Goodbye Aer Lingus

riclad

300 million is nothing, its like 0.0001per cent of our national debt. ireland owes billions to bondholders etc WE need competition on london to dublin, dublin to europe etc IF aer lingus is sold ,the slots it has in heathrow could be used on different routes . eg london to berlin,paris etc theres a limited amount of slots there . The government stake there was to protect the slots, the workers and jobs in dublin airport . WE are an island nation , we need a national airline . Selling aer lingus makes no sense, its part of our national infrastructure . look at taxes etc the government gets from aer lingus workers , in say 10 years ,its way more than 300 million, those workers are highly paid ,they spend money in shops, pubs ,hotels etc in ireland . IF you want to get to ireland you have 2 choices a boat or a plane. This is a really bad deal for ireland .

Graham

riclad wrote: »

300 million is nothing, its like 0.0001per cent of our national debt. ireland owes billions to bondholders etc WE need competition on london to dublin, dublin to europe etc IF aer lingus is sold ,the slots it has in heathrow could be used on different routes . eg london to berlin,paris etc theres a limited amount of slots there . The government stake there was to protect the slots, the workers and jobs in dublin airport . WE are an island nation , we need a national airline . Selling aer lingus makes no sense, its part of our national infrastructure . look at taxes etc the government gets from aer lingus workers , in say 10 years ,its way more than 300 million, those workers are highly paid ,they spend money in shops, pubs ,hotels etc in ireland . IF you want to get to ireland you have 2 choices a boat or a plane. This is a really bad deal for ireland .

There is no suggestion competition will be eliminated, where are you getting that from?

Perhaps you can explain why these Heathrow slots are so valuable to Ireland, what specific high-demand routes must we keep at all costs?

Junkyard Tom

cml387 wrote: »

Another example is Concorde.

It's not that simple. The transnational Concorde project was a precursor for Airbus and Airbus was instrumental in preventing the US/Boeing from creating a civil airliner manufacturing monopoly.

Airbus' creation was a transnational political decision:

the three nations were acknowledging a simple truth: that without a joint programme of aircraft development and production, Europe would be left trailing in the wake of the Americans, who dominated the industry – and, with the planned long-range 747 “jumbo” on the horizon, looked set to consolidate their supremacy. The proud European firms which had produced some of the world’s best passenger aircraft and pioneered commercial jet travel would become little more than sub-contractors to American manufacturers. Hundreds of thousands of jobs could be at risk and European airlines would be dependent on the United States for new aircraft.

airbus.com/company/history

murpho999

riclad wrote: »

300 million is nothing, its like 0.0001per cent of our national debt. ireland owes billions to bondholders etc WE need competition on london to dublin, dublin to europe etc IF aer lingus is sold ,the slots it has in heathrow could be used on different routes . eg london to berlin,paris etc theres a limited amount of slots there . The government stake there was to protect the slots, the workers and jobs in dublin airport . WE are an island nation , we need a national airline . Selling aer lingus makes no sense, its part of our national infrastructure . look at taxes etc the government gets from aer lingus workers , in say 10 years ,its way more than 300 million, those workers are highly paid ,they spend money in shops, pubs ,hotels etc in ireland . IF you want to get to ireland you have 2 choices a boat or a plane. This is a really bad deal for ireland .

Where to begin? I'll give it a go.

Aer Lingus are not going to resolve our National Debt issues whether sold or not.
The slots: Even after the 7 year guarantee period I don't see them being shifted as London Dublin is a very busy and profitable route. As evidenced by Aer Lingus never using them to fly from Heathrow to somewhere else.

A government share has not prevented job losses at Aer Lingus in the past and cannot guarantee it in the future.

As an island nation we don't need a national airline we just need airlines to fly to us and we have that. Ryanair provide more connections to Ireland than anywhere else.
How many new routes have Aer Lingus brought in the last few years?

Aer Lingus will continue and will hopefully grow and expand so there might be more employees in the long run paying more taxes and buying more in local shops.

Don't see it as a bad deal for Ireland as the demand is there and won't go away. Don't mind union protectionist policies nor Fianna Fail opposition as they sold the 75% in the first place.

end of the road

cml387 wrote: »

Another example is Concorde. BA were losing money on it even though they had been gifted the aircraft by the British and French taxpayer. The staff on the Concorde service were given the job of coming up with ways of making more money. They had the idea of asking the passengers how much they thought their fare cost. Since the vast majority of them had no idea how much their fare was (since it was companies or PA's who has actually paid) they came up with some vastly inflated sum far greater than the actual fare, which then became the ticket price.

it wasn't making any money, so it had to be done so the aircraft could make a proffit and cover its costs. it was an expensive aircraft to run

my friend

end of the road wrote: »

it wasn't making any money, so it had to be done so the aircraft could make a proffit and cover its costs. it was an expensive aircraft to run

^^^
classic boards intellect

end of the road

riclad wrote: »

300 million is nothing, its like 0.0001per cent of our national debt. ireland owes billions to bondholders etc WE need competition on london to dublin, dublin to europe etc IF aer lingus is sold ,the slots it has in heathrow could be used on different routes . eg london to berlin,paris etc theres a limited amount of slots there . The government stake there was to protect the slots, the workers and jobs in dublin airport . WE are an island nation , we need a national airline . Selling aer lingus makes no sense, its part of our national infrastructure . look at taxes etc the government gets from aer lingus workers , in say 10 years ,its way more than 300 million, those workers are highly paid ,they spend money in shops, pubs ,hotels etc in ireland . IF you want to get to ireland you have 2 choices a boat or a plane. This is a really bad deal for ireland .

ah but but, shur were going to get a pittence of a tax cut that will be wiped out by another gambling debt charge. and the money is going to be put into a mythical infrastructure fund

sunshine and showers

Saw this thread on the homepage. Now I've a weird version of "Goodbye, My Lover" by James Blunt stuck in my head. Only about Aer Lingus.

Junkyard Tom

end of the road wrote: »

it wasn't making any money, so it had to be done so the aircraft could make a proffit and cover its costs.

That's not a profit that's a subsidy.

awec

mbur wrote: »

Your 'argument' is complete waffle. 5% return is a performing asset. By your standards 335 million is only spare change so why bother to sell?

If I have a tenner in the bank my 5% performing asset is nothing to get excited about.

You are stripping out all context in an attempt to make your point.

Sell it because:

1. It's not worth keeping
2. The government doesn't need to own part of an airline

You are also presuming that Aer Lingus will always be profitable. History shows that this is a dangerous assumption to make.

awec

riclad wrote: »

300 million is nothing, its like 0.0001per cent of our national debt. ireland owes billions to bondholders etc WE need competition on london to dublin, dublin to europe etc IF aer lingus is sold ,the slots it has in heathrow could be used on different routes . eg london to berlin,paris etc theres a limited amount of slots there . The government stake there was to protect the slots, the workers and jobs in dublin airport . WE are an island nation , we need a national airline . Selling aer lingus makes no sense, its part of our national infrastructure . look at taxes etc the government gets from aer lingus workers , in say 10 years ,its way more than 300 million, those workers are highly paid ,they spend money in shops, pubs ,hotels etc in ireland . IF you want to get to ireland you have 2 choices a boat or a plane. This is a really bad deal for ireland .

You do realise that the government will still get taxes from Aer Lingus workers?

end of the road

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

That's not a profit that's a subsidy.

no its a proffit. passengers being charged so the aircraft can cover its costs and pay back any money the company may have borrowed in relation to such aircraft if they did.

Junkyard Tom

end of the road wrote: »

no its a proffit.

If the public are making up the loss then it's a subsidy. I'm not against subsidy fwiw. 'Private' industry thrives on subsidy - virtuous capitalist car companies just love evil socialist motorways. The modern smartphone is little more than a consolidation of spin-off technologies that were invented, or rapidly advanced, by way of public R&D/money/endeavour.

54and56

mbur wrote: »

18/335 = 5% Try getting that at the bank. This sale is a sh*t deal on a performing asset.

How exactly is it a **** deal? Do you think a 5% yield is too low?

Graham

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

How exactly is it a **** deal? Do you think a 5% yield is too low?

What was the yield every other year for the last 10, 20 years? What's the yield going to be like when the Unions/political parties realise the airline is making a profit and they can push to redirect that profit to increase wages/buy votes in North Country Dublin?

Quin_Dub

I think it's a great deal..

• ~€400M from the sale which will be put into a "Communications Investment Fund" to be spent on Broadband programs etc. - Very good
• 7 year protection of the Heathrow slots - Bit silly, but keeps the union muppets onside
• Minister of Finance retains a voting share in the company , any significant changes to routes/slots have to be ratified by said M.o.F. in future - Again , keeps the unions and local TD's onside
• Aer Lingus gets significant investment from IAG - All good , the EI planes are awful , particularly the Transa-Atlantic ones.

As other have said , BA have plans to use the Irish Customs clearance as a key weapon in their Trans-atlantic plans..

By transiting flights through Ireland, they can fly directly to secondary airports in the US , saving themselves big money on landing fees etc.

That brings more traffic through Ireland , greater connections , more tourists etc.

What's not to like?

This isn't the 80's when EI were the only show in town (and the UK was the only market we did business with) and keeping flight connections was important.. There are now multiple connections to multiple places so Heathrow isn't really that important any more..

And - Heathrow is an awful place - despise it with a passion.

54and56

Graham wrote: »

What was the yield every other year for the last 10, 20 years? What's the yield going to be like when the Unions/political parties realise the airline is making a profit and they can push to redirect that profit to increase wages/buy votes in North Country Dublin?

OK, don't answer the question then :rolleyes:

54and56

Quin_Dub wrote: »

And - Heathrow is an awful place - despise it with a passion.

Couldn't agree more. I will happily spend extra on my flights or spend extra time to connect via any other UK airport or Copenhagen/Munich etc if I'm going long haul.

Graham

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

OK, don't answer the question then :rolleyes:

Yes, I think the yield on average is ****. Regardless of the yield governments in general have proved over and over again that they cannot and should not be running airlines.

54and56

Graham wrote: »

Yes, I think the yield on average is ****. Regardless of the yield governments in general have proved over and over again that they cannot and should not be running airlines.

Do you mean the 5% yield should be higher or lower? I'm genuinely confused and would like to know.

Calina

The most effective way for the government to protect the Heathrow slots is not by guarantees or rules or legal agreements.

It is by ensuring the economy is healthy and growing.

Graham

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Do you mean the 5% yield should be higher or lower? I'm genuinely confused and would like to know.

5% isn't bad in the current market but the yield hasn't been anything like a consistent 5% has it.

Lets go back 5 years, what was the yield in 2009? What has the yield been over the last 10 years, 20 years?

54and56

Graham wrote: »

5% isn't bad in the current market but the yield hasn't been anything like a consistent 5% has it.

Lets go back 5 years, what was the yield in 2009? What has the yield been over the last 10 years, 20 years?

I'll try one more time. Do you think the yield this deal is delivering should be higher or lower than 5%? What do you believe the yield should be?

Graham

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

I'll try one more time. Do you think the yield this deal is delivering should be higher or lower than 5%? What do you believe the yield should be?

5% isn't bad in the current market

Did you miss that, I'm not sure how to make it any clearer.

sbsquarepants

Junkyard Cat wrote: »

You know, if a major war broke out in Europe, or if there was some sort of catastrophe like a massive Tsunami or some other calamity.. a fleet of aircraft under control of the government could be essential for rescuing/evacuating people, bringing in supplies/aid etc.

Jesus Christ - I'm guessing you're the type who pays that few bob extra for tornado insurance.:D

No it makes no sense whatsoever for the government to own an airline just in case of tsunamis! That is in fact fúcking mental!

54and56

Graham wrote: »

5% isn't bad in the current market

Did you miss that, I'm not sure how to make it any clearer.

Seriously, please make up your mind.

Less than 90 minutes ago you posted "Yes, I think the yield on average is ****."

Which is it?

A: "5% isn't bad in the current market"

or

B: "I think the yield on average is ****."

Toss a coin perhaps?

sbsquarepants

murpho999 wrote: »

The fear mongering of this deal is incredible.

Firstly IAG is not an airline but a group that owns several airlines.

BA, Iberia and Vueling.

All of this still exist in their own right so why do people think that Aer Lingus will be phased out when its brand is strong and clearly linked with Ireland.

The slots issue is being made as a big deal but guarantees have been sought..

And more importantly why do they care?
If aer lingus ceases to exist tomorrow - so the fúck what. Fly with someone else - they are generally speaking overpriced anyway, I cant remember the last time I flew with aer lingus. There is nothing patriotic about allowing the state to overcharge you!
The next time I'm flying with them is in about 6 weeks and that is only because I made a stupid mistake checking the prices on sky scanner and actually booked the dearer flights!

Graham

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Seriously, please make up your mind.

Less than 90 minutes ago you posted "Yes, I think the yield on average is ****."

Which is it?

A: "5% isn't bad in the current market"

or

B: "I think the yield on average is ****."

Toss a coin perhaps?

OK, I'll try again.

The average yield over the last 10/20 years has been ****

5% isn't bad.

If you can't understand that let me know and I'll try and work out how I can simplify it further.

Quin_Dub

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Seriously, please make up your mind.

Less than 90 minutes ago you posted "Yes, I think the yield on average is ****."

Which is it?

A: "5% isn't bad in the current market"

or

B: "I think the yield on average is ****."

Toss a coin perhaps?

Graham wrote: »

OK, I'll try again.

The average yield over the last 10/20 years has been ****

5% isn't bad.

If you can't understand that let me know and I'll try and work out how I can simplify it further.

Can we assume that you both think the Sale is a good idea in the long term?


I get where you are coming from Graham - Aer Lingus are currently profitable , but they weren't for years and given the consolidation going on in the Airline Industry there is absolutely no guarantee that a small regional airline would remain profitable in the future..

So, get while the going is good , sell it at a premium whilst it's profitable and reap the short term rewards of the cash and the long term rewards of having one of the largest Airlines in the world running the show...

Korvanica

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Maybe it will become competitive now.

Already is. Booked flights with them last week, 50 quid cheaper than Ryanair was to the same destination.