exxon Mobil, but a company hanging on by the skin on their teeth. His A$$ should be on the street.

 

[fu69atacafyeah]

It is sad for these guys, but let's not lose site of the bigger picture here. It helps with PR and will save some money.

thats bull$hit!! save money my a$$ and looking at the bigger picture this is a stupid thing to do! you think cutting this department will help save? not when they ask for to increase the bailout by billions over 2 weeks. this is a small "expense" for companies this large

 

[Avalanche]

I wouldn't be so sure about that...

The production engineers DO use the corporate jet. If space is available, they often have access empty seats to return to Detroit for the weekend from, say, Kansas. Also, some of the aircraft operate as shuttles.

Auto companies' private jets = political football. Opposition just scored a touchdown...and the extra point.