g500 From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 1227 posts, RR: 0 Posted (3 years 1 month 11 hours ago) and read 7913 times:
Source Wall Street Journal
Amid fears country's creditors will seize her Boeing 757 (Tango 01), the Argentina's president will charter again for a trip to Asia and the Mid East.... She will use the U.K based charter company she also used in 2010 and 2011.
Looks like Chapman Freeborn can provide you with any long-range business jet you want, BBJs, 757, 747s, G-Vs, Globals..
(Obviously a G-V and/or Global Express is out of the question, she will have lots of entourage with her)
2travel2know2 From Panama, joined Apr 2010, 3000 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (3 years 1 month 10 hours ago) and read 7828 times:
Quoting g500 (Thread starter): She will use the U.K based charter company she also used in 2010 and 2011.
I'd suppose Mrs Fernandez Kirshner wouldn't dare to be caught flying a Falkland/Malvinas registred UK owned aircraft from that company.
That would really make such controversial piece of news.
Aren't any reliable South American business jet charter companies?
Why Brazilian Embraer didn't jump to the opportunity to fly Argentina's president around on one of its jets?
AR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7478 posts, RR: 41
Reply 10, posted (3 years 1 month 7 hours ago) and read 6963 times:
Quoting g500 (Thread starter): (Obviously a G-V and/or Global Express is out of the question, she will have lots of entourage with her)
From What I´ve read, she´s getting a Global Exrpress. Her entourage on said plane will consist of the very basic one a head of state uses in these types of trip. The usual rest, is going on an AR A340 charter. Everybody has their panties in a knot in Buenos Aires for doing business this way with a British company. Frankly, it´s incoherent, if not dwonright schizophrenic. She will be visiting Cuba too, and as of yesterday, Venezuela, for Chavez´s "virtual" swearing into office.
Quoting 71Zulu (Reply 5): Hopefully not too far OT, but does anyone know what plane this was?
AR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 7478 posts, RR: 41
Reply 12, posted (3 years 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5844 times:
Quoting g500 (Reply 11): She accuses England of this, that, and the other, then charters a British Global Express?? hum, what's wrong with this scenario?
Not only that. She´s getting grief by the way the contract was assigned. Apparently without any proper bidding. Still, while she and the Argentine biggest media group are in a state of war, she does not help herself by these decisions. You can´t send an official letter to the British Prime Minister complaining about the Malvinas not being returned, and in that same week hire a British company to provide you with transportation services.
PanHAM From Germany, joined May 2005, 10647 posts, RR: 32
Reply 13, posted (3 years 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4475 times:
Chapman Freeborn is an international charter broker for passenger and cargo aircraft. They have an office in Argentina and the way they are set up this might well be an Argentinian company owned by an Argentinian with a franchise to operate under that name.
The aircraft itself can be on any register, I doubt that Mrs. Presidente will trabvel on a G registered aircraft
gonzalo From Chile, joined Aug 2005, 2026 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (3 years 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2182 times:
This woman is a real embarrassment for her country. She talks about dignity and sovereignty, and must travel around the world like a fugitive. It will be nice if one of the hedge funds also could seize her collection of Louis Vouitton purses and jewels. I honestly can not understand how an educated people like the Argeninians can be ruled by this woman, a case of sociological study without any doubt.
Personally I think the owner of the jet she will fly, should make a detailed list of every single thing on board, and make a careful inspection after she is out of the plane to check everything is in its right place...
Derico From Argentina, joined Dec 1999, 4366 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (3 years 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1889 times:
Quoting gonzalo (Reply 14): honestly can not understand how an educated people like the Argeninians can be ruled by this woman, a case of sociological study without any doubt.
Given I know that you hold personal animus against Argentina, I hold your statements about my country with two "pinzas", but since you made a logical, educated, and respectul post I will answer you.
This may come as a shock, but the Kirchner government has actually convinced me that their "debt" strategy is the right one, even if it is inconvenient at times. This is why: The "capitalist" system needs checks and balances. If borrowers suffer no consequences from bad borrowing, then no one would lend, right? If lenders suffered no consquences for bad lending, they would just play with everyone's money, right? I think we can all agree on that.
Thus, I understand the purpose of "vulture" funds: in the general sense, they are a market mechanism to help insure that lenders or investors have som protection from cases like Argentina, Russia, etc. This is why in discussions with other people I explain to them why vulture funds exist.
However, in the last 6 years since the North American/European financial crisis, we've seen lenders protected at all costs, bailout after bailout, monetary easing after another. That only encourages further improper lending. Banks believe they are too big, and thus make massive risks with everyone's money knowing that if they precipitate a financial crisis, the desperation of the time will force politicians to bail them out, again.
That is just as unhealthy as borrowers being bailed out by the IMF (as were the Asian countries in 1997, including South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, Phillipines, etc; or Mexico in 1994, Brazil 1999, Russia 1998, Turkey 2002). That encouraged other countries to borrow without regards (Greece), and now we are seeing the results.
The difference with Argentina? It was not bailed out by the IMF or anyone, unlike all the other countries. Thus, it has to answer to no one when it comes to the debt issue, except the creditors. Which is why this has gone on for 12 years and there is little the rest of the world can do about it.
And in fact it is GOOD. You know why? Because it balances things out a bit. It makes lenders cautious again. Something the developed world could have used during the 2000s real estate and sovereign debt bubbles.
So Argentina is a "vulture borrower" of sorts. And if you think about it in that sense, it helps keep the market lenders honest, just like vulture lenders help keep borrowes honest. The ultimate solution would be to end bailouts for borrowers and lenders, and let the chips fall where they may in each specific case.
And also break up banks into smaller units that cannot, if one fails, systemically endanger the whole.
My internet was not shut down, the internet has shut me down