Fortune Article: "American Airlines loses $3.3 million a day"
Apr 30, 2008, 9:57 pm
#31
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 388
May 21, 2008, 8:26 am
#32
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SEA
Programs: AA Executive PLatinum CO Platinum DL Gold Hyatt Diamond Hilton no more :)
Posts: 1,958
problem solved. Hey it uses gas to haul it.
May 21, 2008, 8:28 am
#33
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ACT/GRK/DAL/ABI/MIA/FLL
Programs: OMNIArchist, OMNIArchy!, OMNIIDGAS
Posts: 23,478
May 21, 2008, 8:55 am
#34
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: SNA, LAX
Programs: AA EXP
Posts: 1,293
....
...
An effort by Delta to fight discount competitors, called SimpliFares, threw the airlines' pricing wars into a fresh kind of chaos. Delta rewrote its fare rule book in 2005 to price trips each way and eliminate the infamous Saturday-night stay requirement to get the cheapest ticket. The reason the Saturday-night requirement existed in the first place was so airlines could distinguish between their two primary customers: the price-sensitive leisure travelers and the deep-pocketed business ones. Folks traveling on business typically don't stay over Saturday nights. Other carriers had to match Delta's move to stay competitive and charge the same prices to all their customers. Overnight, the premium from business travel was lost.
...
An effort by Delta to fight discount competitors, called SimpliFares, threw the airlines' pricing wars into a fresh kind of chaos. Delta rewrote its fare rule book in 2005 to price trips each way and eliminate the infamous Saturday-night stay requirement to get the cheapest ticket. The reason the Saturday-night requirement existed in the first place was so airlines could distinguish between their two primary customers: the price-sensitive leisure travelers and the deep-pocketed business ones. Folks traveling on business typically don't stay over Saturday nights. Other carriers had to match Delta's move to stay competitive and charge the same prices to all their customers. Overnight, the premium from business travel was lost.
May 21, 2008, 11:07 am
#35
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,748
To answer your question, the $250 million was the value of the stock bonuses given to managers. This is a common incentive technique, as the value of the bonuses goes up when then company performs better. If the company tanks, the stock will tank, and then the bonuses are worth less.
This is not a cash bonus, and there is no cash involved. You could not just give a lower bonus and use the rest to keep the company "alive."
This is not a cash bonus, and there is no cash involved. You could not just give a lower bonus and use the rest to keep the company "alive."
When you get stock grants, you get stocks that can be sold on the open market (after any vesting period). You make money even if the stock price is $0.01. The payouts were calculated using a formula based on AA's stock market performance as a significant metric relative to other airlines not a more legitimate metric to measure company performance, so a temporary blip in stock markets (which may have nothing to do with airline's health) can and did lead to a large bonus payment that unlike stock options would continue to have some value regardless of the stock price.
This payment IS a liability for the airline in its balance sheet and is a liability at the price at which the stock grants were given NOT the current price. The airline will either have to issue more stock (diluting everyone else) or give them already issued stock that it has either not sold yet or has bought back from the open market. In all these cases, the airline could have raised cash instead by issuing/selling those stocks in the open market (even the stock options have an impact on the company's balance sheet but not cash-flow impact). I don't know what the vesting schedule was for the bonus grants but typically stock options have much stricter vesting schedules than stock grants.
Now that the stock price is diving down into $2 territory (current forecast by S&P analysts), the exec bonus is still worth something if they sell them (assuming they didn't cash out earlier) while people given stock options would have been so under water that the options wouldn't be worth the paper they were written on.
The AA executive compensation structure will be remembered as one of the worst designed compensation structure in US industry and a shining example of both executive compensation excess as well as an example of how wrong metrics for performance-pay can reward mediocrity to the detriment of the company's performance. But that is all of academic interest. The real-life fact is that the employees are finding it difficult to make ends meet and facing lay-offs with the downturn and the execs are worried whether they will be able to afford another boat or mansion next year regardless of what happens with the airline. The employees put their livelihood at risk and execs put their mansions and boats at risk for company performance.
There is a problem with this picture for the industry and you don't have to be a socialist/commie to see that this is not sustainable across economic cycles.
May 21, 2008, 11:30 am
#36
Join Date: Jul 2005
Programs: AA: ExPlat, Virgin: Silver, Midwest, US Airways: Gold, NW, Lufthansa: Freq Trav
Posts: 276
It is nearly impossible to explain the financial and operational stresses of a company at an executive level to people who are ignorant and closed-minded (aka union leadership).
May 21, 2008, 11:33 am
#37
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,748
Arguments that dismisses views by labeling are seldom enlightening or correct.