View Full Version : Albania takes Ansett plane

4th Mar 2003, 00:05
Tues "Courier Mail"

Albania takes Ansett plane
By John Masanauskas

ANSETT administrators are celebrating the sale of an aircraft to former Stalinist state Albania.

Exactly one year after the last Ansett plane carried passengers, the administrators are happy to make any sale in a depressed global aviation market.

The BAE 146 aircraft flew out of Melbourne last month to join the Air Albania fleet.

Ansett co-administrator Mark Korda said yesterday that almost $700 million had been raised through asset sales since the airline collapsed in September 2001.

Mr Korda and partner Mark Mentha then tried to sell Ansett to the Lindsay Fox and Solomon Lew Tesna group.

But the high-profile Melbourne businessmen pulled out of negotiations and the airline finally folded on March 4 last year.

Speaking on the first anniversary of Ansett Mark II's demise, Mr Korda defended the administrators' decision to keep the airline flying after its initial collapse.

"Our strategy was to put the planes into the air in order to attract bidders," he said.

"It was definitely the right thing to do."

He said asset sales in cluding Kendell Airlines, Ansett's city head office and the former Melbourne airport terminal were solid gains.

He said that his biggest disappointments were the inability to sell more planes and a court battle with Ansett superannuation trustees. The trustees recently lost a Supreme Court action to recover at least $200 million from the administration, but they may still appeal the decision.

"It's very disappointing that the trustees have tied up this money. We can't distribute it to employees," Mr Korda said.

It has also been revealed that:

ADMINISTRATION costs have topped $300 million, including at least $33 million in management fees.

FEDERAL Cabinet will consider scrapping the Ansett ticket levy on March 24 pending the superannuation trustees' appeal.

ABOUT 100 out of a total 134 aircraft have been sold, leased or redelivered for a return of $45 million.

Mr Korda said he hoped aircraft sales would raise at least $150 million, giving former employees an average total return of 88c in each dollar owed

Buster Hyman
4th Mar 2003, 00:14
We sold an aircraft! We sold an aircraft!!

Break out the Dom boys! The money is rolling in now....err....maybe in...err...18months time....and....errr....it'll probably end up being 10c in the dollar....err...can someone lend me 10 bucks to go to Liquorland???:mad: :} :* :yuk:

4th Mar 2003, 01:19
... and it was a 146!!!

I'll be damned.


4th Mar 2003, 22:31
ADMINISTRATION costs have topped $300 million, including at least $33 million in management fees.

And my guess the Administration will be good for many more Big Buck$ for many more years to come............ Don't count your .88 cents in the dollar too quickly! :yuk:

ABOUT 100 out of a total 134 aircraft have been sold, leased or redelivered for a return of $45 million.

Average $450,000 per aircraft?????????? Sounds like approximately $4.50 per kilogram!

7th Mar 2003, 10:47
Remind me, don't the administration costs get deducted from the funds raised to pay the AN employee's? If so how do they propose to pay 88cents in the dollar if 300 million is to be deducted for admin. costs? Whats your P.O. box Buster, I'll lend you ten while I have it.

Buster Hyman
7th Mar 2003, 14:00
It's 3043 thanks Goose, and I'll bluddy well take it too!!!:D :) :O :rolleyes: :( :* :mad: :} :yuk:

7th Mar 2003, 14:13
When are the AN staff going to wake up, take back control of their money from the Unions and the Bobsey twins and brief a bunch of forensic accountants and lawyers to go have a long hard look at how their funds are being diminished.

It's about time that Joe Average woke up and worked out that he is being done over by the yuppie putative Masters of the Universe, just about everywhere he turns.

HIH, AMP, OneTel, FAI, Ansett, Colonial, BHP/Billiton, ex Govt Utilities getting bailed out by Govt, Telstra, Commonwealth Bank & Piggeries, it goes on and on and on and nobody goes to goal.

Every time I see a Porsche Boxter go past driven by a young kid in a suit, I just know he legally stole the money to pay for it.

7th Mar 2003, 20:06

Included in the 300m. admin costs is the cost of chasing the fairy tale with Fow and Lew. If they hadn't done that , in fact if the unions hadn't sacked the "fair dinkum" liquidators and put the two showponies in control , then we would all have had a lot more money in our pockets and we would have had it now.

I'd hate to know how much s going to lawyers .

7th Mar 2003, 22:13
I realise what's behind your sentiments, Gaunty, but just what the hell do you expect the AN people to do? Power is invested in the administrators, there is no way we can get it back now. We, more than anyone else, are aware of the apparent short-comings of the "system", obviously set up to keep M & M in funds forever, but would you please explain why, in light of the current use of power, we should believe that a "bunch of forensic accountants" would be an improvement? Why would they not want their collective snouts in our trough? I'd love to be able to go to my fund manager with funds to add to the meagre amount supposed to keep myself and wife for our retirement, but HOW?

Kind regards,


Buster Hyman
8th Mar 2003, 01:02

I couldn't agree more, in fact, there is actually a groundswell at the moment. Whether it amounts to anything, is anyones guess though. I think the real pity, is that if it did happen, we'd all just watch another chunk of the monies disappear in the legal challenges to our action.:(

No, the vultures came out when AN died and they're very hungry.:mad:

8th Mar 2003, 02:03

It's really very, very simple.

Control of who does what to whom and how, remains in the control of the Creditors, ie you guys.

You, or at least the majority, gave the Unions or whoever by a majority "vote" your proxy to act on your behalf.

Inevitably the "committee" you have appointed become victims of the "Stockholm Syndrome". It is to them to whom you should address your first attention and failing a satisfactory response, replace them.

As I undersdtand it, that proxy can be revoked, that is by an appropriate "vote" of the Creditors, if they are not happy with the results or have misgivings about the way their interest are being handled.

This should have happened way long ago, certainly at the time of the FLEW "fairy tale".

The fact that there did not appear to be ANY legally enforceable "contract" OR "earnest" required, in the form of serious cash deposit monies in return for an "exclusive opportunity" to go see if they could buy an airline using the airline staffs unfunded entitlements for free with a lot of Government blackmail and without actually stumping up with their own hard earned was breathtaking beyond belief.

It is unlikelyy that P & W or any others for that matter would have fallen fo that little beauty.

You gotta remember in the context of the times, that Andersens were in deep self destruct mode at the time, with the partners and staff facing imminent "disemployment".
When you have a big fat plum like the AN Liquidation in your hands, the temptation to keep it alive and as the foundation for your new job would be irresistible to most.

Liquidation Administration whatever is to be for the benefit of the creditors.

A forensic accountant would be able to put his "finger" on what has actually been going on and as for "legal challenges", I am not one of them buzzards, but as I understand it, "sacking" and appointing another Administrator by a [b]majority of Creditors is no more or less difficult and has the same legal weight as the "sacking" of P & W in the beginning and the appointment of Andersens by your proxies.

The solution, as for most things in life, remains in your hands.

The AN staff were driven onto the guns, for a whole lot of "reasons" and "agenda", mostly political, most of which, no longer have any relevance.

I would suggest that most AN staff have now either gone back to sleep, got another job and got on with it, and/or have resigned themselves to receiving whatever "largesse" the administrators decide to serve up to them, as a bonus. :rolleyes:

It may not be too late to ensure, as is often the case, that the income = costs and a mouthful of feathers for the creditors.:yuk:

10th Mar 2003, 08:01
Gaunty I am not very refined in the matters of law but my thoughts were running along the lines of the creditors filing some class action suit to recover the entitlements which have been recovered but not yet distributed. Though some monies have been paid it seems a fair amount of cash still sits in waiting and at the same time it is being eroded by the growing cost of having it sit there.

Buster, must catch up on an overnight one day soon. I'll bring the ten AND buy us a beer. Thats after I study my preflight inspection books.......:rolleyes:

Buster Hyman
10th Mar 2003, 08:29
...Beauty Goose! :D I'll be there....you'll be able to tell me from the crowd, I'll be the dishevelled one mumbling about how Reg would never have put up with this!!!:(


10th Mar 2003, 21:53
Now, correct me if I'm wrong.....
didn't a company called Oracle only a short time ago, win a case in court?
Being unhappy about joining the line to recover cash from the Administrators, they went straight to the parent company and jumped the queue.
Air New Zealand were ruled as responsible as the parent company and had to pay up.
We now have a prescedent set!
As an ex- Ansett employee, what the hell are we waiting for?
I think it's time to host a few "reunion" meetings and apply some momentum to this issue and get some closure.
I feel alot stronger in myself now in the world after my world fell down around me. I'd like to get on with it now.
"I'm as made as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!"

Pimp Daddy
10th Mar 2003, 22:38
The company was Orica (ICI) and I believe the case succeeded because the company had a travel contract with Air New Zealand for Australasia that stipulated Australian travel and rebates more importantly would be on Ansett.

It wasn't that Air New Zealand was judged responsible, it was a breach of contract case so doesn't really set a precedent.