Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#121
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:19:19 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014, Recliner remarked: Doesn't this simply show that "Virgin" airlines is just Delta (was Singapore Airlines) with a subsidiary that happens to pay a lot for an iconic branding. Just like Virgin Media is NTL paying slightly less for the same. Not quite the same I'm quite sure it's much more "the same" than the picture you paint (that picture being what they want us to believe). The key point is that an EU airline has to be majority owned and seen to be controlled by EU entities. There's no such rule for cable TV or mobile phone companies, and Virgin Media is a US-owned and controlled company. So even if Branson was happy to sell most of his 51% of VS to Delta (which he might well be), he couldn't. He could, of course, sell it to Air France-KLM, and maybe that will happen. |
#123
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2014-09-03 17:02:56 +0000, Recliner said:
Given half a chance, it probably would. I think part of a possible deal for a third runway is that they don't normally run at more than, say, 90% capacity, rather than the current 99%. That would make sense. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
#124
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2014-09-03 19:46:41 +0000, Roland Perry said:
Doesn't this simply show that "Virgin" airlines is just Delta (was Singapore Airlines) with a subsidiary that happens to pay a lot for an iconic branding. Just like Virgin Media is NTL paying slightly less for the same. I would say "and Virgin Trains is just Stagecoach", but the style of the operation as a whole, not just the branding, is very different to EMT. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
#125
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2014-09-03 19:46:41 +0000, Roland Perry said: Doesn't this simply show that "Virgin" airlines is just Delta (was Singapore Airlines) with a subsidiary that happens to pay a lot for an iconic branding. Just like Virgin Media is NTL paying slightly less for the same. I would say "and Virgin Trains is just Stagecoach", but the style of the operation as a whole, not just the branding, is very different to EMT. Yes, Virgin Trains, like Virgin Atlantic, is 51% Virgin, so Stagecoach is definitely the minority partner. But if Virgin-Stagecoach wins the EC franchise, that will be essentially Stagecoach (90%) with Virgin branding. |
#126
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 2014-09-03 22:14:02 +0000, Recliner said:
Yes, Virgin Trains, like Virgin Atlantic, is 51% Virgin, so Stagecoach is definitely the minority partner. But if Virgin-Stagecoach wins the EC franchise, that will be essentially Stagecoach (90%) with Virgin branding. If they do it will be interesting to see the differences, if any, noticeable between the two different management and ownership changes of what will no doubt also be known as "Virgin Trains". Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
#127
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#128
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article
, (Recliner) wrote: wrote: In article , (Mizter T) wrote: On 03/09/2014 14:53, Recliner wrote: On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 13:40:12 +0100, Mizter T wrote: On 02/09/2014 07:57, Recliner wrote: To no-ones's surprise, Boris Island hasn't made the airport expansion short list. Indeed, it's only pressure from Boris that left it on the list for so long at all. So what remains are three options, two for Heathrow expansion, and one for Gatwick. The business vote strongly favours Heathrow, but Gatwick is easier politically. The decision is due after the election, and I wonder which will win? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29026484 Gatwick. Eventually. So why all the procrastination then? The reason they keep deferring the decision is that Heathrow is the only one that makes economic sense, but it's politically very difficult. The only safe time to choose it is right after an election. It's political dynamite! The parties policies on the airports question going into the general election could be interesting - that said, they might well just say 'we'll follow the recommendations of the Airports Commission', when said recommendations (when they arrive) aren't likely to offer such an easy get out of jail free card. Individual candidates might do their own thing anyway. My reckoning is that Heathrow expansion will ultimately just be too politically toxic a path to take (remember the widespread pre-2010 opposition). If a decision was made to expand Heathrow, I wouldn't necessarily consider that the end of the story. A bit like student tuition fees then? Kicked into the long grass by the Labour government with a muddled implementation by the coalition. I reckon a Labour government would expand Heathrow because they don't have enough marginal seats at stake. The Tories have some big troublemakers if they try to do the same. Didn't Zac Goldsmith (Richmond Park) threaten to resign and cause a byelection? And Justine Greening (Putney) blocked it while Transport Secretary and got moved for her pains. Yes, I think you're right. Ironically, therefore, the business lobby that wants Heathrow expansion might actually prefer a Labour victory next year, as that would also make it more likely that we stay in the EU. YMTTICPC! That's also a whole lot more complicated. To get anywhere near winning next year, the Tory party has to find a way of not tearing itself apart over the EU, not helped by Mr Carswell. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
#129
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message
, at 15:54:49 on Wed, 3 Sep 2014, Recliner remarked: Doesn't this simply show that "Virgin" airlines is just Delta (was Singapore Airlines) with a subsidiary that happens to pay a lot for an iconic branding. Just like Virgin Media is NTL paying slightly less for the same. Not quite the same I'm quite sure it's much more "the same" than the picture you paint (that picture being what they want us to believe). The key point is that an EU airline has to be majority owned and seen to be controlled by EU entities. There's no such rule for cable TV or mobile phone companies, and Virgin Media is a US-owned and controlled company. So even if Branson was happy to sell most of his 51% of VS to Delta (which he might well be), he couldn't. He could, of course, sell it to Air France-KLM, and maybe that will happen. The percentage shareholding is not inextricably linked to who makes decisions about which routes to operate on a day to day basis. -- Roland Perry |
#130
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Mayor's Boris Island plan killed off TfL takeover of SoutheasternMetro services | London Transport | |||
Olympic Water Chariots - sunk .. | London Transport | |||
Boris Island feasibility study published | London Transport | |||
Euston Island | London Transport | |||
Oyster PAYG Island Gardens via Bank to Liverpool Street | London Transport |