30 airlines will go bust this year: BA's Willie Walsh

[faithr]

Around another 30 airlines will go under before Christmas in 2008, according to British Airways chief executive Willie Walsh has said.

Willie Walsh has said the impending bankruptcies of these 30 airlines will replay the chaotic scenario whten XL, Britan's third largest holiday company, collapsed, stranding 85,000 passengers around the globe. He said the cause of this misery in the travel industry are soaring fuel costs and the effects of the global economic downturn.

Walsh called the present time ''the worst trading environment the industry has ever seen", with 30-odd airlines having gone bust already this year, and a similar number expect to ffollow suit over the next three or four months. The British Airway's CEO also announced around 1,400 redundancies at his own company.
http://waronyou.com/forums/index.php?topic=918.msg2545;topicseen#new

[Sunshine]

If United goes under, that means I'm stuck in Japan.

Kickass.

[ringworm]

with all that we have achieved, was is commercial flying so hard to keep afloat?

[Aaron]

Who'd have thought that bad things happen in recessions eh?

[ringworm]

the airlines have had trouble for longer than bush has been in office though

even when i was kid, they always seemed one step from going under

[Aaron]

I never mentioned Bush. He didn't cause this current recession. Recessions naturally occur.

[ringworm]

there is nothing natural about what is happening now, but disregard the bush term

it wasnt really relative to what i meant

for decades now the airline industry cant seem to get their act together and i dont know why

[Aaron]

It's an industry that is complimentary to infrastructure, that thinks it IS infrastructure. That's my view on the problem with the industry; that they feel they'll always have a market, when in reality they're in a position where their service can be forgone for a cheaper option in most instances.

Recessions are naturally occurring.

[ringworm]

but even the cheap airlines flop, idk, it seems like such a simple product, that has decades of problems

i think we what the US is struggling with now is far more than a recession, and far from natural, the cause is simple :) imo

[Aaron]

It is natural for dishonesty to occur in financial relationships. When two parties are trading one will always be sacrificing something in the transaction, it's one of the fundamental factors that drives the market towards equilibrium.

[Smokey D]

The airline industry is always in trouble because there are way too many providers and market conditions usually go against them (ie fuel prices go up).

[mph4ever]

air travel should be like bus travel, profitable routes should ensure service on the non profitable ones. should be nationailised. air travel should be an infrastructure. they shouldn't get to decide to cancel routes when people have based their living location on the destination

[ringworm]

It is natural for dishonesty to occur in financial relationships
see, i cant read past this, or accept it, because it is unacceptable

[Aaron]

Why? People look after their interests first. It's natural and logical. It's how the world works. If you don't like my language used, apply to terms efficiency and scarcity to the situation.

[Charlie Daniels]

air travel should be like bus travel, profitable routes should ensure service on the non profitable ones. should be nationailised. air travel should be an infrastructure. they shouldn't get to decide to cancel routes when people have based their living location on the destination
I trust that this is sarcasm?

[ringworm]

Why? People look after their interests first. It's natural and logical. It's how the world works
if you have to use dishonesty to look after yourself, you're not really good at looking after yourself, from my perspective at least

[McP3000]

mph4ever man

[Aaron]

if you have to use dishonesty to look after yourself, you're not really good at looking after yourself, from my perspective at least
Sure if you're well off you've got the luxury of morals, but we're being realistic. When you've got however many billion people trying to feed themself then things happen dude.

I can see why nationalisation of local airlines makes sense, tbh.

[McP3000]

Sure if you're well off you've got the luxury of morals, but we're being realistic. When you've got however many billion people trying to feed themself then things happen dude.
Poverty does not excuse a lack of morality, and the second statement is just a cop out.
I can see why nationalisation of local airlines makes sense, tbh.
i dont see how you jump to this conclusion

[Aaron]

Poverty does not excuse a lack of morality, and the second statement is just a cop out.
Poverty doesn't excuse it, but it does motivate people to act outside their morals if they need to survive. My second statement was referring to the concept of scarcity, hardly a cop out.

i dont see how you jump to this conclusion
Reduction of the amount of carriers, and adding a price ceiling would regulate the industry and remove some of their stupid practices [ie underbooking flights which leads to unneccesary fuel costs]. Dunno, maybe I just prefer efficient to inefficient operations. It wouldn't work on an international level however.

[McP3000]

Poverty doesn't excuse it, but it does motivate people to act outside their morals if they need to survive. My second statement was referring to the concept of scarcity, hardly a cop out.
I understand the concept of scarcity but your statement came off really different.

Reduction of the amount of carriers, and adding a price ceiling would regulate the industry and remove some of their stupid practices [ie underbooking flights which leads to unneccesary fuel costs]. Dunno, maybe I just prefer efficient to inefficient operations. It wouldn't work on an international level however.
So you're saying you want the government to put airlines out of business and control how they price their tickets?
And you cant force planes to not underbook flights. It is something out of their control, assuming they do not have too many active planes.

And the efficient to inefficient operations statement is laughable. Like the government would do a better job.

And seeing that the Earth is growing ever more globalized by the day, you just made your own point null by saying that it wont work on an international level.

[Smokey D]

Reduction of the amount of carriers, and adding a price ceiling would regulate the industry and remove some of their stupid practices [ie underbooking flights which leads to unneccesary fuel costs]. Dunno, maybe I just prefer efficient to inefficient operations. It wouldn't work on an international level however.

Price ceilings are inefficient too, though.

[Aaron]

Not in all cases. Where there's constant demand it'll cause the provider to work innovatively to reduce production costs.
So you're saying you want the government to put airlines out of business and control how they price their tickets?
No. I'm saying they should regulate the cost pricing for flights while allowing this companies to operate, provided they they prove they're economically viable. I think tenders is the best way for this to occur.

And you cant force planes to not underbook flights. It is something out of their control, assuming they do not have too many active planes.You can stop them purposely doing it.

And the efficient to inefficient operations statement is laughable. Like the government would do a better job.Opinion. Not everyone's government is as inefficient as yours.
And seeing that the Earth is growing ever more globalized by the day, you just made your own point null by saying that it wont work on an international level.I'm saying the regulation wouldn't.

[Sunshine]

Not in all cases. Where there's constant demand it'll cause the provider to work innovatively to reduce production costs.

Thanks but no thanks.
Eventually that leads to cheaping out on important things that keep you from falling out of the sky and dieing.

[Smokey D]

Not in all cases. Where there's constant demand it'll cause the provider to work innovatively to reduce production costs.

Leading to a shortage in supply and causing deadweight loss, which is inefficient.

[Aaron]

Yeah in the long-run, but not in the short [unless they're idiots].
Thanks but no thanks.
Eventually that leads to cheaping out on important things that keep you from falling out of the sky and dieing.
:lol:

[Smokey D]

Yeah in the long-run, but not in the short [unless they're idiots].

It'd be a relative short long run since.

[Aaron]

I don't mind if it becomes inefficient in the long-run, any short-run gain that increases productivity is good in my book, provided it's feasable.

[Smokey D]

Right but if the long run is reached in less than a year you're going to have problems.

[Aaron]

Feasibility studies FTW

[Smokey D]

I can't see it as feasible since airline travel is pretty easy to shut down.

[Aaron]

I was talking in general terms. Being my usual vague self while I tap away at work.

[Sunshine]

:lol:

[Read: She's right so I'm just going to try and cover my *** with a :lol: instead of actually attempting to defend my flawed idea.]

[Iscariot]

Thanks but no thanks.
Eventually that leads to cheaping out on important things that keep you from falling out of the sky and dieing.

having worked in an aerospace factory and worked directly on the engine parts (cutting, prepping, cleaning), i can assure you that you're likely to fall out of the sky and die anyway

people in the plant made mistakes all the time on almost every part including cutting struts that were supposed to remain intact and touching the titanium components with their bare hands and putting the parts at risk of cracking and resulting in total failure and most of the time these errors went unnoticed by the inspection crew and the parts were shipped on out for assembly

think about that the next time you hit a patch of turbulence

[mph4ever]

I trust that this is sarcasm?

no, not at all. its one of those services that really should not have been privatised.

mph4ever man

I trust that this is sarcasm?

having worked in an aerospace factory and worked directly on the engine parts (cutting, prepping, cleaning), i can assure you that you're likely to fall out of the sky and die anyway

people in the plant made mistakes all the time on almost every part including cutting struts that were supposed to remain intact and touching the titanium components with their bare hands and putting the parts at risk of cracking and resulting in total failure and most of the time these errors went unnoticed by the inspection crew and the parts were shipped on out for assembly

think about that the next time you hit a patch of turbulence

stop it will you, i hate flying, and i have to fly next week, to finland, this is not a good thing to read all of 10 days before hand, sweaty hands and sleepless nights

[Sunshine]

stop it will you, i hate flying, and i have to fly next week, to finland, this is not a good thing to read all of 10 days before hand, sweaty hands and sleepless nights

I don't see why you'd be worried, considering the number of flights that go out every single day incident free.

[Iscariot]

I don't see why you'd be worried, considering the number of flights that go out every single day incident free.

well since we manufactured parts for everything from delta to rolls-royce i would consider every safe flight a miracle

[Crapdragoon]

jared you dick





<333

[Sunshine]

well since we manufactured parts for everything from delta to rolls-royce i would consider every safe flight a miracle

Well then I should probably play the lottery more often with all this luck I seem to have.

[mph4ever]

I don't see why you'd be worried, considering the number of flights that go out every single day incident free.

the more chances you take, the more probable your number comes up

[Sunshine]

Ehh, live a little.

[Aaron]

[Read: She's right so I'm just going to try and cover my *** with a :lol: instead of actually attempting to defend my flawed idea.]Hardly. More like I'm laughing at you not following the discussion between Smokey and I discussing innovation in economic terms, and spouting some I'm-scared-of-flying crap. :rolleyes:

[Sunshine]

Hardly.

More like, your proposal is stupid, because eventually they'd start cutting costs...like, I dunno, well-trained pilots and air traffic control.

Scared-of-flying my ***, I'd be willing to put money on having spent more milage in the air than you have. And only one time have I been remotely afraid.

[Aaron]

Again you fail to understand how the world works and I'm too tired to explain that increasing productivity is how firms make profits. Take your poor understanding of capitalism elsewhere.

I don't care how many times you've flown.

[Sunshine]

And what does capitalism have to do with government-funded flying again?

Oh right.
Nothing.

[Aaron]

Hmm. What does an economic transaction have to do with the structure it's operating in? Nothing, you're right.

[Sunshine]

Here, I'll quote it for you again.

Not in all cases. Where there's constant demand it'll cause the provider to work innovatively to reduce production costs.

The more the system tanks, the more they'll have to "reduce the production costs."

Until it becomes a stupid and dangerous system.

You still haven't told me what capitalism has to do with government-funded operations.

[Aaron]

Go quote where I talk about feasibility-studies.

How?
Capitalism is the economic system in which the means of production are owned by private persons, and operated for profit] and where investments, distribution, income, production and pricing of goods and services are predominantly determined through the operation of a free market. Capitalism is usually considered to involve the right of individuals and corporations to trade, incorporate, employ workers, and use money, in goods, services (including finance), labor and land. By definition, production and distribution in a capitalist system are governed by the free market rather than state regulation, though this does not exclude the state defining and enforcing the basic rules of the market and may include the provision of a few basic public goods and infrastructure.

[Sunshine]

Did you actually read that wiki quote?

'Cause in the first sentence it clearly states the means of production are owned by private persons.

Government =/= private persons

Oh, and down a little farther, where it says By definition, production and distribution in a capitalist system are governed by the free market rather than state regulation.

Granted I'll give the last bit about not excluding the state defining and enforcing the basic rules, the system you were describing was not "capitalism."

[Aaron]

Where did I say the government is to directly control the means of production or alter production of individual firms? Nowhere. The second statement affirms what I was stating earlier in this thread; that regulation needs to occur to motivate these companies into being more productive. Read the paragraph as a whole, as it was intended.

Read this, then give your opinion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism#Keynesian_economics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism

[mph4ever]

Ehh, live a little.


ehh, how do you suggest?

[Reductio]

Sunshine you're embarrassing yourself. Back to the kitchen, thanks.

[Iscariot]

jared you dick


<333

tee hee

<3

i love sharing my stories from the factory with people who are getting ready to take a plane trip

[ringworm]

i used to manufacture electrical connectors for the auto industry and computers :)

[Iscariot]

did you guys screw up a lot to?

[Smokey D]

Did you actually read that wiki quote?

'Cause in the first sentence it clearly states the means of production are owned by private persons.

Government =/= private persons

Oh, and down a little farther, where it says By definition, production and distribution in a capitalist system are governed by the free market rather than state regulation.

Granted I'll give the last bit about not excluding the state defining and enforcing the basic rules, the system you were describing was not "capitalism."

How can you quote the same paragraph he quoted, bold the same words he bolded but miss out the crucial next sentence?

Also government regulation doesn't = ownership, and government owned enterprises can operate in a strictly commercial way.

[hismajestythepope]

business' don't deserve government support tbh

[Aaron]

Thanks for that Smokey-man. Glad someone got me.

[EaterOfUterus]

What is a redundancy? Apparently there were 1,400 of them.

[Aaron]

When a company lays off it's workers with a lump-sum payment of likely future wages.

[ringworm]

did you guys screw up a lot to?

basically :)

[Iscariot]

basically :)

:h5: