Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Lufthansa Foreign Ownership Over 45 %  
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7062 posts, RR: 4
Posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3947 times:

Quote:
Lufthansa said on Friday foreign shareholders now owned more than 45 percent of its stock but that it had no plans for a capital increase.

In order to retain its operating license under European law and air traffic rights to international destinations outside Europe, an airline's foreign ownership may not exceed 50 percent of the share capital.

The carrier has the right to issue new shares to domestic investors if foreign ownership breaches the 45 percent level.

But a Lufthansa spokeswoman said the company had no plans for such a step. The firm was confident that even without counter-measures, the foreign-owned stake would not reach 50 percent.

The company is able to take a number of measures to ensure that its shareholder structure remains predominantly German. It is entitled to buy back its own shares once more than 40 percent are foreign-owned.

Foreign holdings in the firm breached that level in August, but Lufthansa at the time welcomed the mainly US and British investors and said it had no plans to buy back any stock.

Lufthansa is obliged to issue a statement when certain levels of foreign ownership are exceeded.

If foreign holdings were to breach the 50 percent mark, Lufthansa can intervene, for example by denying foreign investors the right to enter their stock into its shareholder register, the spokeswoman said.
(Reuters)



http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1164407935.html
Maybe this will help to stop the a.net legend that LH has to buy Airbus only....


It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDIJKKIJK From France, joined Jul 2003, 1791 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3904 times:

So who are these ''owners''? Any idea of who is the largest shareholder?

Quoting Columba (Thread starter):
Maybe this will help to stop the a.net legend that LH has to buy Airbus only

I don't see the connection...



Never argue with idiots. They will bring you down to their level, and beat you with experience.
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7062 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3892 times:

Quoting DIJKKIJK (Reply 1):
I don't see the connection...

Because people tend to say that the German goverment has so much influence on LH that they have to buy Airbus only but there can´t be any goverment influence if the airline has a foreign ownership of 45 %.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineUA777300ER From Belgium, joined Jun 2006, 96 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3859 times:

Quoting Columba (Reply 2):
there can�t be any goverment influence if the airline has a foreign ownership of 45 %.

I wouldn't be so sure of this. There are many other ways a government can influence an airline without direct control of the airline.


User currently offlinePADSpot From Germany, joined Jan 2005, 1676 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3699 times:

The German government sold their last shares more than 10 years ago. The largest investor is the French AXA Group (insurance) with 10.76%.

The point where I read comments that suggest that LH might be influenced by the government is the point where its poster usually loses his credibility ... just plain nonsense. Even if one could say that LH pefers one OEM over another, LH management will have reasons for it that are rational enough to convince the supervisory board.


User currently offlineLHStarAlliance From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3616 times:

Also AF/KL has a 40+ % foreign ownership ...

User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9330 posts, RR: 29
Reply 6, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3511 times:

Quoting UA777300ER (Reply 3):
I wouldn't be so sure of this. There are many other ways a government can influence an airline without direct contr

may be, but in a publicly owned company, the CEO/COO as well as the supervisory board might be personally liable if they make the wrong "political" decisions.

The Federal Republic has no shares, hence it has no voting rights in Lufthansa. The voting rights are with the shareholders and they fill the Cologne Arena very well on the AGM.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3398 times:

Quoting PADSpot (Reply 4):
The point where I read comments that suggest that LH might be influenced by the government is the point where its poster usually loses his credibility ... just plain nonsense.

I'm not too sure about this. The German government takes a lot of influence into companies decisions, remember the Siemens & BenQ issue lately? Our Chancelorette called Mr. Kleinfeld. And the EADS story? Merkel trying to safe German jobs? They may not have shares of LH anymore, but after these other stories, I can imagine they'll tell LH what they want them to fly. However, German companies contribute to Boeing planes, too.


User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2898 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3289 times:

In fact AF/KL issued exactly the same statement one week ago. Privately, they seem happy that foreign ownership went above 45%, but they were obliged (under the Chicago convention) to issue a warning. LH did exactly the same just now.


I scratch my head, therefore I am.
User currently offlinePelican From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2531 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3277 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
remember the Siemens & BenQ issue lately? Our Chancelorette called Mr. Kleinfeld.

And? Do you think Mr. Kleinfeld says - "yes ma'am!". This is a typical political PR-stunt. It shows the voters that Mrs. Merkel is doing something about BenQ. Whether or how much this influences a company I can't say (but I guess very little).

pelican


User currently offlineGbfra From Germany, joined Sep 2006, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3254 times:

LH and AF belong to the most profitable airlines in the world and their future appears to be very promising. No wonder that international investors are putting money into them. It appears that these investors do not think that LH or AF are slaves to their governments.


The fundamental things apply as time goes by
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2900 times:

Quoting Pelican (Reply 9):
And? Do you think Mr. Kleinfeld says - "yes ma'am!". This is a typical political PR-stunt. It shows the voters that Mrs. Merkel is doing something about BenQ. Whether or how much this influences a company I can't say (but I guess very little).

Siemens just paid money for the employees of BenQ. € 180 million!

http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,450500,00.html

This pressure of governments and the media works. Companies don't live in a vacuum, they need customers and sometimes the good will of authorities.


User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9330 posts, RR: 29
Reply 12, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2838 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 11):

Siemens just paid money for the employees of BenQ. € 180 million!

First of all, your translation is wrong. Siemens did not pay anything, they SET ASIDE UP TO 180 Million €. Other media information says that Siemens may only need less than half of that amount. Since Siemens still owes BenQ some money out of the deal, you can bet that BenQ will not see the part of the money paid out to former employees. This is indeed a PR matter, Siemens has trouble enough right now, they would not even need to do it since they hardly produce anything for B2C customers anymore, they are B2B almost exclusively. .

Next - you compare 2 completely different matters - a sale of a branch to a Taiwanese company gone wrong with the purchase of new aircraft. How can a CEO or the chief of a supervisory board listen to an "advice" of a politician, whoever that may be? A CEO is not resonsible to a politician but to his shareholders and the paragraphs of the "Aktiengesetz" (applicable law) only and the politician will not take responsibilty for his/her advise if the matter goes wrong.

Amy CEO receiveing a call will politely say that he will see what he can do and refer to the laws, his personal liability and the market conditions. We still have to learn in Germany that the market sets the rules. Mayrhuber and his board know that and they will buy the aircraft which are best on the market and for the intended task, not what Ms. Merkel or other politicians may tell them.

That can be Airbus or Boeing or both. And since the market works, contrary to popular belief in Germany, in every aspects, the passengers could not care less if they fly Airbus or Boeing, as long as they get the fare, go from A to B at the time they want and get the service they expect.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2812 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
First of all, your translation is wrong. Siemens did not pay anything, they SET ASIDE UP TO 180 Million �. Other media information says that Siemens may only need less than half of that amount.

And? They don't know how much they'll have to pay, so they set the money aside and will pay later. I doubt they would set aside twice the sum they need.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
Since Siemens still owes BenQ some money out of the deal, you can bet that BenQ will not see the part of the money paid out to former employees. This is indeed a PR matter,

Even if they owe money, whatever of these 180 million will be paid - it's a loss for Siemens.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
Siemens has trouble enough right now, they would not even need to do it since they hardly produce anything for B2C customers anymore, they are B2B almost exclusively.

Do you think in B2B nobody cares about the social responsibility of a company?

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
Next - you compare 2 completely different matters - a sale of a branch to a Taiwanese company gone wrong with the purchase of new aircraft.

The point is that German politicians intervene when German jobs are involved.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
How can a CEO or the chief of a supervisory board listen to an "advice" of a politician, whoever that may be? A CEO is not resonsible to a politician but to his shareholders and the paragraphs of the "Aktiengesetz" (applicable law) only and the politician will not take responsibilty for his/her advise if the matter goes wrong.

The politicians have a leverage. For example, it is rumored that our beloved government is not giving EK the rights to serve Berlin, in order to help LH. In case LH doesn't comply, they could end that kind of support. There are many other issues, and there are connections between government and companies.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 12):
And since the market works

Except for 5 million unemployed.


User currently offlineJohnnybgoode From Germany, joined Jan 2001, 2187 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2785 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 11):
Companies don't live in a vacuum, they need customers and sometimes the good will of authorities.

this is so true!!! this is the best line ever when it comes to the never ending topics of whether or not governments have impact on corporate decision making.

rgds
daniel



If only pure sweetness was offered, why's this bitter taste left in my mouth.
User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9330 posts, RR: 29
Reply 15, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 2667 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):
Do you think in B2B nobody cares about the social responsibility of a company?

They have a better understanding of the situation than the general public. Stupid populism does not work here


Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):

The point is that German politicians intervene when German jobs are involved.

they can intervene as much as they like, if they pay out money a CEO might chose to take it, but at the end of the day he is in charge and not a politician and the same politician who has created the mess will blame the CEO for it.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):
The politicians have a leverage. For example, it is rumored that our beloved government is not giving EK the rights to serve Berlin, in order to help LH. In case LH doesn't comply, they could end that kind of support. There are many other issues, and there are connections between government and companies.

AFAIK EK has the rights to serve any place in Germany under the open skies agreement. Don't give anything on rumours. BTW, LH is making (or has made) good use of the open skies agreement with their SHJ cargo hub.

I have seen Messrs. Weber and Mayrhuber at several LH AGMs, they are company leaders, they do not "comply" . You have a wrong udnerstanding about how businesses are run, obviously.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 13):
Except for 5 million unemployed.

wrong again, there is no market because it is over regulated. Open up the jobs market in Germany and miracles will happen.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 16, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 2663 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 11):
Siemens just paid money for the employees of BenQ. € 180 million!

I own a rewritable BenQ dvd player...works great.. thumbsup 



"Up the Irons!"
User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9330 posts, RR: 29
Reply 17, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 2652 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 16):

I own a rewritable BenQ dvd player...works great..

good for you.

@ Thorben - if the Government really wants to help Lufthansa they should speed up the process to get a new runway build at both FRA and MUC. That is all the help LH needs and that is what they cannot get accomplished by their own ressources.

It doesnot cost the Government a cent, it would generate new jobs by the tens of thousands, these jobs would contribute to the social system, pay taxes, the economic impact (which is lost every year due to the slow process) would be in the Billion€ range.

It is about time, economic thinking takes place in politics.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 2526 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
@ Thorben - if the Government really wants to help Lufthansa they should speed up the process to get a new runway build at both FRA and MUC. That is all the help LH needs and that is what they cannot get accomplished by their own ressources.

You see? LH has a reason to make the government happy. And they won't do that with a large Boeing purchase. Not when you consider the way things look at EADS right now.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
It doesnot cost the Government a cent, it would generate new jobs by the tens of thousands, these jobs would contribute to the social system, pay taxes, the economic impact (which is lost every year due to the slow process) would be in the Billion� range.

It would also mean more pollution and more noise in the areas around it. Besides, you remember these endless legal issues about the runway west in FRA, the extension of the runway at XFW, the new airport at SXF? There are also disadvantages and thousands of people against, who go to every court they can find.


Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
It is about time, economic thinking takes place in politics.

 sarcastic  Maybe Roland Berger should become chancellor? Then we could strip all unproductive people (unemployed) of their citizienship (IOW: fire them), neglect the environment, and outsource un-profitable states like McPomm, Brandenburch and Sachsen-Anhalt.  yuck 


User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7062 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 2514 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
if the Government really wants to help Lufthansa they should speed up the process to get a new runway build at both FRA and MUC

That would be up to the local goverments of Hesse and Bavaria and not the Federal Goverment.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7062 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 2506 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 18):
And they won't do that with a large Boeing purchase. Not when you consider the way things look at EADS right now.

Even if the up-coming and long expected longhaul order will be only Boeing 787s and 747-8Is or 777-300ERs LH´s main line fleet would consists of only 2 Boeing types will still having a one of the largest Airbus fleets (A319/A320/A321, A330, A340-600 (even if the 787 would replace the A343 the A346 would stay a while) and A380). LH will definitely place an order for additional A320s since their latest purchase will not fill their need especially if some of the aircraft will be used for the new LCC Italianwings.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 60
Reply 21, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 2501 times:

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 17):
good for you.

You didn't see the humour in my comment...regardless..nevermind...



"Up the Irons!"
User currently onlinePanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 9330 posts, RR: 29
Reply 22, posted (7 years 9 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 2481 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 21):

You didn't see the humour in my comment

I did, you didn't catch mine

Quoting Thorben (Reply 18):

It would also mean more pollution and more noise in the areas around it. Besides, you remember these endless legal issues about the runway west in FRA, the extension of the runway at XFW, the new airport at SXF? There are also disadvantages and thousands of people against, who go to every court they can find.

You really think that Germany is a Banana Republic, do you? It is up to the Federal Government to present legislation to the Bundestag to streamline the legal process in building large infrastructure projects. That has nothing to do with LH pleasing the Government by buying Airbus. That goes not only for runways but for roads, rail lines, power lines, canals etc. This country is chkoing istelf, preventing jobs to developm except useless ones in the legal business.

The predictions for the need of the # 4 runway at FRA was 2006, nothing happening so far, even 2011 is in doubt. The predictions were exactly right, FRA traffic stagnates because they cannot accomodate additional slots. Jobs are prevented and chances to make a living taken from hundreds if not thousands. Less taxes paid less contribution into the social system. That is what I mean with running the country like a business. Your answer to that is ignorant leftist bullshit.

Quoting Columba (Reply 19):
That would be up to the local goverments of Hesse and Bavaria and not the Federal Goverment.

No, see above. It has to be Federal legislation.

The conclusion is that Lufthansa makes its choice without any Government interference and regarding the crowded conditions here in FRA, they are in the excellent situation to have room for growth in Munich. At least for another 10 years.



E's passed on! That parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker!
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (7 years 9 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2399 times:

Quoting Columba (Reply 20):
Even if the up-coming and long expected longhaul order will be only Boeing 787s and 747-8Is or 777-300ERs LH´s main line fleet would consists of only 2 Boeing types will still having a one of the largest Airbus fleets (A319/A320/A321, A330, A340-600 (even if the 787 would replace the A343 the A346 would stay a while) and A380). LH will definitely place an order for additional A320s since their latest purchase will not fill their need especially if some of the aircraft will be used for the new LCC Italianwings.

Yes, but a large order for the competitors of the A380 and the A350 in these times would really have some outrage in this country.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 22):
You really think that Germany is a Banana Republic, do you?

And you think it is the perfectly clean and honest democracy?

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 22):
It is up to the Federal Government to present legislation to the Bundestag to streamline the legal process in building large infrastructure projects. That has nothing to do with LH pleasing the Government by buying Airbus.

LH pleases government, government pleases LH, it's that simple.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 22):
That goes not only for runways but for roads, rail lines, power lines, canals etc. This country is chkoing istelf, preventing jobs to developm except useless ones in the legal business.

Yes, but don't say that too loud, Columba might read it.

Quoting PanHAM (Reply 22):
Your answer to that is ignorant leftist bullshit.

 rotfl 

I need to put the finger in the wound of you capitalistic idealists sometimes.


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...
IATA's CEO: Liberalize Foreign Ownership posted Tue Sep 19 2006 08:52:06 by Centrair
The Purpose Of Foreign Ownership Laws posted Fri Jun 9 2006 14:29:28 by MaartenV
Foreign Ownership/Open Skys Bill On Way To Pres posted Thu Jun 8 2006 14:19:39 by Lowecur
Forbes Article On Foreign Ownership posted Fri Jan 27 2006 15:56:59 by BigGSFO
Canada May Raise Foreign-Ownership Limit posted Mon Sep 19 2005 22:12:38 by DFORCE1
Status Of Foreign Ownership Limits posted Tue Apr 12 2005 21:37:10 by StevenUhl777
Lufthansa To Raise Over 750 Million To Buy Planes posted Mon May 24 2004 11:59:15 by 777ER
USA: Raise Proposal Foreign Ownership US Airlines posted Fri May 21 2004 17:31:04 by Northernlights
Lufthansa To Take Over Swiss posted Sun Jul 13 2003 22:20:02 by PremiereClasse
USA To Consider Lifting Foreign Ownership To 49% posted Wed May 28 2003 00:14:30 by Singapore_Air