Should Aer Lingus be privatised:Poll

arcadegame2004

There is a better case of maintaining ownership of a national asset and taking a dividend each year. Also the tax and wage contributions of Aer Lingus to the Irish economy are far higher than Ryan Air's simply because of all its overseas bases and staff. And if Ryan air continue their policy of employing eastern european workers at low wages even more money will flow out of the economy.

Taxes and dividends from Aer Lingus are a drop in the ocean compared to the 26 billion euro budget. We don't need them to be in State ownership. Aer Lingus should be removed from political-interference. It should be able to take decisions on a commercial-basis, not on the basis of an electoral-timetable.

Aer Lingus will survive in the private-sector. TSB, ACC and ICC are still there aren't they.

Forcing Aer Lingus to bear the full brunt of going out in the world on its own (to coin a phrase) would lead to it becoming more self-reliant, and to finding commercial solutions for its own problems instead of nagging the taxpayer for a bailout Ryanair won't be getting (or needing).

monument

We don't need them to be in State ownership.

You don't want ANYTHING to be state owned, what's your point?

Aer Lingus should be removed from political-interference.

So it will be a airline for profit and noting more.

It should be able to take decisions on a commercial-basis, not on the basis of an electoral-timetable.

Get you cheap flights - it's electoral time. :rolleyes:

Aer Lingus will survive in the private-sector.

Is anyone saying they will or wont?

Forcing Aer Lingus to bear the full brunt of going out in the world on its own (to coin a phrase)...

Try and answer questions, not coin a phrases.

...would lead to it becoming more self-reliant,

What like Eircom?

and to finding commercial solutions for its own problems what problems?

What problems?

instead of nagging the taxpayer for a bailout Ryanair won't be getting (or needing).

What bailout? What BIG EVENT do you know that is going to happen that's not going to effect Ryanair? And why are you still talking about Ryanair?

Mighty_Mouse

Forcing Aer Lingus to bear the full brunt of going out in the world on its own (to coin a phrase) would lead to it becoming more self-reliant, and to finding commercial solutions for its own problems instead of nagging the taxpayer for a bailout Ryanair won't be getting (or needing).

I didn't think Aer Lingus was in trouble? If the Air Line is not in trouble and competing successfully under public ownership then whats the point in privatisation? Is it for the sake of privatisation itself?

The benefits of public ownership in this circumstance far outway the benefits of privatisation if you ask me. The fact that, as an Island on the edge of Europe, our air transport industry is a guaranteed service which can be manipulated if necessary for the greater good of the country is no bad thing IMO.

My 2c

secret_squirrel

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Taxes and dividends from Aer Lingus are a drop in the ocean compared to the 26 billion euro budget

By that definition so is the occasional bail out.

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Aer Lingus will survive in the private-sector. TSB, ACC and ICC are still there aren't they.

Forcing Aer Lingus to bear the full brunt of going out in the world on its own (to coin a phrase) would lead to it becoming more self-reliant, and to finding commercial solutions for its own problems instead of nagging the taxpayer

Aer Lingus are doing damn well in the public sector - why change a winning formula?
IT IS self reliant.
IT doesnt need to nag the taxpayer (Govt actually) for a handout that it DOESNT need.

BuffyBot

TSB, ACC and ICC are still there aren't they

Well, that would depend on your definition of "still there". TSB absorbed in to IL&P, ACC is a shadow of itself and owned by Rabobank (based in the Netherlands) and the ICC - well, there isn't even an ICC now, it's Bank of Scotland (Ireland).

arcadegame2004

Aer Lingus are doing damn well in the public sector - why change a winning formula?

Past performance is no guarantee of future performance. And Aer Lingus have a bad history, despite their recent success.

Tuars

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Past performance is no guarantee of future performance. And Aer Lingus have a bad history, despite their recent success.

If 'past performance is no guarantee of future performance' then its 'bad history' is irrelevant. So your point is?

I'd be more interested in your answer to this question...

secret squirrel wrote:

Aer Lingus are doing damn well in the public sector - why change a winning formula?
IT IS self reliant.

...which you nicely side-stepped as you fell back onto the cliché.

Seaneh

Yes it should.

Privitisation of State run companies across Europe and North America has without a doubt made Air, Rail and Electrical companies far more efficient (With the exception of The British Rail system which is a disgrace, something like 8 regional comanies and a few national companies and no cooperation at all).


So yeah, Privitisation is a good thing.

MadsL

Aer Lingus no longer will carry 'remains' back to Ireland it was revealed today, as they have decided to forgo short-haul 'cargo' business. They currently carry 1200 bodies a year.

Can you imagine how much 'excess-baggage' Ryanair woould charge for this.

arcadegame2004

If 'past performance is no guarantee of future performance' then its 'bad history' is irrelevant. So your point is?

The only absolute guarantees in life are birth and death. But a long-term analysis of the fortunes of Ryanair and Aer Lingus gives cause for belief that Aer Lingus will fare better in the private-sector than in the public-sector, especially now that the Government is forbidden from investing in it.

Those who play up Aer Lingus's recent success are espousing the usual short-termism for which Socialism is notorious.

Tuars

arcadegame2004 wrote:

... a long-term analysis of the fortunes of Ryanair and Aer Lingus gives cause for belief that Aer Lingus will fare better in the private-sector than in the public-sector...

According to the experts past performance is no guarantee of future performance .

You're also ignoring the numerous subsidies and payoffs that Ryanair have received over the years (mostly by bullying and threatening the governments of small regions such as ourselves).

I don't share your faith that unfettered privatisation will benefit the Irish consumer. If there was reasonably strong regulation of the market then maybe we would have a chance. As it stands we're lambs to the slaughter of the big corporations.

Lennoxschips

Those who play up Aer Lingus's recent success are espousing the usual short-termism for which Socialism is notorious.

Erm, didn't capitalists invent that whole stock market thing?

secret_squirrel

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Those who play up Aer Lingus's recent success are espousing the usual short-termism for which Socialism is notorious.

Nicely argued there - why is it when ever you cant back up your arguments you fall back on meaningless ideological claptrap. The only people who have introduced ideology into this thread are those of you who believe in privatisation at any cost - not becuase it would be good for aer lingus, their customers and the country, but simply because you cant stand the thought of state owned companies.

Make an economic and social argument for the privatisation and I would support it - but the fact is you cant. Its doing as well in the Public sector as it would in the private and with the imminent loss of another 1300 workers there is absolutely no case for privatisation since it will now make money hand over fist.

Tuars

From today's Irish Independent (reg. reqd.):

Aer Lingus is to axe its business class and pull out of the One World Alliance. The moves are part of the change to a no-frills airline which has already provoked fury from commercial users.

Exporters discovered last week that interline cargo would not be carried from September 1, and no cargo anywhere in Europe from January 1. Customer service staff at the state airline said they were receiving irate phone calls from major multi-national companies.

"It has been murder at ground level here over the past few weeks, and it's causing major ructions with companies who are used to booking with us," an Aer Lingus employee said.

"Companies have been coming up and threatening to pull out of Ireland if this goes ahead. People are asking to speak to Willie Walsh, and they are now saying they will contact the Minister for Transport direct.

"The whole point of business class is that you can ring and book flights at the drop of a hat. And the business class section on the flights is always full, don't let anyone tell you otherwise."

The Aer Lingus source questioned why Willie Walsh was being allowed to make these changes prior to an official go ahead for privatisation.

So it looks like Aer Lingus is reducing consumer choice to make it more attractive if it is privatised. Tell me again how privatisation is good for the consumer and good for the country?

BuffyBot

^^

I think I predicted that one a while back

Champ

Aer Lingus is to axe its business class and pull out of the One World Alliance. The moves are part of the change to a no-frills airline which has already provoked fury from commercial users.

Opps Intel ain't too happy about it :rolleyes:
http://breaking.tcm.ie/2004/08/22/story162928.html

Probably because they invested all that money into that new fab in Ireland
http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/news_story.php?id=57905 ; only to find out that it's going to be somewhat awkward to move the produce... :rolleyes:

arcadegame2004

Aer Lingus is to axe its business class and pull out of the One World Alliance. The moves are part of the change to a no-frills airline which has already provoked fury from commercial users.

It's doing that NOW while it is in the public-sector. You see? The unresponsiveness to demand of semi-state companies. Increases the argument for privatisation is you ask me.

Tuars

arcadegame2004 wrote:

It's doing that NOW while it is in the public-sector. You see? The unresponsiveness to demand of semi-state companies. Increases the argument for privatisation is you ask me.

No actually. These changes are prompted by the drive for privatisation.

Arcade, I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt but I think you're arguing based on an ideological principle rather than the practicalities of this particular case.

Let me bring you up to speed on this particular case. This government has no objection in principle to privatisation of Aer Lingus. Their only worry is that the timing will be right to get the best price.

Meanwhile Willie Walsh is cutting the company left, right and centre to in order to target the lucrative no-frills market.

And while this is great for the financials of the company it is not compatible with the broader welfare of the country.

If Ryanair becomes another Aer Lingus then what sort of choice is that for the consumer?

You claim that the market can provide the choice that we need but this is plainly not the case as is evidenced by Aer Lingus's move to the low-cost-no-frills model while the business needs of the country require something else, something that the private companies are not interested in offering.

arcadegame2004

And while this is great for the financials of the company it is not compatible with the broader welfare of the country.

Why not?

Tuars

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Why not?

Please have the courtesy to read the links to the news items in the original post from me and the follow-up from Champ.

I cannot educate you if you're not willing to learn.

star gazer

originally posted by arcadegaem2004
Why not?

The termination of services reduces this countries competitive advantage. Willie walsh has a job to do but so has the nominal shareholder who is answerable to the electorate.

lucernarian

Could Arcadegame2004 tell me how reducing the choice of consumers is a good thing? At the moment, I'm glad that there is still an airline that looks after disabled people in Irish airports, to say the least.

arcadegame2004

Well I am sure that there are plenty of other airlines, including foreign airlines, that will be perfectly willing to seixe the opportunity to seize the market-share that Aer Lingus is alienating by this move.

By the way, whoever here is saying that Aer Lingus is democratically accountable to us: does the One World decision not seem to contradict this?

I don't recall getting a vote for the Chairman of Aer Lingus. So how is it "democratically accountable" to us?

sliabh

To_be_confirmed wrote:

Could Arcadegame2004 tell me how reducing the choice of consumers is a good thing? At the moment, I'm glad that there is still an airline that looks after disabled people in Irish airports, to say the least.

Ryanair do provide services to disabled people. They just bitch and whine about it. And even if both airlines said in the morning that they wouldn't it's a small matter for the government to pass a law requiring them to do so. Which is much better than the government founding/buying/running an airline to provide that service.

Those advocating government ownership of Aer Lingus seem to be starting from the position that unless there is a reason not to then the Govenrment should own companies. I think it's generally accepted internationally that the opposite is the case.

And as for the choice argument, it hardly applies to something like business class. If you argue that we need a state airline because the other airlines are not providing some of the features/perks that we feel are needed then I would turn that back and say should the government be involved in every industry where the existing service offering is not 100%.

e.g. If my local newsagent does't stock the particular magazine I want then maybe we should have nationalised news agents? Or maybe the state should force An Post to sell every newspaper and magazine in their outlets?

star gazer

originally posted by sliabh
And as for the choice argument, it hardly applies to something like business class. If you argue that we need a state airline because the other airlines are not providing some of the features/perks that we feel are needed then I would turn that back and say should the government be involved in every industry where the existing service offering is not 100%.

So your argument is that the government should either be all in or all out, your choice being all out of the business world. Even the American government subsidises its airlines and yet you think it inappropriate for the irish airline to make decisions in the best interests of the irish nation and by extension it's only shareholder.

Those advocating government ownership of Aer Lingus seem to be starting from the position that unless there is a reason not to then the Govenrment should own companies. I think it's generally accepted internationally that the opposite is the case.

Those advocating the dismantling of non core branches of the Aer lingus business seem to be starting from a position that any service dropped by Aer Lingus will have no appreciable effect on irish business interests. Tunnel vision isn't going to solve the issues around Aer Lingus.

bonkey

arcadegame2004 wrote:

Well I am sure that there are plenty of other airlines, including foreign airlines, that will be perfectly willing to seixe the opportunity to seize the market-share that Aer Lingus is alienating by this move.

And were they actually capapble of competing with the service AL was previously offering there, they would have already made inroads into that market already.

The fact that they didn't means that realistically speaking the consumer will end up with either a more expensive service or a reduced service over what AL were providing.

Again...the consumer doesn't benefit.

jc

sliabh

star gazer wrote:

So your argument is that the government should either be all in or all out, your choice being all out of the business world.

No that is not my view. But "Aer Lingus needs to stay in state ownership so we have a business class" has to be one of the most laughable arguments for state ownership I have heard.

star gazer wrote:

Those advocating the dismantling of non core branches of the Aer lingus business seem to be starting from a position that any service dropped by Aer Lingus will have no appreciable effect on irish business interests.

This would assume that this are services that are needed and not available anywhere else. As a person who used to fly business class with Aer Lingus all the time I can live with it going.

The freight thing is not a major issue either as other companies are providing short haul air freight out of Ireland. I know this too as my we used to use them with my previous employer to priority ship products.

star gazer

originally posted by sliabh
This would assume that this are services that are needed and not available anywhere else. As a person who used to fly business class with Aer Lingus all the time I can live with it going.

Good for you. But not everyone is the same as you. There is no doubt that some businesses and other business class travellers have accepted the low cost model, but choice is important to some people who want to be able to pick up the phone at the last minute and get on a plane at the last minute.

No that is not my view. But "Aer Lingus needs to stay in state ownership so we have a business class" has to be one of the most laughable arguments for state ownership I have heard.

Aer Lingus has just proved that it doesn't need to be privatised to be a successful company while retaining services that might not fully fit in a privatised version.

The freight thing is not a major issue either as other companies are providing short haul air freight out of Ireland.

The exporters association seem to have a problem with the loss of service. But what would they know they only represent the ones that use the service.

sliabh

star gazer wrote:

Aer Lingus has just proved that it doesn't need to be privatised to be a successful company

Which again assumes that the default state of a company should be - In State Hands.

star gazer wrote:

The exporters association seem to have a problem with the loss of service. But what would they know they only represent the ones that use the service.

They are a representative body, and like the hauliers association with the super trucks in the port tunnel, or the IFA and farm subsidies they are expected to bitch and whine about any change. Otherwise their members begin to wonder why they are paying out a sub to them all the time.

And anyway I don't think they are saying that without AL there will be no short haul air cargo out of Ireland.

star gazer

originally posted by sliabh
Which again assumes that the default state of a company should be - In State Hands.

The Airline is in State hands and is making a profit while maintinaing services that have provoked calls from several multinationals to have them kept. Because this is a successful company the burden of proof is for the advocates of change.

They are a representative body, and like the hauliers association with the super trucks in the port tunnel, or the IFA and farm subsidies they are expected to bitch and whine about any change. Otherwise their members begin to wonder why they are paying out a sub to them all the time.

If they misrepresent their members or run around in a pointless campaign, they will lose their members a lot faster. They have a job to do they are doing it.

And anyway I don't think they are saying that without AL there will be no short haul air cargo out of Ireland.

just a lesser service which will at least inconvenience some of their members with a 'messy' situation with some probably put out a lot more.