The fault-finder will find faults even in paradise. -Henry David Thoreau
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I checked under the FAA regulations and they are allowed to carry cargo on the proving flights. For the link, see my post #52575
IMO, I checked on Edgar, the exhibits that are under the CTOs for Virgin Air and United are listed in the most recent 10Q for each.
Virgin America's CTO refers to exhibit 10.6 in the 10Q filed July 30, 2015. This would be the 10Q for period ended June 30, 2015. Here is a link to all the documents associated with that filing:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1614436/000119312515270885/0001193125-15-270885-index.htm
Based on the Exhibit, it looks like a contract between Virgin Airlines and American Express.
United's CTO refers to exhibits 10.1 to 10.8 for the 10Q filed on July 23, 2015. This would refer to 10Q for period ending on June 30, 2015. Link here for the documents associated with that filing:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/100517/000119312515261239/0001193125-15-261239-index.htm
It looks like the exhibits refer to contracts between United and Boeing for purchase of airplanes.
IMO
ahh ok, so probably the when landing gear and switching the nose was mentioned, they were referring to the same thing.
Really appreciate the information Robodog. I do not know much about the aviation industry and am learning a lot from your posts.
Agreed firestream, BLTA the Rocky Balboa of the airline industry IMO!
Thanks for the information on the landing gear. Same here, the only place I have hear about the landing gear change is on the boards.
Question, if they were planning on taking on max payload in cargo during proving flights, would that require a change in landing gear? What I am thinking is Boeing designed the landing gear for so much cargo and so much passenger weight. So if they are planning to fill the plane with all cargo, and treat it like a cargo plane, during proving flights would that warrant a change in the landing gear?
All IMO,
I was thinking about the changing of the landing gear. First, the plane already went through the D Check, meaning BLTA was confident that everything on the plane would handle their needs and could be inspected/certified for service. Probably BLTA looked at their projected capacity listed on pro formas and figured out the limit on weight when they would need to upgrade landing gear to accommodate growing demand in passenger and cargo service.
Being the plane completed D Check with the old landing gear, that would imply that the landing gear that was equipped was able to handle cargo and passengers that BLTA was projecting on proving flights and beginning of service. Now they were changed out. Something changed between the check and now, that the decision was made the landing gear needed changed now to handle extra capacity. Keep in mind it was posted that BLTA is possibly lining up cargo contracts for proving flights. So, maybe when they started actually lining up the contracts, ,maybe they found they greatly underestimated the demand for cargo service, both domestic and overnight to Russia, and the weight limit would be hit sooner, on proving flights, than anticipated?
All IMO of course.
Nevermind, found the date of the document to be January 15, 2010.
If you are still interested in seeing it, how I originally found it is I went to google.com and searched in quotes:
Found this, thought I would post. ELCR is L37-5. Does anyone know if this is old or new?
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://www.commerce.gov.cn/webmanage/eWebEdit/UploadFile/201142513560781.doc&prev=search
ELCR's part is all in chinese, I just went to google translate to translate it.
Very interesting and encouraging, thanks for the information.
Agreed, the absence of an answer is not an answer.
I wish you would not say that phrase, you are making me hungry lol
I need to borrow yours and Robodog's crystal ball, my magic 8 ball is just not cutting it lol.
Check out quarterly estimated taxes for IRS IMO.
Not a prob, thanks for posting correct link.
Hmm, the correct link didn't go through. If you are looking at the previous page on my other post, it was for British Airways, to get to Baltia's, click the "World Airlines" tab on the side. When you click the "World Airlines" tab, click the "North American Airlines" link under "America:"
Baltia listed under North American airlines:
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&u=http://www.airlines-inform.ru/world_airlines/British_Airways.html&prev=search
Some reading on the airline industry:
http://airlines.org/data/
Last one...business class:
Departing on September 21, and returning on September 22, there are 6 airlines that offer service with the lowest price of $3,375 and going up to $7,956. The minimum travel time is 12 hours at the $7,956.
IMO, this is interesting. The shortest travel time cost the most, and they are still listed selling tickets which would mean they are getting customers. This is telling because people are willing to pay a premium to get there faster.
BLTA plans to shave 4 hours off that. IMO, people are going to pay the premium for the shorter time to get there, leaving BLTA to grab a substantial portion of market share.
https://www.google.com/flights/#search;f=JFK;t=LED;d=2015-09-21;r=2015-09-22;sc=b;q=flights+jfk+to+moscow
IMO.
Was doing some research regarding flights on Google. Looking at the St. Petersburg, JFK route under first class (depart on September 21 and return on September 22), the prices start at $13,187 and go up to $20,325. There are 5 airlines that offer this service, none of which have nonstop flights of at least 12 hours 5 minutes travel time and one stop. IMO, BLTA could capture a portion of this market where the demographics prefer shorter flight time.
https://www.google.com/flights/#search;f=JFK;t=LED;d=2015-09-21;r=2015-09-22;sc=f;q=flights+jfk+to+moscow
IMO.
While it could be concerning that the price can fluctuate on such low volume, it can be a good sign as well. It shows the volatility of the stock in that small purchases or sells have the power to move the stock. There are 6,610,882,624 shares outstanding as of the last quarterly report. In theory, the price should be hard to move up or down because of many shares on the ask or bid. However, if the price will move pretty well on 100,000 shares buy or sell (a value of $470 at current prices) the float must be a lot smaller, with more people holding than selling, thus the stock moves up or down so fast.
If I may comment as well on the mini, the absence of an answer is not an answer. When a jury deliberates longer than what is normal, do you automatically assume that they decided against you and begin an appeal process or begin to pay/do any penalties before the jury comes back? No, because the jury still deliberating means they don't have an answer yet and means it can go either way.
All IMO of course.
Nah, I'm long on this. IMO, great company great management, and great potential here.
Again IMO.
Could you elaborate on your source for that information? I have not seen anything that indicated a decision was reached. Thanks.
Also go to google finance, look at the institutional owned percentage for those stocks.
Rupees can also be found in Hyrule ;P
It probably said unaudited because auditors just do a review of a 10Q, not an audit. IMO its misleading because at first glance, it can easily be interpreted into auditors did not look at the quarterly report and only audit annual reports.
IMO, good idea at looking at competitors and their financial state, shows the advantage BLTA has in terms of low debt.
I agree with you, I think BLTA would not have had trouble finding an auditor. It is great to see that it is done and off the list, that task now on a long completed list :)
IMO, if you look back to when the other mini's were attempted information started leaking onto the board within a few days.
IMO.
Delta’s annual report is audited. If you are looking at the quarterly reports, those are reviewed and a letter is enclosed with the financial statements from the auditors. If they were not, they would be in violation of SEC regulations. In order to be on the New York Stock Exchange, they must be audited. Here is an excerpt from NYSE requirements:
Congrats HYSR and all longs!
I am looking at it when at .004 trade went through it could have stayed at that level, but it did end back up near the open at the end of the session. I take that as a good sign that the PPS is holding.
IMO
Hey Robodog, sorry this is a little late, wanted to answer your question on the importance of audited financial statements.
The basic goal of accounting is to provide relevant and reliable information to users (investors, bankers, etc.) to make an informed decision. To meet this goal the FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) created GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) as a standardized way to for companies to record transactions and create reports. Through this process, FASB tries to make all financial information uniform by standardizing the way transactions are recorded and reports are created, thus adding to their degree to be relied upon based on adherence to GAAP.
Now, annual reports are audited, and quarterly reports reviewed, by auditors. Auditors ensure and certify that the statements are adhering to GAAP. This certifying gives a level of confidence that the reports are accurate and can be relied upon to make informed decisions. Without being certified, users have no idea if the reports are objective and truthful, or numbers were made up to to make the company look good and attract people to invest.
Another reason financial statements are audited is that it is a requirement of the SEC. The SEC can levy fees, penalties, and even suspend trading the stock if reports are not on time, not certified by auditors, or there are disagreements between the SEC and the company. And if I may throw in there as well, nearly all exchanges require current audited annual reports.
Bottom line: Audited financial statements add confidence they were prepared the right way and you have an accurate view of the company based on real numbers and totals. It is also required to keep the company trading.
Hope this helps.
IMO just was thinking the same thing, look at how the price reacted, it recovered back to .005.
IMO
The absence of an answer is not an answer IMO.
Nice Find
I meant 2 weeks would be best case scenario, assuming commitment for flights Monday through Friday. I apologize, I didn't clarify that too well in my last post.
My assumption was based on 6 hours of flights a day, Monday through Friday meeting the 50 hour requirement. IMO.
3 weeks not too bad, it would makes sense. Thanks for the information.
If you can find the documents, that would be great. Thanks
You and me both IMO.
So here is my question, best case scenario proving flights could be completed in 8 business days (assuming 6 hours of flights a day)?
I don't think I said freight, but reading about the difference between cargo and freight, it sounds like they mean the same thing, just freight is used for train and truck transport and cargo is used for planes and ships.
http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-cargo-and-freight/
Random fact of the day lol.
Lol, sry didnt see this post before I posted the one before.
Thanks again.
Ok, thanks for the information. Appreciate the insight from someone in the industry.
BLTA might fall under this regarding the engines what do you think?: