Shannon Aer Lingus Row

Villain

Well it looks like the Government are going to dig their heels in here, Dempsey has apparently said people in the Shannon region *"might be exaggerating the impact of the decision by Aer Lingus" which they may well be but I don't think a Minsiter saying that publicly is going to help matters at the minute.

Back Benchers seem to coming out pretty strong and any cabinet would be very foolish to ignore them, the Government kept a 25% share after they sold off Aer Lingus however they seem to be a silent share owner in this case.

*"Mr Dempsey also said that while the company's move was not in line with the Government's regional policy it was made by Aer Lingus on a commercial basis" My ass it is, its more political than anything else imo the North are looking to grow now that powersharing has been setup and I'm sure this decision has been helped in the backround by the Government to show Europe that Belfast is place to do business now, only problem is its at the expense of the West of Ireland.

*Quotes from RTE.ie

lostexpectation

irish1 wrote:

Well it looks like the Government are going to dig their heels in here, Dempsey has apparently said people in the Shannon region *"might be exaggerating the impact of the decision by Aer Lingus" which they may well be but I don't think a Minsiter saying that publicly is going to help matters at the minute.

does this help, willie odea calling mannion a latter day cromwell, might that be the exgeration he's talking about?

mike65

The government should remain 'disinterested', a decision was made to privatise the company so the management must be allowed to manage.

Mike.

Villain

Was it really a company decision though or was it governmend led?

is_that_so

If it was September and there were other serious things to discuss then this would be a no more than a storm in a teacup. I find myself agreeing with Dempsey. Aer Lingus are fully entitled to make commercial decisions. I also find it bizarre that usually staid CEOs would come out with apocalyptic warnings about their businesses. They can't be up to very much if their business is based on some landing slots to one airport by just one of the airlines that services the airport. Pure hyperbole IMO.

As for O'Dea, well enough said, really not fit to be a minister in my book. All about having a minister or two in the southwest.

Villain

is_that_so wrote:

I also find it bizarre that usually staid CEOs would come out with apocalyptic warnings about their businesses. They can't be up to very much if their business is based on some landing slots to one airport by just one of the airlines that services the airport. Pure hyperbole IMO.

They may be overstating it but those landing slots are not just a connection to London the Majority of International travel from Ireland and the UK to the rest of the world goes through Heathrow the use of those slots was a major issue when the Government decided to privatise the company and I find it very hard to accept that the deicision to move those slots to Belfast is purely a commercial decision.

is_that_so

irish1 wrote:

They may be overstating it but those landing slots are not just a connection to London the Majority of International travel from Ireland and the UK to the rest of the world goes through Heathrow the use of those slots was a major issue when the Government decided to privatise the company and I find it very hard to accept that the deicision to move those slots to Belfast is purely a commercial decision.

London has three other airports excluding Heathrow with onward connections.
The Aer Lingus decision also gives them a hub in "the UK" at an airport that still has smallish passenger numbers, notwithstanding the tourist potential. Plus the fact that it is within 2 hours of the north and east of the country.
They obviously see a lot of potential and profit there.

Much of the criticism has come out of the midwest region itself and they have been spectacularly vociferous on the stopover as any of us who've gone across the pond adn been forced to stop, can attest to.

lostexpectation

irish1 wrote:

They may be overstating it but those landing slots are not just a connection to London the Majority of International travel from Ireland and the UK to the rest of the world goes through Heathrow the use of those slots was a major issue when the Government decided to privatise the company and I find it very hard to accept that the deicision to move those slots to Belfast is purely a commercial decision.

when did the gov get the slots and when did they lose control of them?

was it four slots, what does that mean in practical terms, can aer lingus now use those slots not for belfast but for other routes entirely? I guess its already the case that the slots aren't being used for belfast but for aer lingus internatioal with belfast just being the garage for the planes?

J.S. Pill

is_that_so wrote:

If it was September and there were other serious things to discuss then this would be a no more than a storm in a teacup. I find myself agreeing with Dempsey. Aer Lingus are fully entitled to make commercial decisions. .

I've seen absolutely sh!t all detail on the commercial background to the decision. The papers refer to a 'commercial decision' but don't elaborate any further. Would anyone care to enlighten us?

is_that_so wrote:

I also find it bizarre that usually staid CEOs would come out with apocalyptic warnings about their businesses. They can't be up to very much if their business is based on some landing slots to one airport by just one of the airlines that services the airport. Pure hyperbole IMO

I'm not surprised at all. Just think back to the apocalyptic warnings from the hospitality indistry that abounded after the smoking ban was announced.

mike65

The Shannon managment came out yesterday and said they could proberly find 4 million euro in savings for Aer Lingus per annum, maybe that'll temp them back, depends what the savings are in Belfast I guess.

Mike.

Villain

If this was about money I'm sure Aer Lingus would have released a statment showing the figures imo its about giving the North some help and tbh thats a great thing but it shouldn't be at the expense of the West.

Akrasia

mike65 wrote:

The government should remain 'disinterested', a decision was made to privatise the company so the management must be allowed to manage.

Mike.

A decision was made to privatise, but a decision was also made to keep a 25% stake in order to retain influence.

Are you now saying that the Government should stand back and allow an essential transport link be removed from the west of Ireland

(Imagine if the owners of the west link toll bridge, a private company, decided they'd make more money by closing off the motorway and opening up a starbucks franchise)

Akrasia

irish1 wrote:

If this was about money I'm sure Aer Lingus would have released a statment showing the figures imo its about giving the North some help and tbh thats a great thing but it shouldn't be at the expense of the West.

No its not. Aer Lingus couldn't give a sh1t about northern politics. This is part of a long term strategy to set up a hub in belfast airport. Politics doesn't come into this, its all about money. They're a private company. and the government isn't even the biggest shareholder. Why would they do this just to prop up N.Ireland? Any CEO who tried to do something like that against the financial interests of the corporations and against the wishes of the shareholders, he would be acting ultra vires and liable for criminal damages

WeeDiddly

Akrasia wrote:

Are you now saying that the Government should stand back and allow an essential transport link be removed from the west of Ireland

(Imagine if the owners of the west link toll bridge, a private company, decided they'd make more money by closing off the motorway and opening up a starbucks franchise)

If it was Dublin airport, you'd find the likes of Dempsey, Fianna Fail & Co. would be quicker to step in and uphold there 1/4 share.

Zebra3

Akrasia wrote:

No its not. Aer Lingus couldn't give a sh1t about northern politics. This is part of a long term strategy to set up a hub in belfast airport. Politics doesn't come into this, its all about money. They're a private company. and the government isn't even the biggest shareholder. Why would they do this just to prop up N.Ireland? Any CEO who tried to do something like that against the financial interests of the corporations and against the wishes of the shareholders, he would be acting ultra vires and liable for criminal damages

Nail on head.

The state owns 25% of the shares in AL, not 51%.

If you voted FF and are pissed off at the decision by AL, tough.

You reap what you sow.

mike65

Akrasia wrote:

A decision was made to privatise, but a decision was also made to keep a 25% stake in order to retain influence.

Are you now saying that the Government should stand back and allow an essential transport link be removed from the west of Ireland

If the government was seriously pushed about influence they would'nt have sold 75% of it off or indeed any of it off. Also markets as a rule abhore a vacumn, lets see if another airline pops up with fresh services into London. Maybe not Heathrow but many would say 'who needs Heathrow?' these days.

Anyone else find it buscuit taking that Ryanair (the uber-capitalists of modern Ireland) should suggest they and the government link up to stop Aer Lingus managment? Michael O'Leary would rightly go balastic if the boot were on the other foot.

Mike.

mickger

Zebra3 wrote:

Nail on head.

The state owns 25% of the shares in AL, not 51%.

If you voted FF and are pissed off at the decision by AL, tough.

You reap what you sow.

Agree 100%

WeeDiddly

Zebra3 wrote:

Nail on head.

The state owns 25% of the shares in AL, not 51%.

If you voted FF and are pissed off at the decision by AL, tough.

You reap what you sow.

Exactly.

Sinn Féin had a good point when they spoke out against privatisation of powerful companies like this. Maybe, I didn't agree with them saying they were going to re-nationalise it, but what did FF expect after selling Eircom, etc. I would have thought it being a lesson learnt after what happened to Telecom Éireann.

And whats worse than that is that since 1939, the Irish Government and the tax payers is what kept Aer Lingus in the air, now it's privatised, and they move everyhting straight out of the country. the thing I'm gonna do now, is not book any flights with the company and if everyone does the same, it'll plunge them worse than ever before!

Zebra3

Yeah, they've moved eveything out of the country. :rolleyes:

If AL are more profitable running those routes from Belfast rather than Shannon, the taxpayer will gain from higher profits through its 25% holding in AL. :cool:

Richard

Zebra3 wrote:

Yeah, they've moved eveything out of the country. :rolleyes:

If AL are more profitable running those routes from Belfast rather than Shannon, the taxpayer will gain from higher profits through its 25% holding in AL. :cool:

But won't the Irish taxpayer lose revenue, given that the Belfast to Heathrow flights take off and land in the UK, meaning applicable tax revenue goes to Westminster.

Zebra3

Well, at the end of the day it's making the skies around Shannon less polluted. Enviroment is very "in" these days.

Mucco

I've two comments on this.

Firstly, I read that Ryanair are against the move, as they own 25% of the shares, and the state also own 25% of the shares, it could be easily blocked.

Secondly, Heathrow is by far the worst airport in London. Kitty Ussher, the City minister said that many business people will do anything to avoid going through the airport. In my opinion, City airport is best, then Gatwick. All the airports have good transport links. So what's this obsession with Heathrow?

Villain

Because it has more international connections than any other airport, one news item during the week said that 70% of all international flights to destinations outside europe from Ireland and the UK go through Heathrow, I'm not sure if that stat is true but I do know anytime I have flown to outside Europe it was through Heathrow.

Liam Byrne

Zebra3 wrote:

Yeah, they've moved eveything out of the country. :rolleyes:

If AL are more profitable running those routes from Belfast rather than Shannon, the taxpayer will gain from higher profits through its 25% holding in AL. :cool:

That's assuming that the only gains that are relevant to the taxpayer are profits.....

There are a hell of a lot of taxpayers in the west of the country and those taxpayers no longer have a service that either they (when going abroad) or their potential customers (coming to Ireland) can use.

We own 25% of the airline, and the Government (supposedly representing us) is sitting on their collective arses while the Heathrow slots go outside the State juristiction.

Some idiot (and it was the presenter, not a guest) on Today FM fired off a couple of glib comments that they should put "a big road" from Limerick to Cork to use "the brand new terminal there". What an ininformed and biased idiot !

1) There is a road, but unfortunately all motorways in this country lead to Dublin so it takes nearly 2 hours to get the 70 miles to Cork Airport

2) Due to lack of any proper "outside-the-Pale" Government planning and foresight, there isn't even a rail link from Limerick to Shannon, or even a proper 70-mile rail link from Limerick to Cork

3) Even with "a big road" or motorway, I couldn't see de Dubs being happy if they were being told that they'd have to travel to Mountrath (a similar distance to Limerick-Cork) in order to get to London.....in fact, at 104 miles but with the superb motorway, it'd probably be more feasible for the Dubs to get to Belfast......so let's check out that solution:

Dublin got Shannon's stopover - check
Shannon gets Dublin's Aer Fungus Heathrow slots - check (counterbalance the above)
Dubs can still get to Heathrow, based on the Today FM presenter's opinion - check
Mid-West folk can still get to Heathrow - check

The perfect solution! :rolleyes:

4) It's not just Limerick and the Mid-West; a "big road" from Limerick to Cork would do nothing for Galway's tourism and business interests which are currently served by that route

Aer Lingus could have removed a slot from each of the 3 airports and thereby given Belfast 3 slots without causing half as much uproar....unless, of course, the Dubs would be more voiciferous if the issue was affecting their own backyard ?

I think that if the Government had any bottle they'd either (a) force the EGM with Michael O'Leary, thereby actually representing us for a change or (b) sell their 25% stake immediately, crippling Aer Lingus' share price as a punishment, and then invest the money in an airline that is prepared to factor in the well-being of its shareholders into the equation, while also paying for a brand new landing slot at Heathrow that was owned by the State and would be leased at favourable rates to the same airline.

Aer Arann might be worth looking at.

First Telecom Eireann (sell the infrastructure and then regret it) and now Aer Fungus (sell the landing slots and watch them disappear out of the country).....will those idiots if Fianna Failure ever learn ?

is_that_so

WeeDiddly wrote:

Exactly.

And whats worse than that is that since 1939, the Irish Government and the tax payers is what kept Aer Lingus in the air, now it's privatised, and they move everyhting straight out of the country. the thing I'm gonna do now, is not book any flights with the company and if everyone does the same, it'll plunge them worse than ever before!

I think that what you'll find it is expensive flights that kept Aer Lingus in the air. That's one positive that can be drawn from the emergence of Ryanair.
It is also obvious from the stories emerging this morning, excluding the bishops :rolleyes: , that Shannon are actively looking at ways to mitigate the loss of the slots, by searching for alternative airlines.

IMO the whole story has become nothing more than an excuse for local representatives to "appear to be doing something". That and the fact that there is no other news at all.

The days of Shannon being special are over and that has been well-telegraphed for some years. So spluttering outrage on the national airwaves does not conceal the fact that it needs to stand on its own two feet.

is_that_so

Liam Byrne wrote:

I think that if the Government had any bottle they'd either (a) force the EGM with Michael O'Leary, thereby actually representing us for a change or (b) sell their 25% stake immediately, crippling Aer Lingus' share price as a punishment, and then invest the money in an airline that is prepared to factor in the well-being of its shareholders into the equation, while also paying for a brand new landing slot at Heathrow that was owned by the State and would be leased at favourable rates to the same airline.

On what basis? Just because there is much disgruntlement in the midwest.
If as the company has said it was for commercial reasons that is hardly much of a reason to call an EGM. There would certainly be a case to answer for if they pulled slots from Dublin, with its much much larger passenger numbers. But I suspect if they were considering it the DAA would have seen it coming and moved to do something about it.

Belfast makes sense as it has a much larger catchment area. The city alone has 250,000 people in it. Even people as far away as Donegal could consider flying out of Belfast. It also encompasses many of the border counties as well.

As I have already posted it's not as if this hasn't been coming. IMO ,the gnashing of teeth just sums up (not having at a go at the Midwest here ) our usual lack of planning and foresight. Shannon can benefit from this, not by blaming everything since Cromwell for Aer Lingus' departure but by looking on it as an opportunity to develop and grow itself. What's to stop it becoming a hub in its own right?

mike65

Greater Belfast has a population of nearly 600,000 so its plenty big enough as a market in itself.

Mike.

Akrasia

mike65 wrote:

Greater Belfast has a population of nearly 600,000 so its plenty big enough as a market in itself.

Mike.

And Shannon has a catchment of 500,000 (within an hour drive)

Except in belfast, there are 9 other heathrow slots already competing with Aer lingus, while Shannon has none.

Moving the heathrow slots to Belfast is a bad business decision unless they are planning to base their operations there and move more routes to achieve economies of scale. I fully expect Aer Lingus to fully pull out of shannon and move all their U.S. routes to belfast in the coming years.

The CEO has just been on RTE news saying essentially that Aer Lingus doesn't have any responsibility for or loyalty to the Mid West region

Liam Byrne

is_that_so wrote:

On what basis? Just because there is much disgruntlement in the midwest.
If as the company has said it was for commercial reasons that is hardly much of a reason to call an EGM.

The Government is a shareholder and this move is not (on face value) in their interests. If the company is no longer acting in their [our] interests (not surprising, since the Government doesn't even seem to want to ask them to) then they should invest our money somewhere else.

There would certainly be a case to answer for if they pulled slots from Dublin, with its much much larger passenger numbers.

If they pulled ALL slots, yes, but they could easily pull one or two if the rationale is to form a base in Belfast....after all, it's only 90 mins or so up the motorway....similar to Limerick - Cork.

Here's hoping some good comes of this......like the West giving the two-fingers to Aer Fungus and replacing them with someone better. I'd also like to see Aer Fungus go down the tubes in Belfast because they can't fight off the existing competition that they themselves have decided to go head-to-head with.

Regarding Shannon becoming a hub in its own right, or attracting other carriers, that would involve the Government rowing in with proper roads, rail and other infrastructure; if they do that in an effort to help out in this crisis, then better late than never;

The alternative is that there's a revolt at Government inaction and we finally get rid of this inept "we can't do anything about it" coalition like we should have back in May.

Villain

Anybody seen a Green Party member speak on this??? Becomming lapdogs like the PD's were are they?

miju

Akrasia wrote:

And Shannon has a catchment of 500,000 (within an hour drive)

extend Belfasts catchment area by the one hour drive and you've nearly doubled it again thus negating your point.

have to agree with above posters this is all a storm in a teacup because theres nothing better to report on during silly season. the west should just take it on the chin and instead of pissing and moaning and wringing their hands they should be proactive is sorting another airline etc.

all this talk of legal action on AL and lobbying etc is just more and more time wasted when they could be using their efforts to just replace AL with another airline

times change deal with it :rolleyes:

miju

Liam Byrne wrote:

If they pulled ALL slots, yes, but they could easily pull one or two if the rationale is to form a base in Belfast....after all, it's only 90 mins or so up the motorway....similar to Limerick - Cork.

yes they could pull one or two slots from Dublin but lets be realistic here Dublin is the capital of the country and cant remember the exact figure but somewere of 70% of money generated in the economy comes from Dublin and we have the biggest population.......try think clearly for a minute will ye

Liam Byrne wrote:

if they do that in an effort to help out in this crisis, then better late than never;

again lets get real here this isn't a crisis it's a few slots to heathrow, people can fly to gatwick etc and / or bring in a different airline with heathrow slots. of course people in the west will have to stop their hand wringing first and be proactive in solving the problem (not a crisis) and theres no signs of anyone in the west taking this initiative anytime soon

Liam Byrne

miju wrote:

Dublin is the capital of the country and cant remember the exact figure but somewere of 70% of money generated in the economy comes from Dublin and we have the biggest population

Agreed, at least in general terms, but the question is WHY ? Because Dublin has all of the required infrastructure and easy access to abroad, therefore many people are forced to move there in order to get jobs, thereby imbalancing the whole country.

This Government claims to support regional development, and has so far only attempted to do so in one half-assed, ill-thought-out way - decentralisation.

If they acted on an actual issue, rather than creating one which creates problems of its own, then it might be more productive.

The alternative is that the remainder of the population is left to languish without any international jobs, and potentially (worst-case scenario) forced to join everyone currently in Dublin because there's nothing worthwhile anywhere else.

I'm not whinging here.....fact is that the Western Road Network and the Limerick-Shannon-Ennis-Galway-Sligo rail corridor have been proposed, agreed and then delayed on numerous occasions because of funding issues; meanwhile the Government spends our money to buy out NTR and build Luas, metro, rail links to the overcrowded Dublin airport and even money for a new terminal......yes, investment in the capital is required, but the imbalance is ludicrous and only makes matters worse, since if the remainder of the country is neglected more people will have to move or commute, meaning the underlying problems do not get addressed or solved.

Yes, the ultimate cock-up is by the Government; if there was a proper infrastructure in this country then Shannon-Heathrow would not be a crisis; for feck's sake, many of RyanAir's continental city airports are farther from their cities than Limerick - Cork; if the infrastructure was there, then this would be a problem, not a crisis.

But the fact is that due to Government ineptitude, directly landing in Shannon is the only option for people flying in and out of the west.......while I would have no problem with a fully-private company making a decision like this - however ill-thought-out, it's their cock-up if they want to ditch a profit-making route for a potentially bigger one with way more competition - but the annoyance is at the Government, as a major shareholder [supposedly on our behalf] saying there's "nothing" they can do.

Also, bear in mind that a national much-sought-after resource, has gone outside the country, and if that goes unchallenged the Cork and Dublin ones could be next as soon as Aer Lingus decides that profit comes before people* no matter what the cost**.

* Understandable
** Understandable IF there was a loss, but not understandable considering there were already substantial profits from Shannon and the fact that that Belfast is such a gamble with the existing competition on the routes; also completely and stunningly arrogant considering that the Government, with its supposed regional policy, is a major shareholder

The Government buys out the Western Toll Bridge, at our expense, in order to improve infrastructure in Dublin; the Government stands idly by while an airline, in which it has shares and an existing say, disimproves infrastructure in the west.

There was talk before the election that a Mayo Taoiseach was urgently required......events over the past week have proved this.

Yes, Shannon can try and get a new Heathrow link, but that will take time and money.....as asked above, imagine if National Toll Roads decided that they'd demolish the West Link bridge and take a chance on a potentially more lucrative but completely unproven bridge somewhere else ?

While it would be in the interests of all affected to get off their own arses, give the two fingers to NTR and get someone else to build a new bridge, what would the effect be on Dublin in the interim ?

And I can hazard a guess that Shane Ross and the Government would ENSURE that State assistance would be available and would not be rambling that there was "nothing they could do to help". Or are you seriously suggesting that they would tell business and residents in the area to go find an alternative provider all by themselves ?

Akrasia

miju wrote:

times change deal with it :rolleyes:

Times don't just change by themselves, they are changed, and the privatisation of National assets is a deliberate strategy which has failed miserably every single time it has been tried. And it's still the dominant ideology in Government.

I'll say it again. What would the people of Dublin think if the private owners of the east link toll bridge unilaterally decided to close the bridge because they could make more money using it for something else?

It's the same thing. A transport link that the west Needs has been unilaterally shut down and it is going to cost many people their jobs.

Akrasia

Akrasia wrote:

A decision was made to privatise, but a decision was also made to keep a 25% stake in order to retain influence.

I reckon the 25% was kept to make the unions think there was a strategic interest being kept-in reality it meant nothing and could have meant nothing.

Are you now saying that the Government should stand back and allow an essential transport link be removed from the west of Ireland

It's not that essential.
Freight has reasonable alternatives.
The only other disadvantage it has is,it means "fat cat executives" have to use ryanair to Gatwick and spend an hour on a train to heathrow.
God love them...the poor things.

(Imagine if the owners of the west link toll bridge, a private company, decided they'd make more money by closing off the motorway and opening up a starbucks franchise)

Uhm they couldn't possibly make more money on that but I take your point.
4 heathrow slots would cost about £350 stg for the government to buy (according to Moore McDowell on the last word last week).
He suggested that the local councils/agencies etc do a collection if it's allowed.
They might not be available to buy though and E.U rules would probably be broken if they were bought directly off EI.
That said EI rent some to U.S airlines at heatrow afaik so ,there could be some thought put into a bidding war for the rent of them.

J.S. Pill

Liam Byrne wrote:

Also, bear in mind that a national much-sought-after resource, has gone outside the country, and if that goes unchallenged the Cork and Dublin ones could be next as soon as Aer Lingus decides that profit comes before people* no matter what the cost**.

* Understandable
** Understandable IF there was a loss, but not understandable considering there were already substantial profits from Shannon and the fact that that Belfast is such a gamble with the existing competition on the routes; also completely and stunningly arrogant considering that the Government, with its supposed regional policy, is a major shareholder

Am I right in saying that Aer Lingus doesn't really have the option of operating from both Shannon and Belfast because it has a limited amount of slots at Heathrow - it has to be one or the other but not both irrespective of that fact that they both would be profitable?

I read in the business post this morning that Aer Lingus leases 2 of its Heathrow slots to Continental airlines and BMI. Would the Aer Lingus not be able to cancel there leases at all?

Villain

Tristrame wrote:

It's not that essential.
Freight has reasonable alternatives.
The only other disadvantage it has is,it means "fat cat executives" have to use ryanair to Gatwick and spend an hour on a train to heathrow.
God love them...the poor things.

The problem Tristrame is those "fat cat executives" bring jobs and money to the West of Ireland and there isn't exactly a queue of them of them in America or Europe looking to invest so instead of forcing them to fly to Gatwick and go to Heathrow we should be helping them in any way we can, the last thing the Irish Economy needs right now is for the Government to get complacent.

I have no great love for FF as you know but they have managed to build a strong economy and while the East and Midlands have been booming the West hasn't seen the same level of growth. If this really is a commercial decision I'd love to see the figures including the offer from Shannon Airport to cut €4 million a year in charges to Aer Lingus.

I have no doubt that the people of the West are over stating the impact as are the media when the Dail and Courts are closed there isn't much news to report but the Government need to help the people of the West of Ireland they sold the national airline and there is no point in having 25% of shares if they aren't willing to use them to try and force Aer Lingus to keep some Heathrow routes in Shannon.

Zebra3

Akrasia wrote:

Times don't just change by themselves, they are changed, and the privatisation of National assets is a deliberate strategy which has failed miserably every single time it has been tried. And it's still the dominant ideology in Government.

Yep, and Willie O'Dea a minister in that government got 19,082 votes = 38.65% in the recent elections so the locals around Shannon seemed to have been happy enough with this policy of privatisation.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

The problem Tristrame is those "fat cat executives" bring jobs and money to the West of Ireland and there isn't exactly a queue of them of them in America or Europe looking to invest so instead of forcing them to fly to Gatwick and go to Heathrow we should be helping them in any way we can, the last thing the Irish Economy needs right now is for the Government to get complacent.

Apparently they aren't.
They've been chatting to citijet regarding CDG.

Villain

They have 0% share in Cityjet and 25% share in Aer Lingus, I think they would be better off taking Michael O'Leary's offer and using his 25% along with the employee's 15% to get Aer Lingus to keep some slots in Shannon.

Also the Cityjet talks are apparently about using Paris as a hub for international flights so not exactly the same either. But at least they are telling RTE they are doing something to keep the media hounds at bay.

markpb

Tristrame wrote:

I reckon the 25% was kept to make the unions think there was a strategic interest being kept-in reality it meant nothing and could have meant nothing.

Martin Cullen said at the time he was withholding 25% of the shares because the Heathrow slots were a strategic national asset and he didn't want to see another airline buy up Aer Lingus just for it's slots. I don't care either way about this issue but the hypocrisy of the government going back on it's word annoys me.

4 heathrow slots would cost about £350 stg for the government to buy (according to Moore McDowell on the last word last week).
He suggested that the local councils/agencies etc do a collection if it's allowed. They might not be available to buy though and E.U rules would probably be broken if they were bought directly off EI.

As far as I know, they're not available from LHR, they can only be bought from another airline and they usually go for astronomical prices. Buying more simply isn't an option.

I don't except that there is anything wrong with CDG being a replacement hub.

Thing is ,an executive can fly business class all the way to practically anywhere on cityjet via paris.
It's the exact same flight time roughly as heathrow with a huge quantity of business class connections,to North south and central America,Aisa and the rest of the world, (Gatwick is poor in that regard).

If it's London only that the executive wants then Gatwick is grand.
I understand it's the loss of LHR as an onward hub that these people were concerned about.They have no excuse as regards a lack of access to London on it's own and freight can easily be routed through CDG.

I didn't know O'Leary actually offered to row in with the government,when did he offer that?
I'd only heard that it was theoretically possible but hadn't heard of any offer.
That would surprise me as I thought O'Leary would have been delighted with the EI decision to move the heathrow slots.

As for media hounds being at bay-I'd imagine that any government would be "doing something" about this situation.They'd lose a lot of Willy O'Dea's votes if they weren't.
But I'd imagine also that they could not say anything publically untill they had some positive indication that the likes of Cityjet or whoever else were interested.

markpb

markpb wrote:

Martin Cullen said at the time he was withholding 25% of the shares because the Heathrow slots were a strategic national asset and he didn't want to see another airline buy up Aer Lingus just for it's slots. I don't care either way about this issue but the hypocrisy of the government going back on it's word annoys me.

Correct they have been found out in that regard.
Mind you,it must have been obvious to any business analyst that those slots couldn't be sold (if the privatisation articles are to be believed) but they could be rented or moved.
I doubt any government could have fore seen that they would move them to Belfast with the ensue-ing tricky political fall out if there is a Dublin effort to reverse that decision.

lostexpectation

no chance of anyone buying aer lingus still, one of the huge airlines? and using the slots for anywhere to heathrow?

seamus

This is a money-motivated decision, pure and simple. AL pulled out of Shannon because the unions there had them running with relatively massive costs. Drop all your staff and move to a cheaper area, hire new staff onto proper non-union contracts, and your profits soar. The North is also set for massive economic growth - look at their housing market - so AL are just making the decision to cash in on it. And why not?

It's a commercial company, they're entitled to make this decision. I feel for people who are now feeling put out, but any company who makes their business depend 100% on a single airline operating a single route, has planned very very poorly and now has to deal with the consequences of their horrific business model.

Another airline will step into the breach, and will make trips to other UK airports. The companies affected will just have to deal with the change. The Government absolutely should not get involved.

I have a hunch that they'll put a few flights back into Shannon in a year or two, when they no longer have to pay exorbitent wages to union lifers.

Villain

Seamus do you honestly believe that the AL decision was not in any way influenced by the Irish and UK Government?

seamus

Not in the slightest.

Villain

It wasn't influenced in the slighest?

is_that_so

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0807/aerlingus.html. If people are looking for the initial release of the news they might find that link useful devoid as it is of Cromwell and other misgivings. Click on either the video or audio buttons to get a list of stories for that day.

seamus

irish1 wrote:

It wasn't influenced in the slighest?

I don't believe in the slightest that either Government had a hand in the decision. It was clearly motivated by political factors - the stability in the region and impending growth that I pointed out.

But I don't believe that the Irish government was involved. It's too much of a good decision for them to have been involved.

Akrasia

Tristrame wrote:

I reckon the 25% was kept to make the unions think there was a strategic interest being kept-in reality it meant nothing and could have meant nothing..

Tristrame, it was an exercise in public relations, and intended entirely to deceive, not just the Unions, but also the public in the run up to an election.

Indefensible behavior and quite standard operating procedure in Irish politics.

I have heard a lot of people say "But the public knew FF was in favor of privatisations, but they still voted for them therefore they must also agree with (or at least put up with) the consequences"

The reality is different. The public was deceived and lied to. While some of this is the fault of the public for being too trustworthy, the majority of the blame lies with the corrupt self serving politicians themselves. (I regard deliberate deception to be a form of corruption)