MERGED: Alan's still not happy......
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas inflating its crisis: Air NZ chief Christopher Luxon
Pretty strong words from across the ditch...
It appears AJ is making more bad vibes for the Qantas brand than he first may have thought... 
SOPS, possibly why AJ has been quiet on media front the last week or so, someone may have told him to zip it, as he has made a bit of a goose of himself since late November.. the above story helps confirm this for me which may well be the case, along with what many on here have already said .. poor AJ
QANTAS has been accused of creating a misconception that it is about to go broke while making "outrageous" and "offensive" attempts to label Air New Zealand as a predatory, state-owned airline seeking its destruction. In the first public comments by any of the three airline investors in Virgin Australia, Air NZ chief executive Christopher Luxon accused Qantas of orchestrating a crisis that had hurt its brand as well as undermined the confidence of its customers and employees.
"I think it's quite outrageous and frankly quite offensive to be positioning Air New Zealand as a predatory state-owned airline wanting to cripple and hurt Qantas," Mr Luxon told The Weekend Australian. "Our strategic rationale for investing in Virgin is extremely clear and has remained unchanged. We want to be able to have exposure to markets across the whole of the Pacific Rim and weight our assets and our market risk accordingly.
"The other thing for us is it's a natural investment because it's a very large connected, adjacent market to New Zealand."
Far from the picture painted by Qantas, Mr Luxon said Air NZ was a listed company that acted commercially and rationally at all times. He said it was a more efficient use of Air NZ's capital to invest in Virgin than to attempt to start its own services in Australia.
"We're a fully listed company that's not state-controlled; we have a 100 per cent independent board and we're legally obliged to act in the interests of all our shareholders," he said. "And the government of New Zealand has not, and will not, guarantee Air New Zealand's debt.
"So we are a pure commercial enterprise and our objective for investing in Virgin is purely commercial, and I think it is bit disingenuous to be positioning us as someone who is deliberately wanting to hurt Qantas."
Qantas recently had its investment grade credit rating with Standard & Poor's downgraded to junk after it revealed it expected to record an interim underlying pre-tax loss of up to $300 million. It has been conducting a lobbying campaign for government assistance, arguing that moves by key Virgin airlines shareholders Air NZ, Etihad Airways and Singapore Airlines to support a $350m entitlement offer has created an unlevel playing field in Australian aviation.
Mr Luxon said Air NZ was not about to stand by and let Qantas weaken Virgin to a point of insolvency so that the bigger airline could have a complete monopoly again.
While he believed Qantas was in "a challenging place", he said the airline remained well-resourced by international airline standards.
He believed Qantas had created a misconception and a disconnect that it was about to go broke when it was an incredibly well-resourced company with massive natural advantages in the Australian marketplace.
"I don't quite understand the narrative in Australia, given it feels like the creation of artificial, orchestrated crisis which ultimately hurts the brand, the share price and undermines confidence from customers and ultimately employees," Mr Luxon said. "The reality is there are quite a lot of levers available to improve any business and Qantas is still free to attract foreign capital if they wish. They are still free to undertake a rights issue as Virgin has done; they are certainly free to improve the basis of their cost levers within their businesses as Air New Zealand has done over a decade."
Mr Luxon said it was up to Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce and his team to work out what they needed to do and he acknowledged that the aviation industry was tough. "We clearly have competition from Jetstar in New Zealand and it's a very good thing," he said. "They are a very good competitor and that competition is very energising and very good for Air New Zealand. And so I think the reverse works in the Australian marketplace as well."
Air NZ boosted its stake in Virgin to 24.5 per cent as a result of the capital raising and has Foreign Investment Review Board permission to lift that to 25.9 per cent.
Mr Luxon said that was a decision for the future and the the airline was at the level it wanted to be in terms of exposure to markets and assets. He reiterated comments earlier in the year that Air NZ did not want to see Virgin privatised and the scrutiny involved in being publicly listed was good for management. Air NZ, Etihad and Singapore will also be invited to join Virgin's board, but Mr Luxon said he had yet to consider whether to take up the seat.
"It probably makes sense now given that we have $400m invested in the business to be able to participate in that board . . . It's a very good board, it's obviously full of Australian independent directors and an Australian independent chairman. We'll work our way through that and Virgin will work its way through that in the next few months I imagine."
Commenting on Australian reports of potential tensions between airline shareholders, Mr Luxon said Air NZ saw the other shareholders as being very constructive and very invested in making sure "Virgin can compete very effectively against a massive monopoly competitor".
He said the relationship with Virgin continued to deepen across the Tasman, although they competed vigorously on other markets such as the Pacific.
Steve Creedy travelled to Auckland courtesy of Air New Zealand.
"I think it's quite outrageous and frankly quite offensive to be positioning Air New Zealand as a predatory state-owned airline wanting to cripple and hurt Qantas," Mr Luxon told The Weekend Australian. "Our strategic rationale for investing in Virgin is extremely clear and has remained unchanged. We want to be able to have exposure to markets across the whole of the Pacific Rim and weight our assets and our market risk accordingly.
"The other thing for us is it's a natural investment because it's a very large connected, adjacent market to New Zealand."
Far from the picture painted by Qantas, Mr Luxon said Air NZ was a listed company that acted commercially and rationally at all times. He said it was a more efficient use of Air NZ's capital to invest in Virgin than to attempt to start its own services in Australia.
"We're a fully listed company that's not state-controlled; we have a 100 per cent independent board and we're legally obliged to act in the interests of all our shareholders," he said. "And the government of New Zealand has not, and will not, guarantee Air New Zealand's debt.
"So we are a pure commercial enterprise and our objective for investing in Virgin is purely commercial, and I think it is bit disingenuous to be positioning us as someone who is deliberately wanting to hurt Qantas."
Qantas recently had its investment grade credit rating with Standard & Poor's downgraded to junk after it revealed it expected to record an interim underlying pre-tax loss of up to $300 million. It has been conducting a lobbying campaign for government assistance, arguing that moves by key Virgin airlines shareholders Air NZ, Etihad Airways and Singapore Airlines to support a $350m entitlement offer has created an unlevel playing field in Australian aviation.
Mr Luxon said Air NZ was not about to stand by and let Qantas weaken Virgin to a point of insolvency so that the bigger airline could have a complete monopoly again.
While he believed Qantas was in "a challenging place", he said the airline remained well-resourced by international airline standards.
He believed Qantas had created a misconception and a disconnect that it was about to go broke when it was an incredibly well-resourced company with massive natural advantages in the Australian marketplace.
"I don't quite understand the narrative in Australia, given it feels like the creation of artificial, orchestrated crisis which ultimately hurts the brand, the share price and undermines confidence from customers and ultimately employees," Mr Luxon said. "The reality is there are quite a lot of levers available to improve any business and Qantas is still free to attract foreign capital if they wish. They are still free to undertake a rights issue as Virgin has done; they are certainly free to improve the basis of their cost levers within their businesses as Air New Zealand has done over a decade."
Mr Luxon said it was up to Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce and his team to work out what they needed to do and he acknowledged that the aviation industry was tough. "We clearly have competition from Jetstar in New Zealand and it's a very good thing," he said. "They are a very good competitor and that competition is very energising and very good for Air New Zealand. And so I think the reverse works in the Australian marketplace as well."
Air NZ boosted its stake in Virgin to 24.5 per cent as a result of the capital raising and has Foreign Investment Review Board permission to lift that to 25.9 per cent.
Mr Luxon said that was a decision for the future and the the airline was at the level it wanted to be in terms of exposure to markets and assets. He reiterated comments earlier in the year that Air NZ did not want to see Virgin privatised and the scrutiny involved in being publicly listed was good for management. Air NZ, Etihad and Singapore will also be invited to join Virgin's board, but Mr Luxon said he had yet to consider whether to take up the seat.
"It probably makes sense now given that we have $400m invested in the business to be able to participate in that board . . . It's a very good board, it's obviously full of Australian independent directors and an Australian independent chairman. We'll work our way through that and Virgin will work its way through that in the next few months I imagine."
Commenting on Australian reports of potential tensions between airline shareholders, Mr Luxon said Air NZ saw the other shareholders as being very constructive and very invested in making sure "Virgin can compete very effectively against a massive monopoly competitor".
He said the relationship with Virgin continued to deepen across the Tasman, although they competed vigorously on other markets such as the Pacific.
Steve Creedy travelled to Auckland courtesy of Air New Zealand.
SOPS, possibly why AJ has been quiet on media front the last week or so, someone may have told him to zip it, as he has made a bit of a goose of himself since late November.. the above story helps confirm this for me which may well be the case, along with what many on here have already said .. poor AJ
Last edited by TIMA9X; 20th Dec 2013 at 15:03.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Townsville
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest rumour is that this is to allow the takeover of Qantas by Emirates in a roundabout way, the new AOC will allow Emirates to buy 100% of Qantas Domestic and with the 49% they will buy of Qantas International they will gain what they want, majority ownership of the Flying Kangaroo.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doesn't "The Qantas Group" already hold a few "Domestic AOC's"?
They would still hold the TAA/Australian Airlines AOC, didn't they also end up with the Ansett AOC?
Not positive about that last one though!
Another question that I've heard asked is with Qantas' present pilot surplus why haven't management started retrenching pilots / offer VR?
One theory I've heard is to do with the Jet Connect / Transmission of Business court case that the AIPA ran a few years ago.
I'm led to believe that the judge ruled along the lines that Jet Connect had many ,let's say "questionable legitimacy" issues ,however nothing could be pursued with reference to "Transmission of Business" until ,I think the term used was, "material disadvantage" occurred to Qantas pilots.
I'm led to believe that basically means until Qantas pilots start getting sacked whilst the other Qantas Group entities continue to expand.
Is there any legitimacy to this theory?
They would still hold the TAA/Australian Airlines AOC, didn't they also end up with the Ansett AOC?
Not positive about that last one though!
Another question that I've heard asked is with Qantas' present pilot surplus why haven't management started retrenching pilots / offer VR?
One theory I've heard is to do with the Jet Connect / Transmission of Business court case that the AIPA ran a few years ago.
I'm led to believe that the judge ruled along the lines that Jet Connect had many ,let's say "questionable legitimacy" issues ,however nothing could be pursued with reference to "Transmission of Business" until ,I think the term used was, "material disadvantage" occurred to Qantas pilots.
I'm led to believe that basically means until Qantas pilots start getting sacked whilst the other Qantas Group entities continue to expand.
Is there any legitimacy to this theory?
Clark's already said he doesn't have the money.
Emirates rules out buying stake in Qantas, amid signs the Government could ease foreign ownership cap - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Emirates rules out buying stake in Qantas, amid signs the Government could ease foreign ownership cap - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
They know if they sack someone the whole thing is exposed....really sad that! Is it a "Genuine Redundancy"? They will continue to recruit to the subsidiaries and contractors(Cobham etc)
VR on offer for several years but they have not taken up the avenue because they need pilots sometime in the future.
They decided to go down this path and it is heading for a cliff....Royal Commission perhaps? I doubt it, they will slip off into the Irish countryside and live in a castle..
As for the Jetconnect case, a manufactured outcome manipulated to suit. Jetconnect does NOT sell tickets, does NOT employ staff directly as they are paid for from Sydney(QF) and their profit/loss can be manipulated. The NZ$125 million they have is from the takeover of Ansett NZ and cannot be taken out of the country. It is used to subsidise the Jetstar NZ losses.
VR on offer for several years but they have not taken up the avenue because they need pilots sometime in the future.
They decided to go down this path and it is heading for a cliff....Royal Commission perhaps? I doubt it, they will slip off into the Irish countryside and live in a castle..
As for the Jetconnect case, a manufactured outcome manipulated to suit. Jetconnect does NOT sell tickets, does NOT employ staff directly as they are paid for from Sydney(QF) and their profit/loss can be manipulated. The NZ$125 million they have is from the takeover of Ansett NZ and cannot be taken out of the country. It is used to subsidise the Jetstar NZ losses.
Clark's already said he doesn't have the money.
If EK bought QF, sold off Jetstar and FF, they would more than recoup the initial outlay. Keep QF domestic and a token QF international.
There is no doubt something is in play, hence Joyce being so publicly vague on exactly what QF are after. I wouldn't be surprised if EK become involved.
Talk the QF business down a bit more and it becomes a steal.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Townsville
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clark's already said he doesn't have the money.
Emirates rules out buying stake in Qantas, amid signs the Government could ease foreign ownership cap - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Emirates rules out buying stake in Qantas, amid signs the Government could ease foreign ownership cap - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Of course they are not interested and do not have the money, and that is the story right up until they take it all over.
It WILL happen, just a matter of when.
Anyone care to place bets on that scummy little irish man dropping the other shoe on Christmas day? I reckon he'll call a press conference at about 8am Christmas day just for maximum effectiveness... anyone else care to place a wager?
And before anyone infers it, no I'm not eagerly awaiting, but like others I find the current silence to be ominous to say the least, like the calm before the storm.
And before anyone infers it, no I'm not eagerly awaiting, but like others I find the current silence to be ominous to say the least, like the calm before the storm.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Townsville
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Tim Clark says Emirates doesn't have the money and aren't interested which has been quoted many time, not to mention it has also been quoted from the Sheik himself.
Then I personnally would take their word for it.
Then I personnally would take their word for it.
well not until it suits me and I change my mind. It will happen, just a matter of when Emirates own the majority of the Flying Kangaroo.........
Doesn't "The Qantas Group" already hold a few "Domestic AOC's"?
They would still hold the TAA/Australian Airlines AOC, didn't they also end up with the Ansett AOC?
Not positive about that last one though!
They would still hold the TAA/Australian Airlines AOC, didn't they also end up with the Ansett AOC?
Not positive about that last one though!
I’d suggest that an accurate knowledge of what AOCs are held by or have been applied for by which entity, what those AOCs do or may authorise and what’s necessary from a regulatory perspective to be issued with and maintain them, is essential to playing this game of chess.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The managing of an AOC, regulatory compliance and the individual responsible for holding the AOC are normally quite a weighty manner. Then again, we are talking about Qantas, and they can pretty much do as they please as Fort Fumble haven't got the balls nor will they ever get permission from the Minister to rattle QF's chain even if they were to grow a set.
As for the comment about "split AOC's", WTF?
As for the comment about "split AOC's", WTF?
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Hunter Valley NSW
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was a interesting comment in The OZ today from the incoming CEO of Air NZ, (Luxon) as he complemented both Ralph Norris and Rob Fyfe for the work they had done, making his job easier. He stated they were instrumental in OPENING UP STAFF ENGAGEMENT, as well bringing new technology to the business amongst other expertise they brought to the company. So we have Air NZ flying nicely along straight and level, and across the ditch, anything but. So where do we get in touch with these two gents? Why are not the shareholders not demanding they be headhunted? In fact where ARE the shareholders? Just like Joyce, deadly silence.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
Qantas is getting an AOC for its domestic operation. Why? One can only speculate.
Since it was announced around 15 months ago it has become a complex Herculean effort costing, according to one middle manager about 6 months ago, a substantial 7 figure sum. This has now, in all probability, become a solid 8 figure sum.
CASA is not established to do this quickly or easily and has told QF so. They also told QF that the words QANTAS means nothing to the process of getting an AOC.
This explains why the 767 has been dropped from the initial plan, because every one of over 1000 delegations has to be re-done and approved.
So what was probably a "brilliant" arcane brainstorm by upper management has turned into a long, costly, slog which is still nowhere near complete.
But the good news is that another layer of management has been duplicated!
Since it was announced around 15 months ago it has become a complex Herculean effort costing, according to one middle manager about 6 months ago, a substantial 7 figure sum. This has now, in all probability, become a solid 8 figure sum.
CASA is not established to do this quickly or easily and has told QF so. They also told QF that the words QANTAS means nothing to the process of getting an AOC.
This explains why the 767 has been dropped from the initial plan, because every one of over 1000 delegations has to be re-done and approved.
So what was probably a "brilliant" arcane brainstorm by upper management has turned into a long, costly, slog which is still nowhere near complete.
But the good news is that another layer of management has been duplicated!
If QAL is applying for another AOC, the AOC will be issued to and held by QAL. QAL is the entity on which the foreign ownership restriction is imposed.
Very odd.
Very odd.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: South of the Equator
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting article can be found here: Alan fiddles while QANTAS "burns" - Airline Hub Buzz | Airline news and Information
With respect - I think the calls here for Fyfe to be headhunted are a little misguided.
I haven't worked with Luxon - don't know him.
It's my view that Fyfe would simply not be able to cope with the depth and complexity of the problems QF faces.
He's very charming, looks the part - talks the talk - but....
I wouldn't be surprised if there had been secret squirrel discussions with him already - but I would be very surprised indeed if he accepted.
For a start, Norris had already stabilised the business when he took over the position at NZ, and the unions had been smashed. They weren't able to mount any effective opposition.
The airline had also been propped up with $800 million of cash.
FARSA was a spent force and made a pretty pathetic attempt at a strike, and the airline kept flying with little disruption.
NZALPA - despite the vitriol from some reps appeared to have a workable relationship with the airline. Things got a bit sporty at the time of the creation of Zeal - the shorthaul holding company - but from the limited amount I saw of the Industrial Relations side of things, it was managed.
The fleet decisions had been already been made with an early commitment to the 787 - despite pressure from two senior execs (one of whom is no longer with the airline) to seriously look at the A380 for LAX-LHR (thank God they didn't).
NZ's total staff numbers at the time were around a third of QFs.
It is much easier to implement profound change in engagement in a smaller organisation.
NZ's fleet at the time was also much smaller (x8 744s in longhaul for example) and had less types.
And it's long-haul route network is much less complex - long and skinny, and importantly, all routes terminate in NZ.
All Fyfe needed to do was come up with marketing ideas really.
Lets use exclusively kiwi food and beverage, products, leather on seats, decor, slogans etc.
That resonated with staff - and it became a virtuous circle of engagement.
Not really rocket science, or grand and radical business strategy.
The only thing he did that I thought was gutsy, is something that many of you would find utterly unpalatable.
Heavy maintenance in New Zealand was ended.
That made a big difference to the bottom line.
By contrast - as I learn more about your business, QF is big, much bigger.
I remember doing a back of the fag packet market cap calc at the time I was at NZ and QF on value alone was six times the size of NZ.
QF has a large number of fleet types. Some utter howlers of fleet decisions have been made.
It has a much more complex long-haul network.
It appears to be overstaffed in many areas.
It's still holding on to what appears to be an economically unsustainable heavy maintenance operation.
Engaged and no doubt decent staff appear outnumbered by a public service entitlement mentality.
Unions are strong, aggressive and highly vocal.
Quite a chalice to drink from.
And for the record - am not gloating - don't want to see QF fail - at all.
I shout at the TV whenever stories come on about it because I wish someone would get on with the job.
Maybe you do need a Willie Walsh at the helm.
I haven't worked with Luxon - don't know him.
It's my view that Fyfe would simply not be able to cope with the depth and complexity of the problems QF faces.
He's very charming, looks the part - talks the talk - but....
I wouldn't be surprised if there had been secret squirrel discussions with him already - but I would be very surprised indeed if he accepted.
For a start, Norris had already stabilised the business when he took over the position at NZ, and the unions had been smashed. They weren't able to mount any effective opposition.
The airline had also been propped up with $800 million of cash.
FARSA was a spent force and made a pretty pathetic attempt at a strike, and the airline kept flying with little disruption.
NZALPA - despite the vitriol from some reps appeared to have a workable relationship with the airline. Things got a bit sporty at the time of the creation of Zeal - the shorthaul holding company - but from the limited amount I saw of the Industrial Relations side of things, it was managed.
The fleet decisions had been already been made with an early commitment to the 787 - despite pressure from two senior execs (one of whom is no longer with the airline) to seriously look at the A380 for LAX-LHR (thank God they didn't).
NZ's total staff numbers at the time were around a third of QFs.
It is much easier to implement profound change in engagement in a smaller organisation.
NZ's fleet at the time was also much smaller (x8 744s in longhaul for example) and had less types.
And it's long-haul route network is much less complex - long and skinny, and importantly, all routes terminate in NZ.
All Fyfe needed to do was come up with marketing ideas really.
Lets use exclusively kiwi food and beverage, products, leather on seats, decor, slogans etc.
That resonated with staff - and it became a virtuous circle of engagement.
Not really rocket science, or grand and radical business strategy.
The only thing he did that I thought was gutsy, is something that many of you would find utterly unpalatable.
Heavy maintenance in New Zealand was ended.
That made a big difference to the bottom line.
By contrast - as I learn more about your business, QF is big, much bigger.
I remember doing a back of the fag packet market cap calc at the time I was at NZ and QF on value alone was six times the size of NZ.
QF has a large number of fleet types. Some utter howlers of fleet decisions have been made.
It has a much more complex long-haul network.
It appears to be overstaffed in many areas.
It's still holding on to what appears to be an economically unsustainable heavy maintenance operation.
Engaged and no doubt decent staff appear outnumbered by a public service entitlement mentality.
Unions are strong, aggressive and highly vocal.
Quite a chalice to drink from.
And for the record - am not gloating - don't want to see QF fail - at all.
I shout at the TV whenever stories come on about it because I wish someone would get on with the job.
Maybe you do need a Willie Walsh at the helm.
Last edited by tartare; 21st Dec 2013 at 21:51.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tartare, you would be surprised how easily change would occur with regards to the strong unionism and protection of terms & conditions for frontline staff. From a pilots perspective, we are just waiting for a leader we can follow.
There will never be trust with the current management.
A significant number of pilots are by choice, on LWOP with other airlines working on inferior conditions.
A new streamlined contract for B787 would be easy to implement and there would be no shortage of takers.
Whilst it will take significant time, this mess can be turned around with sound fleet and route decisions and a focus on the strengths of a 90 plus year Australian icon that has lost it's way.
All that is needed is new management and a chainsaw for the copious amount of dead wood. The employees are screaming out for it!
There will never be trust with the current management.
A significant number of pilots are by choice, on LWOP with other airlines working on inferior conditions.
A new streamlined contract for B787 would be easy to implement and there would be no shortage of takers.
Whilst it will take significant time, this mess can be turned around with sound fleet and route decisions and a focus on the strengths of a 90 plus year Australian icon that has lost it's way.
All that is needed is new management and a chainsaw for the copious amount of dead wood. The employees are screaming out for it!
Something smells ...... again.
Why would QF go through the expense of setting up yet another AOC for domestic operations..... AKA B737 ops when they already have one???
What! hear you exclaim in joyous pre santa moment?
How about a lower cost base, existing HC B737 operator...... and it its number is SY503021
Figured it out yet? EFA
Fully owned, HC approved, low cost base, international & domestic ops, and how hard would it be to add pax ops and NG's...... not hard at all.
So something stinks, 1 year+, high 7 figures, for a B737 domestic operation.... yeah right they have one right in the back pocket.
Either they are completely fubar (ok ok do know it is coward st we are talking about)and simply do not see the forest for the trees or they are up to another cunning stunt by a bunch of stunning .........
Why would QF go through the expense of setting up yet another AOC for domestic operations..... AKA B737 ops when they already have one???
What! hear you exclaim in joyous pre santa moment?
How about a lower cost base, existing HC B737 operator...... and it its number is SY503021
Figured it out yet? EFA
Fully owned, HC approved, low cost base, international & domestic ops, and how hard would it be to add pax ops and NG's...... not hard at all.
So something stinks, 1 year+, high 7 figures, for a B737 domestic operation.... yeah right they have one right in the back pocket.
Either they are completely fubar (ok ok do know it is coward st we are talking about)and simply do not see the forest for the trees or they are up to another cunning stunt by a bunch of stunning .........
