Search

Notices

Rebuttal Day 3

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-17-2013, 08:48 AM
  #61  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: Retired
Posts: 230
Default

I for one don't subscribe to the lame theory that CAL wouldn't have been able to make it on it's own. Alaska is doing pretty well. Hawaiian is doing pretty well. CAL was growing organically. The only real competition at the time was DAL/NWA.

USAirways was pretty dysfunctional as was American.

United was on the verge of collapse. It may offend some out there, but I don't believe United would have made it another year or two if it were not for the merger with CAL. They brought nothing to the table that couldn't have been bought for pennies on the dollar during the United liquidation, and could have helped us avoid most of the downside that came with merging with a decrepit dysfunctional airline.

There was a lot of opportunity for a scrappy well run airline like CAL to grow organically!
tailwheel48 is offline  
Old 06-17-2013, 08:48 AM
  #62  
I love my job!
 
Boneman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: B757 Capt
Posts: 276
Default

Originally Posted by Staller
cal would be lucky to be alive without UAL.
Originally Posted by Staller
Not at all cal was in bad shape and was looking for money. Do a little research.
Staller, your ignorance is showing.
Boneman is offline  
Old 06-17-2013, 08:54 AM
  #63  
Gets Weekends Off
 
cadetdrivr's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
Default

Originally Posted by CALFO
Oh, and it is so illogical to operate two similar fleet types, that Glenn Tilton, in all his wisdom, went out and order 787's and A350's. BRILLIANT!!
I'm no fan of Glenn, but the 787-8s (219 pax) and A350-900s (>300 pax) that he ordered are very different aircraft in terms of capability and mission.
cadetdrivr is offline  
Old 06-17-2013, 08:57 AM
  #64  
Gets Weekends Off
 
cadetdrivr's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,639
Default

Originally Posted by tailwheel48
CAL was growing organically.
Except, of course, it wasn't.

Go ahead and take a look at the CAL fleet size (hint: it's in the annual reports) for the five, or even ten, years leading up to the merger in 2010.
cadetdrivr is offline  
Old 06-17-2013, 09:16 AM
  #65  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 621
Default

Originally Posted by cadetdrivr
I'm no fan of Glenn, but the 787-8s (219 pax) and A350-900s (>300 pax) that he ordered are very different aircraft in terms of capability and mission.
Valid point. Given tilton's logic of keeping fleet types to a minimum, a 777-1000 order could have taken care of the 747 retirements. Further, ual could have just waited (as with the nb's) until boeing made a final decision on the stretch 787's.

Was anyone really a Glenn Tilton fan?
CALFO is offline  
Old 06-17-2013, 09:17 AM
  #66  
SLI best wishes!
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: B767 Capt
Posts: 399
Default

Originally Posted by tailwheel48
I for one don't subscribe to the lame theory that CAL wouldn't have been able to make it on it's own. Alaska is doing pretty well. Hawaiian is doing pretty well. CAL was growing organically. The only real competition at the time was DAL/NWA.

USAirways was pretty dysfunctional as was American.

United was on the verge of collapse. It may offend some out there, but I don't believe United would have made it another year or two if it were not for the merger with CAL. They brought nothing to the table that couldn't have been bought for pennies on the dollar during the United liquidation, and could have helped us avoid most of the downside that came with merging with a decrepit dysfunctional airline.

There was a lot of opportunity for a scrappy well run airline like CAL to grow organically!
So let me see if I can understand your point: Alaska and Hawaiian are doing just fine in the LITTLE glitch MARKETS WITHOUT exposure to outside competitive market forces, ie International Carriers on all premium routes. Care to also speculate on Alaska and Hawaiian COST structure if they had a international global fleet the size of United or CAL.
The rest of your argument really has no merit if you overlooked the obvious point above. I have heard the United has 30 days until liquidation statements before, that was over 10 years ago. As to UsAir, have you bother to look at their revenue in spite of all their labor integration issues. The fact that a DAL/NWA and AA/US are force to recon with I would not want to take a chance on a stand alone United or CAL. So we are where we are UA/CAL, and no speculation/prediction as to what could have or might have been means squat, cause we will never know.
LeeMat is offline  
Old 06-17-2013, 09:22 AM
  #67  
Gets Weekends Off
 
untied's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Posts: 521
Default

Originally Posted by tailwheel48
I for one don't subscribe to the lame theory that CAL wouldn't have been able to make it on it's own. Alaska is doing pretty well. Hawaiian is doing pretty well. CAL was growing organically. The only real competition at the time was DAL/NWA.

USAirways was pretty dysfunctional as was American.

United was on the verge of collapse. It may offend some out there, but I don't believe United would have made it another year or two if it were not for the merger with CAL. They brought nothing to the table that couldn't have been bought for pennies on the dollar during the United liquidation, and could have helped us avoid most of the downside that came with merging with a decrepit dysfunctional airline.

There was a lot of opportunity for a scrappy well run airline like CAL to grow organically!
Oh no....UAL was on the verge of collapse!

I've heard CAL guys say it, but there doesn't seem to be any proof.

The only thing CAL had going for it (from a pilots perspective) is that they were buying new airplanes.

Let's be clear....simply ordering new airplanes and "growing" doesn't automatically mean that your airline is thriving. Anyone can simply order large numbers of new airframes. The history of aviation is littered with the corpses of airlines who bought a bunch of planes that they couldn't use (or afford).

Luckily for CAL, United had plenty of opportunities for growth through our ORD, DEN, and LAX hubs.
untied is offline  
Old 06-17-2013, 09:30 AM
  #68  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2011
Position: A Nobody
Posts: 1,559
Default

"United was on the verge of collapse..."

"There was a lot of opportunity for a scrappy well run airline like CAL to grow organically!"

These rank as two of the most ignorant statements I have read on this forum.

The truth is United was not in danger of collapse and CAL was not going out of business.

What United brought to the table was the (or one of the) strongest International networks, the skills to market it, a revenue pricing model equal to all and cash. What CAL brought to the table was a young management who wanted to be kings, new(er) narrow bodies,current aircraft orders (not financed completely) and a board willing to talk.

The truth also is Jeff S. and his experts almost sunk the whole process by trashing almost everything good over the past years. He even admitted it to WS this past week.

What you experts also fail to grasp this "merger" was about the bankers, lawyers and people both airline networks use to operate daily. These people wanted the merger to be completed because they assured their positions for years to come.

So conclusion, get over yourselves! You and I are pilots who get paid to safely move airplanes from a to b. You aren't dropping bombs or saving the world from tyranny, this isn't 'Dr. Stranglove."
Regularguy is offline  
Old 06-17-2013, 09:43 AM
  #69  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: B777 CA - SFO
Posts: 730
Default

Originally Posted by Regularguy
"United was on the verge of collapse..."

"There was a lot of opportunity for a scrappy well run airline like CAL to grow organically!"

These rank as two of the most ignorant statements I have read on this forum.

The truth is United was not in danger of collapse and CAL was not going out of business.

What United brought to the table was the (or one of the) strongest International networks, the skills to market it, a revenue pricing model equal to all and cash. What CAL brought to the table was a young management who wanted to be kings, new(er) narrow bodies,current aircraft orders (not financed completely) and a board willing to talk.

The truth also is Jeff S. and his experts almost sunk the whole process by trashing almost everything good over the past years. He even admitted it to WS this past week.

What you experts also fail to grasp this "merger" was about the bankers, lawyers and people both airline networks use to operate daily. These people wanted the merger to be completed because they assured their positions for years to come.

So conclusion, get over yourselves! You and I are pilots who get paid to safely move airplanes from a to b. You aren't dropping bombs or saving the world from tyranny, this isn't 'Dr. Stranglove."
Most excellent, RG.

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room."
Lerxst is offline  
Old 06-17-2013, 09:49 AM
  #70  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

Originally Posted by Lerxst
Most excellent, RG.

"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room."
Agreed.

SpecialTracking is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
meloveboeing
Regional
5
10-02-2010 07:47 AM
kc135driver
United
119
08-24-2010 08:30 AM
UAL T38 Phlyer
Military
4
05-25-2009 10:23 AM
exerauflyboy5
Flight Schools and Training
15
02-18-2009 08:29 PM
Busdriver
JetBlue
70
01-16-2006 10:32 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices