Air New Zealand to follow Ansett
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: LA, Cal, USA
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RUTB
Come over to this side of the "dutch" and you will soon see what reality is all about.
There are 70,000 jobs directly affected according to commentators this morning on current affairs shows and countless thousands indirectly affected.
The Air NZ board of directors would also be welcome over here to explain how the staff are going to get their full entitlements.
Early settlement will be appreciated.
Come over to this side of the "dutch" and you will soon see what reality is all about.
There are 70,000 jobs directly affected according to commentators this morning on current affairs shows and countless thousands indirectly affected.
The Air NZ board of directors would also be welcome over here to explain how the staff are going to get their full entitlements.
Early settlement will be appreciated.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Don`t blame Air New Zealand - if anything, they probably extended Ansett`s life.
Look at the previous owners and managers - why do you think Rod Eddington blew in and blew out so quickly?
Air New Zealand, in their enthusiasm to wield power over Aussies, overlooked the considerable debt and day-to-day running expenses of Ansett.
ANZ, however, is that (small) countries National flag carrier, and as such will NOT be allowed to fail. Even if it means a Government buyout.
The New Zealand government has a responsibility to Kiwis (and sheep), but not to an Australian domestic airline, that was one of three.
Be fair guys.
If Shell (Royal Dutch Shell) the petroleum company that employs tens of thousands of Aussies was about to go titsup, how would Australians react if the Dutch demanded that the Australian government was financially responsible for dragging them out of the poo?
Look at the previous owners and managers - why do you think Rod Eddington blew in and blew out so quickly?
Air New Zealand, in their enthusiasm to wield power over Aussies, overlooked the considerable debt and day-to-day running expenses of Ansett.
ANZ, however, is that (small) countries National flag carrier, and as such will NOT be allowed to fail. Even if it means a Government buyout.
The New Zealand government has a responsibility to Kiwis (and sheep), but not to an Australian domestic airline, that was one of three.
Be fair guys.
If Shell (Royal Dutch Shell) the petroleum company that employs tens of thousands of Aussies was about to go titsup, how would Australians react if the Dutch demanded that the Australian government was financially responsible for dragging them out of the poo?
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Asia
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Facts are facts, even if the Mark Westfield works for the Murdoch
Unfortunately AirNZ got in way above its head and this is a direct result of Brierley Investments trying to save their own skin ahead of what was good for AirNZ.The common directors of the two companies have a lot to answer for. Ultimately they may have to.
Far from wishing the demise of AirNZ, it would be obvious to blind Freddie that neither SIA, Brierley or the NZ Govt are going like what they see once due didligence is done and potential liabilities stemming from Ansett are fully understood.
In addition AirNZ stands to lose a substantial amount fo traffic ex Australia and across the Pacific as a result of reduced travel to and from the USA in the short term.Cash flow will dry up almost instantly.
If AirNZ survives it will cost the NZ taxpayers dearly.
FWIW
Unfortunately AirNZ got in way above its head and this is a direct result of Brierley Investments trying to save their own skin ahead of what was good for AirNZ.The common directors of the two companies have a lot to answer for. Ultimately they may have to.
Far from wishing the demise of AirNZ, it would be obvious to blind Freddie that neither SIA, Brierley or the NZ Govt are going like what they see once due didligence is done and potential liabilities stemming from Ansett are fully understood.
In addition AirNZ stands to lose a substantial amount fo traffic ex Australia and across the Pacific as a result of reduced travel to and from the USA in the short term.Cash flow will dry up almost instantly.
If AirNZ survives it will cost the NZ taxpayers dearly.
FWIW
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Around & About
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Kaptin!
Traffic; remember what they say about believing everything you see on telly? The same also applies to what you read in the paper, what is said by pols (especially leading up to an election), Airline Board members etc.
Stop throwing the B-S at Kiwis in general & Air NZ in particular.
In the absence of wilful criminal activities, and rationally you HAVE to rule that out, it's hard to see how Ansett got to where it is in 12-18 months if it wasn't already poked, that's all! Air NZ management haven't made a bad job of running that airline over the last 50 odd years, nothing to write home about either, but can they really be that incompetent?
If the Aussies want to disassociate themselves from NZ that's OK, keep the Bledisloe Cup, but '...watch yourseex!'
Traffic; remember what they say about believing everything you see on telly? The same also applies to what you read in the paper, what is said by pols (especially leading up to an election), Airline Board members etc.
Stop throwing the B-S at Kiwis in general & Air NZ in particular.
In the absence of wilful criminal activities, and rationally you HAVE to rule that out, it's hard to see how Ansett got to where it is in 12-18 months if it wasn't already poked, that's all! Air NZ management haven't made a bad job of running that airline over the last 50 odd years, nothing to write home about either, but can they really be that incompetent?
If the Aussies want to disassociate themselves from NZ that's OK, keep the Bledisloe Cup, but '...watch yourseex!'
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Barbers Pole,
IMHO you have hit the nail on the head and driven it a fair way into the wood.
If anyone is looking for some one to blame read his post.
I can't see any union trouble in the future as some may suggest, because we are too close to a federal election, and the union heavies won't want to ruin Uncle Kim's shot at the big title.
IMHO you have hit the nail on the head and driven it a fair way into the wood.
If anyone is looking for some one to blame read his post.
I can't see any union trouble in the future as some may suggest, because we are too close to a federal election, and the union heavies won't want to ruin Uncle Kim's shot at the big title.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Briz Vegas
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RUTB
You just don't get it do you?
l've put forward many reasons why this board has got to be brought to justice, and you go on about how AN was always doomed anyway, lay off us kiwi's.
I've not once had a shot at you and yet you lower yourself to have a shot at those who are understandandly pissed off with what has happened.
The NZ board bought it, and as such are responsible for buying it and what happened to it, no one else.
It's not rocket science!
You just don't get it do you?
l've put forward many reasons why this board has got to be brought to justice, and you go on about how AN was always doomed anyway, lay off us kiwi's.
I've not once had a shot at you and yet you lower yourself to have a shot at those who are understandandly pissed off with what has happened.
The NZ board bought it, and as such are responsible for buying it and what happened to it, no one else.
It's not rocket science!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: LA, Cal, USA
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RUTB
Once again it is not, repeat, not personal against kiwis.
There would be the same amount of anger if another OZ company was responsible.
As the previous post says: "it ain't rocket science"
Once again it is not, repeat, not personal against kiwis.
There would be the same amount of anger if another OZ company was responsible.
As the previous post says: "it ain't rocket science"
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Around & About
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do I detect a bit of serious backpedalling here or not?
O_S I've been giving you the benefit of the doubt BUT I wonder if a few of the other posters on this thread actually read their posts before hitting the send button. Wishing Air NZ to go under and dire circumstances for the Kiwi economy, threatening crews etc sounds pretty personal to me. Most of the Oz posters on this thread, given the events of the last couple of weeks, know how personal having your job/career threatened can be, so don't tell me it isn't personal.
HagasTuft, the only thing that you've said that makes any sense so far is; "The NZ board bought it, and as such are responsible for buying it ." Never a truer word.
Why are you insisting "this board", by that I'm assuming you mean the Air NZ board, is the one that "has got to be brought to justice"? Take a step back and stop jumping to conclusions, otherwise the people who ought be brought to justice for this, if it isn't the Air NZ board, will never be brought to account. If it is the Air NZ board well and good, but engineering the downfall of Air NZ as a whole in the process, as is being expressed in this thread and by hot-headed Oz unionists in the past couple of days, hardly sounds like "Justice" to me, or does Australia have a different from of it from the rest of us?
All I ask is keep an open mind, don't look away form Australian causal factors and stop, as has occurred frequently in this thread and I saw on the TV tonight, having a go at NZ, its airline and its people. When we first took over the few Ansett people I spoke to thought it was a great thing because of the previous management's attitude. Short memories some people!
[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: Red under the Bed ]
[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: Red under the Bed ]
O_S I've been giving you the benefit of the doubt BUT I wonder if a few of the other posters on this thread actually read their posts before hitting the send button. Wishing Air NZ to go under and dire circumstances for the Kiwi economy, threatening crews etc sounds pretty personal to me. Most of the Oz posters on this thread, given the events of the last couple of weeks, know how personal having your job/career threatened can be, so don't tell me it isn't personal.
HagasTuft, the only thing that you've said that makes any sense so far is; "The NZ board bought it, and as such are responsible for buying it ." Never a truer word.
Why are you insisting "this board", by that I'm assuming you mean the Air NZ board, is the one that "has got to be brought to justice"? Take a step back and stop jumping to conclusions, otherwise the people who ought be brought to justice for this, if it isn't the Air NZ board, will never be brought to account. If it is the Air NZ board well and good, but engineering the downfall of Air NZ as a whole in the process, as is being expressed in this thread and by hot-headed Oz unionists in the past couple of days, hardly sounds like "Justice" to me, or does Australia have a different from of it from the rest of us?
All I ask is keep an open mind, don't look away form Australian causal factors and stop, as has occurred frequently in this thread and I saw on the TV tonight, having a go at NZ, its airline and its people. When we first took over the few Ansett people I spoke to thought it was a great thing because of the previous management's attitude. Short memories some people!
[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: Red under the Bed ]
[ 16 September 2001: Message edited by: Red under the Bed ]
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sh!t Red 
Talk about fancy footwork. Just fess up and admit it 
The board of ANZ have been pulling the wool over peoples eyes for the past 12 months, give or take a day and now it's time to pay the piper. For mine, it's not a personal attack on Kiwi's, just admission of the truth. ANZ kept themselves afloat at the expense of AN. Straight and simple
Admit it!!!!!
Talk about fancy footwork. Just fess up and admit it The board of ANZ have been pulling the wool over peoples eyes for the past 12 months, give or take a day and now it's time to pay the piper. For mine, it's not a personal attack on Kiwi's, just admission of the truth. ANZ kept themselves afloat at the expense of AN. Straight and simple Admit it!!!!!
Safety First!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is very sad. I see te same people as in other related posts, so Im probably wasting my time, but heres a link with my views.
http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimat...&f=12&t=006964
Kermit
http://www.pprune.org/cgibin/ultimat...&f=12&t=006964
Kermit
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Daghdaghistan
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's great Pharknose, guilty by association..
Next you'll be calling for the rest of NZ to be nuked off the planet.
Mind you, from what I saw on the news tonight, thats what Australia is planning the economic equivlent of.
I didn't vote for this government, neither did a lot of other Kiwis.
As a taxpayer, I'm not too happy with my taxes being used to pay for the mistakes of a few people. I'd rather see that money goto something worthwhile, like the A4s.
Do you thinking we're having a party over here because of Ansett's demise?
If you all think so, wrong anwser. I suggest you think long and hard again.
Next you'll be calling for the rest of NZ to be nuked off the planet.
Mind you, from what I saw on the news tonight, thats what Australia is planning the economic equivlent of.
I didn't vote for this government, neither did a lot of other Kiwis.
As a taxpayer, I'm not too happy with my taxes being used to pay for the mistakes of a few people. I'd rather see that money goto something worthwhile, like the A4s.
Do you thinking we're having a party over here because of Ansett's demise?
If you all think so, wrong anwser. I suggest you think long and hard again.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Briz Vegas
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No but the ANZ board are with their performance bonuses!
RUTB, that is why there are so many unions trying to get the ANZ mis-management to agree to their terms. Not as Helengrad says, by trying to close ANZ down, but by applying pressure to let them know we are still here waiting for what is owed to us, and don't f@ck with us or you will pay for it.
This is not my attitude mind you, however l suggest to the ANZ board not to f@ck with the TWU, and meet their demands, otherwise Air New Zealand can effectivly wipe this side of the Tasman off their route structure.
It's as simple as that.
RUTB, that is why there are so many unions trying to get the ANZ mis-management to agree to their terms. Not as Helengrad says, by trying to close ANZ down, but by applying pressure to let them know we are still here waiting for what is owed to us, and don't f@ck with us or you will pay for it.
This is not my attitude mind you, however l suggest to the ANZ board not to f@ck with the TWU, and meet their demands, otherwise Air New Zealand can effectivly wipe this side of the Tasman off their route structure.
It's as simple as that.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probe into Air NZ assets
By FLEUR ANDERSON
17sep01
ANSETT'S administrator will join the Australian Securities and Investments Commission in the hunt for the collapsed airline's assets, claimed to have been stripped by owner Air New Zealand.
PricewaterhouseCoopers partner Peter Hedge, who was appointed administrator to the airline last week, said he would examine Ansett's business records to discover whether Air New Zealand had stripped its assets in the weeks before the collapse.
"It would be totally unacceptable if someone had their hand in the cookie jar at that last minute," Mr Hedge told Channel Nine's Business Sunday yesterday.
"If anyone has inappropriately taken assets of our company, they will be made to return them."
The alleged stripping of assets includes the sale of four Airbus A320 Ansett planes to Singapore Airlines, an A320 simulator, the relocation of a Brisbane maintenance centre to New Zealand, Ansett engines being replaced with old NZ engines and Air NZ refuelling on Ansett's account.
ASIC has already begun a formal investigation into Ansett's collapse and has asked the NZ Securities Commission for co-operation.
It will focus on whether Air NZ directors breached the Corporations Act by allowing Ansett to trade while insolvent.
The possible recovery of some assets from Air NZ would be good news for Ansett, which desperately needs a buyer.
"The cupboard was bare when we got there," Mr Hedge said.
"And that's what has put us in such a difficult position in our attempts to keep the business alive so that we can find buyers for them as going concerns."
A reduced Ansett could be flying as early as tomorrow, depending on the outcome of negotiations after administrators were "inundated with calls" from potential buyers.
Mr Hedge said Air NZ directors should not be able to walk away from their responsibilities.
"We're doing everything we can to ensure that every source and every pressure point we can apply to pull funds back into Ansett to keep it alive is being made," he said.
A cloud also hangs over the future of Air NZ, which last week revealed a $230 million operating loss for the year, before a $NZ1.3 billion writedown for its Ansett investment. And its $NZ850 million rescue package – provided by Air NZ's major shareholders Singapore Airlines and Brierley Investments – now could be in danger of being reclaimed by Ansett's administrators.
Qantas chief Geoff Dixon yesterday said the airline would rethink its $9 billion fleet renewal plan because it could buy some of Ansett's newer aircraft.
Qantas, the main beneficiary of the Ansett collapse, has snared 93 per cent of the Australian market. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission chairman Professor Allan Fels said yesterday Australia needed to beef up its competition laws to ensure new entrants could enter the market against the quasi-monopoly player.
"We favour some strengthening of the Trade Practices Act in this situation – particularly the laws about the misuse of market power," he said.
The ACCC was also in favour of allowing international carriers to pick up passengers on domestic routes, he said.
By FLEUR ANDERSON
17sep01
ANSETT'S administrator will join the Australian Securities and Investments Commission in the hunt for the collapsed airline's assets, claimed to have been stripped by owner Air New Zealand.
PricewaterhouseCoopers partner Peter Hedge, who was appointed administrator to the airline last week, said he would examine Ansett's business records to discover whether Air New Zealand had stripped its assets in the weeks before the collapse.
"It would be totally unacceptable if someone had their hand in the cookie jar at that last minute," Mr Hedge told Channel Nine's Business Sunday yesterday.
"If anyone has inappropriately taken assets of our company, they will be made to return them."
The alleged stripping of assets includes the sale of four Airbus A320 Ansett planes to Singapore Airlines, an A320 simulator, the relocation of a Brisbane maintenance centre to New Zealand, Ansett engines being replaced with old NZ engines and Air NZ refuelling on Ansett's account.
ASIC has already begun a formal investigation into Ansett's collapse and has asked the NZ Securities Commission for co-operation.
It will focus on whether Air NZ directors breached the Corporations Act by allowing Ansett to trade while insolvent.
The possible recovery of some assets from Air NZ would be good news for Ansett, which desperately needs a buyer.
"The cupboard was bare when we got there," Mr Hedge said.
"And that's what has put us in such a difficult position in our attempts to keep the business alive so that we can find buyers for them as going concerns."
A reduced Ansett could be flying as early as tomorrow, depending on the outcome of negotiations after administrators were "inundated with calls" from potential buyers.
Mr Hedge said Air NZ directors should not be able to walk away from their responsibilities.
"We're doing everything we can to ensure that every source and every pressure point we can apply to pull funds back into Ansett to keep it alive is being made," he said.
A cloud also hangs over the future of Air NZ, which last week revealed a $230 million operating loss for the year, before a $NZ1.3 billion writedown for its Ansett investment. And its $NZ850 million rescue package – provided by Air NZ's major shareholders Singapore Airlines and Brierley Investments – now could be in danger of being reclaimed by Ansett's administrators.
Qantas chief Geoff Dixon yesterday said the airline would rethink its $9 billion fleet renewal plan because it could buy some of Ansett's newer aircraft.
Qantas, the main beneficiary of the Ansett collapse, has snared 93 per cent of the Australian market. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission chairman Professor Allan Fels said yesterday Australia needed to beef up its competition laws to ensure new entrants could enter the market against the quasi-monopoly player.
"We favour some strengthening of the Trade Practices Act in this situation – particularly the laws about the misuse of market power," he said.
The ACCC was also in favour of allowing international carriers to pick up passengers on domestic routes, he said.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air NZ's survival now on the line
Mr Toomey...no assurances.
By Sarah Crichton in Auckland
Air New Zealand's future was in doubt last night, with analysts predicting the next two weeks would prove critical to whether the Kiwi carrier would continue in its current form.
Analysts said the airline's position appeared precarious for several reasons and did not rule out receivership as a stepping stone before the airline returned to profitability sometime later.
"Effectively, Air NZ is surviving on the goodwill of the banks and the funding package from the New Zealand Government," one analyst said.
But with Air NZ having breached its banking covenants, it is understood that National Australia Bank and Bank of New Zealand are reconsidering their exposure.
Air NZ chief executive Mr Gary Toomey yesterday declined to give assurances there would not be redundancies at the airline. But analysts say his resignation from all Ansett directorships on August 24, informing the market and Ansett staff just last week, sent a further negative signal to the market.
Air NZ's large debt means it needs urgent recapitalisation. However, a proposed part-government, part key shareholder-funded $NZ850 million rescue package is at least six weeks from being finalised.
Mounting uncertainty about Air NZ's legal liability toward Ansett is intensifying market concerns and the company's cash flow position would be further affected by the American terrorist attacks, with costs increasing and passenger demand down globally.
Australia's pending election and the fact that Air NZ has been threatened with industrial action in Australia would also affect it, analysts said.
"It is still very highly geared and operating in an environment which is difficult for all airlines - particularly Australasian ones due to foreign currency and competitive market conditions," said Mr Peter Sigley, an analyst with JB Were in Auckland.
"The whole situation is still very messy. Nobody seems certain where the liabilities will fall in the wake of the Ansett fallout, and the fact it has become a political football in Australia has seen investors shunning the stock and likely to continue to do so.
"It throws the whole recapitalisation into doubt."
The New Zealand Government's part of the rescue package is limited to a $NZ550 loan facility and, with Air NZ's share price plummeting a further 30 per cent on Friday, there are now questions about the level of commitment by major shareholders, Brierley's Investments Limited and Singapore Airlines.
Mr Toomey...no assurances.
By Sarah Crichton in Auckland
Air New Zealand's future was in doubt last night, with analysts predicting the next two weeks would prove critical to whether the Kiwi carrier would continue in its current form.
Analysts said the airline's position appeared precarious for several reasons and did not rule out receivership as a stepping stone before the airline returned to profitability sometime later.
"Effectively, Air NZ is surviving on the goodwill of the banks and the funding package from the New Zealand Government," one analyst said.
But with Air NZ having breached its banking covenants, it is understood that National Australia Bank and Bank of New Zealand are reconsidering their exposure.
Air NZ chief executive Mr Gary Toomey yesterday declined to give assurances there would not be redundancies at the airline. But analysts say his resignation from all Ansett directorships on August 24, informing the market and Ansett staff just last week, sent a further negative signal to the market.
Air NZ's large debt means it needs urgent recapitalisation. However, a proposed part-government, part key shareholder-funded $NZ850 million rescue package is at least six weeks from being finalised.
Mounting uncertainty about Air NZ's legal liability toward Ansett is intensifying market concerns and the company's cash flow position would be further affected by the American terrorist attacks, with costs increasing and passenger demand down globally.
Australia's pending election and the fact that Air NZ has been threatened with industrial action in Australia would also affect it, analysts said.
"It is still very highly geared and operating in an environment which is difficult for all airlines - particularly Australasian ones due to foreign currency and competitive market conditions," said Mr Peter Sigley, an analyst with JB Were in Auckland.
"The whole situation is still very messy. Nobody seems certain where the liabilities will fall in the wake of the Ansett fallout, and the fact it has become a political football in Australia has seen investors shunning the stock and likely to continue to do so.
"It throws the whole recapitalisation into doubt."
The New Zealand Government's part of the rescue package is limited to a $NZ550 loan facility and, with Air NZ's share price plummeting a further 30 per cent on Friday, there are now questions about the level of commitment by major shareholders, Brierley's Investments Limited and Singapore Airlines.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Smoke City
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm a Kiwi and I love my country I got shafted by News Corp (then ANZ's partner in Ansett) in 99 I left during the lockout and never came back. I have been shocked by the collapse of airlines dunnunder and the NZ economy and it's future doesn't thrill me either. This effects my prospects of returning Dunnunder. I do feel very sad for those people out of a job and my family and I offer support. Some strong views on this post and understandable I suppose keeping the events that have happened recently in mind. Kiwi's, I have found Australians , on average, to be straight and honest people who only expect a fair deal in return for an honest effort on their behalf and if some of you and your leaders are poking a stick in their eye in their time of hardship and have stolen from them then watch out they will only hurt your (our) ailing economy more. And we can't afford that at all so Kiwi's, ask questions as your leaders have upset your friends and neighbours! Sorry Aussies a point to you, and I know how tough it is (reallly) but don't shoot the messengers your beef is not with joe bloggs Kiwi it is with Clark and her bunch of elected politicians and Air New Zealand. Seek the truth and if they are found to have acted in a truly dishonourable fashion then they will have to answer to their own countrymen as well as their economy slips even further into recession as Australia cuts NZ loose. I hope that this doesn't happen.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: OZ
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folks listen to Des Pferd.......He has descibed the mail on the head
A lot of emotion here but lets direct it at who is responsible. For employees of both islands dont vent yr anger at each other
Yes i am directly affected ie now unemployed with ansett & no pay for the last 4 weeks OUCH..it hurts).
The blame here
The NZ Pollies for not allowing SIA to increase its stake 49% especially after Toomey stated 3 months ago to the public that the group was at the Point of No Return. The airline was pleading for help. However KIWI Nationalistic pride would not allow overseas ownership levels to increase. We live in a global environment & therefore must accept it or lice in a very bleak backwater
The Oz Govt for severly delaying the SIA negotiations by supporting the QF bid to buy into Air NZ. Anderson stated very strongly that if the SIA 49% deal was done then QF as stated by Dixon would not be able to compete against SIA/AN/ANZ......Not true, QF / BA would not have been taken on by a "Behometh" as they said. This situation pushed the deal well past the PNR
Air NZ directors for buying the 2nd 50% when they already had 4 years to check the books. Why did they then buy the 2nd 50%.its beyond me. If they are found to have acted illegaly then well i will keep my anger in check until then
I lived in NZ for sometime in the 1990's. Loved the place, the people, It is a fantastic country to live how ever & dont take offense KIWI's but while it is a shame, we all have no choice ......no small country who wants to play in the big world can afford for "NATIONALISTIC PRIDE" to get in the way of common sense
Talking to friends i will try & put this in perspective regarding the sentiment over here.........The vast majority dont have ill feelings to each of u individuals except the Air NZ directors & the Pollies. Yes we will choose to travel on carriers other than Air NZ. No most wont boycott buying KIWI products as that is just affecting KIWI's that have nothing to do with this whole sorry saga. So in essense yes i will buy NZ chese etc but my ski holiday to NZ nest year well no...not now as to travel internally will place my money into Air NZ. Ask yrselves why should I + as far as i know the airline still has ownership or interests in the ski fields
RUTB + associates we dont want to see u guys out of a job, that achieves NOTHING & i for one wish u well with yr future which i might add would improve if u voted the throwback from woodstock PM of yrs. She must have been a lovechild from Nimbin. AN was cast aside by pressure from Clack & her associates & no doubt SIA. There is talk of Freedom flying here internally well i think by the above comments of mine that i am fairly reasonalble about this butif that were to happen then.... i might think about befriending "Bin LADEN" & ask him a few favours....
Take care folks
That about somes it up.....There were many others at fault such as the Fatman & Paperman but that has been well documented
A lot of emotion here but lets direct it at who is responsible. For employees of both islands dont vent yr anger at each other
Yes i am directly affected ie now unemployed with ansett & no pay for the last 4 weeks OUCH..it hurts).
The blame here
The NZ Pollies for not allowing SIA to increase its stake 49% especially after Toomey stated 3 months ago to the public that the group was at the Point of No Return. The airline was pleading for help. However KIWI Nationalistic pride would not allow overseas ownership levels to increase. We live in a global environment & therefore must accept it or lice in a very bleak backwater
The Oz Govt for severly delaying the SIA negotiations by supporting the QF bid to buy into Air NZ. Anderson stated very strongly that if the SIA 49% deal was done then QF as stated by Dixon would not be able to compete against SIA/AN/ANZ......Not true, QF / BA would not have been taken on by a "Behometh" as they said. This situation pushed the deal well past the PNR
Air NZ directors for buying the 2nd 50% when they already had 4 years to check the books. Why did they then buy the 2nd 50%.its beyond me. If they are found to have acted illegaly then well i will keep my anger in check until then
I lived in NZ for sometime in the 1990's. Loved the place, the people, It is a fantastic country to live how ever & dont take offense KIWI's but while it is a shame, we all have no choice ......no small country who wants to play in the big world can afford for "NATIONALISTIC PRIDE" to get in the way of common sense
Talking to friends i will try & put this in perspective regarding the sentiment over here.........The vast majority dont have ill feelings to each of u individuals except the Air NZ directors & the Pollies. Yes we will choose to travel on carriers other than Air NZ. No most wont boycott buying KIWI products as that is just affecting KIWI's that have nothing to do with this whole sorry saga. So in essense yes i will buy NZ chese etc but my ski holiday to NZ nest year well no...not now as to travel internally will place my money into Air NZ. Ask yrselves why should I + as far as i know the airline still has ownership or interests in the ski fields
RUTB + associates we dont want to see u guys out of a job, that achieves NOTHING & i for one wish u well with yr future which i might add would improve if u voted the throwback from woodstock PM of yrs. She must have been a lovechild from Nimbin. AN was cast aside by pressure from Clack & her associates & no doubt SIA. There is talk of Freedom flying here internally well i think by the above comments of mine that i am fairly reasonalble about this butif that were to happen then.... i might think about befriending "Bin LADEN" & ask him a few favours....
Take care folks
That about somes it up.....There were many others at fault such as the Fatman & Paperman but that has been well documented