If you take any possible corruption and mismanagement aside, as impossible as that is, ultimately a government run business does not, has not ever, worked anywhere in the world. Government owned but run as a private company works, but government run never works without making a loss.
The A320s coming are not the NEO/sharklet new version probably because the decision taken precedes delivery by 10 years or more. The PFMA (Public Finance Management Act) creates so much paperwork and restrictions that a business trying to ride the pulse of a dynamic market, such as the aviation industry's, is doomed to fail even before the start gun has fired.
I am a staunch believer that the free market, capitalist way is the way to iron out the men from the mice when it comes to business. But I am also a staunch believer that the RSA government should be protecting the aviation industry (pilots, engineers, etc...) from the far more powerful likes of Emirates, etc... Somewhere inbetween, where the government owns the airline but appoints a board to run it like a business, without political influence is part of the answer. Leaving the domestic to the low cost private industry is also, I think, part of the answer. I think having a state run low-cost airline is blindly dumb, what's the point!? It doesn't benefit the industry, the passenger or the tax-payer. SAA should be, in my opinion, a mostly regional and international airline but not at the detriment of the customer or tax-payer, it should be to the detriment of the likes of Emirates, etc...
I believe this is possible to achieve, but not under the rule of the current anti-capitalist buffoons.
Last edited by Next Leg Undefined; 16th May 2013 at 16:26.