Blerg wrote:

GLANKG wrote:

The thread is about FR complaining about OS bailout.

Austria announced 15 billion bailout funds for troubled companies as the situation is unprecedented, OS is one of the largest employers in land and played a vital role in the wider economy. Naive to think they won't be part of it, they submitted an application about 767 million last Tuesday, but government demands LH concessions. We haven't heard about MOL since, maybe he will sue them or maybe he will back down, let's see.

Some compared different governments bailout programs, but let's not forget that Austria and Germany are both sovereign states, each has its own tax regime and labour system. When it comes to what to do with LH, Berlin probably weighs in more about Adidas' 3.3 billion bailout rather than considering a foreign company's treatment or an outcast who comes and goes when regional subsidy initiatives suit them. When Austria closed border to Germany, you'd get a sense that EU is not US, bailouts are not industry focused but nationality based, it's just the reality.

Easyjet just got £600m loan from UK after being shoved away by Swiss government don't they, maybe FR should be more open about talking to Dublin? So far they insisted they could weather through (like Wizz and BA) but what if demand doesn't come back for a few years as VS's analysis?

You can literally read the name of the thread, it's not about Austria as you claim, it's about subsidies provided by various (almost all) EU nations to their national carriers.

GLANKG wrote:

Blerg wrote:

GLANKG wrote:

The thread is about FR complaining about OS bailout.

Austria announced 15 billion bailout funds for troubled companies as the situation is unprecedented, OS is one of the largest employers in land and played a vital role in the wider economy. Naive to think they won't be part of it, they submitted an application about 767 million last Tuesday, but government demands LH concessions. We haven't heard about MOL since, maybe he will sue them or maybe he will back down, let's see.

Some compared different governments bailout programs, but let's not forget that Austria and Germany are both sovereign states, each has its own tax regime and labour system. When it comes to what to do with LH, Berlin probably weighs in more about Adidas' 3.3 billion bailout rather than considering a foreign company's treatment or an outcast who comes and goes when regional subsidy initiatives suit them. When Austria closed border to Germany, you'd get a sense that EU is not US, bailouts are not industry focused but nationality based, it's just the reality.

Easyjet just got £600m loan from UK after being shoved away by Swiss government don't they, maybe FR should be more open about talking to Dublin? So far they insisted they could weather through (like Wizz and BA) but what if demand doesn't come back for a few years as VS's analysis?

You can literally read the name of the thread, it's not about Austria as you claim, it's about subsidies provided by various (almost all) EU nations to their national carriers.

You are correct, my bad. The original Irish Times report didn’t even mention OS, they only talked about AF/KL/LH/AZ. I did wonder why MOL didn’t MOL the bailouts at FR’s top markets. The thread was misleading from the very beginning as it started by hinting Lauda/FR should be entitled to AUA/LH similar treatment (Or maybe wrong article was quoted here because it's really not relevant).

Good luck to MOL then, he will need it, no other airline has ever lost as many times as Ryanair in the history of ECJ.

leghorn wrote:

https://simpleflying.com/ryanair-sweden-legal-action/

Ryanair are making it clear that if Governments exclude them from support that they will have to justify themselves in Court.
They don't want the money but they don't want to be put at a disadvantage if other airlines are given it.

Blerg wrote:

Seems like this crisis in Lufthansa is affecting the coalition partners in Berlin. Apparently CDU is willing to give in to LH's demands but the Socialists are still not budging on gaining more control over Lufthansa. Let's see what becomes of this in the end and how much longer Lufthansa can last without aid, time is not their friend right now.

https://www.airliners.de/koalition-mitb ... ansa/55254

leghorn wrote:

https://simpleflying.com/ryanair-sweden-legal-action/

Ryanair are making it clear that if Governments exclude them from support that they will have to justify themselves in Court.
They don't want the money but they don't want to be put at a disadvantage if other airlines are given it.

leghorn wrote:

You are really tying yourself up in knots trying to make yourself believe that Ryanair and other LCCs are as parasitical as the Legacy operators who depend on direct cash infusions and tilting the market environment in their favour through their respective Governments

oldJoe wrote:

leghorn wrote:

https://simpleflying.com/ryanair-sweden-legal-action/

Ryanair are making it clear that if Governments exclude them from support that they will have to justify themselves in Court.
They don't want the money but they don't want to be put at a disadvantage if other airlines are given it.

If they don`t want the money how any government can exclude FR from support ?
FR put other airlines ( illegal ) in a disatvantage more than once in the past, tell me what MOL is claiming ?

leghorn wrote:

I'm not defending their actions. As I said before they will push every law and established practice to the limit except for safety.
Ryanair isn't receiving exceptional poor treatment. There are many smaller carriers operating on routes in the DACH region which will go out of business due to Lufthansa getting preferential support...They'd be competing with Lufthansa's smaller aircraft for the most part on routes which don't suit a Ryanair 737.

leghorn wrote:

First example I can think of straight off the top of my head is Aer Lingus flying FRA-DUB with no FRA employees but very much a competitor to LHR on FRA-DUB.

leghorn wrote:

First example I can think of straight off the top of my head is Aer Lingus flying FRA-DUB with no FRA employees but very much a competitor to LHR on FRA-DUB. Where is the love for Aer Lingus? Where is the free money for them. Do they not deserve a level playing surface or do they deserve nothing because they don't pay German labour taxes.
It is either a common open fair market or it isn't. Which is it.

Olddog wrote:

Fr has a long track record with justice in France. They can threaten all they want, being successful is an other story .

leghorn wrote:

I'm not defending their actions. As I said before they will push every law and established practice to the limit except for safety.
Ryanair isn't receiving exceptional poor treatment. There are many smaller carriers operating on routes in the DACH region which will go out of business due to Lufthansa getting preferential support...They'd be competing with Lufthansa's smaller aircraft for the most part on routes which don't suit a Ryanair 737.

leghorn wrote:

First example I can think of straight off the top of my head is Aer Lingus flying FRA-DUB with no FRA employees but very much a competitor to LHR on FRA-DUB. Where is the love for Aer Lingus? Where is the free money for them. Do they not deserve a level playing surface or do they deserve nothing because they don't pay German labour taxes.
It is either a common open fair market or it isn't. Which is it.

fraT wrote:

leghorn wrote:

First example I can think of straight off the top of my head is Aer Lingus flying FRA-DUB with no FRA employees but very much a competitor to LHR on FRA-DUB. Where is the love for Aer Lingus? Where is the free money for them. Do they not deserve a level playing surface or do they deserve nothing because they don't pay German labour taxes.
It is either a common open fair market or it isn't. Which is it.

Lufthansa = German = Support from German Gov.
Aer Lingus = Irish = Support from Irish Gov.

Why should Germany support an Irish company? As per you thinking, Germany should also support the U.S. tech companies who moved their European HQ to Ireland so they have to pay the smallest percentage of taxes in Europe.

RvA wrote:

leghorn wrote:

First example I can think of straight off the top of my head is Aer Lingus flying FRA-DUB with no FRA employees but very much a competitor to LHR on FRA-DUB.

What does this mean? Not sure I understand the LHR reference here.
Btw, what free money are we talking about has LH been given free money?

leghorn wrote:

RvA wrote:

leghorn wrote:

First example I can think of straight off the top of my head is Aer Lingus flying FRA-DUB with no FRA employees but very much a competitor to LHR on FRA-DUB.

What does this mean? Not sure I understand the LHR reference here.
Btw, what free money are we talking about has LH been given free money?

Should have been LH not LHR.

Terrier79 wrote:

Ryanair is filing a lawsuit against the state aids for Air France.

"The Irish airline said Monday it filed a lawsuit at the European Union’s General Court seeking to topple the EU’s approval for a program delaying aviation tax payments for companies with a French license. The tax break will mostly benefit Air France and excludes Ryanair and easyJet Plc, which fly many routes from French airports but are based elsewhere."

https://www.bloombergquint.com/business ... s-bailouts

mig17 wrote:

It is amusing to say the least when Ryanair which benefits all years long from the advantageous tax policy of Ireland find it illegal for another country to modify it's tax policy.

"The tax break will mostly benefit Air France and excludes Ryanair and easyJet Plc, which fly many routes from French airports but are based elsewhere." => that can also be read : Ryanair and easy Jet Olc, which fly many routes from French airports but are based elswhere do not pay taxes in France … Or maybe Ryanair want to become a French entity???

I have said it in another thread, Schengen or the Eurozone have an harmonisation problem. But Ryanair pointing out the system they keep getting around in their business is comical ...

mig17 wrote:

"The tax break will mostly benefit Air France and excludes Ryanair and easyJet Plc, which fly many routes from French airports but are based elsewhere." => that can also be read : Ryanair and easy Jet Olc, which fly many routes from French airports but are based elswhere do not pay taxes in France … Or maybe Ryanair want to become a French entity???..

LJ wrote:

This is exactly what you see in France. They tie state support to whether the business in in France. They do it in the automotive market, they do it now in aviation as well. Moreover, you see this logic in more countries. Why support companies who either don't (or barely) pay taxes in the respective country. To be honest, one can make a good case for it. Companies paid taxes and are now getting something back in return.

leghorn wrote:

LJ wrote:

This is exactly what you see in France. They tie state support to whether the business in in France. They do it in the automotive market, they do it now in aviation as well. Moreover, you see this logic in more countries. Why support companies who either don't (or barely) pay taxes in the respective country. To be honest, one can make a good case for it. Companies paid taxes and are now getting something back in return.

You are making a case for protectionism. Wiser heads than yours have decided that that is counter-productive.

leghorn wrote:

LJ wrote:

This is exactly what you see in France. They tie state support to whether the business in in France. They do it in the automotive market, they do it now in aviation as well. Moreover, you see this logic in more countries. Why support companies who either don't (or barely) pay taxes in the respective country. To be honest, one can make a good case for it. Companies paid taxes and are now getting something back in return.

You are making a case for protectionism. Wiser heads than yours have decided that that is counter-productive.

mig17 wrote:

Terrier79 wrote:

Ryanair is filing a lawsuit against the state aids for Air France.

"The Irish airline said Monday it filed a lawsuit at the European Union’s General Court seeking to topple the EU’s approval for a program delaying aviation tax payments for companies with a French license. The tax break will mostly benefit Air France and excludes Ryanair and easyJet Plc, which fly many routes from French airports but are based elsewhere."

https://www.bloombergquint.com/business ... s-bailouts

It is amusing to say the least when Ryanair which benefits all years long from the advantageous tax policy of Ireland find it illegal for another country to modify it's tax policy.

"The tax break will mostly benefit Air France and excludes Ryanair and easyJet Plc, which fly many routes from French airports but are based elsewhere." => that can also be read : Ryanair and easy Jet Olc, which fly many routes from French airports but are based elswhere do not pay taxes in France … Or maybe Ryanair want to become a French entity???

I have said it in another thread, Schengen or the Eurozone have an harmonisation problem. But Ryanair pointing out the system they keep getting around in their business is comical ...

GLANKG wrote:

Interesting statements from MOL.

'Ryanair confirmed that it favoured EU government supports for airlines that are transparent and available to all carriers, and thus are not state aid. This includes payroll support schemes and UK government loans.' (FR must be one of the biggest beneficiaries of UK furlough given their huge UK bases, and yes they have to be based in UK to qualify the scheme, clearly they haven't got a problem with it, even though airlines like KLM/LH who do loads UK flying from abroad base don't qualify)

Laudamotion "would not apply for or receive “any of the €800 million Austrian state aid subsidy” being granted to Austrian Airlines. This is illegal state aid which Ryanair and Laudamotion will oppose,” a statement said. (funny the patronising tone they adopted as if they were not THE airline who was ruled against for receiving illegal state aid by ECJ)

- It sounds like they would support any 'legal' subsidy when they are on the receiving end (UK), and oppose all 'illegal' state aid when they don't get anything (Sweden), regardless if they are willing to take it or not given the conditions (Ö). Some normal people eh. Do they get lawyer discount when they sue so many governments at the same time?

Der Staat als Retter erhält derzeit eine zentrale Rolle. Sie selbst stecken mit der Lufthansa in Gesprächen über eine Rettung der Austrian Airlines. Laufen wir in eine Staatswirtschaft?
Ich glaube, das wäre der absolut falsche Weg. Wir haben es mit einer Gesundheitskrise zu tun. In deren Verlauf wird einiges sichtbar, zum Beispiel, dass Regionalität etwas sehr Positives ist. Ebenso ein Grad an Autarkie bei landwirtschaftlichen Produkten und der Versorgung von anderen Grundbedürfnissen. Wir sehen, dass es gut ist, wenn Industrien in der Lage sind, schnell zu adaptieren und etwa Schutzmasken oder Beatmungsgeräte herzustellen. Daraus können wir Lehren ziehen. Auf einmal aber zu glauben, dass der Staat besser in der Lage ist, ein Unternehmen wie eine Fluglinie zu führen als die Manager dort, würde ich für einen gefährlichen Ansatz erachten.

Staatsbeteiligungen im Zuge der Krise sollten also zeitlich stark begrenzt sein?
Genau. Es ist wichtig zu unterscheiden zwischen notwendigen Finanzspritzen und Unterstützungsmaßnahmen in der Zeit der Krise einerseits sowie der Frage, ob der Staat ein guter Unternehmer ist.

Wann, glauben Sie, finden Sie bei der Austrian Airlines zu einer Einigung?
Wir sind in guten Gesprächen mit der Lufthansa. Es lässt sich noch nicht sagen, ob es hier noch zu einer Einigung kommt. Aber beide Seiten bemühen sich.

Blerg wrote:

GLANKG wrote:

Interesting statements from MOL.

'Ryanair confirmed that it favoured EU government supports for airlines that are transparent and available to all carriers, and thus are not state aid. This includes payroll support schemes and UK government loans.' (FR must be one of the biggest beneficiaries of UK furlough given their huge UK bases, and yes they have to be based in UK to qualify the scheme, clearly they haven't got a problem with it, even though airlines like KLM/LH who do loads UK flying from abroad base don't qualify)

Laudamotion "would not apply for or receive “any of the €800 million Austrian state aid subsidy” being granted to Austrian Airlines. This is illegal state aid which Ryanair and Laudamotion will oppose,” a statement said. (funny the patronising tone they adopted as if they were not THE airline who was ruled against for receiving illegal state aid by ECJ)

- It sounds like they would support any 'legal' subsidy when they are on the receiving end (UK), and oppose all 'illegal' state aid when they don't get anything (Sweden), regardless if they are willing to take it or not given the conditions (Ö). Some normal people eh. Do they get lawyer discount when they sue so many governments at the same time?

No lawyer discounts but they get incredible amount of PR which boosts their brand image and helps them sell even more tickets.Each time some newspaper reports on them they include their statement which always contains the same message that they are a cheap and affordable carrier in a sea of overpriced, unsustainable carriers.

mig17 wrote:

Blerg wrote:

GLANKG wrote:

Interesting statements from MOL.

'Ryanair confirmed that it favoured EU government supports for airlines that are transparent and available to all carriers, and thus are not state aid. This includes payroll support schemes and UK government loans.' (FR must be one of the biggest beneficiaries of UK furlough given their huge UK bases, and yes they have to be based in UK to qualify the scheme, clearly they haven't got a problem with it, even though airlines like KLM/LH who do loads UK flying from abroad base don't qualify)

Laudamotion "would not apply for or receive “any of the €800 million Austrian state aid subsidy” being granted to Austrian Airlines. This is illegal state aid which Ryanair and Laudamotion will oppose,” a statement said. (funny the patronising tone they adopted as if they were not THE airline who was ruled against for receiving illegal state aid by ECJ)

- It sounds like they would support any 'legal' subsidy when they are on the receiving end (UK), and oppose all 'illegal' state aid when they don't get anything (Sweden), regardless if they are willing to take it or not given the conditions (Ö). Some normal people eh. Do they get lawyer discount when they sue so many governments at the same time?

No lawyer discounts but they get incredible amount of PR which boosts their brand image and helps them sell even more tickets.Each time some newspaper reports on them they include their statement which always contains the same message that they are a cheap and affordable carrier in a sea of overpriced, unsustainable carriers.

Oh, they get PR yes, but good PR? More and more often, when you hear about Ryanair, it is because they are not playing by the rules, not treating customers or staff well, playing dumping, threatening to abandonne some routes if they dont get what they want, … Ryanair is the LCC I will never fly, ever!

kayik wrote:

Ryanair decided to dance with every bear around
https://www.france24.com/en/20200602-fr ... -ultimatum