Hawaiian to aquire another 767

[mdanno808]

No announcement yet.

Any prediction from the HAL guys on the number of bypasses? I'm guessing less than 10 total.

 

[HAL]

No announcement yet.

Any prediction from the HAL guys on the number of bypasses? I'm guessing less than 10 total.

Maybe even less than that, but hard to tell. It was that 'senior furloughee' group that I got the least amount of responses from. It's hard to tell when I don't know what they're all up to.

HAL

 

[PowerRanger]

Are these 767-300's or 764's that HAL is getting?

 

[mdanno808]

300's.

 

[HAL]

OK, maybe sooner than we all thought. I got a message today from crew planning asking whether I would be bypassing or not, as they were getting ready for a recall. They want to have the first crews back (for training, I assume) by the first week of May! Since the planes wouldn't be ready for 4+ months after that, I'd guess this is more of a 'staffing' recall than an expansion recall, with more to come later. I was out when they called so I don't know how many recalls yet, but I'll let you all know what I hear when I call back tomorrow.

HAL

 

[mdanno808]

Unless the rumor about the 300 is true, and it will be on line sooner than the Delta planes.

 

[HAL]

According to Crew Planning, it is about 25 recalls, to start training the first week of May. I didn't ask about further recalls, but expect there would be some more soon. They will have the recall notices in the mail in the next two weeks.

HAL

 

[mdanno808]

Congratulations. I heard from a neighbor of my dad's that the word at Fort Koapaka is that Dunkerley had 5 tail numbers ordered. So how many in this first 25 are going to bypass? I say 2.

 

[mdanno808]

Mesa countersues Hawaiian Air

The Arizona carrier, seeking to start interisland flights, accuses Hawaiian of antitrust violations

By Dave Segal
[email protected]

Mesa Air Group Inc., determined to begin interisland flights next quarter, countersued Hawaiian Airlines for unspecified damages yesterday and accused the incumbent local carrier of violating antitrust law.
The Phoenix-based regional carrier said in a federal Bankruptcy Court filing that Hawaiian's lawsuit last month against Mesa was an attempt to "monopolize" interisland air transportation by keeping Mesa out of the market for at least two years. Mesa said the suit and other Hawaiian actions were in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Mesa said Hawaiian Air coerced two freight-forwarding companies, Vital Express and Pilot, into not accepting parts and equipment that Mesa wanted to ship to Hawaii for its new operations. Mesa said Hawaiian told the freight forwarders that Hawaiian would not accept any Mesa freight on Hawaiian's aircraft.
Mesa said it wanted to ship the freight on Hawaiian's widebody aircraft because it had more cargo space than narrowbody aircraft and it was the only widebody aircraft operator with nonstop service between Phoenix and Hawaii.
The out-of-state carrier also said Hawaiian conducted a road-show disparagement campaign against Mesa targeted at investors interested in providing financial backing for Mesa's interisland operations or investing in Mesa's publicly traded stock.
Mesa said its business prospects suffered as a result of Hawaiian's alleged violations. Mesa also said Hawaiian damaged Mesa's business relationships with freight forwarders, investors and future interisland customers.
In addition, Mesa is seeking an injunction against Hawaiian to stop any continuing antitrust violations, and filed another motion to have the case moved to federal District Court and heard before a jury.
Separately, Mesa filed a motion to have the count against it dismissed that seeks to have Mesa return confidential information obtained from Hawaiian in 2004 when Mesa was planning to invest in the local carrier. Mesa said it destroyed the information after being dropped as a potential bidder and that Hawaiian has no standing to request the information because the old Hawaiian Airlines ceased to exist after it emerged from reorganization.
Hawaiian claims Mesa violated a nondisclosure agreement and used the proprietary information in preparing to start a new interisland airline.
Mesa's countersuit describes Hawaiian's suit as a "sham." Jonathan Ornstein, chairman and chief executive of Mesa Airlines' parent, said Hawaiian's action has strengthened Mesa's resolve to come to the islands.
"It's not going to make us pull out. It's not going to stop us," Ornstein said. "It's a desperate act and it shows exactly how concerned they are of our entry into the marketplace."
Ornstein said Mesa still plans to begin flights in Hawaii during the second quarter and that its timetable is being dictated only by operational issues such as getting aircraft and spare parts to Hawaii and working out details of its space arrangement with the state Department of Transportation.
"Our lawyers feel these guys were trying to pull out all the stops from bringing our low fares to the marketplace and felt the suit was necessary," Ornstein said. "Frankly, I always view lawsuits as negative energy, and a lot of time spent on lawyers' pay with very little good coming out of them. But it's clear these guys were willing to pull out all the stops and so we felt we had no choice."
Hawaiian Airlines attorney Bruce Bennett accused Mesa of masking the real issue.
"This lawsuit is not about competition," he said. "It's about the undisputed fact that Mesa had access to enormous amounts of Hawaiian Airlines' confidential information. The only question is how they used that information."
Hawaiian claims Mesa downloaded documents that included more than 2,000 pages of detailed and highly proprietary information about Hawaiian's financial performance, projections and business strategy. That information provided detailed quarterly projections through the end of 2007, Hawaiian said.
Mesa said in its countersuit that it destroyed all the Hawaiian Air information after its bid for the local carrier was rejected in May 2004, and it didn't begin to formulate a business plan to enter the Hawaii market until April 2005.
But Bennett pointed out yesterday that Mesa said in a September 2005 press release that it began looking at the Hawaii market in early 2004 and labeled the venture "Project Hele."
Mesa says Hawaiian never asked about the documents before, and claims Hawaiian is using the tactic as a back-door legal attempt to stall it from coming to Hawaii.
"This has nothing to do with our use of confidential information," Ornstein said. "It's all about trying to get us from competing."
Not so, said Bennett.
"Everyone knows that the Hawaii interisland marketplace is highly competitive," Bennett said. "To suggest that Hawaiian Airlines or anyone else dominates the market is absurd."
Ornstein said Mesa simply wants to compete in the marketplace.
"The low fares we published (as low as $43 one way) were half of what (Hawaiian) charged," Ornstein said. "We're trying to do a good thing here. ...
"We intend to do to Hawaii what Southwest did for California and the East Coast and really open the arteries of commerce."

 

[mdanno808]

From another message board...

The certain additional assets, for those interested, are a fifth Aircraft and engine.

“Fifth Aircraft and Engine” means the Boeing 767-332 Aircraft and the General Electric Model CF6-80A2 Engine that Borrower disclosed to Agent prior to the Closing Date that Borrower would be purchasing.

Agent will, subject to the terms of the Securities Account Control Agreement, as promptly as practicable, direct the Securities Intermediary to transfer an amount equal to $10,000,000 to the Designated Account (or to Agent, who will transfer such amount as promptly as practicable to the Designated Account) to finance the acquisition of such airplane or engine.