You raise an interesting point..however, at THAT time, there were NO takers due to a number of factors such as the OPEC OIL CRISIS, the inability to fly over the US for whatever reason.

The difference NOW, is that there IS a taker, Richard Branson. There is some doubt on this board as to whether or not Mr. Branson has the ability to fly it. My point is, BA should have given him the chance, and let him drown or succeed on his own merits. PERIOD. Tell him to pony up, and put his money where his mouth is. The only reason they did not do this, was the secret fear they had, that RICHARD BRANSON JUST MIGHT SUCCEED, WHERE THEY COULDN'T.

A prime example of this in Canada is a company called WestJet that is pulling amazing growth numbers and service responses from customers as a "discount airline", and Air Canada, the established contender is on the verge of bankruptcy. Let me say that as an AC flyer they have never treated me poorly, but could they be more efficient? YES. Westjet has taken Air Canada to task @ their own game. When it was launched everyone said they had the proverbial "snowballs chance in hell". The #'s look profoundly different today. While I have never personally flown Westjet, I CAN say from friends and colleagues experiences that their existance has caused AirCanada become more customer focused--maybe too little too late, some might say (with bankruptcy looming around the corner)

Before everyone says that running a discount airline is NOT the same as flying SST's, well Running record companies and flying planes are arguably MORE different--and Branson's has succeeded at these.

I encourage you to look at the BUSINESS PARALLELS, and when you do the argument for Branson becomes VERY STRONG, IF looked at with an open mind