Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
EU To Approve AZ Rescue Plan  
User currently offlineScotron11 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1178 posts, RR: 3
Posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2739 times:

Now, please stay in your seats. It is being reported that the EU outgoing transport commissioner, Loyola de Palacio, has said she will recommend that her successor approves a plan to rescue flag carrier AZ, Italy's transport minister said today.

"De Palacio assured me that she will prepare all the cards so that the French commissioner who will replace her has everything needed to approve it". Transport Minister Pietro Lunardi said on the sidelines at an awards ceremony.

De Palacio is being replaced next month by Jacques Barrot. After presentation of the AZ rescue plan on Wednesday, a source said that the EU commission would find it hard to avoid an in-depth investigation of the proposals.

Any state aid is prohibited under EU rules. An in-depth probe could have lasted 18 months , prolonging uncertainty over the future of the loss-making carrier.

Keep a sharp eye for future employment of De Palacio with any Italian company....in-depth probre indeed! This is a bloody joke and, if true, should be stopped. All they are doing is prolonging the inevitable.....this airline will not be around in a few years!

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSarrebal From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 67 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2693 times:

Sure.

Remember your fellow Neil Kinnock, former EU transport commissioner?

He ruled out the Milan airport system regulation, which would have launched MXP as a first-class hub.
At that time BA, LH, AF and other airlines filed a ridicolous complaint.

Guess what!
Neil Kinnock was found to be working for a consulting company which had BA as its client.

Before assuming that De Palacio will work for an italian company, look at what happened in the past.
At least DePalacio is not an AZ consultant now.


User currently offlineScotron11 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2604 times:

Never liked him, never will!! Last I knew he was in charge of anti-corruption at the EU and all he's done is harass and fire whistleblowers.

User currently offlineFoxiboy From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 208 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2509 times:

If thats the case then the belgium government should be allowed to resurect sabena that would be fair, let the UK,IRISH,SPANISH,GREEK, govns plow cash into their national carriers, now that would be fair ,oh and let the dutch government buy KLM back from AF, oh but i forgot thats not allowed.

User currently offlineHirnie From Germany, joined May 2004, 593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2456 times:

And the Polish government should buy some 7E7s and A380 for LOT to expand their network. Perhaps Bundeskanzler Schröder has some millions left for Lufthansa....
That`s all crap!
Alitalia should have been gone with Sabena and Swissair!!!


User currently offlineTW741 From Liechtenstein, joined Sep 2004, 478 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2450 times:

oh yes, I do like those people sitting in Bruxelles and Strassbourg and ...

=TW741=



TWA - we showed you how good we have been!
User currently offlineFoxiboy From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 208 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2397 times:

HIRNIE Thats the point i was making if the italians can do it then all eu member states should be allowed.

User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2379 times:

It's ridiculous to allow more state aid for AZ without at least significant restructuring of the company, otherwise it's just throwing good money after bad. Italy needs to suck it up like Belgium and Switzerland - your national carrier's a dud, get over it, moveon.org. It's not like Italy will suddenly be without a national carrier, Alitalia 2 or Alitalia Milan Airlines or some such sucky name will be resurrected from the ashes.

P.S. re the Milan hubbing debacle, that decision was a blatant attempt by the Italian government to favour Alitalia by insisting that all foreign carriers use Malpensa (a crappy half-finished white elephant 40km from town, and at that time without proper highway or rail connections to Milan) while AZ could continue to use Linate. The EU ruled, perfectly properly, that the Common Aviation market prohibited this restriction, and permitted all carriers to operate routes in LIN that had more than 1 million (or was it 3 million, I forget) per year.


User currently offlineSarrebal From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 67 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2354 times:

JGPH1A,

I suggest to review the case more deeply.
All you said is BS, which is not even close to what happened.
No hard feelings!


User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2345 times:

No hard feelings, but ahem - some backup please. All very well saying BS, but I'd be most interested in hearing your version of events. I was working at BA at the time of the Milan debacle, and was involved in the never-ending reroute of flights between LIN and MXP while the affair dragged on, so I remember a bit about it.

User currently offlineAlanUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2279 times:

What a joke! Alitalia is one of those airlines that should have disappeared many years ago, alongside with Olympic, Swiss, Sabena... (I could include Air France, but I'm not going to this time!). Airlines that have hardly ever made money for years on end don't deserve to fly the skies today, when other airlines, such as BA, Iberia, Lufthansa fight for survival in their own stride...

User currently offlineJamesvf84 From Switzerland, joined Sep 2003, 129 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2275 times:

Strange as it may seem I have a perculiar feeling that AZ will get what it is hoping for, the Italians are very proud and not to say this with spite, their pride will easily block their judgment of keeping their airline afloat!

They will probably bury the the ruling against them under the ton of papers that remain the pillar of their famous administration  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

JGPH1A, I don't think the Swiss sucked it up...they still have not gotten over it, they are a bit more descret though!  Big grin


User currently offlineSarrebal From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 67 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2251 times:

JGPH1A

Here you go:

You said:

"P.S. re the Milan hubbing debacle, that decision was a blatant attempt by the Italian government to favour Alitalia by insisting that all foreign carriers use Malpensa (a crappy half-finished white elephant 40km from town, and at that time without proper highway or rail connections to Milan) while AZ could continue to use Linate. The EU ruled, perfectly properly, that the Common Aviation market prohibited this restriction, and permitted all carriers to operate routes in LIN that had more than 1 million (or was it 3 million, I forget) per year."


Let's not consider the comment about MXP (Have you ever seen LIN?) and the highway (There's been a highway between D'town Milan and MXP since 1990. It has just been expanded in 1999).
What you said about what the EU ruled is simply wrong.
The Italian government proposed to keep at LIN routes with more than 2 million pax/year. At that time (and I believe even today) only the Milan-Rome route met that requirement.
The Milan-Rome route could be freely operated by ANY european carrier.
Other european airlines argued. They complained about the fact that AZ could feed its FCO hub from LIN and other airlines could not.
That would have been reasonable if AZ had plenty of long-haul destinations from FCO. Look where AZ flies out of FCO and tell me if you can call that a hub.
AZ moved basically all of its long-haul flights from FCO to MXP at that time.
So there was no hub to feed in FCO.

Of course the EU and its transport minister/BA consultant forced the Italian government to not apply that regulation.
The agreement that was reached was the following:
Airlines could keep 34% of the existing flights at LIN and move the remaining 66% to MXP (or BGY).
That has been in effect until April 19, 2000.
AZ was the only airline hit by that. Why?
Because:
- MXP couldn't be launched as the hub it was supposed to be.
- AZ had to give up most of its LON-PAR-FRA and other european flights from LIN (AZ chose to keep most of its 34% for the FCO flights). Therefore it couldn't properly compete with its european competitors.
- Other european airlines could increase their flights to their main hubs. i.e.: LH used to fly 5x daily the LIN-FRA. Giving up its other destinations from LIN they could increase up to 6x daily.

What you said about the 1-million (or even worse 3-million) limit was wrong.
Hey, everybody makes mistakes. But don't come on this forum and address people on the aviation market rules when you don't even know the real facts. Facts that are not even confidential and could be instead found with a quick research. I'm sorry, but I call that BS. And again, no hard feelings!

When I don't know the facts, I just avoid to post and address other people on which airlines should be in business and which ones should not.


User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2207 times:

Thank you for correcting me on the basis by which flights may be retained at LIN - as far as I can tell that was the only bit that I actually got wrong. As to the rest, it was clearly intended as a protectionist move, sadly it backfired. The likelihood of another European carrier actually setting up and running LIN-FCO flights was at best remote (I believe BA tried, with their local and very short lived franchise, can't remember the name, but that fell apart very quickly. I think LH codeshare on Air One on the route as well).

Yes, AZ moved their long haul operation to MXP, but there was nothing stopping them moving longhaul flights back to FCO - some routes are duplicated between both hubs now. That was a commercial decision by AZ.

Yes I have been to LIN and MXP. LIN is a nice little local airport and great for downtown Milan, its a short ride away on public transport. At the time the decision was made to move everyone to MXP, the new terminal was not even finished and during that initial period it was total chaos, with basic infrastructure for check-in, baggage and fueling not working IIRC. The road out to the airport was not a full highway and was congested, and there was no rail connection.

AZ may have been negatively impacted by the ruling to allow other carriers to continue serving LIN, but I'm sure that's not the only reason the MXP hub failed to take off. MXP is a terrible airport to transit through, mostly due to SEA not AZ - lack of transfer desks, very slow security, commuter gates that are total chaos - it's really bad. That and the ever present threat of strikes at AZ mean for most travellers, it's not worth the risk.


User currently offlineSarrebal From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 67 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2191 times:

I don't agree on MXP being bad for connections.
Actually, given the fact that it's one of the few airports developed vertically and not horizontally, passengers don't have to walk for miles to reach the other gate.
People appreciate connecting in MXP. And the lost baggage ratio is lower than other european hubs.

I agree with the chaos during the first days.
But hey, when a huge airport opens up, there's always chaos.
Look at HKG, DEN and others.

LIN is ugly and indeed unsafe. The only good thing is that it's located basically in the city.
They should have closed it and demolished when MXP opened.
But political conflicts between Milan and Rome didn't allow that.



User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2184 times:

I don't know so much about 'vertical' - I've walked quite a few hundred horizontal meters transferring through MXP. Maybe it was because I transfer to NCE flights, which go from the commuter hell-hole, but my experiences through MXP have been uniformly negative, to the point where I now avoid it. True, they've never lost my luggage, I'll give you that.

The chaos at MXP was way worse than HKG (although I'll grant you DEN was a bit of a disaster too). Especially because MXP wasn't actually a brand new airport, it was just a new terminal.

I'm sure LIN is way too popular with the Milanese business community for it ever to be closed. It's location, however unsafe, makes it very convenient.


User currently offlineFoxiboy From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 208 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2087 times:

ERM correct me if i am wrong wasnt this post about wether or not AZ should be bailed out by the italian government?


User currently offlineAlitalia744 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 4731 posts, RR: 45
Reply 17, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2062 times:

like BA doesn't try the same bullsh*t?

Look @ Heathrow.

Thanks.



Some see lines, others see between the lines.
User currently offlineFoxiboy From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 208 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1946 times:

No BA does not get any government aid,it like many other european airlines have to fight for survival, and regards LHR, well that is a BRITISH AIRPORTS AUTHORITY airport nothing to do with BA, the BAA is also a private company.
So i say if alitalia gets help from the italian government, then all european airlines should get the same help.
After all is the purpose of the EU to ensure all member states are treated fairly,this in turn should include all companies, however this rarely happens depending on which member state you live in.


User currently offlineScotron11 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 1178 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 1906 times:

This post, and others along the same thread, are about one particular EU airline receiving state assistance. I guess it would be like the US government deciding to give aid to one particular airline, lets say UAL, and denying assistance to all others. Why should this be allowed? Why should AZ receive "special" treatment to the detriment of other carriers?

A previous post suggested that Mr. Kinnock was working as "paid" consultant for a company which was hired by BA to block AZ and their plan to develope MXP as their hub. If that was the case, why then did 11 other EU carriers protest as well?

I smell a deal somewhere here....I really do....this "reorganization"...if you can call it that...will go ahead...because "politics" are concerned...and nothing else!

Shame on AZ and bigger shame on the Italian government for allowing it to happen!


User currently offlineFoxiboy From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2004, 208 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1853 times:

Well said scotron11 , totally agree its totally unfair for one member state to be able to do this,while screaming if another tried this.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
EU Wants Scrutinizing AZ Rescue Plan posted Tue Oct 26 2004 11:10:25 by Scotron11
EU To Approve LH / Austrian Alliance posted Fri Dec 14 2001 23:15:21 by Singapore_Air
"AF Must Invest In AZ Rescue To Get Stake" posted Tue Oct 24 2006 17:43:46 by Mindscape
FI: Airbus To Ask Board To Approve A350 XWB posted Mon Oct 23 2006 10:21:23 by Leelaw
Courts Approve Vasp Recovery Plan posted Fri Aug 25 2006 20:42:24 by Antiuser
Delta Seeks To End Pilots Pension Plan posted Sat Aug 5 2006 07:08:41 by NWDC10
Cathay Challenge To Air NZ's China Plan posted Thu Jun 15 2006 02:06:04 by Flyer88
Delta CEO Seeks To Terminate Pilots' Pension Plan posted Sat Jun 3 2006 14:44:57 by Lumberton
NW Flight Attendants Object To Exit Row Price Plan posted Thu Apr 6 2006 23:00:02 by KarlB737
Northwest To Freeze Pilot Pension Plan! posted Wed Feb 1 2006 01:46:12 by NWDC10