Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
British Airways Slams U.S. Bankruptcy Laws  
User currently offlineBlrsea From India, joined May 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 3
Posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 9135 times:

BA chairman slams US bankruptcy laws.

Eddington says U.S. turning 'itself into the land of the free ride'

Quote:
Sir Rod Eddington on Thursday used his last public speech as British Airways chief executive to berate the U.S. for its use of "protectionism" to prop up failing domestic airlines.

"America, the land of the free, is turning itself into the land of the free ride," he said.

...
He accused the U.S. of hypocrisy in its approach to global free trade. "The lessons America has been imposing on third world markets with an almost pitiless ferocity apply to America just as much."

...
"This is offensive because it is stupid, because it doesn't benefit anyone, because it encourages inefficiencies, rewards bad habits, drives out good money and replaces it with bad."


130 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2012 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 9024 times:

Perhaps they should complain to the WTO! Big grin


it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2358 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8966 times:

It is every americans god given right to stiff creditors via the courts. Big grin


The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlineSATX From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 2840 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8918 times:

Quoting Blrsea (Thread starter):
"America, the land of the free, is turning itself into the land of the free ride," he said.

 checkmark  100%!

Personal welfare has been hacked to the bone under both Clinton and Bush, but who has the balls to do something to about corporate welfare?



Open Season on Consumer Protections is Just Around the Corner...
User currently offlineB744F From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8910 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 2):
It is every americans god given right to stiff creditors via the courts. 

Good luck, now that the new laws have passed


User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26414 posts, RR: 76
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8876 times:

Um, how about US carriers bitch about BA's initial government set up, built in dominance of London Heathrow, etc. and see what BA says


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineBCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8822 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 5):
how about US carriers bitch about BA's initial government set up, built in dominance of London Heathrow, etc. and see what BA says

Does not the same apply to AF, which is still partly owned by the French Government and has far more built in dominance at CDG compared to BA's dominance at LHR. For your information today's BA does not have any aircraft that were funded by the taxpayer. All BA aircraft are now owned or leased using finance obtained from their working capital or from EMTLs through the Stock Exchange and other commercial sources.

Edington is right. Is it unfair competition that the US airlines have the protection of Chapter 11. There is no similar arrangement available in the UK. The nearest would be to call in the receivers and the airline would then be run in administrative receivership.



MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
User currently offlineDougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 8794 times:

Bankruptcy as a subsidy? It's preposterous, and it's a testimony to how wrong an adult can be about things of which he knows bupkis.....maybe what His Nibs ought to do is spend a few days with me in court seeing people and businesses getting savaged in bankruptcy-I could wipe that silly grin off his mug without even breaking a sweat.

Methinks His Onions ought to stick to his knitting.


User currently offlineTango-Bravo From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3805 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8738 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 2):
It is every americans god given right to stiff creditors via the courts

Not true anymore for your average ordinary everyday working American. Nothing however (to my knowledge) has changed with regard to the ability of big business, airlines it seems in particular, to stiff creditors and their employees behind cover of bankruptcy court rulings that have turned the law into a corporate welfare scam. And nothing seems to prevent the payment of 6-7 figure bonuses to members of management responsible for the court-protected stiffing of everyone in sight.


User currently offlineSydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2955 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8732 times:

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 7):
maybe what His Nibs ought to do is spend a few days with me in court seeing people and businesses getting savaged in bankruptcy

Maybe what you, and American Airline execs, should do is to go to airlines that actually make a profit and study how this occurs. Maybe a group tour at Southwest, a jaunt to London on BA, a sidetrip to Asia to Cathay Pacific or Singapore. I know it may be hard for you to fatham airlines operating without bankruptcy, but why should these companies be protected after squandering as much as they have?? They shouldn't!!! They dug their own grave for whatever reason and the time has come to let them slip into oblivion. That way the employees can find new jobs, which will inevitably be created by stronger airlines expanding, and the stockholders/bankers and brokers can get on with financing businesses rather than basketcases. Let them die, as we did Ansett, and let the strong survive.


User currently offlineAirways45 From United Kingdom, joined May 2000, 300 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8707 times:

Rod is absolutely right - the existence of Chapter 11 is a major problem and is not helping the financial health of the US airline industry.

There's too much capacity in the US market at the moment - fares are just too low (great for people flying, terrible for airlines who can't make money). By allowing airlines who are financially dead to linger on just ain't right.

You've now got the situation where other US majors are considering going into Chapter 11 so that they too can have the reduced cost structure of their rivals (for instance, AA might have to do this now NWA & DAL is in Chapter 11).

How many times can management change at the majors, how many times are majors allowed to screw up before someone says - hey, you are all turkeys, let another airline have a go and see if they can do it better.

Chapter 11 has become a way out for lousy management. It shouldn't provide this opportunity.

Take SWA - never been in Chapter 11 but is competing against those airlines that are being propped up at taxpayers expense. Fair to SWA? No. Fair to jetBlue - no.

For my US friends - remember, in Europe there isn't such a safety net. Who would have imagined that the airline based in the home city of the EU - Brussels, would be allowed to die because financial help isn't allowed to be given to it? Sabena would still be in Chapter 11 if Europe had the US system.

Isn't it also strange how airlines come out of Chapter 11 and spend money on nonsense - rebrands. Why Air Canada was wasting money on new colours (no matter how nice) beats me. But Chapter 11 helps you lose touch with reality.

No airline has a god given right to suceed. However, that's what I believe UAL thinks - so they force cheaper lease rates, force through lower wages, pensions etc.

What other industry can you think of that behaves the way the airlines do? Which other industries allow slow deaths which benefit nobody?

If they can't survive without Chapter 11, then they shouldn't be in the business in the first place. It should be removed straightaway in my view.

This is echoed by all of the aviation analysts I know - nobody supports Chapter 11 unless you work for the airline in question (or hold their frequent flyer points, in which case you are biased). We all felt US Airways should be allowed to die for the good health of the industry, to remove capacity, to allow fares to increase and restore profitablity).

Just my view!

Airways45


User currently offlineBCAL From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2004, 3384 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8689 times:

Quoting Airways45 (Reply 10):
Just my view!

Spot on  thumbsup 



MOL on SRB's latest attack at BA: "It's like a little Chihuahua barking at a dying Labrador. Nobody cares."
User currently offlineVC-10 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 1999, 3700 posts, RR: 34
Reply 12, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8672 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A business exec recently said on BBC radio that Chapt 11 is there so that companies can legally defraud their creditors

User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7459 posts, RR: 17
Reply 13, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8671 times:

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 7):
Bankruptcy as a subsidy?

No. But Chapter 11 Bankruptcy clearly is a subsidy.

If you have creditors and the law says you do not have to meet your obligations to your creditors and the management who got the company into its current financial state is allowed to go being paid by and running the company and (finally) the shareholders interests are put above those of the creditors then the creditors are clearly subsidising the companies operations and the shareholders investment.


User currently offlineSuseJ772 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8666 times:

Quoting Blrsea (Thread starter):
"America, the land of the free, is turning itself into the land of the free ride," he said.

I sort of agree in regards to Ch. 11 only!

Quoting N1120A (Reply 5):
Um, how about US carriers bitch about BA's initial government set up, built in dominance of London Heathrow, etc. and see what BA says



Quoting BCAL (Reply 6):
Does not the same apply to AF, which is still partly owned by the French Government and has far more built in dominance at CDG compared to BA's dominance at LHR.

I don't think N1120A was necessarily saying there was anything wrong with BA's setup by there government, but rather BA shouldn't be so hypocritical when dealing with the US airlines.



Currently at PIE, requesting FWA >> >>
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26414 posts, RR: 76
Reply 15, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8616 times:

Quoting BCAL (Reply 6):
For your information today's BA does not have any aircraft that were funded by the taxpayer.

But the aircraft that they have purchased were funded on the backs of the ones that were

Quoting BCAL (Reply 6):
The nearest would be to call in the receivers and the airline would then be run in administrative receivership.

Remember, UA will have a whole new set of shareholders when this is all over.

Quoting BCAL (Reply 6):
has far more built in dominance at CDG compared to BA's dominance at LHR

Ha

Quoting BCAL (Reply 6):
Does not the same apply to AF, which is still partly owned by the French Government

Yes, particularly when it was majority owned by the French government.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineTPASXM787 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1730 posts, RR: 19
Reply 16, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8600 times:

Quoting B744F (Reply 4):
Good luck, now that the new laws have passed

And these new laws were sorely needed. An individual could declare a ch.7 bankruptcy, screw all their creditors, and a year later have a gleaming credit report. someone who tried to pay their bills, albeit slowly, looked like the bad guy.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 5):
Um, how about US carriers bitch about BA's initial government set up, built in dominance of London Heathrow, etc. and see what BA says

 checkmark 



This is the Last Stop.
User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7459 posts, RR: 17
Reply 17, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8570 times:

Quoting TPASXM787 (Reply 16):
Um, how about US carriers bitch about BA's initial government set up

This is a great idea - for making hot air and wasting time. After all US airlines are going into Chapter 11 protection now. Something could be changed so that the playing field is moire even in the future.

But the UK government has had less influence and provided less help to BA in the last twenty years than the US government has to US airlines (an example being the subsidies to implement anti-terrorist precautions). But however much hot air you blow you will not change something that was changed all that time ago. So forget it.


User currently offlineTravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 8535 times:

Quoting Airways45 (Reply 10):
Take SWA - never been in Chapter 11 but is competing against those airlines that are being propped up at taxpayers expense.

How does being in Chapter 11 = being propped up at taxpayers expense? Honestly, I see this statement often, but have yet to figure out what people are talking about. Chapter 11 is at CREDITORS' expense, not taxpayers.

I'm not all for lingering for years in Chapter 11, but it's farcical to say that the EU governments do not help their airlines.

See:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...i_m0CWU/is_2004_Oct_11/ai_n6230704

Italian government reserves additional funds for aviation industry - report
Airline Industry Information, Oct 11, 2004

AIRLINE INDUSTRY INFORMATION-(C)1997-2004 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

The Italian government's reported inclusion of EUR750m in its latest budget for "capital for companies in the air transport sector" has led to speculation that the national carrier may receive another state handout.

Alitalia has recently been granted access to a EUR400m loan guaranteed by the Italian government and approved by the European Union to undergo a radical restructure that could see the airline split into two divisions, one dealing with flight operations and the other with services, called AZ Fly and AZ Service respectively.

The new EUR750m budget allowance for aviation companies could mean that the airline receives far more than the EUR400m approved by the EU. No one from the Italian government yet commented on the purpose of this budget fund.


Talk about not letting an airline die....


User currently offlineAirways45 From United Kingdom, joined May 2000, 300 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8495 times:

Two points:

1) Chapter 11 and public money - here's the BA response:


"In the last four years, the U.S. airlines have soaked up $15 billion to $20 billion (€12 billion-€16 billion) of public subsidies and loan guarantees," Eddington Rod said. "They're operating in protected markets, they're hoovering up public funds and still they can't make a profit."

2) EU aid:

Alitalia and Olympic are examples of Europe not playing fair, I agree. These two airlines should have died years ago, so you are right to say that the EU turns a blind eye to some 'state aid'. Just the other day, assistance to Olympic from the Greek government was declared illegal and they will have to repay, from memory, 800m Euros. Quite where that money comes from is another story. Alitalia seems to have been allowed Italian government help, far too much in my opinion.


User currently onlineVV701 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 7459 posts, RR: 17
Reply 20, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8485 times:

It is clear that in our airline world bad management comes out tops. If you are a US airline and well managed you have to compete against all those badly managed airlines whose management have sought and obtained Chapter 11 Protection from their creditors.

It is equally clear that if you are a European airline and well managed you have to compete against badly run government subsidised airlines like Olympic and Alitalia.

Now to my mind there is a very simple solution to all of this. You change the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Protection laws so that protection is only granted if all top management leave the company within a defined period (of, perhaps, six months from entering bankruptcy protection). In Europe the EU should introduce a new law that results in the immediate sacking (without appeal) of management when any form of subsidy is given to an airline.

Hopefully these changes will discourage management from taking the easy option and filing for Chapter 11 protection or searching for a government subsidy.


User currently offlineTravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8465 times:

Quoting Airways45 (Reply 19):
"In the last four years, the U.S. airlines have soaked up $15 billion to $20 billion (€12 billion-€16 billion) of public subsidies and loan guarantees," Eddington Rod said. "They're operating in protected markets, they're hoovering up public funds and still they can't make a profit."

But I still don't get where BA is getting that information. If they are talking about the help the airlines received after 9/11, OK, that was state aid. Loan guarantees, however, are not direct state aid (and I don't know which airline received any government loan guarantee. The government rejected United's request, and HP may have received a government loan but promptly repaid it.)

Operating in a protected market? That is a complete joke for BA to talk about that particular subject. Heathrow is virtually one of THE most protected markets in the world, and BA has been one of the primary beneficiaries.

As I said, the current Chapter 11 system doesn't work that great for airlines. Which is why it is being changed. But Chapter 11 does NOT equal taxpayer help, because it is up to the creditors whether or not they want to continue funding the airline in Chapter 11.


User currently offlineCTHEWORLD From Mayotte, joined Dec 2004, 478 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8423 times:

Quoting Sydscott (Reply 9):
Maybe what you, and American Airline execs, should do is to go to airlines that actually make a profit and study how this occurs. Maybe a group tour at Southwest, a jaunt to London on BA, a sidetrip to Asia to Cathay Pacific or Singapore.

Yes, maybe the U.S. Airline industry should take a page out of the BA/SQ/QF monopoly book! How incredibly simplistic to suggest that all one needs to do is to look at those airlines. There are many factors that put the U.S. industry where it is, not one silver bullet. Most of the problem can be placed at the feet of the U.S. government, not the companies trying to operate in a screwed up system. And BTW, the WN business model isn't scalable to international ops, and wouldnt be making money if they didn't have a hedge...they rolled the dice and won, but that doesnt mean their business model is as durable as every airline geek on this board would like to believe.


User currently offlineAirways45 From United Kingdom, joined May 2000, 300 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 8408 times:

Ok, here's the deal: Chapter 11 and US Taxpayers Money - it's all about Pensions.

One of the main reasons for NWA and DAL going into Chapter 11 was the hope that they might be able to rid themselves of their huge pension liabilities which are then partially assumed by US taxpayers.

For example, United managed to avoid over $6bn in pension liabilities. The pension burden will be absorbed by employees whose expectations may
greatly exceed what they will receive from the U.S. Government program, and by U.S. taxpayers who will have to pay for the program.

Under laws enacted by Congress, the government (i.e the taxpayers) has guaranteed billions of dollars in (profitable, interest-bearing) bank loans to airlines. But when travellers make (interest-free, unsecured) loads to airlines by buying tickets now for future travel -- a significant component of airlines' financing, on which they depend -- there is no similar guarantee. If you don't think that banks are more deserving of Federal protection than consumers, or that commercial banking corporations should receive more security for their loans, at taxpayer expense, than individual travellers, complain to Congress!!


User currently offlineTravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (8 years 11 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 8366 times:

I do understand what you are saying. However, I will repeat that for BA to complain about operating in protected markets is farcical at best. And I will also reiterate: The Chapter 11 law is changing in mid-October.

25 SuseJ772 : Again, I don't know how to reiterate this enough on this board. The new laws do not effect business and Ch. 11. They effect individuals, Ch. 13 & Ch.
26 Post contains links Travelin man : Ummm....please see article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...le/2005/08/02/AR2005080200329.html If Northwest and Delta Air Lines file for Chapt
27 AC777233LR : That is a fantastic idea, I'd vote for you!
28 Sydscott : Yeah BA is a real monopoly out of the UK/London, there is no domestic competition in Australia and of course SQ must be a monopoly......Get a grip. N
29 B744F : So that's the only thing the law was created for?
30 Sydscott : That means Alitalia would have had more Management teams than Italy has had had governments!!!!!! Seriously though Eddington is consistent in not lik
31 Dougloid : You're oversimplifying bankruptcy law. It's a specialty. I don't understand it myself and I've worked in the legal system for ten years. Not true...I
32 Max Q : Pot calling the kettle black. BOAC and, later BA were bailed out on numerous times and were, truly a Nationalised airline before Thatcher told them to
33 Sydscott : Why shouldn't they have the lions share of the slots at their hub airport in their home city?? You make it sound like BA is the only airline that has
34 Max Q : Sydscott, I am English, so your assumption is not accurate. BA have the advantage of a near monopoly and pricing power that they have been able to tak
35 Schipholjfk : There is no such thing as TRUE free market economy. So stop whining everyone. Every government one way or the other tries to help local companies. Whi
36 CTHEWORLD : Granted fares are too low, but pricing power is further eroded by taxes that are nearly 30% the price of a ticket, an archaic infrastructure, redicul
37 Sydscott : You are exactly right which is why the weaker ones should be allowed to die. Any economic consequences of the weaker dying would be negated by strong
38 Scbriml : And there's the reason for the situation at LHR. It's slot constrained. Even if the US and UK started an open skies agreement tomorrow, I'd like to s
39 Post contains links and images KL662 : I think one thing that's missing in this discussion is the whole point of Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Its intent is to give a business breathing room to pr
40 Doona : I have to say that it's nothing wrong with a country's government looking out for the nations businesses. It's not the company itself it's trying to p
41 Zeekiel : Finally a bloke who knows what he is talking about. Why is that person is going on about the QF 744's at LAX during the day? Obviously he didn't do h
42 IRelayer : OK HANG ON A MINUTE HERE!!!! I read that and my BS meter jumped up a few notches. I know the situation has changed with Labour's reforms and Margaret
43 Post contains images Cricket : I'm very sure that Sir Rod and Sir Richard agree on something on this. At least they agree on something Let the market decide the fate of the airlines
44 Juventus : I don't see how this is any of his concern. America protects its airlines
45 Scbriml : In that case, why exactly is the US concerned that the EU loans Airbus money? In case you didn't notice, BA is competing directly with several US air
46 Adria : yes but Alitalia is state owned, so there is a difference. true, but the US also protect their market, not long ago Virgin wanted to fly domestic US
47 Juventus : What about Lufthansa, Air France, Air Canada, Aeromexico, and Mexicana? These five airlines plus BA compete against the US airlines more than the res
48 BCAL : Granted that they all have a case, but this thread is about BA slamming US Bankruptcy Laws not LH etc. Perhaps Eddington (or rather Walsh) should ins
49 Scbriml : The whole point of the thread was BA's complaint that protection of US airlines under Ch.11 amounts to unfair competition and a form of subsidy. If t
50 QuestAir : If BA's partner AA was in bankruptcy, Sir Rod might be singing a different tune.
51 Tockeyhockey : what everyone seems to be missing in this post is that the us government keeps airlines alive for national security reasons, not because it is a prot
52 Post contains images Komododx : ??? Most troop movements are done with World Airways and ATA, not DL, US, UA, or Indy. Stefano
53 Post contains images Scbriml : Any chance of some documented evidence to back this up?
54 ClassicLover : I beg your pardon... The already government owned domestic airline (BEA) and the already government owned international airline (BOAC) were merged in
55 A5XX : You're implying that Air Canada was under chapter 11.... There is no such thing as a chapter 11 in Canada, and the bankruptcy laws are totally differ
56 Post contains images Doona : LOL, I'd like to see indy transporting a regiment of soldiers on their CRJ's and A319s... Cheers Mats
57 Scbriml : British Telecom was split from the Government run GPO (General Post Office) and then privatised. The two UK public airlines BEA and BOAC were merged,
58 Post contains images Airways45 : Air Canada was under Canadian Bankruptcy protection. As far as airlines go, whilst there may be slight differences, the spirit of it is the same - pr
59 Ftrguy : He claims that the US government is keeping the airlines alive. I have one word for that, AIRBUS!!!!
60 WhiteHatter : Airbus is not an airline. In case you hadn't noticed. Nice try, no cigar. Sir Rod is absolutely right. The abuse of Chapter 11 by some carriers which
61 LMP737 : People are focusing a bit to much on US bankruptcy laws, which by the way are changing next month. What really is keeping these airlines afloat is com
62 Post contains images Cornish : Unless it was Greece or Italy and just as importantly from a US perspective, (and ignoring anything to do with BA) it is weakening the likes of Ameri
63 Jush : Amen! Well it applies to a lot of other carriers. If i'm correct it applies alos to LH and KLM. Cheers jush
64 Post contains images Charliecossie : Dear Mr. Komododx, Since Britain and America invaded Iraq, United Airlines have operated at least 300 trooping flights through Frankfurt airport. My e
65 Geo772 : Rod Eddington happens to be one of the most accomplished airline CEO's of recent years. Almost singlehandedly his policies and business strategy have
66 Starlionblue : To be honest, new colors don't really cost a lot, since the airplanes need to regularly repainted anyway. But I agree with the rest of it! This is ab
67 Coa747 : I find it amusing there are so many European experts on US bankruptcy laws. BA's argument is rediculous. Comparing BA and SQ and QF to AA, CO, NW & DL
68 Post contains images Scbriml : That wouldn't have anything to do with LHR being their home base would it? You should ask your own Government why US airlines can't fly to LHR - they
69 VV701 : Not true. The British and French governments directed BOAC and Air France to order 5 Concordes. The value of the order was £125,000 not the £5 that
70 Timboflier215 : erm, might that be because the UK and Singapore are a tad smaller thank the USA. that aint BA or SQ's fault, its geography! the US carriers swamping
71 SparkingWave : I can understand BA's complaint, but sad to say, it's groundless. There are so many variables and circumstances that have created the very complicated
72 Geo772 : As has almost certainly been mentioned: Chapter 11 is damaging for foreign carriers competing against the US carriers in bankruptcy protection. Chapte
73 Geo772 : And Bob Ayling damn near succeded!
74 LTBEWR : Bankruptcy laws originally developed in the USA to counter the idea popular in the UK at the time of our founding of putting debtors in prison. Then y
75 Tockeyhockey : sorry -- no documented evidence. just the word out of my father's mouth, who has worked in the pentagon for most of his adult life and is a former na
76 Dougloid : Good work bruthah... there are a lot of self appointed experts out there who appear to know more about American law, culture and industry than we do
77 Thumper3181 : I am not much of a bankruptcy expert so can someone tell me how our bankruptcy laws subsidize corporations at the expense of the taxpayer? Also can so
78 Douwd20 : Fares may be too low but somehow the carriers keep lining up new financing. Incredible as it seems the old adage 'a sucker is born everyday' rings tru
79 N79969 : I agree that BA is distorting the facts and repeating the mantra that Chapter 11=subsidy until someone actually believes it. That is simply asinine. N
80 IRelayer : BT was nationalized 4 years after splitting off from the GPO (1984). British Airways was created in 1974, a full 13 years before it was privatised (1
81 Post contains links Vfw614 : Interesting aspect, by the way, in this whole "who-is-subsiding-who in the US and the EU" saga: A unique and significant part of the nation's mobilit
82 ORDagent : This is only partially true. The vast majority of people declaring bankruptcy in the U.S. are due to catastrophic illnesses. The changes in U.S. bank
83 Ckfred : Sir Rod needs to remember that the U.S. is the land of opportunity and fresh starts. Unlike the U.K., the U.S. never had debtors' prisons. We've never
84 Egmcman : Is there a time limit a company can be chapter 11 before the companies cease operations? Because administrators act very quickly to try sell the comp
85 Mariner : So one of the basic laws of capitalism is wrong? cheers mariner
86 IRelayer : No...read the whole post... Pure free market capatalism with no government oversight whatsoever as set forth by Adam Smith in "The Wealth of Nations"
87 N79969 : While the "invisible hand" is an important concept in free markets, so is the term "creative destruction" as coined by Joseph Schumpeter. Free market
88 IRelayer : I agree. UA has been in bankruptcy for far too long. US is even weaker and should have been allowed to die. Delta also. They should have been gone a
89 Mariner : I did read the whole post. And - ? When Pan Am, or any of the airlines you cite, went belly up, there was no national catastrophe. In Australia, when
90 IRelayer : Let me reset my original thought here. The point I was trying to make, until it got all muddled up in responding to other points, was that I don't be
91 Mariner : I have used the word "protectionism" with regard to the US Chapter 11 proces - and been toasted for it here. I do not believe that the original inten
92 Travelin man : Saying "that's the way it is because you guys signed an agreement" doesn't address the fact that the legislation is protectionist and the US now want
93 Post contains images Gilesdavies : British Airways has one of the lowest percentage of slots at its primary base compared to other carriers which operate from their primary hubs. I don;
94 B777fan : Mariner, I think you have it mostly right. Chapter 11 by itself is not protectionist and in fact is a fundamental part of the 'creative destruction' p
95 Post contains images Mariner : I wouldn't argue with that. cheers mariner
96 IRelayer : If you carefully read what I have said you might be able to piece together that I agree with you. I was merely displaying my indignation over Mr. Edd
97 Scbriml : The US Government agreed to Bermuda II. Good or bad, until both sides can agree a new set of rules, the existing ones remain regardless of how much b
98 VV701 : I seem to remember that for national security reasons the US government paid to have the floors of the fleet of Boeing 741s operated by Pan American
99 Richard28 : Ok, lets cut to the chase. It is in the US interests to have Ch. 11 as it protects their workers, and will help stop state benefits being paid to the
100 LTBEWR : USA Bankruptcies are in theory supposed to have a reasonable time to allow Chapter 11 reorganizations. This time period is to be shortened when the la
101 Dougloid : If anything that is by definition indirect.
102 Mariner : The point is moot because it hasn't happened and now, and at least in the foreseeable future, it is unlikely to happen. But times do change. Britain
103 VV701 : I understand your point. Mine was that if the US taxpayer gave the Chapter 11 Protected airline a sum of money equal to but indstead of taking over t
104 DarthRandall : Someone who isn't on corporate America's payroll, no doubt, which rules out any Republicans or Democrats. It's become niegh impossible and hardly wor
105 Post contains images Sydscott : Not to mention his work at Cathay Pacific and Ansett before that. So what?? Shall we look at the present here or are you going to keep harping on abo
106 LMP737 : The liabilities are not transferred to the US taxpayer under the PBGC. The PBGC is funded by insurance premiums paid by companies with defined benefi
107 Dougloid : Well, don't get me started on the PBGC. I haven't even tried to figure it out, but the way I understand it it was because companies were underfunding
108 Mariner : Yes - because that is what the thread is about - Sir Rod Eddington's comments on US Chapter 11. If you want to start a thread on the role of GECAS (a
109 LMP737 : The point I was trying to make is that while so many people, such as Mr Eddington, are focusing US bankrutcy laws they seem to ignore the role of the
110 Dougloid : As a practical matter look at it this way. GECAS is in too deep. If they say "OK, that's it, no more money!" everything shuts down. They stand a bett
111 Egmcman : I would be surprised if the British government did look what happened to Rover. It would easier for a new owner to buy them due to the fact there are
112 Baw716 : This is going to sound very harsh, so I apologize in advance: While I agree that there are many problems with the bankruptcy laws for corporations her
113 Post contains images Scbriml : Well, it is their home base, so that would be true. It's not rocket science is it? The US Government signed the Bermuda II agreement, so quit bitchin
114 Post contains images Mariner : So - a guilty person should get off free because someone else is guilty as well? If you want to have a debate about British implicit "protectionism" o
115 G-CIVP : "Before 1980, Britain's answer to a failed corporation was to nationalize it." But that was 25 years ago!! It doesn't reflect what has occurred over t
116 Bigginhill : I'd rather see airlines kept in business than laying off thousands of workers. Rod Eddington and industrial relations don't go together though do they
117 Braniff727 : BINGO! You hit the nail on the head! This is the same reason that the US Government purchases military aircraft from US manufacturers, to spend money
118 Sydscott : Ronald Reagan said it best - : If it moves, tax it; if it keeps moving, regulate it; if it stops moving, subsidize it. Welcome to America's industry
119 Post contains images Baw716 : Mariner, Excuse me, but Bermuda II is a little one sided. How much access does BA have to different gateways in the US vs. the number of flights that
120 Mariner : I agree. Fine by me. That may be so. If someone asked the question of Sir Rod, I would expect him to answer. The point is only that we live in an inc
121 Sllevin : Of course you want it, since your most valuable asset (slots at Heathrow) are all locked up -- in your favor! Now, if Open Skies included BA releasin
122 Egmcman : It's their priciple hub could you ever see an American carrier doing the same to heir principle hub? I would also like to add UA & AA have aproximate
123 Baw716 : Mariner, Sorry my friend, Bermuda II has been a sore point for me for a very long time. It has affected air service from Seattle to Europe and created
124 Sllevin : Heathrow is far more than just a "hub" -- it's the primary destination in the United Kingdom. How much of BA's inter-UK money is made on flights that
125 Post contains images Mariner : I understand that. I think it is probably not "hate" - I think he enjoys the game as much as anything. Certainly the grin on his face when he won the
126 VV701 : And which airline is that? I repeat Rod Eddington has been replaced at BA by Willie Walsh (previosly with Aer Lingus). His comments were made as a pr
127 Dougloid : So that makes him, what? A private citizen. It does not make him an expert or even knowledgeable about US law. next time I need to find out what it t
128 Sydscott : For all the Whingers in here lets put this into perspective. AA & UAL I believe started out with the equivalent of 20 flights each on their licences
129 Zeekiel : I'm not sure about being the flag carrier as there are several people who can put their own spin on the definition. But we will work with that anyway
130 Travelin man : You guys just don't get it. You are on the one hand saying "change your bankruptcy laws because they are unfair" (which, by the way, ARE being changed
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...
Employment At British Airways? posted Thu Nov 16 2006 15:09:51 by Paul
British Airways Unveils New Club World Website posted Sun Nov 12 2006 23:50:47 by Singapore_Air
British Airways Seating posted Fri Nov 10 2006 02:26:17 by Slovacek747
British Airways @ Heathrow T3 Why Not Also At T2? posted Fri Nov 3 2006 13:52:08 by 8herveg
British Airways Summer 2007 India Update posted Tue Oct 31 2006 06:43:22 by Behramjee
British Airways - 744 To Bahrain & Doha posted Sun Oct 29 2006 16:14:26 by B742
British Airways Lounges posted Thu Oct 26 2006 10:44:41 by Anirudhvs
British Airways 777 In Near Collision posted Sat Oct 21 2006 01:34:46 by Ge90110b1
British Airways Winter 2006 Schedule Changes posted Thu Oct 19 2006 18:15:26 by BA777
British Airways Fleet Purchase Plans posted Thu Oct 19 2006 16:41:02 by JumpJet