nzer
Perhaps we (A-NZ) will have to agree to disagree on this mess. But your agruments will always be flawed. YES Ansett was in a bad (very bad) state BEFORE ANZ took 100% ownership. So why did they take that last 50%? Can you answer that? You guys say that you "had no or little idea" of the grave problems at Ansett when you aquired all of it. So what is worse, that you bought a dog, or that you didn't know you were buying a dog!!!! I wouldn't invest 5cents in something I didn't know about, but you twits invested half of NZs wealth in it!
And this while a cashed up SIA was willing to take the other half, how sad...now ANZ is state owned, with no hope for the future. Ansett would have (obviously) flourised, but then again, so would have ANZ. I can't even imagine how hard you idiots must be kicking yourselves right now. As far as Ansett is concerned, while we admit our huge problems which fermented over a decade, we had a good buyer (SIA) which ANZ and only ANZ vetoed and therefore our destruction is ALL YOUR FAULT.
Oh well, at least we have new buyers beating at our doors, unlike you. Enjoy government owenership kids, I bet Helen is negotiating in the US or France on your next big purchase. Not.
