Mango - all you need to know about it (threads merged)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Solid Rust Twotter
Correct.
Unfortunately, the general perception among the populace of SA is that the state has lots of money. The fact that it has to come from somewhere is not apparent.
Another taxpayer funded cock up is not going to make things better for the already beleaguered bloke who has to bail them out every time.
My objection is to their opposition having to budget carefully and make a profit while SAA has free rein to squander the money their opposition have to pay as tax.
Unfortunately, the general perception among the populace of SA is that the state has lots of money. The fact that it has to come from somewhere is not apparent.
Another taxpayer funded cock up is not going to make things better for the already beleaguered bloke who has to bail them out every time.
My objection is to their opposition having to budget carefully and make a profit while SAA has free rein to squander the money their opposition have to pay as tax.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Deskjocky
No one disputes the "unfairness" of the state subsidising a company in competition with other smaller private companies. Clearly the state feels its justified in doing so. Here is some food for thought:
Companies like SAA, Telkom, the SABC all state owned and with the exception of Telkom (until recently) have had their industries deregulated to allow private sector competition. These private companies now use the infrastructure that was paid for by the state- to support the state owned enterprise, to support their current operations.
A good example of this is how SAA sold (for literally a song) Comair its first 3 B737's ZS-SBN/SBR/SBO SAA even provided the pilots for the first year- the deal included full maintenance (which still continues for some of their fleet today) for the fleet- without this help things would have been much more expensive for Comair to get into the market in the first place- Comair benefited form the infrastructure paid for by the tax payer. Comair used this SAA connection to gain credibility among the travelling public when all it had were a few F27's and an old DC3. The deal also included use of SAA's sims- which Nationwide also still use to this day, why, because it’s cheaper than going elsewhere as well as being convenient.
These are just small examples of how private industry has benefited from state investment. Even 1Time benefit form taxpayers money- they are handled by Equity aviation- 50% owned by the state, why do they offer such cheap handling prices to 1Time? Because SAA (by definition the taxpayer) has over the years paid for all of the ground handling equipment they use today (Equity- Previously called Apron Services was part of SAA for decades until it was unbundled form the Airline in the 90’s) Equity even check-in 1Time in some outstations – again offering cheap prices because the staff and ground handling equipment are at that station to service SAA in any even event. This allows 1Time to open up shop in a city for no infrastructural costs at all- effectively at the taxpayers’ expense. Kulula also make use of Equity at some stations that CHS do not operate from.
This issue is not as cut and dried as you may think
Companies like SAA, Telkom, the SABC all state owned and with the exception of Telkom (until recently) have had their industries deregulated to allow private sector competition. These private companies now use the infrastructure that was paid for by the state- to support the state owned enterprise, to support their current operations.
A good example of this is how SAA sold (for literally a song) Comair its first 3 B737's ZS-SBN/SBR/SBO SAA even provided the pilots for the first year- the deal included full maintenance (which still continues for some of their fleet today) for the fleet- without this help things would have been much more expensive for Comair to get into the market in the first place- Comair benefited form the infrastructure paid for by the tax payer. Comair used this SAA connection to gain credibility among the travelling public when all it had were a few F27's and an old DC3. The deal also included use of SAA's sims- which Nationwide also still use to this day, why, because it’s cheaper than going elsewhere as well as being convenient.
These are just small examples of how private industry has benefited from state investment. Even 1Time benefit form taxpayers money- they are handled by Equity aviation- 50% owned by the state, why do they offer such cheap handling prices to 1Time? Because SAA (by definition the taxpayer) has over the years paid for all of the ground handling equipment they use today (Equity- Previously called Apron Services was part of SAA for decades until it was unbundled form the Airline in the 90’s) Equity even check-in 1Time in some outstations – again offering cheap prices because the staff and ground handling equipment are at that station to service SAA in any even event. This allows 1Time to open up shop in a city for no infrastructural costs at all- effectively at the taxpayers’ expense. Kulula also make use of Equity at some stations that CHS do not operate from.
This issue is not as cut and dried as you may think
THUNDERTAILED
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: L200
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If SAA starts an LCC would they cut their normal SAA domestic services dramatically?
Would they create a whole new airline or would they hand over the 319's to SAX and make SAX the LCC?
Would they create a whole new airline or would they hand over the 319's to SAX and make SAX the LCC?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: #37 for Start
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Deskjocky, things are not always as simple as they seem..
Firstly, with all the benefits gained via the SAA infrastructure, does one really believe that you would get a discount on your PAYE once SAA is privatised.?
Think not - Is there any individual who would say outright that he would be a proud South African, when the likes of the National Carrier no longer exists and as an example, BA is known as the franchised South African National carrier?
Think not again - Similar embarresment as when one needs to watch the Springboks arrive on a BA flight....
This whole discssion is somewhat twisted, wrt how SAA only benefits while at the end they actually provide employment for some 800 aircrew, sure, some have probably over stayed their welcome now..
With the demise of SAA, do you really believe that your chances of employment would improve because the crew will be wiped with SAA?
Think not again x2.
What I am trying to say is, sure, we should all be vouching to get SAA profitable and its icon status restored (if you are truly South African), so that things could improve for all!
Firstly, with all the benefits gained via the SAA infrastructure, does one really believe that you would get a discount on your PAYE once SAA is privatised.?
Think not - Is there any individual who would say outright that he would be a proud South African, when the likes of the National Carrier no longer exists and as an example, BA is known as the franchised South African National carrier?
Think not again - Similar embarresment as when one needs to watch the Springboks arrive on a BA flight....
This whole discssion is somewhat twisted, wrt how SAA only benefits while at the end they actually provide employment for some 800 aircrew, sure, some have probably over stayed their welcome now..
With the demise of SAA, do you really believe that your chances of employment would improve because the crew will be wiped with SAA?
Think not again x2.
What I am trying to say is, sure, we should all be vouching to get SAA profitable and its icon status restored (if you are truly South African), so that things could improve for all!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Planet Tharg
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The costs of Equity and other former parastatals would have been carried by the taxpayer to begin with as is everything government related. I very much doubt any of the non SAA carriers are getting discounted rates. If it's not a fair price for the service I'm pretty sure plan B would have been put in place by those affected and alternatives found. To this end I believe paying market rates, whether originally set up by the taxpayer or not is the point and not the fact that it used to be govt owned.
No one is talking about shutting SAA down but it must be made profitable and not remain as a parasite surviving on tax paid by those airlines who have no government backing (as well as the rest of us). This attempt to penetrate a sector of the market occupied by profitable companies is nothing new. Undercutting prices with the help of the taxpayer in an attempt to shut down opposition is an old trick they've used before. Supposing they manage to shut down Kulula, CE and 1Time, how long do you think it'll be before prices once again skyrocket to contain the expenses generated by a building full of managers and secretaries at Airways Park?
BA/Comair as the national carrier? I have no objection as long as I don't have to support them with taxes. ERJ, you speak only for yourself. Do not presume everyone feels the way you do about the Boks not flying on SAA. As for jobs with SAA, many of us are already excluded as a result of government policies, so no real difference to me.
No one is talking about shutting SAA down but it must be made profitable and not remain as a parasite surviving on tax paid by those airlines who have no government backing (as well as the rest of us). This attempt to penetrate a sector of the market occupied by profitable companies is nothing new. Undercutting prices with the help of the taxpayer in an attempt to shut down opposition is an old trick they've used before. Supposing they manage to shut down Kulula, CE and 1Time, how long do you think it'll be before prices once again skyrocket to contain the expenses generated by a building full of managers and secretaries at Airways Park?
BA/Comair as the national carrier? I have no objection as long as I don't have to support them with taxes. ERJ, you speak only for yourself. Do not presume everyone feels the way you do about the Boks not flying on SAA. As for jobs with SAA, many of us are already excluded as a result of government policies, so no real difference to me.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: On the flight deck
Age: 54
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ERJ135
U raised a VERY good point, and I totally aggree with you. I think we as pilots get a bit emotional sometimes about things and dont always think things through because of those emotions.
Seeing the Springboks arrive by BA colours should be an embarresment for the National carrier and I think they should work hard at getting the Boks back on board.
COMAIR chaps....PLEASE, no harm intended. You guys should be saluted for seizing the oppurtunity when SAA was snoozing.
Having a national carrier is like having a national team.........your not quite a Springbok until you play for them, regardless of whether you win games or not. To say that things are at an alltime low at SAA is a gross understatement. Management are seemingly clueless (not just the current one) and has been for a while. There are constant friction between them and the pilot group, passenger service is non-existing, etc, etc. Nevertheless, they are the national carrier, and I for one would certainly like to be a Springbok.
Seeing the Springboks arrive by BA colours should be an embarresment for the National carrier and I think they should work hard at getting the Boks back on board.
COMAIR chaps....PLEASE, no harm intended. You guys should be saluted for seizing the oppurtunity when SAA was snoozing.
Having a national carrier is like having a national team.........your not quite a Springbok until you play for them, regardless of whether you win games or not. To say that things are at an alltime low at SAA is a gross understatement. Management are seemingly clueless (not just the current one) and has been for a while. There are constant friction between them and the pilot group, passenger service is non-existing, etc, etc. Nevertheless, they are the national carrier, and I for one would certainly like to be a Springbok.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Cape Town SA and Manchester UK
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pax Boy,
Having read Barbara Cassani's account of GO I should have stated my facts correctly - Sorry. Easyjet probably acquired it at about half of what it was worth.
Getting back to the matter in hand I would have to say that it is again fundemantally about idelogies. The success of legacy carriers at going LCC is not good.
Deskjocky, I very much respect your opinions and knowledge of the industry. I do disagree with the fact that South Africa as a nation would cease to function without SAA. Again I probably have more faith in what the invisible hand of market forces can do given the chance.
With regard to privatisation of state industries, I'm pretty sure that most profits came as a result de-regulation and privatisation not before.
Having read Barbara Cassani's account of GO I should have stated my facts correctly - Sorry. Easyjet probably acquired it at about half of what it was worth.
Getting back to the matter in hand I would have to say that it is again fundemantally about idelogies. The success of legacy carriers at going LCC is not good.
Deskjocky, I very much respect your opinions and knowledge of the industry. I do disagree with the fact that South Africa as a nation would cease to function without SAA. Again I probably have more faith in what the invisible hand of market forces can do given the chance.
With regard to privatisation of state industries, I'm pretty sure that most profits came as a result de-regulation and privatisation not before.
Paxing All Over The World
Not at all GT. I admired the whole GO operation under Ms C. I would have used them a lot, save that their main base was Stansted which was the most awkward and distant of the four London airports from where I was then living.
I understand that 3i made an absolute killing on the sale thus proving that Mainline had a good idea - by giving the job to someone to start a brand new operation on a separate field - but then made the wrong decision about when to sell.
If SAA are allowed to start an LCC it will be a very bad day. Any short term gains of (apparent) jobs and low fares will vaporise within three years.
I understand that 3i made an absolute killing on the sale thus proving that Mainline had a good idea - by giving the job to someone to start a brand new operation on a separate field - but then made the wrong decision about when to sell.
If SAA are allowed to start an LCC it will be a very bad day. Any short term gains of (apparent) jobs and low fares will vaporise within three years.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Front right seat
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SAA Flak
It's easy for non-SAA drivers to give us flak. What they don't see and know is that when the cockpit door closes we do our utmost to run a super efficient and safe operation. We use the highest standards availible worldwide as our benchmark. We were recently audited by Boeing. Afterwards we were told that our operation was one of the top five in the world. A democratically elected Goverment (I didn't say a good one) dictates our policies. From pilot selection to running ineffient routes. From sub-standard ground handling to the leasing of our A340-300. Politics runs SAA.
As level minded proffesionals we know that SAA could make a lot of money. We should have cornered the majority of the sub Saharan market long ago with the head start we had.
Look A Emirates. An airline run on aggressive business principles. SAA is run on aggresive politicle principle. Our last COO lasted 6 months. Our CFO resigned this week after 16 months. Our CEO can't spell airline. Through all of this we manage to still run a fantastic flight operation.
We, as a pilot group are and will continue to be the standard of flight safety and professionalism in South Africa. LONG LIVE SAA.
As level minded proffesionals we know that SAA could make a lot of money. We should have cornered the majority of the sub Saharan market long ago with the head start we had.
Look A Emirates. An airline run on aggressive business principles. SAA is run on aggresive politicle principle. Our last COO lasted 6 months. Our CFO resigned this week after 16 months. Our CEO can't spell airline. Through all of this we manage to still run a fantastic flight operation.
We, as a pilot group are and will continue to be the standard of flight safety and professionalism in South Africa. LONG LIVE SAA.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Planet Tharg
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one is gunning the pilots. SAA management has come to rely on the taxpayer (including their opposition) to bail them out after yet another disastrous foray into the real world and that is what burns my @rse.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ERJ135
I agree with Deskjocky, things are not always as simple as they seem..
Firstly, with all the benefits gained via the SAA infrastructure, does one really believe that you would get a discount on your PAYE once SAA is privatised.?
Think not - Is there any individual who would say outright that he would be a proud South African, when the likes of the National Carrier no longer exists and as an example, BA is known as the franchised South African National carrier?
Think not again - Similar embarresment as when one needs to watch the Springboks arrive on a BA flight....
This whole discssion is somewhat twisted, wrt how SAA only benefits while at the end they actually provide employment for some 800 aircrew, sure, some have probably over stayed their welcome now..
With the demise of SAA, do you really believe that your chances of employment would improve because the crew will be wiped with SAA?
Think not again x2.
What I am trying to say is, sure, we should all be vouching to get SAA profitable and its icon status restored (if you are truly South African), so that things could improve for all!
Firstly, with all the benefits gained via the SAA infrastructure, does one really believe that you would get a discount on your PAYE once SAA is privatised.?
Think not - Is there any individual who would say outright that he would be a proud South African, when the likes of the National Carrier no longer exists and as an example, BA is known as the franchised South African National carrier?
Think not again - Similar embarresment as when one needs to watch the Springboks arrive on a BA flight....
This whole discssion is somewhat twisted, wrt how SAA only benefits while at the end they actually provide employment for some 800 aircrew, sure, some have probably over stayed their welcome now..
With the demise of SAA, do you really believe that your chances of employment would improve because the crew will be wiped with SAA?
Think not again x2.
What I am trying to say is, sure, we should all be vouching to get SAA profitable and its icon status restored (if you are truly South African), so that things could improve for all!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Planet Tharg
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I am trying to say is, sure, we should all be vouching to get SAA profitable and its icon status restored (if you are truly South African), so that things could improve for all!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: #37 for Start
Posts: 460
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This will also be my last...
Sorry to say, but this will be my last post on this topic.
I understand that there is a lot of bad publicity wrt SAA. The thing that bothers me is that according to some, SAA is making it their business to make mistakes - I unfortunately do not believe this.
In life, not even a serial killer does his business, without him/her believing that this is the best thing to do, given info/gen available at the time.
Sure, with experience one could always do better...
In my opinion, SAA starting a LCC is yet another step for them to try and return to profitability, not to waste money, yet. If this works, would all not support it, rather than keep on slagging them down..?
The same sentiments were shared when 1Time started, its all about trying to protect your turf.
SRT, with regard to your comment on policies etc keeping you out of SAA:
It has never been easy and never will be, same as not all at NASA will become astronauts. But, the moment you give up the race, is the FIRST time that you have actually come close to loosing it...
Food for thought: In the last 3 months I have met 4 people who are on the SAA Shortlist, here's the thing - They are ALL pale males and 35+
Start some positive thinking and NEVER give up (It worked for me...)
I understand that there is a lot of bad publicity wrt SAA. The thing that bothers me is that according to some, SAA is making it their business to make mistakes - I unfortunately do not believe this.
In life, not even a serial killer does his business, without him/her believing that this is the best thing to do, given info/gen available at the time.
Sure, with experience one could always do better...
In my opinion, SAA starting a LCC is yet another step for them to try and return to profitability, not to waste money, yet. If this works, would all not support it, rather than keep on slagging them down..?
The same sentiments were shared when 1Time started, its all about trying to protect your turf.
SRT, with regard to your comment on policies etc keeping you out of SAA:
It has never been easy and never will be, same as not all at NASA will become astronauts. But, the moment you give up the race, is the FIRST time that you have actually come close to loosing it...
Food for thought: In the last 3 months I have met 4 people who are on the SAA Shortlist, here's the thing - They are ALL pale males and 35+
Start some positive thinking and NEVER give up (It worked for me...)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by divinehover
It's easy for non-SAA drivers to give us flak. What they don't see and know is that when the cockpit door closes we do our utmost to run a super efficient and safe operation. We use the highest standards availible worldwide as our benchmark. We were recently audited by Boeing. Afterwards we were told that our operation was one of the top five in the world. A democratically elected Goverment (I didn't say a good one) dictates our policies. From pilot selection to running ineffient routes. From sub-standard ground handling to the leasing of our A340-300. Politics runs SAA.
As level minded proffesionals we know that SAA could make a lot of money. We should have cornered the majority of the sub Saharan market long ago with the head start we had.
Look A Emirates. An airline run on aggressive business principles. SAA is run on aggresive politicle principle. Our last COO lasted 6 months. Our CFO resigned this week after 16 months. Our CEO can't spell airline. Through all of this we manage to still run a fantastic flight operation.
We, as a pilot group are and will continue to be the standard of flight safety and professionalism in South Africa. LONG LIVE SAA.
As level minded proffesionals we know that SAA could make a lot of money. We should have cornered the majority of the sub Saharan market long ago with the head start we had.
Look A Emirates. An airline run on aggressive business principles. SAA is run on aggresive politicle principle. Our last COO lasted 6 months. Our CFO resigned this week after 16 months. Our CEO can't spell airline. Through all of this we manage to still run a fantastic flight operation.
We, as a pilot group are and will continue to be the standard of flight safety and professionalism in South Africa. LONG LIVE SAA.
Paxing All Over The World
In my opinion, SAA starting a LCC is yet another step for them to try and return to profitability, not to waste money, yet. If this works, would all not support it, rather than keep on slagging them down..?
The same sentiments were shared when 1Time started, its all about trying to protect your turf.
The same sentiments were shared when 1Time started, its all about trying to protect your turf.
A simple example from an unrelated area: In the UK in 1985, two companies started up cellular radio telephone service. A company called 'Cellnet' was 50% owned by British Telecom who were only just emerging as a stand alone company and were not yet listed on the stock market. They had run mobile radiophone service (VHF) for many years and already had customers and knew about running mobiles (they thought) and they were highly confident that they could run this new technology.
The other company was a start up called Vodafone.
The licenses became active at 00:01 on 1st January and Vodafone connected their first call at that time, Cellnet followed 17 days later and have (in my opinion) never caught up. Certainly, Vodafone is now a global company of massive influence and clout. The Cellnet brand? Eventually it was sold off to other parties and rebranded as 'O2' and still runs many millions of customers but has always been the Number Two in this country and, by some measures, is the Number Three.
Moral of the story: Legacy companies think that they know how to be agile and new. Mostly, they cannot. This is NOT about slagging SAA operational staff, whom I respect and would pax with any day of the year. Also, it makes no never mind if SAA is run politically or commercially - they still would not know how to be a new and nimble company. The rest of the world has already tried this in many areas and the results can be read in the stockmarket and financial papers.