Yellow | 2019! It's On!

The danger in your posts is that you articulate better than the average person and you are correct on some of the business principles you mentioned,such as the mortgage insurance and the control the creditors have over the company.Then you throw in your own theory that it was impossible for the company to shut down.You will have people buying into something you conjured up with zero facts,it's just the way you think it is.

All the business analyst thought it was a miracle that YRCW survived.All of the trucking analysts were skeptical about their survival.The same analysts that sit in on the quarterly results meetings with Old Dominion,FED EX, XPO,ABF,UPS,ect.ect but you somehow know more than they do.
I guess you don't remember when we were being charged 150 million per year in interest with impossible loan terms.They had no intention of keeping us open and as a matter of fact they planned to profit from our closure with credit default swaps.Several investors were betting against our ability to survive.Read the link
https://www.counterpunch.org/2010/01/08/how-the-teamsters-beat-goldman-sachs/

This was exactly what was happening in the case of YRCW. According to Michael Greenberger, the University of Maryland law professor who headed Trading and Markets at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in the Clinton Administration, this was a case of “Goldman (Sachs) et al seemingly forcing the country’s biggest truck company into bankruptcy in order to get pay-offs under CDS, with 50,000 jobs at stake.

I guess you and Wongway are smarter than the rest of us that thought our jobs were in peril and know more than a law professor so please send us the factual links.

By the way, round two was even closer to the end and without those cuts to satisfy the new lenders we would have absolutely been in bankruptcy protection.Ill be happy to give you and Wong those facts also.
The same analysts who said the mortgage market was in good shape and recommended toxic collateralized debt obligations? The LTL analysts rarely got published (market cap too small)but one did and agreed there was no way for YRC creditors to get satisfaction via bankruptcy. The credit default market is going to cover the creditors on a company everyone agreed was doa? Laughable.
You voted for the pay cut twice.
You can't admit you got bluffed.
 
The same analysts who said the mortgage market was in good shape and recommended toxic collateralized debt obligations? The LTL analysts rarely got published (market cap too small)but one did and agreed there was no way for YRC creditors to get satisfaction via bankruptcy. The credit default market is going to cover the creditors on a company everyone agreed was doa? Laughable.
You voted for the pay cut twice.
You can't admit you got bluffed.
Whose going to go to this bunch for a strike vote when the company plays the 'B' card again, you know, the same one they sucessfully played twice before?
 
The same analysts who said the mortgage market was in good shape and recommended toxic collateralized debt obligations? The LTL analysts rarely got published (market cap too small)but one did and agreed there was no way for YRC creditors to get satisfaction via bankruptcy. The credit default market is going to cover the creditors on a company everyone agreed was doa? Laughable.
You voted for the pay cut twice.
You can't admit you got bluffed.

You have concocted this crap up in your head.You know just enough to make you dangerous.Yeah ,one big conspiracy against YRCW teamsters.
The same know it alls were talking to he same crap at C.F.
2019 will be all about math, period..If the creditors don't like our terms the game is over.

By the way, the LTL analyst rarely got published is bullshit.Its what they do for a living.Oh ,and one says creditors would get no satisfaction in bankruptcy.Creditors lose their asses in bankruptcy all the time.Bankruptcy saves creditors from losing even more ,sometimes.
Please post the link of the one LTL analyst you are talking about so we can all see why you think you know more than everyone else.
 
Last edited:
Whose going to go to this bunch for a strike vote when the company plays the 'B' card again, you know, the same one they sucessfully played twice before?
So the creditors had swaps to cover? Why didn't they cash them and stop tying up 1.5B so they could partcipate in this bull market?
 
I certainly hope you are right, I remember saying that 27yrs ago, so did Cornflake, Double Diamond just to mention a couple
You know I could be here all night about the ones who thought the same.
"NEVER SAY NEVER"
'NEVER EVER WILL HAPPEN PERIOD .....................................................................and the 3030 contract will still be a sheep yes vote & Old Yellow will still be losing money , BUT the Cayman Island Banks are loving us !! kinda like the song Forever and Ever Amen !!
 
The danger in your posts is that you articulate better than the average person and you are correct on some of the business principles you mentioned,such as the mortgage insurance and the control the creditors have over the company.Then you throw in your own theory that it was impossible for the company to shut down.You will have people buying into something you conjured up with zero facts,it's just the way you think it is.

All the business analyst thought it was a miracle that YRCW survived.All of the trucking analysts were skeptical about their survival.The same analysts that sit in on the quarterly results meetings with Old Dominion,FED EX, XPO,ABF,UPS,ect.ect but you somehow know more than they do.
I guess you don't remember when we were being charged 150 million per year in interest with impossible loan terms.They had no intention of keeping us open and as a matter of fact they planned to profit from our closure with credit default swaps.Several investors were betting against our ability to survive.Read the link
https://www.counterpunch.org/2010/01/08/how-the-teamsters-beat-goldman-sachs/

This was exactly what was happening in the case of YRCW. According to Michael Greenberger, the University of Maryland law professor who headed Trading and Markets at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in the Clinton Administration, this was a case of “Goldman (Sachs) et al seemingly forcing the country’s biggest truck company into bankruptcy in order to get pay-offs under CDS, with 50,000 jobs at stake.

I guess you and Wongway are smarter than the rest of us that thought our jobs were in peril and know more than a law professor so please send us the factual links.

By the way, round two was even closer to the end and without those cuts to satisfy the new lenders we would have absolutely been in bankruptcy protection.Ill be happy to give you and Wong those facts also.
The danger in your posts is that you articulate better than the average person and you are correct on some of the business principles you mentioned,such as the mortgage insurance and the control the creditors have over the company.Then you throw in your own theory that it was impossible for the company to shut down.You will have people buying into something you conjured up with zero facts,it's just the way you think it is.

All the business analyst thought it was a miracle that YRCW survived.All of the trucking analysts were skeptical about their survival.The same analysts that sit in on the quarterly results meetings with Old Dominion,FED EX, XPO,ABF,UPS,ect.ect but you somehow know more than they do.
I guess you don't remember when we were being charged 150 million per year in interest with impossible loan terms.They had no intention of keeping us open and as a matter of fact they planned to profit from our closure with credit default swaps.Several investors were betting against our ability to survive.Read the link
https://www.counterpunch.org/2010/01/08/how-the-teamsters-beat-goldman-sachs/

This was exactly what was happening in the case of YRCW. According to Michael Greenberger, the University of Maryland law professor who headed Trading and Markets at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in the Clinton Administration, this was a case of “Goldman (Sachs) et al seemingly forcing the country’s biggest truck company into bankruptcy in order to get pay-offs under CDS, with 50,000 jobs at stake.

I guess you and Wongway are smarter than the rest of us that thought our jobs were in peril and know more than a law professor so please send us the factual links.

By the way, round two was even closer to the end and without those cuts to satisfy the new lenders we would have absolutely been in bankruptcy protection.Ill be happy to give you and Wong those facts also.
Finally got to read the law professor link. It helps make my point: "YRC wasn't going bankrupt if we didn't agree to give backs". (The give backs got the creditors their money sooner rather then later. )The link says the creditors took equity in lieu of the money YRC owed them. They did this after Jimmy jr wrote letters, ran demonstrations, etc. There was so much pressure brought to bear that the credit default swaps fell apart and the creditors took the equity instead.
I'm not going to debate anything about what the law professor wrote (no matter how fantastic) with the exception of his use of the term 'equity'.
He said the most desirable plan was for the creditors to exchange their iou's for 'equity'. There was no equity held by YRC. No hard assets.
The law professor must have meant stock. Stock that is offered by an over leveraged company. The same clueless creditors who extended credit to Zollars and friends became steely eyed wall street cut throats and saved their scalps thru credit default swaps, but then Voila!, voluntarily abandoned those same default swaps for YRC stock! Could they have simply bought YRC stock in the first place?(if this assessment is factually inaccurate WRONGWAY, please help me)
My point is that the creditors had bet on a loser, YRC, and had no way out. Even FEDX took a one billion dollar write down on the purchase of KINKOS.
The only thing left was the billions of gross income YRC generated and those gullible YRC employees.
If they could cut running costs (payroll) the revenue generated would lead them to the promised land!
 
You have concocted this crap up in your head.You know just enough to make you dangerous.Yeah ,one big conspiracy against YRCW teamsters.
The same know it alls were talking to he same crap at C.F.
2019 will be all about math, period..If the creditors don't like our terms the game is over.

By the way, the LTL analyst rarely got published is :horseshit:.Its what they do for a living.Oh ,and one says creditors would get no satisfaction in bankruptcy.Creditors lose their asses in bankruptcy all the time.Bankruptcy saves creditors from losing even more ,sometimes.
Please post the link of the one LTL analyst you are talking about so we can all see why you think you know more than everyone else.
YRCW has paid over $1,200,000,000 since 2009 (source, YRCW Investor relations) yes 1.2 BILLION in interest to the banks. They have been paying about a 4 to 8% premium in servicing that debt, over what a solvent company would pay. The banks are on board, because the paydown on the debt has only been 500 million over those 8 years and there is still over 1 BILLION of debt remaining. Good luck in 2019.
 
Finally got to read the law professor link. It helps make my point: "YRC wasn't going bankrupt if we didn't agree to give backs". (The give backs got the creditors their money sooner rather then later. )The link says the creditors took equity in lieu of the money YRC owed them. They did this after Jimmy jr wrote letters, ran demonstrations, etc. There was so much pressure brought to bear that the credit default swaps fell apart and the creditors took the equity instead.
I'm not going to debate anything about what the law professor wrote (no matter how fantastic) with the exception of his use of the term 'equity'.
He said the most desirable plan was for the creditors to exchange their iou's for 'equity'. There was no equity held by YRC. No hard assets.
The law professor must have meant stock. Stock that is offered by an over leveraged company. The same clueless creditors who extended credit to Zollars and friends became steely eyed wall street cut throats and saved their scalps thru credit default swaps, but then Voila!, voluntarily abandoned those same default swaps for YRC stock! Could they have simply bought YRC stock in the first place?(if this assessment is factually inaccurate WRONGWAY, please help me)
My point is that the creditors had bet on a loser, YRC, and had no way out. Even FEDX took a one billion dollar write down on the purchase of KINKOS.
The only thing left was the billions of gross income YRC generated and those gullible YRC employees.
If they could cut running costs (payroll) the revenue generated would lead them to the promised land!

I just wish something would be sustainable for our pensions besides the company having to pay full contributions which would be impossible,both operationally and the ability to obtain financing.For me it's absolutely insane for a company to be burdened with increased pension payments to pay for the pensions of people that never worked for them.
The Ponzi scheme needs to be gutted and replaced.No other LTL wants to be a part of a defunct pension nightmare either.
I don't know what you meant about gullible YRC employees but to me the only ones that were gullible were the ones that thought they wouldn't bankrupt.
I heard the know it alls talking the same crap at C.F.
 
Fact in the 90's i made a cool 60k per year, in 2017 dollars that's 96,200,4 day bid 52-57 hours back then,4 weeks vacation.
Fact m/f is growing farther apart from ups(package) wages every year.
Fact there is no solidarity in the brotherhood any longer,every contract there's 1,500 members with 3 years or less waiting to go and would work for 5 bucks an hour to get there.

Hope,and pray for change but don't count on it.:tr10driving03:
 
Looks to me like the Onion and the company may have been negotiating a contract a little early.I see the company has secured more financing up to 2022.I guess the company has made the bankers more at ease by offering positive outcomes from the Onion.misspelling union on purpose
 
may have been negotiating a contract a little early.I see the company has secured more financing up to 2022.I guess the company has made the banke

Do you have a link? I saw where they filed with the S.E.C to try and extend the loan maturity date until 2022 .They were going to negotiate with the lenders to try and achieve this.Maybe I misunderstood.
 
Hard to believe you guys would bring up said sad company finances,quarterly reports,bla bla blah.Why haven't you learned to NOT believe what they say.Vote no,strike them,and make sure the unions go to work for us.24,000 teamsters, 68 bucks a month dues the unions will be without,that makes it get real.
 
Top