Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > ATC Issues
Reload this Page >

Government Shareholding in NATS to be Disposed of

Wikiposts
Search
ATC Issues A place where pilots may enter the 'lions den' that is Air Traffic Control in complete safety and find out the answers to all those obscure topics which you always wanted to know the answer to but were afraid to ask.

Government Shareholding in NATS to be Disposed of

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 12:04
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sunny Warwickshire
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Government Shareholding in NATS to be Disposed of

Chancellor announced in Budget that Government Shareholding in NATS to be disposed of.

Had to happen eventually!!

Anyone got a few million spare?
radar707 is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 12:58
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Not much of a surprise, been on the cards for a while.
The question is, who wants it ?
The airlines are strapped for cash & given a chance, The Airline Group would sell their shares too.
Mr A Tis is online now  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 13:57
  #3 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'm sure there's a private equity firm, with a short term view, out there somewhere. We do have some assets worth stripping.
Roffa is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 15:16
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Awesome, bring on making money in a non profit making organisation.

I feel safe already
5milesbaby is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 15:46
  #5 (permalink)  
Spitoon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
We do have some assets worth stripping.
Ummm???????
 
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 16:38
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ummm???????
The pension fund for a start ....
Ali Bongo is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 16:42
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeah, that'll be the only reason anyone wants to buy us.

Anybody seen that dry powder anywhere? Remember that stuff? Anybody? Hello?..

rab-k is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 16:54
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Any new owners of NATS would only be entitled to take any pension contribution surplus that they have accrued and I do not believe that the Civil Aviation Authority Pension Scheme (NATS Section) is in surplus.
I would think however that in the event of a takeover the right of existing employees to be members of the CAAPS would be under great threat.

Last edited by DC10RealMan; 22nd Jun 2010 at 20:10.
DC10RealMan is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 17:26
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Age: 45
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The dry powder blew away in a light breeze when 30% of members couldn't be arsed voting one way or another to stop our pensions being changed.
Todays announcement was widely expected but it was the only line in the budget that made me wince.
It's probably downhill from here as far as our Ts and Cs are concerned
rolaaand is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 17:29
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: That France
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
<<< It's probably downhill from here as far as our Ts and Cs are concerned >>>

No change there then from way way back.
Minesthechevy is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 17:50
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: london
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Don't bank on Prospect

No doubt the "union" will rage against this. But as seen in the past the Union is very similar to a chocolate teapot and as much use.
mr not grumble is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 21:49
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: -
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
rolaaand

The dry powder blew away in a light breeze when 30% of members couldn't be arsed voting one way or another to stop our pensions being changed.
Turnout for the last Unite/BASSA vote was 71% - wonder if they're still going on about the 29% who "couldn't be arsed"?

The Budget document states in the section "Asset Sales" that

"as part of a wider programme of asset commercialisation over the next 12 months the Government will:
  • explore with other shareholders the options for a potential sale process in NATS".
As a shareholder, I look forward to being consulted.


Budget 2010 .pdf
rab-k is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2010, 22:00
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,365
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Who would buy into a company that was not for profit? Unless of course the goal posts were to be moved again.
Mr A Tis is online now  
Old 23rd Jun 2010, 07:18
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
One option: a stock market flotation?

Exclusive: Gatwick Owner Plots Bid For NATS | Gatwick | Air_Traffic | NATS | Kleinman | Sky News Blogs
anna_list is offline  
Old 23rd Jun 2010, 07:18
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: South of England
Posts: 1,172
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
If they've got a growing aviation sector then they may get a lot out of coming into NATS who are well respected worldwide. They could gain a lot of valuable expertise for their own sectors by _______ our company.

Note : Insert suitable adjective to the above blank space.
I think you mean "verb" - present, continuous, active!

2 s
2 sheds is offline  
Old 24th Jun 2010, 10:10
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,820
Received 98 Likes on 71 Posts
I was told by a trustee of the IAL pension Scheme that SERCo only bought IAL because of it's pension scheme; he was on 'gardening leave' (minimum pay after a job in the middle east)due to his refusal to let SERCo get their sticky fingers on the money!!
chevvron is offline  
Old 24th Jun 2010, 11:39
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 5116N00044W
Age: 76
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wouldn't worry too much about a prospective purchaser planning a raid on the pension fund! The latest valuation gives:
  • The value of the assets is £2,804.9M
  • The technical provisions (the assets needed to meet member benefits if the scheme continues as a going concern) are £3156.0M (funding ratio 89%)
  • The value of the solvency liabilities (the assets needed to buy insurance policies to provide member benefits earned to date) is £4,433.6M (statutory estimate of solvency 63%)
Any new owner will have to match the new employer contribution rates (36.7%), rather than being able to draw on any surplus. I don't think that Schedule 22 of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 offers any quick wins for any new owner here!
PeltonLevel is offline  
Old 24th Jun 2010, 12:22
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mr not grumble
No doubt the "union" will rage against this. But as seen in the past the Union is very similar to a chocolate teapot and as much use.
The Union is only as strong as it's members. If they are chocolate can't be arsed members then don't blame the organisation.....Having been through what you are about to go through, my condolences for your T's & C's. Your pension will end up being a lot less than you had planned for....Unless of course there are not so many chocolate warriors out there and you are prepared to fight for them.
call100 is offline  
Old 24th Jun 2010, 16:16
  #19 (permalink)  
StandupfortheUlstermen
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of Wurzelsetshire
Age: 53
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Union rules state that if the govt announces a sale of the rest of it's shareholding (or part of) then the union shall ballot for industrial action. It's there in the standing orders, there's no way round it (unless members vote to give it up). Each member needs to let their rep know what they want to happen should the govt push the plan further, rather than bleating about what has gone before and fighting amongst ourselves.
Standard Noise is offline  
Old 24th Jun 2010, 16:37
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Union rules state that if the govt announces a sale of the rest of it's shareholding (or part of) then the union shall ballot for industrial action. It's there in the standing orders, there's no way round it (unless members vote to give it up).
Was that the same standing order that said if they tamper with the pension fund then they ballot the members?
Ali Bongo is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.