Seems the Canadian public disagrees with your sentiments, Ferrari and FlyerAl -- why does this not surprise me? The G&M reports that their Ipsos Reid poll found 64% support an injection of public funds for AC and other airlines. Maybe they recognize the financial health of this industry is critical to a country that is so spread out, and that if they -- the public -- continue to demand the cheapest fare, someone other than AC's staff and shareholders are going to have to pay the bill.

The airlines have been in financial difficulties for decades, and much of it can be traced back to various world and terrorist events. The Gulf War destroyed the transAtlantic market for many years, preventing a significant recovery and stability to their balance sheets coming out of the Carter/Reagan recessions. The old style hijacking scares did not help at various times.

The insurance industry has bailed on them, no longer covering "acts of war". This has forced governments all over the world to cover off such politicies. When heat is on, it seems the private sector bails. And governments must step in and broaden the services they provide to keep the world functioning.

Get off the SouthWest, WestJet bull ****. These two carriers are totally different from the rest of the world's airlines. They have no history, no baggage which all other carriers bring with them. They have little infrastructure, and refuse to fly routes on which they cannot skim the cream and make money. Sen. Kirby's rediculous statement "maybe AC should sell some of its routes" begs the question to who? It tried to sell Canadian Regional and there was no taker, Canadian or foreign. [And don't say King Richard. He's cut and run like a rat and will not show his face soon in Canada, transAt or domestic.] Same goes for AC's regional carrier. Not a buyer in sight. The dear senator also suggested AC sell its YVR-TKO route to WestJet. That carrier has made some really annoying statements that defy logic. Mr. Beddoes knows that if he had to serve certain communities, he'd lose money too. [How about Grande Prairie as well as Ft. McMurray?]

AA will be cutting food service dramatically in the months ahead, to pare down its expenses. Why not? If people want low fares, they will get minimal service. Meals will still be available in the front cabin, and I suspect they believe most of their core FFers use upgrades and so will not suffer from this loss of service. I suspect this is similar to AC's plans for the back cabin, again assuming those who want the frills can either pay for them, or will use upgrades.

If people want SW and WestJet prices, then they also must accept that style of cabin service.

If you want to blame an entire industry for losing money and being bloated and inefficient, go ahead. Maybe it applies. But these changes were coming, Sept 11 or not, it was just a matter of time. Sept 11 just accelerated such changes because passenger loads fell off even lower, and with the system down for almost a week, it became catastrophic to their balance sheets.

Perhaps the real issue is that AC should never have been privatized. It is an essential public service which the private sector appears not to be able to provide an a national basis, and within the scope of the Canadian marketplace. Like public transit on the ground, or passenger rail service, it needs to be done by the public sector.

"Selfish" is not the operative word. "Self Preservation" is. In a war, you take out the vital elements of a country. Airlines today are as vital as railways were in the past two world wars. First you remove public confidence, then you let the marketplace play its role by rendering them bankrupt and financially unviable. Once that's done, you move on to the next industry... That's the type of war that is being fought by these *******s -- I know that word will be ****d out by some censor on FT -- against us, and it is the governments job to ensure they lose each of these battles.

The Canadian public seems to understand that. Why can't FlyerAl et al?

[This message has been edited by Shareholder (edited 09-24-2001).]