<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Aurigny ‘will be back in profit inside two years’</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2009/11/26/aurigny-will-be-back-in-profit-inside-two-years/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2009/11/26/aurigny-will-be-back-in-profit-inside-two-years/</link>
	<description>Island News, Sport, Community &#38; Lifestyle</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 16:54:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2009/11/26/aurigny-will-be-back-in-profit-inside-two-years/#comment-57057</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 18:09:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thisisguernsey.com/?p=39726#comment-57057</guid>
		<description>Surely the States should consider merging Aurigny into Blue Islands or at least retaining a significant minority stake or &quot;golden share&quot; to ensure that the Gatwick routes are protected.

Blue Islands competing with Aurigny on the inter-island route is utter madness. Neither of them can be making any money on that route at the moment.

I actually like Aurigny&#039;s service, especially to Gatwick (although £336 for a day return to Manchester recently is surely taking the p*ss for a plane that was half-empty), but let&#039;s look at why Blue Islands might be a better shareholder in Aurigny than the States.

Blue Islands have a strong vested commercial interest in making our national airline a success. Their group has strong tourism and trading interests here.  Their customer service levels are excellent. They have been able to invest in far better and newer planes for the inter-island route. They are running a very useful and efficient Geneva/Zurich route. They could do a lot more. On the other hand Aurigny are continually under pressure BECAUSE they are States-owned, and cannot operate as effectively as a private business can.  A merger of the two airlines would make a lot of sense to result in one very commercial, modern airline which has everything going for it.

It was the right decision for the States to buy Aurigny at the time and it should be seen as a vital strategic investment albeit one which runs at a loss. It was the best deal on the table when the deal had to be done to secure Gatwick. But times have moved on. It may not be the best deal now to retain it, and Blue Islands are not fly-by-nights - they have proven that they know how to run an airline in this part of the world, and have been able to put their money where their mouth is.

The only thing missing is a direct flight to London City Airport and/or to Heathrow, but we can&#039;t have everything !

I&#039;d even go so far as to suggest that the States should retain say 35% of a merged airline and commit to investing £500k a year in it as a grant for the next 5 years to guarantee that its a success and to establish certain new routes, such as London City and/or Heathrow (if ever feasible), or maybe Paris if Heathrow isn&#039;t an option.  That&#039;s probably a better deal than retaining Aurigny and making it compete with Blue Islands in the current market.

And at the same time the States in both Guernsey and Jersey should abolish inter-island landing taxes to encourage greater use of inter-island air links in conjunction with onward connections offered out of one island but not the other, making all those marginal routes far more viable and sustainable.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surely the States should consider merging Aurigny into Blue Islands or at least retaining a significant minority stake or &#8220;golden share&#8221; to ensure that the Gatwick routes are protected.</p>
<p>Blue Islands competing with Aurigny on the inter-island route is utter madness. Neither of them can be making any money on that route at the moment.</p>
<p>I actually like Aurigny&#8217;s service, especially to Gatwick (although £336 for a day return to Manchester recently is surely taking the p*ss for a plane that was half-empty), but let&#8217;s look at why Blue Islands might be a better shareholder in Aurigny than the States.</p>
<p>Blue Islands have a strong vested commercial interest in making our national airline a success. Their group has strong tourism and trading interests here.  Their customer service levels are excellent. They have been able to invest in far better and newer planes for the inter-island route. They are running a very useful and efficient Geneva/Zurich route. They could do a lot more. On the other hand Aurigny are continually under pressure BECAUSE they are States-owned, and cannot operate as effectively as a private business can.  A merger of the two airlines would make a lot of sense to result in one very commercial, modern airline which has everything going for it.</p>
<p>It was the right decision for the States to buy Aurigny at the time and it should be seen as a vital strategic investment albeit one which runs at a loss. It was the best deal on the table when the deal had to be done to secure Gatwick. But times have moved on. It may not be the best deal now to retain it, and Blue Islands are not fly-by-nights &#8211; they have proven that they know how to run an airline in this part of the world, and have been able to put their money where their mouth is.</p>
<p>The only thing missing is a direct flight to London City Airport and/or to Heathrow, but we can&#8217;t have everything !</p>
<p>I&#8217;d even go so far as to suggest that the States should retain say 35% of a merged airline and commit to investing £500k a year in it as a grant for the next 5 years to guarantee that its a success and to establish certain new routes, such as London City and/or Heathrow (if ever feasible), or maybe Paris if Heathrow isn&#8217;t an option.  That&#8217;s probably a better deal than retaining Aurigny and making it compete with Blue Islands in the current market.</p>
<p>And at the same time the States in both Guernsey and Jersey should abolish inter-island landing taxes to encourage greater use of inter-island air links in conjunction with onward connections offered out of one island but not the other, making all those marginal routes far more viable and sustainable.
<p align="right"><a href="http://www.thisisguernsey.com/comment-reports/?c=57057" rel="nofollow">Report abuse</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Student Jim</title>
		<link>http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2009/11/26/aurigny-will-be-back-in-profit-inside-two-years/#comment-57033</link>
		<dc:creator>Student Jim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:34:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thisisguernsey.com/?p=39726#comment-57033</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d still love to know who had the bright idea of the States buying Aurigny and then retaining the existing management. 
I know the economic conditions are less than favourable but they were losing money years ago. 

I guess proven experience with running the airline at a loss is a benefit to the island...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d still love to know who had the bright idea of the States buying Aurigny and then retaining the existing management.<br />
I know the economic conditions are less than favourable but they were losing money years ago. </p>
<p>I guess proven experience with running the airline at a loss is a benefit to the island&#8230;
<p align="right"><a href="http://www.thisisguernsey.com/comment-reports/?c=57033" rel="nofollow">Report abuse</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
