Foreign ownership, they are trying again!

[maru657]

Admittedly, I've been waiting on this for years. I'm just surprised that it's taken so long considering the voting habits of so many pilots. So many of the politicians that so many pilots seem to like have an annoying habit of supporting "free trade initiatives". These uasually seem to have a price tag that costs many Americans any hope of a stable career. Well, them chickens may have finally come home to roost. The end result of these initiatives will be to enhance corporate profitability and of course anything else would just be socialism.

 

[Flyer1015]

Yeah....


...because American ownership of US airlines has a done a great deal for us labor, hasn't it?

 

[Flyby1206]

Yeah....


...because American ownership of US airlines has a done a great deal for us labor, hasn't it?

Yea, US airlines have been failing for decades, so why would any foreign carrier want to buy one? Only to support the foreign carrier's international flights, at the sacrifice of any domestic route structure.

This is a great interview with Bob Crandall and he covers many topics, among them foreign ownership in Part 2. Long but worth it

http://www.law.depaul.edu/centers_institutes/aviation_law/crandall_interview.asp

 

[Dumb Pilot]

Yea, US airlines have been failing for decades, so why would any foreign carrier want to buy one? Only to support the foreign carrier's international flights, at the sacrifice of any domestic route structure.

This is a great interview with Bob Crandall and he covers many topics, among them foreign ownership in Part 2. Long but worth it

http://www.law.depaul.edu/centers_institutes/aviation_law/crandall_interview.asp

Are you sure? Or is it the same reason as to why foreign companies have been buying and investing in the US like crazy in the past 5 years, everything from real state, failed restaurants, energy companies, technology companies, they know that the recovery in the US will be big, this country is set to come back and come back big. They are interested because they feel confident that they will do better managing these airlines, they see the potential.

 

[maru657]

Yeah....


...because American ownership of US airlines has a done a great deal for us labor, hasn't it?

Guess someone missed the entire context. It's not ownership, it never was. It's always been labor. Blue coller employees thinking their white coller and voting accordingly.

 

[Ex737Driver]

Keep voting for those republicans on Tuesday. See where that gets your profession. Pilots who vote republican and claim they're pro labor crack me up.

Vote republican and make your own choices with your own liberty. Vote democrat and have them made for you at at the expense of your liberty.

 

[wmuflyguy]

Vote republican and make your own choices with your own liberty. Vote democrat and have them made for you at at the expense of your liberty.

Right, like the republicans that want to make their religious beliefs into laws the rest of us would have to live by. No thanks

 

[Flyby1206]

Are you sure? Or is it the same reason as to why foreign companies have been buying and investing in the US like crazy in the past 5 years, everything from real state, failed restaurants, energy companies, technology companies, they know that the recovery in the US will be big, this country is set to come back and come back big. They are interested because they feel confident that they will do better managing these airlines, they see the potential.

It is an interesting debate, but I tend to agree with Crandall's point of view (hah thats a first). Foreign companies investing in things like real estate, tech, energy, etc makes sense since those companies posted lucrative returns when the US economy was booming. Even in the best times of the US economy the airlines posted small profits, and margins far below most other industries.

Then again, maybe all airline CEOs are the same and think they can re-invent the wheel. I think companies like the Gulf/Asian carriers have seen success due to geographical advantages, lack of government interference (taxation/regulations), minimal unionization, and relatively low competition. They will have a rude awakening if they expect the same conditions when buying a US carrier.

Euro carriers have faced many of the same pressures that the US ones, and I think companies like BA want to merge with AA so that they can fortify their trans-atlantic presence. Europe is under the same domestic pressure from LCCs as the US, and many have all but given up the market to Easyjet/Ryanair type carriers.

 

[Dumb Pilot]

Then again, maybe all airline CEOs are the same and think they can re-invent the wheel. I think companies like the Gulf/Asian carriers have seen success due to geographical advantages, lack of government interference (taxation/regulations), minimal unionization, and relatively low competition. They will have a rude awakening if they expect the same conditions when buying a US carrier.

i didn't say their ideas were correct not that they will succeed where American management doesn't, what I said is that they see potential, I think that the concept of foreign carriers or management groups investing in airlines in the US just to use routes, I don't think that is the case, they are interested because they think they can do better at it, maybe they can, but the odds are against it for the reasons you mentioned, but there are groups that are interested on it for the potential, wether it is a realistic expectation or not, that is another issue.

 

[flyboyike]

very true about foreign carriers having a better international product. The last thing I want to deal with on a 14hr flight is some 60+ year old grandma complaining to me that she has to work today.

Especially when that's the VERY BEST case scenario.

 

[Abernathy]

Vote republican and make your own choices with your own liberty. Vote democrat and have them made for you at at the expense of your liberty.

Republicans have never been about liberty unless it's about the second half of their favorite amendment. The only "party" that has a leg to stand on with liberty are the libertarians.

 

[Ex737Driver]

Right, like the republicans that want to make their religious beliefs into laws the rest of us would have to live by. No thanks

You mean like not stealing, not murdering, not lying? Right...bad, very bad.

 

[Ex737Driver]

Republicans have never been about liberty unless it's about the second half of their favorite amendment. The only "party" that has a leg to stand on with liberty are the libertarians.

Not true. Until Blojama your were free to have medical insurance or not, freedom to say whatever you want about gays or minorities, freedom to drill offshore, freedom to not spend my tax dollars on abortions, the freedom to feel secure in our own country, and the freedom to not have to share the wealth.

 

[Dornier 335]

Can you have freedom without responsibility?

 

[list2002]

"The last thing I want to deal with on a 14hr flight is some 60+ year old grandma complaining to me that she has to work today."

Especially when they are in the left seat. Oh!