Layoffs coming soon
#1
Original Poster




Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: B6 Mosaic 3, Bonvoy LT Titanium (x SPG LT), UA Silver
Posts: 6,172
Layoffs coming soon
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...html?ana=yahoo
Looks like Alaska's dedication to the Bay Area starts with laying off 225 Virgin America staff members as soon as the deal closes...
Looks like Alaska's dedication to the Bay Area starts with laying off 225 Virgin America staff members as soon as the deal closes...
#3
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend




Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Over the Bay Bridge, CA
Programs: Jumbo mas
Posts: 42,597
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfranci...html?ana=yahoo
Looks like Alaska's dedication to the Bay Area starts with laying off 225 Virgin America staff members as soon as the deal closes...
Looks like Alaska's dedication to the Bay Area starts with laying off 225 Virgin America staff members as soon as the deal closes...
#4
Original Poster




Join Date: Apr 2003
Programs: B6 Mosaic 3, Bonvoy LT Titanium (x SPG LT), UA Silver
Posts: 6,172
Many have already abandoned ship or have been actively looking to get out. Just a bit ironic as mentioned that AS just released a video saying how committed they are to the Bay Area and immediately announce that they are eliminating the jobs of those that created and kept the company running.
#5


Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: LAX
Posts: 230
Sorry to burst the bubble of fans, but the informed crowd knows how big a fiscal flop Virgin America was.
Prior to the acquisition the stock hovered at half it's present value, and the airline lost money far more quarters than it didn't.
I'm sure there's a lot of redundancy in the merger, and thus a lot of Burlingame will be let go.
I'm not sure how smooth the transition will be, but we've hit a total race to the bottom in airlines- so I'm curious if they even care. We've lost 5 airlines now in the last 10 years to Mergers and Consolidation.
Prior to the acquisition the stock hovered at half it's present value, and the airline lost money far more quarters than it didn't.
I'm sure there's a lot of redundancy in the merger, and thus a lot of Burlingame will be let go.
I'm not sure how smooth the transition will be, but we've hit a total race to the bottom in airlines- so I'm curious if they even care. We've lost 5 airlines now in the last 10 years to Mergers and Consolidation.
#6




Join Date: Jan 2014
Programs: Amtrak Guest Rewards (SE), Virgin America Elevate, Hyatt Gold Passport (Platinum), VIA Preference
Posts: 3,642
Yeah, but a lot of that was down to incredibly bad timing on the launch. Remember, the stock price doubled not because of a change in the inherent value of either company but because the VX folks put the company up and B6 and AS got into a brutal bidding war and really bid more than VX was worth.
#7
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: LAX
Programs: Virgin America Gold, Virgin Atlantic Gold, AAdvantage Platinum, B6 Mosaic, HHonors Gold
Posts: 215
How many airlines are profitable when they launch? Your point -- unprofitable more quarters than not -- isn't quite valid when the airline's been around less than 10 years and it takes an enormous amount of time to get an airline into profitability.
It has nothing to do with "bursting the bubble of fans" and everything to do with someone who likely knows little about VX attempting to inform others about what he incorrectly perceives as fact.
Also, nearly all US airlines have share valuation far below VX/AS' $55-57. LUV and AAL are 36. DAL is 37. JBLU is under 16. The fact that VX was trading at less than half its present value is entirely irrelevant. Please redirect your post to some forum for arrogant and ill-informed stock brokers. It's not relevant in the present forum, either in substance or in tone.
#8


Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: LAX
Posts: 230
How many airlines are profitable when they launch? Your point -- unprofitable more quarters than not -- isn't quite valid when the airline's been around less than 10 years and it takes an enormous amount of time to get an airline into profitability.
It has nothing to do with "bursting the bubble of fans" and everything to do with someone who likely knows little about VX attempting to inform others about what he incorrectly perceives as fact.
Also, nearly all US airlines have share valuation far below VX/AS' $55-57. LUV and AAL are 36. DAL is 37. JBLU is under 16. The fact that VX was trading at less than half its present value is entirely irrelevant. Please redirect your post to some forum for arrogant and ill-informed stock brokers. It's not relevant in the present forum, either in substance or in tone.
It has nothing to do with "bursting the bubble of fans" and everything to do with someone who likely knows little about VX attempting to inform others about what he incorrectly perceives as fact.
Also, nearly all US airlines have share valuation far below VX/AS' $55-57. LUV and AAL are 36. DAL is 37. JBLU is under 16. The fact that VX was trading at less than half its present value is entirely irrelevant. Please redirect your post to some forum for arrogant and ill-informed stock brokers. It's not relevant in the present forum, either in substance or in tone.
... an airline that also wasn't deeply, deeply subsidized by cash infusions from angel investors and Richard Branson.
VX has undersold it's product since day 1- and did so without making enough money to keep itself afloat. Read historical posts on here about VX- it's always been a question of how long will it be until they run out of investor cash, another infusion, then another countdown.
The fact that VX stock was trading at half value is incredibly relevant. If the merger is canceled tomorrow you can bet your ... the stock would plummet.
How is that not relevant to the fact this airline's biggest success story is getting out of the game?
#9
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K, AS MVP, Bonvoy Plat, IHG Plat, HH Gold, Hyatt Disc
Posts: 217
Also, nearly all US airlines have share valuation far below VX/AS' $55-57. LUV and AAL are 36. DAL is 37. JBLU is under 16. The fact that VX was trading at less than half its present value is entirely irrelevant. Please redirect your post to some forum for arrogant and ill-informed stock brokers. It's not relevant in the present forum, either in substance or in tone.
(OT, but this is also the reason why the Dow Jones is a stupid index--a 1% drop in the value of GOOG will make the Dow go down ~$7.70, because the company doesn't split its stock as much as others, so it's very expensive per share; whereas if GOOG issued far more shares -- say, enough to price the stock at $1/share -- then a 50% drop in the company's value would only make the Dow go down 50 cents.)

