Irish PM has a go at Willie Walsh [Archive]

Idunno

17th May 2006, 13:55

This is tied to the news that the Aer Lingus privatisation has been postponed until the autumn.

I said it at the time, and I say it again, Willy was out to line his pockets. Now Bertie has said it again too.

Walsh's refusal to expand the airline after the recovery has led to the current mess - aircraft could've been picked up for nearly nothing in 2002 but he didn't want to take on any debt which would be on the balance sheet when it fell into his lap.

Willy was more interested in breaking the unions and destroying all opposition to his future O'Leary-like dictatorship than in growing the company.

That said - he did so with full backing of the government, led by our hero Bertie.

Pigsfly

17th May 2006, 13:58

Well.

Perhaps this explains the speedy departure. Obviously the main artery of BA`s pension plan is a better feeding ground for his probiscus. Juicy sucking to be done there. I hope Bertie hangs out the dirty washing, but will not hold my breath, Mr Ahearns Govt has so many skeletons in its own closet it vibrates likea rattle-snake.

After all what did Willie do, copied Mick O`Learys Ryanair model. Only for the staff stopping him it would be a FR twin now. Willie they meant you to fix it, not strip it bare and remove its National Carrier Status. IATA membership gone and One World abadoned!.

The quick turnarounds for a/c ( A la Ryanair ) have led to one thing........Dirty cabins.

P

Doors to Automatic

17th May 2006, 14:29

I seem to remember that before Willie Walsh arrived the airline was flogging off assets (like fine art!) to generate enough cash to stay afloat on a day-by-day basis.

Perhaps Mr Ahern thinks that was a better state for the airline to be in!?

flyerire

17th May 2006, 14:45

Perhaps we should remember the grave difficulties Aer Lingus was faced with post 9/11.

Who was the man that saved them from the Swissair, Sabena...etc fate???

While he may have been looking to benefit somewhat himself from running the company, would you have liked his position post 9/11?? I would'nt imagine it as being too easy a job!

Either way, for whats its worth, i believe that Aer Lingus's very existence today is down to the Trojan work of Willie Walsh and his team!

RogerIrrelevant69

17th May 2006, 14:56

I wonder would the brave Mr.Ahern repeat this allegation outside of the Dáil?

Or is the cloak of parliamentary privilege being abused?

Given the choice of the two men, I know who I would prefer in charge of a business.

Pigsfly

17th May 2006, 15:03

Wow, its the charge of the Willie Brigade !!!!

Faire d'income

17th May 2006, 16:21

Usually those that swallow everything that Willie throws at them are less public in their affection. :rolleyes:

RogerIrrelevant69

17th May 2006, 17:25

...or the charge of the "Stop talking bollox brigade" and that also includes Ahern :)

Lucifer

17th May 2006, 17:30

Is there an election coming up in Ireland?

I doubt he could get away with it in BA though, its already privatised
Could always do a leveraged buyout to private equity...!

akerosid

17th May 2006, 17:34

In fairness to WW, while I didn't agree with everything he did, I think he deserves better than a dishonourable attack such as this, made with the cover of Dail privilege. Everyone deserves a reputation and it is profoundly unfair - whatever one thinks of WW - to be attacked in this way.

The reality of the situation - and let's face it, we've seen it in many other areas (the airport terminal, for example), that this govt does not move on aviation issues unless it has a sharpened pitchfork prodded into its posterior. The interest SIMPLY ISN'T THERE. Aer Lingus was back from the dead and the govt was just happy to let it amble/struggle along; it didn't plan for a battle with unions and it didn't want it, so you can understand that Bertie was pretty cheesed off when WW went public with calls for privatisation.

At the time he called for the MBO, WW had probably done as much as he could within the bounds of state ownership; he last throw of the dice, as a means to focus attention on the airline's needs, was a call for an MBO. Perhaps it was politically naive, but I don't believe it was seriously intended; its sole function (which worked) was to focus attention on the airline's future.

Whatever one may think of WW, the reality of this govt's attitude to aviation must be understood and its attitude to being forced to take an interest in the subject seen in that context. Aviation will never achieve its potential as a generator of growth as long as Ahern is Taoiseach.

st patrick

17th May 2006, 17:45

Doors to automatic, it was Willie that sold the pics and it was the right thing to do. He also took a lot of tough decisions that others would have shirked from making and it is quite possible that Aer Lingus would not be around if a lot of these things were not done. But it apprears that everything he (by he I include the management team under Willie`s control) touched did not turn to gold! A contract was signed with an outside cleaning company to clean the aircraft in Dublin prior to agreeing this with unions (which is the way things are generally done in this company). It cost a lot of money to get out of this contract (and not a bin emptied by them). He also tried to break a maintenance contract with SR Technics (a deal signed for ten years when Aer Lingus sold their maintenance division) which led to the hiring of contract engineers. SR had an iron-cast deal and those engineers have now been let go. Willie also dropped cargo on short-haul - it is steadily creeping back because it makes money!

I doubt the true version of this story will ever come out!:oh:

Akersoid, I think a better way of forcing the Governments slow hand would have been to announce a bold expansion plan as Mannion has done - a plan that needs a lot of capital - thus landing the ball back in Bertie`s court. Willie did not have an expansion plan( that he shared with others), he certainly didn`t leave one behind for Mannion to follow.

Lucifer general alection must be called in the next 12 months.

Idunno

17th May 2006, 19:45

Perhaps it was politically naive, but I don't believe it was seriously intended; its sole function (which worked) was to focus attention on the airline's future.

Deleted. Personal abuse.

Walsh never did ANYTHING in his business affairs that wasn't coldly calculated to see things come out his way. It didn't matter what it cost - Willy always had to win. If it meant a choice between what was good for Willy and what was good for Aer Lingus...Aer Lingus could go to hell.

In the midst of all the media speculation over his supposed MBO, Walsh never denied it was his intent to actually pursue it until Ahern castigated him in the Dail.
Then suddenly he was falling over himself to quash the rumour.

Clever tactic - a few well placed leaks and then let the media drive the speculation. Run the idea up the flagpole and see who salutes.
Plenty of Irish politicians stood to attention - things looked good for Willy, until Ahern shot him down, and that was the end of his career in Irish aviation!

As to his 'saving the company' Aer Lingus has been through about 4 of these calamities in the last 25 years and has weathered every one. Sure things had to change, but it didn't take a genius to see where the changes had to be. Walsh simply did the obvious. Nothing more, nothing less.

His mistake was he went well beyond what was actually good for the airline in the long run. This error was driven by his greed and personal ambition to own the company. He alienated the staff, the public, and the leader of the government eventually.
He also damaged the companies competitiveness by baulking the much needed expansion in 2002. Now, 4 years on, the whole project is still in turmoil thanks to his mishandling of the recovery.

Incidentally, he has always denigrated the Profession of Piloting in his public comments. He used his insider knowledge of the flight crew function to screw more out of them than any other department in the airline.
Any pilot who believes Walsh was some kind of hero - is either plain stupid, or a traitor to his own profession.

Doors to Automatic

17th May 2006, 21:54

Walsh never did ANYTHING in his business affairs that wasn't coldly calculated to see things come out his way. It didn't matter what it cost - Willy always had to win. If it meant a choice between what was good for Willy and what was good for Aer Lingus...Aer Lingus could go to hell.

That may be the case, I have never met the man and have never had anything to do with EI so can't comment. But I doubt that anyone can argue that were it not for him the airline would not exist today.

Idunno

18th May 2006, 00:39

Are you honestly telling me that you believe nobody else in the whole wide world could've managed the recovery at Aer Lingus?
I'm sure you understand how stupid that sounds.
Now, having established that notion as nonsensical lets ask - do you honestly mean to say nobody else in Europe could have managed the recovery?
Or even nobody in Ireland?
Its a patently stupid notion.
We're narrowing things down a lot now - aren't we!
Aside from the fact that there were probably dozens of people in Ireland who could have done it - there were probably more than a handful in Aer Lingus itself who could have.
Always remember, Walsh was a manager in the company for at least the previous ten years, and Chief Operations Officer for at least two years previous.
Therefore, far from being a saviour,
Of course he could manage Aer Lingus out of a quandry...he'd been there and seen it done before!
Its traditionally been Aer Lingus managements area of expertise! Some would say - it's ALL they're good for!
They've NEVER been much more than a bunch of jumped up Civil Servants.
You insult the people who REALLY saved Aer Lingus because you fail to mention them at all - the ones who picked up the pieces when the years of mismanagement by Walsh and his cronies finally came home to roost in spades.
I refer of course to - THE STAFF.

RogerIrrelevant69

18th May 2006, 06:46

Deary me, BA obviously didn't do there research properly when they appointed their new CEO. They should have asked the staff at Aer Lingus....:hmm:

Anyway, lots of comments to pick over in this article from the venerable Irish Times:

www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2006/0518/2139428890HM1AERLINGUS.html

RogerIrrelevant69

18th May 2006, 10:03

Yeep, absolutely true DTA,

What some people seem to forget is:
The company really was on the brink of extinction that time. Thousands simply had to go or everyone was going to go. End of.
The frequently accessed pot of gold called the Irish Taxpayer had finally dried up, mostly due to the EU.
Bertie Ahern is a north Dublin TD. What percentage of Aer Lingus employees live there? Most of the Dublin based ones.
It's politics. He is a politician. Who is naive when they blindly accept what a politician says 12 months from an election?

Idunno

18th May 2006, 10:35

There may well be many people who could have turned Aer Lingus around. Fact is Walsh DID !
As I previously said - NO he didn't. The Staff did.

Hi RogerIrrelevant - I absolutely agree with you....thousands had to go. And they did. Thus saving the company.

Now I ask you - was that so BRILLIANT? Was that some stroke of GENIUS?

Walsh had been told time and again by ordinary pilots at management seminars that the company was OVER MANNED - yet Walsh's response was ridicule and denial! How do you explain that? The guy was sitting watching the weight pile on, but did nothing about it, and even denied there was a problem.

When the proverbial hit the fan - suddenly he 'realises' the problem and 'rushed' to save the company with a 'stroke of genius' that nobody else could've thought of?? :yuk:

If it wasn't so sick it'd be funny.

RogerIrrelevant69

18th May 2006, 10:55

Not sure who you are quoting when you say:

suddenly he 'realises' the problem and 'rushed' to save the company with a 'stroke of genius' that nobody else could've thought of??

Would Walsh have had difficulty (political or otherwise) making all those people redundant when he first took over? Correct me if I am wrong but I seem to remember Aer Lingus was recording huge profits around the time he took over (as was just about everyone else who could remember to breath).

Then 2001 came along, things not so perfect (global economic downturn had started) and then Sept 11 and wallop. Possibly something to do with timing, but Walsh along with every other CEO of the airlines that survived acted. They had to whether they liked it or not.

Idunno

18th May 2006, 12:49

Not sure who you are quoting when you say:
suddenly he 'realises' the problem and 'rushed' to save the company with a 'stroke of genius' that nobody else could've thought of??
I'm not quoting anyone - its the 'conventional wisdom' spread about my a fawning media and lapped up by the sheeplike public.
Would Walsh have had difficulty (political or otherwise) making all those people redundant when he first took over? Correct me if I am wrong but I seem to remember Aer Lingus was recording huge profits around the time he took over (as was just about everyone else who could remember to breath). Huge profits?!:}
So funny - how you said in your previous post the company was 'always a drag on the taxpayer' and the next it was making 'huge profits'!
You're a bit confused I think.:ugh: Which is it??
Then 2001 came along, things not so perfect (global economic downturn had started) and then Sept 11 and wallop. Possibly something to do with timing, but Walsh along with every other CEO of the airlines that survived acted. They had to whether they liked it or not.
Well ALRIGHT THEN!! So he did no more than what everybody else would've done! As I said already!
Now we're getting somewhere!
Walsh's 'genius' was in fact based on nothing more than a simple twist of fate. Nothing genius about it - just obvious actions that should've been taken years earlier anyhow, only he was too fat dumb and happy, and chose to be a good little civil servant instead, go with the flow, keep his head down, and feather his own nest.

RogerIrrelevant69

18th May 2006, 13:22

No confusion here, however here are some figures regarding Aer Lingus to assist:

1971: loss IR£2.39 million
1981: loss IR£11.2 million
1994: loss IR£1.12 billion in 1994 (yes billion)
1996: profit IR£41 million
1998: profit IR£55 million
2000: 72 million euro profit
2001: 50.4 million euro loss

Number of bail-outs received in the 70's, 80's and 90's? More than one and all Irish taxpayers money which the country found very difficult to afford as it was very very skint back in those days.

But yes it made a big profit in the middle of a humungous economic boom. And this was the time to rationalise staff? Difficult to say the least. More like impossible.

Who said Walsh was a genius? Not me. But clearly good enough to take correct and difficult decisions when required in my opinion. Many would agree. Perhaps not you but there you go.

Irish Steve

18th May 2006, 13:37

Mary Harney has gone on record with comments that are not going to help this go away. As she is in theory No 2 to Ahern, it makes "interesting" reading.

The Tánaiste has told the Dáil she does not share the perspective that three former Aer Lingus executives tried to steal the assets of the airline.
Responding to questions about comments made yesterday by the Taoiseach, Mary Harney said she thought Bertie Ahern may have intended to use the word strip rather than steal.
Ms Harney said her view was that the former Chief Executive, Willie Walsh, had done a fantastic job with the national carrier.

For the full report, go to http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0518/aerlingus.html

For what it's worth, there is no way the unions at Dublin would have accepted anything like the cuts that were eventually required at the time of Walsh's arrival, even if some of the proposed cuts could have been justified. That just wasn't the way things were done in semi state bodies then, and even now, making drastic changes in semi state bodies is still akin to mating elephants. You only have to look at the shambles that surrounds anything to do with progress at Dublin airport to realise that the problems are much deeper than at most places, and take a lot longer to resolve. For many years the same was true at Aer Lingus, which made for huge problems when the time eventually came for a harsh dose of realism to be injected at the core.

Idunno

18th May 2006, 13:57

No confusion here, however here are some figures regarding Aer Lingus to assist:
2000: 72 million euro profit
2001: 50.4 million euro lossGood - so we can again agree that Aer Lingus was always a profitable company. Even when it made a loss in 2001 the net result over 2 years was a PROFIT of 20M.
Not much of a 'drag on the taxpayers' really then, eh?

Number of bail-outs received in the 70's, 80's and 90's? More than one and all Irish taxpayers money which the country found very difficult to afford as it was very very skint back in those days.
That figure you quoted for 1994 is Expletive Deleted! Show me a link to that alleged 1Billion loss in 1994! In fact - show us links for ALL those other figures too - you can't be trusted.

You've fallen into the trap of sucking up the myth encouraged by the Government, that hundreds of millions of pounds were poured into a black hole called Aer Lingus. Nothing could be further from the truth. In its 60 years the Company received £175 million in 1993 as part of the Cahill plan and £60 million in the previous 50 years. A total of 235M, and that includes the initial investment to found the airline.

It made 100M in profit last year alone, and is valued at 600M on flotation.

The NET result will show that Aer Lingus has been hugely PROFITABLE over the long run and a highly valuable public assett. We haven't even touched on the inward revenue generated for the State by tourist links provided by Aer Lingus, or indeed the industrial development and investment in Ireland inc. which was made possible by air links with the US and Europe.
Nor have we considered the millions of pounds/euro generated in taxes for the state by the employees of the company, nor the millions of euros generated for businesses serving the airport and Aer Lingus.

The numbers are staggering when you think about it.
Except of course when you'd rather NOT think about anything - except what you're TOLD to think.

But yes it made a big profit in the middle of a humungous economic boom. And this was the time to rationalise staff? Difficult to say the least. More like impossible.
Yes, absolutely! That was the time to rationalise staffing levels - when the company had the money to fund redundancies and incentivise the excess numbers to leave.
Most of the dead wood was in administration personnel, not in the productive operations side of the company. It would have improved the bottom line and increased efficiency. Aer Lingus now manages its admin just as well with a quarter of the pen pushers.

Who said Walsh was a genius? Not me. But clearly good enough to take correct and difficult decisions when required in my opinion. Many would agree. Perhaps not you but there you go.This is just more waffle. He was an opportunist handed an opportunity. He blew it by getting greedy.

Tom the Tenor

18th May 2006, 14:07

Prior to Mr Mannion being appointed as the new boss in EI were there any options for new aeroplanes cancelled? Just a query.

RogerIrrelevant69

18th May 2006, 14:18

Idunno you're a gas man as they say but I am getting very bored with this, so you are entirely right and I am entirely wrong. Aer Lingus has always been a great success, never cost the Irish tax payer a cent, the money didn't go missing it was resting, everyone on board was worth their weight, etc, etc, if it hadn't been for those darn interfering kids in Ryanair we could have got away with it, etc, etc, blah, blah, and there goes a flying pig.

Idunno

18th May 2006, 14:31

Deleted. Personal abuse.

RogerIrrelevant69

18th May 2006, 14:56

I like it, good reply Idunno!

...but before I do, I forgot to mention not only am I wrong so is:

Mary Harney,
Mary O'Rourke (note: Fianna Fail but not north county Dublin...),
Most Irish taxpayers who did not work for Aer Lingus,
The entire board of B.A.
and of course Willie Walsh and oh I forgot to mention Elvis wasn't too happy about the financial arrangements either.

Get real, if Aer Lingus hadn't been dug out of the **** all of those times, it wouldn't be still around. That is life, even for semi-state black holes.
A few glorious years in the late 90's and 2000 does not make it a financial success.

PS: actually got around to reading your last load of drivel and spotted this:

In fact - show us links for ALL those other figures too - you can't be trusted.

You cheeky boy! Anyway as you appear to have difficulty using google here is one link for you:

http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Aer-Lingus-Group-plc-Company-History.html

There are others but I'll leave that to you to find.

akerosid

18th May 2006, 18:04

OK guys, can we turn down the temperature a bit!

Idunno, you're right - I never met WW, but one thing I do know for certain is that over the last nine years or so, Ahern has had an appalling record on aviation policy. You've seen it with the airport and on so many other areas. There is no interest or pro-activity; things only happen because the govt is pushed into doing them.

I believe - possibly quite wrongly - that WW tried to twist Ahern's arm into making the airline go public by floating the MBO issue. In saying that, my aim is not to defend WW, but to point out that prodding with a sharpened pitchfork is the only way to get the govt to move on aviation policy. Look at the airport as an example; about six months was spent last year debating it (and you'll recall that you and I argued about that too) and the solution was politically motivated. We didn't even know where the terminal was going to be until September and even then, no one noticed that it completely blocked off growth for cargo traffic/access to parking stands.

This is the kind of mentality we're dealing with. It's incredibly frustrating that in a country so dependant on air transport, there is such a lastlustre, lethargic and disinterested approach to aviation policy and that has to be challenged. It's simply not acceptable that it is simply a pawn in a chess game. But we accept that and here, we allow ourselves to be sidetracked by what WW did or didn't do a few years back. Focus on the future: how is an interest in - and proactivity in - aviation policy going to be encouraged?

RogerIrrelevant69

18th May 2006, 19:09

Couldn't agree more aeroskid, the future is more important and leaving it in the hands of those politician clowns is far from ideal.

However coming back to the original business of the thread, I don't think I have ever agreed with Mary Harney in the past but compared to Ahern's spiteful remarks, I think she is much closer to the truth in her evaluation of WW. Ahern hasn't and won't repeat the essence of what he said as he has clearly made a right eejit of himself. Parliamentary privilege or not.

akerosid

18th May 2006, 21:57

Is it absolutely necessary for you to abuse and patronise people who don't agree with you. As I said above, I don't particularly care about WW. I'm trying to look to the future. The key issue is whether the current government has sufficient interest in or ability to recognise the importance of aviation to the Irish economy. I tend to doubt it.

We can argue about what WW did or didn't do or to whom. You say I am trying to give WW a positive spin; I'm merely saying that in order to get the govt to take action on aviation issues, YOU NEED TO PROVOKE THEM. They will NOT act responsibly of their own volition; aviation is a very low priority for them and that needs to be changed. And while you accuse me of giving WW a positive spin, you constantly give him a very negative spin, to the extent that you defend the single biggest threat to aviation's ability to serve the Irish economy - the Taoiseach.

Now, I really don't want to get into a drawn out argument with you; we saw that on the Aer Lingus thread a few days ago and it ruined it for other people, so please, let's be courteous. More importantly, let's focus on the things we can change. WW is BA's problem now; the other BA is ours ...

PPRuNe Pop

18th May 2006, 23:30

Idunno

You are treading thin ice.

If you continue with snide and abuse in your posts you will find yourself unable to make posts. Your other post that my colleague Evileyes removed, and together with your later one it shows that you have no sense of debate. Slagging others will not be tolerated. They have as much right to their opinion as you do. Please take heed, you will not have another warning.

Evileyes

18th May 2006, 23:32

Well done to those who showed the maturity to keep the thread on-topic and civil despite the provocations which we edited out above. akerosid is quite right when he suggests that we carry on with a bit more curtesy between the viewpoints.

Cheers,
The Mods

akerosid

19th May 2006, 03:26

The Taoiseach has really put his foot in it over this issue, with challenges to come out fighting. Actually, I'm really surprised he did this, because it is unlike him; it's usually very difficult to get him to express an opinion on anything.

There's a lovely quote from Pat Rabbitte in response to the Tainiste's comment about what Bertie actually meant. I've leave you to read it ...

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1615950&issue_id=14057

RogerIrrelevant69

19th May 2006, 08:24

Hi akerosid,

Any chance you could cut and paste some of that Indo report. I'm not an Indo subscriber and would like to see what Mr.Rabbitte had to say. Used to be one of my local TD's - good bloke - believe or not a genuinely good honest politician.

Actually hold that akerosid, I found coverage in the Examiner (it's free!):

http://www.irishexaminer.com/text/story.asp?j=996600&p=996864&n=996892

How odd, I'm not a politician or a lawyer but it appears every opposition party and even the coalition partner have taken the same position as me: disgraceful comment and an abuse of parliamentary privilege. Mr. Ahern you are the weakest link, goodbye.

PS: good work moderators, your intervention was timely, that Idunno bloke was beginning to wind me up. He nearly suckered me into hurling abuse back at him but I (just barely) managed to hold back. I think I may have to subscribe to pprune now!

MarkD

19th May 2006, 11:45

Idunno

that E100m euro operating profit was E2m net after exceptionals from Willie's axe swinging.

GodsCountry

19th May 2006, 13:16

As another former EI'er who saw the light and escaped during the Walsh years I had the opportunity to meet and work with him on occasions. Whether you liked his style or not there was no doubt that there was a very active and ruthless mind working in the background. Did his masterplan go too far - possibly. Did the staff contribute to the turnaround - undoubtably, but not without alot of wailing and gnashing of teeth from Bertie's buddies in SIPTU and to an extent in IMPACT (and not forgetting a significantly increased shareholding).

As for Bertie having a swipe at WW, typical of his get votes at any cost attitude. Whilst I'm not so sure I'd like to see "Inda" as Taoiseach I'd love to see Bertie fall.

RogerIrrelevant69

19th May 2006, 14:39

GodsCountry,

What a choice indeed. Will be interesting to see how that works out next year!

I agree with your comment regarding WW in that there has to be "very active and ruthless mind working". I did mention earlier on, before a certain gentleman started to flame me, that BA would not go into hiring WW on newspaper headlines. They had to study him closely and obviously they liked what they found.

I remember my grandfather saying to me years ago "Ireland is a nation of begrudgers". I thought that had all long since past based on the outward success of recent years but maybe not. Just imagine if a successful American airline CEO type had been parachuted in to Aer Lingus to take over and do what WW did. Would he have been castigated by Ahern and others? No, they would have said "Jaysus, why didn't we think of that, you've saved the company, halleyuyah, we'll make a saint of you yet". But an Irishman does it and what happens, they jump all over him and defame him in the Dail.

Well the begrudgers can **** off as far as I'm concerned. That same man now runs one of the greatest airlines in the world and I for one hope he is a great success.

Faire d'income

19th May 2006, 14:58

RogerIrrelevant you make the common mistake of believing the figures that are published about Aer Lingus.

The predicted loss for 2001 was €130m. The actual loss posted was €50m. A close look at the books would reveal some interesting decisions made after 911. A lot of money seems to have left the company at a time when Mr Walsh warned the board ( Dentists and B&B owners ) they could be guilty of reckless trading.

EI-DAA appears to have been purchased ( not leased ) after 911. What did an A330 cost in 2001? Also some serious fuel hedging seems to have taken place after 911. Odd for a company that was allegedly trading from week to week.

The only source of the story that Willie Walsh saved Aer Lingus from doom is eh...Willie Walsh.

I choose not to believe him. You choose otherwise, fair enough.

RogerIrrelevant69

19th May 2006, 17:49

Faire d'income,

I'm confused. The only figure I quoted for 2001 was:

"2001: 50.4 million euro loss"

Not sure where the €130 came from. However, those figures are not my point at all. I 've said it before, AL did make stonking good profits in the late 90's and of course in the year 2000. After that it all went horribly wrong for AL and a lot of other national flag carriers. Someone had to sort it out. In AL's case it fell to WW and he (in my opinion) did what was needed to be done. It wasn't extraordinary what he did, any CEO of a fully private firm worth his salt would have done exactly the same. Difference is they probably would have emptied out the pension fund to fund the redundancy payments and covered it up with creative accounting!

Don't get me wrong, I am not a worshipper of WW but I respect the man's ability which he clearly has. I have worked for many different directors and the true test of any of them has always been their reaction to when the **** hits the fan. The **** hit the fan by the van load for AL. WW reacted correctly - in my opinion.

Faire d'income

19th May 2006, 18:01

Not sure where the €130 came from.

It came from the Board. That is what they told the Government the loss for the year would be. They subsequently posted the loss as €50m. I would guess the purchase of the last A330 cost over €100m. I would love to know exactly how much they spent on hedging after 911.

I think Mr Ahern should have a good look at the 2001 accounts and the various transactions that occurred at the time.

Reducing the number of staff was hardly an inspired decision. Getting the politicians to accept it was an achievement that Walsh deserves some credit for.

Selling the paintings was a stunt for the impressionable.

akerosid

21st May 2006, 07:30

"Selling the paintings was a stunt for the impressionable"

Maybe the paintings were by impressionists? (Sorry - couldn't resist!)

Anyway, the Great One is being well and truly carved up for a Sunday roast by the papers, from Matt Cooper in the Sunday Times, to the attached, from the Indo. Whether it's a focus on the outrageousness of attacking someone under Dail privilege, to the fact that it diverted attention away from his own (and his governments' - I use the plural, because it's over the past decade) abysmal record on Aer Lingus.

At least one of the papers has commented on how Ahern's vacillation and SIPTU's refusal to visit planet Earth have played into Michael O'Leary's hands. What an irony, since neither are likely to be on each other's Christmas card lists!

Where do we go from here? Well, hopefully, people will start looking more closely at the Taoiseach's record on aviation issues. It's usually so hard to get him to express an opinion on anything, but when he does so, he really puts his foot in it; I'm not defending Walsh - he isn't the focus of this thread, as much as Ahern. The recent opinion polls, even though they were taken before this debacle, are encouraging. Hopefully the opposition can build on this and take the initiative to focus attention on the need for a positive, constructive and aggressively proactive aviation policy.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=36&si=1617991&issue_id=14075

GodsCountry

21st May 2006, 12:31

I think the great fence sitter has changed sides so many times he doesnt know fact from fiction any more. His most recent statements about the health service no really being in crisis just reinforces this. You can be sure he's never had to wait days on a trolley in A&E. Let them eat cake and all that.

His swipe at WW stinks of vote plugging to keep the people of the northside happy along with his cronies in that dinosaur SIPTU. To hell with what is best for the country/company. SIPTU keep harping on about the govt having the ability to invest in EI if they want to. Sounds great except there are far more deserving causes (black holes) such as the health service and education to chuck the money into.:rolleyes:

maxalt

22nd May 2006, 10:24

What about the 'State Holding Company' idea then?

GodsCountry

22nd May 2006, 13:59

Not 100% sure of the detail of the state holding company notion but is that an extension of the semi state idea over again just another step removed? Also where would the investment come from in this instance ie govt or private investment.

The big decision needed to be made by govt is how do they want the airline to be run. If they are happy to keep investing/bailing out the airline whilst protecting the jobs that are there then fine let it remain in state hands and let them justify the expenditure versus the potential return/strategic value of the airline. However if they want it to have a commercial mandate then it needs to be allowed perform in a commercial manner and take tough decisions when required without worrying about the political ramifications of those decisions. Requires a major mindset change if thats the route they want to go down and following Bertie's outburst god only knows what he thinks is the right thing to do.

maxalt

22nd May 2006, 17:59

So you don't know anything about the State Holding Company idea?
Maybe you need to do some research. Try to think outside the box.

'Take tough decisions'?
Thats just code for 'Shaft the employees'.

The only tough thing that needs doing at ALT now is getting money for expansion. Thats really NOT that tough. Just politically sensitive.

The State Holding Company works well elsewhere - its one option...if you're actually even VAGUELY bothered to think of ANY option beyond 'GET RID OF IT'.

RogerIrrelevant69

23rd May 2006, 07:35

I think GodsCountry has a fair question. Is their a handy definition of a 'state holding company'? And where does the investment come from in such a company?

Having read a lot of Aer Lingus related stuff in the newspapers in Ireland this weekend, mostly taking a fair old dig at Bertie but written with no new insight or ideas, the state holding company was one idea not floated. All any of the journos came up with was why has the floatation been delayed for so long and now it looks like they may have missed the boat. Well from my experience most economics journos talk utter horsepoo (as witnessed by their 100% incorrect predictions prior to the tech stock crash of 2000: "let's all buy eircom and Baltimore shares....."), so much of what they speculate about has to be taken with a rather large lorry load of salt.

However, I'm sure the majority of Irish people (including me) would prefer Aer Lingus to remain an Irish company. But is there a way to do it without incurring the wrath of EU law, unfair competition rules, MOL, etc, etc...?

Just a genuine question, not a cue for anything else.....

GodsCountry

23rd May 2006, 08:50

Maxalt,

I said I am not 100% familiar with the detail - not no idea. I am perfectly happy for EI to remain in government control in whatever guise as long as it can continue to be a viable entity. I still remain a shareholder in EI and as such want to retain the value of it that I and my colleagues worked hard for. I dont make any apologies for having capitalist leanings and took my chances and left EI when I did. Having a floatation where the govt retain 25.1% and the ESOT retains 14.9% is hardly getting rid of. If the govt are serious about maintaining the strategic asset they and the ESOT still control a very serious block of voting power.

Tough decisions do not necessarily mean "shaft the employees" - in my opinion that is an easy cop out for people cloistered in a semi state mind set where commercial realities are something for management to worry about but the staff isolate themselves from. I believe many of the staff that remain in EI are hard working and have a genuine interest in contributing to the company's sucess but in the same way that sacrifices were made during the survival plan (for which staff were compensated) alot of the current restrictive work practices have to be examined, but this goes back to my previous post - is the company to operate with a commercial mandate or not. If not then fine continue to do what you do but if so then the tough decisions notions apply.

Irish Steve

23rd May 2006, 20:31

Seems Bertie has at last had the decency to accept that his comments were inappropriate.

RTE is now covering his withdrawal of the earlier comments.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2006/0523/aerlingus.html

As to the reason, we will have to wait and see. It has been suggested locally that the presence of a large number of Aer Lingus workers in the constituency that is represented by Mr Ahern may have been a factor in his comments.

It's clear from the rumblings in the background that there has been a lot more said out of earshot of the press and other politicians:E

Maybe some of the problem is that Bertie apparently HATES flying, and has made that feeling more than clear on several occasions.

It's just a pity that none of them seem to be even remotely capable of thinking with any sort of clarity about anything related to transport issues. Bottom line is that Ireland is fundamentally dependant on transportation for just about everything, but there seems to be no clarity of thought or vision about how to make transportation services successful, or even acceptably accessible. We've seen hiatus with Aer Lingus, the airports, the rail services, Ferry services, and the road systems. Almost all of them have severe problems with structure, efficiency, accessibilty, affordability, and in some cases even availability, but nothing of any real serious quality or signinificance seems to come from the people that are supposed to be leading things in a forward direction. Instead, we get fudge after fiddle after tweak, and the end result is that so many things that are apparent to the dogs in the street are unchanged 10 years later, and likely to remain so for a long time to come.

Such is life in good old laid back Ireland, sure, it it were any more laid back it would be horizontal!

At least he's had the decency to recognise that the comment he made was unacceptable. A small step for mankind, a gigantic leap for a politician:E