Well you give the
AirRabbit a hard time about Economics 101 but no-one else is putting up the solutions!
So which part of Economics 101 didn't we understand?
Is it the part about how revenues minus costs mustn't be a negative number?
Lets say, we halved the size of the fleets, got rid of even more staff, introduced some efficiencies and raised prices...
No-one likes to say it because we're in the business and its our colleagues we're talking about here but would that not work? Put it this way, would Michael O'Leary see it that way?
But the classic anecdote applies:
If I owe the bank $10K,
I've got a problem. If I owe the bank $10billion,
the bank has a problem.
The creditors are half the problem here. I can't see them in favour of abandoing Ch 11. In turn they're bank-rolled by who?
The whole thing is an almighty piss-take and that some people have got seriously rich out of it is criminal.
My $0.000000000001 ( = NPV of my pension).
