JetStar HK!
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 387
Likes: 2
From: shoe box
Different industries and regulations I know, but I couldn't help thinking about the similarities after reading about Hong Kong Television Network laying off 320 staff after their failed bid for a free-to-air TV license, which instead were awarded to i-Cable and PCCW.
A couple of quotes from yesterday's Standard really stand out....
and this one....
For the sake of those folk who have given up other jobs to join crapstar, I hope you have more success than the unfortunate HKTN workers.
A couple of quotes from yesterday's Standard really stand out....
Many of my staff joined me and my company and gave up their jobs even though I had not been issued a license.
Beyond the industry, Civic Party lawmaker Ronny Tong Ka-wah said the license decision "projected a feeling that the government is protecting an operator who monopolizes the market".
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,609
Likes: 0
From: Asia
Strewth
You continue to bend the facts to suite your argument. The reality is that the HK regulator will be looking at the owners of Jetstar HK’s Primary Place of Business when considering the application, not Jetstar HK itself. The facts are 66.6% of Jetstar HK’s ownership has their Primary Place of Business outside Hong Kong and this is a major problem. The regulator has also stated they will look at Jetstar HK’s share structure in determining the application. As I have said there is a very good reason why every single airline that has been based in Hong Kong since 1997 has had majority HK ownership. Finally if you don’t think the regulator won’t seriously take into account the intent of the “Hong Kong Basic Law” then you are delusional. Andrew Pine who advised the HK Government at the time with the drafting of Chapter V Section 4 has already stated its intent. I place a hell of a lot more weight on his opinion as one of its architects than some lobbyist.
You continue to bend the facts to suite your argument. The reality is that the HK regulator will be looking at the owners of Jetstar HK’s Primary Place of Business when considering the application, not Jetstar HK itself. The facts are 66.6% of Jetstar HK’s ownership has their Primary Place of Business outside Hong Kong and this is a major problem. The regulator has also stated they will look at Jetstar HK’s share structure in determining the application. As I have said there is a very good reason why every single airline that has been based in Hong Kong since 1997 has had majority HK ownership. Finally if you don’t think the regulator won’t seriously take into account the intent of the “Hong Kong Basic Law” then you are delusional. Andrew Pine who advised the HK Government at the time with the drafting of Chapter V Section 4 has already stated its intent. I place a hell of a lot more weight on his opinion as one of its architects than some lobbyist.
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2,609
Likes: 0
From: Asia
Strewth
J* HK is a JV/Partnership/Call it what you want, airline trying to set up in HK where the majority of the ownership have their Principal Place of Business outside Hong Kong.
Every time a law is tested, its intent is looked at.
I have never said or implied that. What I said is that every airline that has been based in Hong Kong since 1997 have interpreted “The Basic Law” that way. I would imagine they received independent legal advice on how to comply with it.
The Hong Kong Government has been very consistent with their interpretation of The Basic Law since the handover in 1997. What makes you think they are going to hand over the keys to Hong Kong aviation to any foreign airline that wants to set up an international airline here when the same right isn’t given to Hong Kong carriers to do the same, especially in Australia and China. The Hong Kong Government loves competition but we already have fierce competition in the aviation market with 107 airlines operating here. The government is also very protective of local businesses against unfair competition and I seriously doubt they would want to simply see Hong Kong become a “Flag of Convenience” for any airline that wants set up shop here, because, after all that is what you are asking them to do.
When you criticise someone because of the letters after their name, you only damage your own argument.
JHK JV, PPB HK, 33% QF, we’ll see.
You’re also suggesting the law isn’t clearly written, requiring explanation as to intent
whilst implying a local owned majority is law.
I expect the seriousness the HK Govt. places on law, its existing policies and its hope to enhance relevant arrangements through review is rather the point.
NB L specifically LL with a B. Only BA as opposed to LL.B or LLB. missing, after AP. Losing count of elephants again.
Eidolon
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 2,244
Likes: 62
From: Some hole
Qantas set to feed more money into the independent Jetstar franchise in Japan.
http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-...tar-japan.html
http://www.pprune.org/australia-new-...tar-japan.html
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
From: York International
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
From: Where else?
Oops.
Jetstar rejects claim airport unable to cope - The Standard
Any truth in the rumor there is going to be a cap on overnight movements?
Jetstar rejects claim airport unable to cope - The Standard
Any truth in the rumor there is going to be a cap on overnight movements?
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 635
Likes: 0
From: All over
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
From: Hong Kong
Don't know your view guys but how about those foreign LCC currently flying into HKG? Perhaps they want to stop them also?
Foreign aircraft (be it LCC or legacy) operate using a slot and capacity taken from the air service agreement between Hong Kong and their home "state".
For every foreign LCC flight into Hong Kong, there's a flight available on the same route for a Hong Kong registered and operated aircraft.
Totally different to what Jet* is proposing. They're trying to be a "Hong Kong" airline, using the Hong Kong side of air service agreements to operate services to foreign ports. Hong Kong law quite rightly defines very tightly the definition and registration of a "Hong Kong" airline.
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,777
Likes: 9
From: Blighty
LCC airlines should relocate to Macau...plenty of slots, parking space and no congestion...HKG should be a widebody only airport except current resident operators...
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 370
Likes: 16
From: 1313 Mockingbird Lane
From the Plane Talking article..
I think the director general was hinting that they should forget this idea due to the plan by the Gov to cap overnight movements to current levels to shut the noise whingers up in Park Island and Tung Chung.
The writer of the article saw through the minor Jet* problem and realizes the bigger problem for the existing players.
No additional night time slots as of NOW.
Looks like they just killed the airport.
P.S. BTW, its not just a 5 hour period. Apparently "overnight" is considered to be from 10pm to 7am.
SCMP and Apple Daily: Start asking a few hard questions about how a bunch of whingers on an island that wasn't developed til 2 years after the airport was opened and another bunch who live in the town that only existed because of the airport construction can kill our 24 hour airport.
conduct most of its operations in a five hour period during which no-one wants to fly
The writer of the article saw through the minor Jet* problem and realizes the bigger problem for the existing players.
No additional night time slots as of NOW.
Looks like they just killed the airport.
P.S. BTW, its not just a 5 hour period. Apparently "overnight" is considered to be from 10pm to 7am.
SCMP and Apple Daily: Start asking a few hard questions about how a bunch of whingers on an island that wasn't developed til 2 years after the airport was opened and another bunch who live in the town that only existed because of the airport construction can kill our 24 hour airport.
Last edited by LapSap; 31st December 2013 at 00:57.