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.
Wow.. Volume almost 200,000!
Surely it means they will fly soon!? :-p
So there is a little more volume being traded... Ummmm, and that will help them get a 747-200 that needs heavy maintenance into the air how?
Still in the same spot: nowhere....no matter who is investing in this. Still 0 information from Baltia themselves. Still 0 progress on the plane (6 month old video). Just more speculation, speculation, speculation! No hard facts. Nice try....
Also, are you sure it wasn't something like "Baltia management to meet in Branson, MO for holiday"?? Lol..
Please elaborate. Why would they meet? Interesting rumor, but where did you hear this?
I think the biggest concern is transparency. If the work is being done, document it!! Show it to the investors. Not like there are trade secrets involved or not like it would devalue the company... and from the regulations.gov filings it is evident no other carriers feel threatened from their lack of response or challenge.
When the people Baltia are asking to invest are left in the dark, what do you expect will happen to those investors' attitudes? Especially dealing with a company that has made so many promises in the past, including very recent years. The past is the biggest indicator of the future right now UNLESS YOU CAN PROVE OTHERWISE.
If not, then this is worthless and not worthy of any more discussion because it is all a pipe dream. Prove the progress. There is no excuse for people receiving their primary information from these investor sites and not from the company itself. That doesn't mean videos that look like they're from the same era as the plane with 6 month old information either.
Yeah.. it is pretty silly. I've seen countless posts deleted by these supposedly unrelated users that just drop out of the sky with "buy buy buy" attitudes...I've been saving them for entertainment however.
So where's the progress then? Making more changes to the website by NS/Viseon doesn't do much good to get a plane in the air now does it??
Funny stuff guys.. funny stuff..
Don't worry mymoney123, I can assure you that the majority of aviation professionals and intelligent investors are able to see through this whole charade. A lot of the rebuttals and defenses are either from the company posing on here as regular investors or some sorry souls that don't know a damn about aviation but hope to strike it rich on a 20 year old scheme.
Where do their deleted posts keep going anyway? Maybe they're worried that the SEC will be onto them if they're really disseminating this false info constantly?
Pathetic.
Don't give them (Baltia) any ideas. They'll probably issue tickets Monday morning to hype the stock up... In related news, the Baltia office is predicting a shortage of toilet paper Monday afternoon.
Virgin Atlantic - From Conception to Start of Service: About a year
- Mid 1983: Hellary and Fields applied for a license between Gatwick and Newark Liberty International Airport
- June 1984 Virgin Atlantic operated its inaugural scheduled service between Gatwick and Newark using a leased Boeing 747
Baltia - From Conception to ...: 20+ years
- Late 1980s/early 1990s: Idea conceived to fly airborne waiters from New York to St. Petersburg in a 747-200
- 2010: Idea still to fly airborne waiters from New York to St. Petersburg still in a now aged and expensive-to-maintain 747-200
Right... Please don't insult Virgin any more.
I like how the screennames you guys use are always bullish too. "eyeforthedeal" "wolfpick"
lol
Yes. I am sure you have quite a nice position in the stock, possibly your wife too! It's called preferred shares, am I correct?
I'm not sure if you're just trolling or if my suspicion really is correct that you are employed/receiving compensation from Baltia. If you are the latter, why do you guys feel the need to play these "marketing" games?
In the end, you compare yourselves to Jetblue and Virgin America. Do you realize how much money they both had for startup? Jetblue around $150 million and Virgin about infiniti... They were busy actually starting an airline not making silly news reports or offering compensation to various "marketing" firms to spam their stock (Jetblue didn't have public stock until after launch and Virgin still doesn't, yet you guys have been publicly traded for what? 10-15 years?)
Viseon is the same as Baltia. Admit it or prove me wrong! Enough with the games...
Any would-be investors in this stock should be weary and read about "Family Airlines." They even painted their plane...
1)
http://www.prlog.org/10631199-viseon-internet-marketing-website-release-seosemppc-web-design-must-for-todays-busine.html
Wait for it!!
2)
http://www.prlog.org/10644771-viseon-internet-marketing-new-client-baltia-air-lines-bltaob-seo-sem-ppc-web-development.html
Surprise anyone? Seriously though, how the hell do you take these guys seriously? You're not fooling anyone Baltia/Viseon.
I hope people see this for what it is! This is beyond belief!
If the company would just focus on starting the airline rather than pumping their stock--now complete with their own self created "marketing company" 3 months would have been realistic in March 2009. If they even intend to start an airline. It has been 20 years anyway. You reading this BLTA staff? Shame shame shame--just when I thought you guys were really legitimate.
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. -Albert Einstein"
Do you work for Baltia?
If it is only a "C" check then it wouldn't make much sense to fly the plane to Asia would it? With cost of jet fuel... Surely it could be done in the Americas for cheaper?
Or is it a "D" check?
I agree. It's a long road ahead... Given the 20 year history, seems some of these investors don't mind.
Another relevant page describing the "D" check found via googling:
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/tech_ops/read.main/175232/
Where is the $5-7 million dollars going to come from? That would use up their entire "credit line." Also, where are those people that jumped on me a few weeks ago for saying the 747-200 was a bad choice due to mx costs? LOL...
Seriously, an investment in an EAS carrier would be better at this point. Guaranteed revenues!
It's nothing really that significant IMO... This would never be announced if it was any other startup carrier. Just another false hope.. Sigh
Yeah, this volume going out is way above average. Does anyone know if management could sell their shares at this point, or would that violate SEC rules?
The 747-200 Isn't good enough for the air force and president anymore...
But the fleet of planes now used to transport President Obama -- two highly customized Boeing 747-200B series aircraft -- is aging. The first of the current aircraft were delivered 20 years ago during the administration of President George H. W. Bush.
Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Kan., a member of the committee and a former aerospace executive, noted that there are fewer than 20 747-200s -- the commercial model Air Force One is based on -- still in service. Tiarht said the president's aircraft is nearing a point where the operation and support costs will exceed the value of the existing planes.
Lol... Just goes to show where this 35 million is going...
"Lol" Good point...
Why is the volume so low compared to the average? Also, any interest in this company seems to be dead online... are people concerned with what the Q1 financials will show?
I was under the same impression. I think I read somewhere in their filings that the passenger deck only would need 40% load factor with a full cargo area? I hope that they are looking at all revenue streams and talking to travel agencies/etc about bulk tickets to fill the planes. They really need to bid on charters and stuff during week they are not flying. Planes don't make money sitting on the ramp.
I hope there is some good news come April---I really want these guys to succeed just so hard to be confident with so many airline startups going bust over the years...
Is the value of the company inflated? $34+ million with so few in PP&E and no revenue? Do you think it will really increase to the $XXX million(s) after revenue flights? I am just trying to get a better idea of how this company will be valued after revenue flight.. there is a great disparity in a lot of airline stocks as far as profit/loss and stock price go--- and BLTA should expect to lose money for a while even after the first flight (like any airline startup post 1903 ;-p). Serious question so back off in advance to all of you fanatic fan clubbers that swallow the kool-aid....
Yes, it certainly looks that way.
I have done quite a bit of research and DD on this company and read all of its filings. There is NO excuse for keeping investors in the dark AND taking so damn long to start-up. They have the authorization and the capital required for startup (EXCEPT MOST OF IT IS THE CREDIT/ASSETS OF MANAGEMENT: Read, won't be used!!).
I used to think they would reach a first flight then bite the dust. Now I am beginning to lose confidence that they will ever even fly. I would like to see otherwise but it just doesn't look good. They have so much misinformation out there (such as where the interior will be fitted...Malaysia? Pinal Airpark?, etc.)
Anyone believe they will still fly??? If so, when do you think they will???
Yes, I agree with you about the mx. That is my point though-- I just hope BLTA has enough capital to cover mx.
I see they have several reserved N-Numbers so this is good news for the whole backup aircraft situtation:
"559EV 21035 BOEING 747-200 BALTIA AIRLINES INC
705BL BALTIA AIR LINES
706BL BALTIA AIR LINES
707BL BALTIA AIR LINES
708BL BALTIA AIR LINES
709BL BALTIA AIR LINES
7308B BALTIA AIR LINES INC"
I agree -- the DC-9 is an amazing aircraft. Amazing how Delta is still operating the Northwest birds, some of while Delta sold to Northwest decades ago and now they have back!
It's quite alright--I have just been a lurker until I saw the 3-5 year post, and to be honest I was quite shocked people were planning on holding onto this for that long.
Believe me, I wish them the best of luck, and truly hope they succeed (acquire A LOT more cash prior to start up as well as at least one more flight-ready airplane). I LOVE the classic 747 from an enthusiast's perspective but not from a "3-5 year investor" perspective. Airlines that make old airplanes work do it on short flights with 85-90% load factors (read: Allegiant Air and their MD-80s... if you have the time, I highly suggest reading their 10K--some very interesting airline information). It is much tougher to profit on a long haul route with an older airplane, but maybe they expect the cargo revenues to help offset enough of the costs.
Time will tell... and with this company that is probably going to be a lot of time (once again, don't get me wrong, better they take their time then to launch when not 100% ready).
There is a big difference between a company with so little cash in the bank and the United States of America which can spend an unlimited amount of E4s (Air Force 747-200).
Yes, they are leasing engines. But what about the airframe, avionics, etc? With that many cycles, it will be prone to structural and other issues. It says a lot about the economics of repair costs when the former cargo operator (after Pakistan) parked this particular airplane/airplane type.
If you only have 1 plane and there are delays/cancellations/anything wrong--you have just shot yourself in the foot. The airline is essentially grounded until the plane is fixed. This makes for horrible press and passenger relations. Jetblue had it hard enough with Christmas delays a few years ago and that's with an entire fleet at JFK. Outsourcing aircraft, crew, and maintenance to an established carrier get's rid of a lot of worries.
In response to your "your presence is not needed here"-- well, this is an investor's forum-- and I'm sure my views are valued by someone when conducting their own DD.
I would not expect the company to be around in 3-5 years. Honestly, you should not expect any more than to sell this stock after their first flight.
Why you ask? They're going to be using a 747-200 at JFK---one of the WORST airports for delays in the country. With only one plane, a maintenance prone plane at that, a significant mechanical delay can seriously crush their image beyond repair.
Seriously though, a 747-200?? I don't see why they couldn't have contracted with World Airways or Atlas Air to provide aircraft, crew, and maintenance. OR they could have bought a couple ETOPS 757s which would make JFK-LED most of the time and stop in SNN occasionally. Does it really make sense to buy the lease expensive plane guys??? On paper, maybe. In practice, no.
Don't get me wrong, the route is great---if they really have cargo commitments---but using only ONE OLD PLANE is not a good way to start an airline. A 747-200 might have been acceptable when they were first planning this airline TWENTY YEARS AGO, but not now.