| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
vt-snc
Member
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 5
|
 Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:18 pm Post subject: A330-200 |
 |
|
http://164.100.24.208/lsq14/quest.asp?qref=42943
"Indian Airlines and its subsidiary have inducted in its fleet 25 A320, 5 A319, 2 A330-200 and 4 ATRs on lease."
This is what Praful Patel stated as part of an answer to a question related to Ai/IA fleet expansion on 26/4/2007.
Which aircraft is he talking here about, the ones that IA plans to induct or the ones it already has? What A330s are being talked of here? Can any one explain?
--
Last edited by vt-snc on Thu May 10, 2007 2:28 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
JumboJet
Member
Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 492
Location: Mind Over Matter
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pray....who is this Parul Patel 
_________________
I love the smell of Jet Fuel in the morning. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andrew
Member
Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Posts: 212
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The A330s are planned to be inducted later this year (Nov 2007) and ATRs are goign to be procuered for Alliance NEFP operations. I think either PP or his scribe got the grammar wrong (future tense instead of past). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vt-snc
Member
Joined: 10 Apr 2007
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| oops... i mean praful patel... the text in the original post has been edited now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andrew
Member
Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Posts: 212
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 2:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Duh!!! Only India's most coolest, visionairy and press loving Civial Aviation minister.....
I've heard other members here affectionately refer to him as Pee Pee.
He's done a good job though, you've got to hand it to the guy!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tsk911
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 223
Location: DEL
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
He's truly PraFOOL Patel... Hope the a_380 agrees with me on this... 
_________________
Nalini... The Princess of the Sky... You are a star which will continue to illuminate your own A.net-India forever... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vivekman
Member
Joined: 26 Dec 2006
Posts: 1897
Location: BOM
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
IC has A330-200s on lease order. Am not sure whom they are leasing the aircraft from.
IC wanted to fly them on the India-OZ routes if I remember correctly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jaysit
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 4346
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It appears that for an airline that is being merged, the head doesn't know what the arse is doing and vice versa.
IC's off leasing high density A332s from a charter carrier, AI is busy parking its brand new 777s in some unknown spot, even as it continues to use odd 767s and a sole 757 as part of its fleet. There appears to be some kind of seat crisis, and yet this merged entity keeps prattling on about how it intends to become one of the top 5 airlines in the world.
Probably not in my lifetime or yours. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shivendrashukla
Member
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 1354
Location: Mumbai, India
|
| Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 10:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I truelly don't know what's going on with AI and IC. I really don't have a clue as what they are upto.
Cheers
Shivendra |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COUGAR
Member
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 986
Location: Bangalore
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 12:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pee Pee is runnin both airlines into the ground with this stupidity.
Best would have been to privatise AI through the strategic sale route (The Tatas and Ambani Gorup would have been interested), while IC could have been retained as the govts air arm.
_________________
http://www.cougar-rides.com
<B>Live to Ride - Ride to Live</B>
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tayaramecanici
Member
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 648
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 3:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| COUGAR wrote: | Pee Pee is runnin both airlines into the ground with this stupidity.
while IC could have been retained as the govts air arm. |
why shouldn't IC be pvt ? Are you saying IC is not capable of attracting pvt equity and needs the crutches of INDIAN TAX PAYERS funding to keep its QUOTA dominated incompetent workforce employed, think you express your true assessment of IC in this faus pax, let both be sold separately but definately.
The govt has no business of running Airline business. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jaysit
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 4346
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 5:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| COUGAR wrote: | Pee Pee is runnin both airlines into the ground with this stupidity.
Best would have been to privatise AI through the strategic sale route (The Tatas and Ambani Gorup would have been interested), while IC could have been retained as the govts air arm. |
Why does IC need to be funded with tax payer funds?
If its so well managed as you often claim it is, then it should shine even more if it was freed from the clutches of assorted GOI ministers, babus and the kind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andrew
Member
Joined: 24 Apr 2007
Posts: 212
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
It really does seem strange that they are proceeding with re-branding both airlines whilst there is discussion in the media that the rebranding will be done all over again post merger. It might explain in reality of why the AI 777s have not been delivered.
Originally I had thought that they would be owned by one entity but would keep different brands (like QF/ Jetstar or SQ/ Silkair and Tiger and CX/ Drago Air etc). That made sense a lot of sense to me..... Use the AI brand for the lush long haul carrier, the Indian brand for domestic and short haul international no nonsense services and AI Express for low cost both domesticall and internationally (rolling Alliance in AIX if necessary).
That way all the airlines still run separately and fous on efficiency and have separate marketing value positions, whilst paying at different scales etc etc - BUT they use common services for ground, maintenance and back office/ call centre, head office, strategy overheads etc etc - reducing the real costs to each airline drastically.
It sounded like a good plan to me and also perhaps explained why they spent so much money on rebranding..... Now for PP to come out and say one brand will be used just sounds like a pure and utter mess. Its going to take them so long to get themselves organised that 9W and IT will be way way ahead of them before they come out of their little cubby holes to look at the world realities again post merger. What a shame!!
Also I really like the new Indian branding.... what a pity to see it disappear. The new AI brand on the other hand is so 1980s and crap!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sammyk
Member
Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 2719
Location: Austin, TX
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| andrew wrote: | | It really does seem strange that they are proceeding with re-branding both airlines whilst there is discussion in the media that the rebranding will be done all over again post merger. It might explain in reality of why the AI 777s have not been delivered. |
May not be why they haven't be delivered but it's probably why the third one sits unpainted. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deaphen
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 933
Location: India
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| COUGAR wrote: | Pee Pee is runnin both airlines into the ground with this stupidity.
Best would have been to privatise AI through the strategic sale route (The Tatas and Ambani Gorup would have been interested), while IC could have been retained as the govts air arm. |
Isnt that the plan? to merge both the airlines and once the merger is complete.. the end target is to privitize them? I think that would be the major objective in the ministers mind.
correct me if u thinkim wrong.
nitin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COUGAR
Member
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 986
Location: Bangalore
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is no plan to PRIVATISE the 2 airlines or even the merged entity. So get that out of your heads. Partial Disinvestment is different from Privatisation.
As for retaining IC: IC has proved that a state-owned entity can be run profitably. The Govt believes in its infinite wisdom that it must continue to have a stake in the aviation business. And so to choose between AI and IC: the Govt can retain IC and sell of AI. In order to get the best deal: it would be better to make a strategic sale like Sri lanka did with UL.
At the end of it: AI will be a FULLY PRIVATELY OWNED airline being run as a priavte entity. IC on the other hand will follow a separate course: it will continue to be held by the Govt and run like a Nav-ratna. An IPO can be planned for IC and upto 49% of the stake can be divested.
This plan is much more sensible than the hare-brained plan being worked out by Pee Pee and his corrupt colleagues in Rajiv Gandhi bhavan.
Jaysit: I am deeply touched by an American citizens heart bleeding for Indian Taxpayers money. But your concerns should be addressed to the American govts subsidies to American legacy carriers dont you think?
_________________
http://www.cougar-rides.com
<B>Live to Ride - Ride to Live</B>
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deaphen
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 933
Location: India
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 12:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| COUGAR wrote: | There is no plan to PRIVATISE the 2 airlines or even the merged entity. So get that out of your heads. Partial Disinvestment is different from Privatisation.
As for retaining IC: IC has proved that a state-owned entity can be run profitably. The Govt believes in its infinite wisdom that it must continue to have a stake in the aviation business. And so to choose between AI and IC: the Govt can retain IC and sell of AI. In order to get the best deal: it would be better to make a strategic sale like Sri lanka did with UL.
At the end of it: AI will be a FULLY PRIVATELY OWNED airline being run as a priavte entity. IC on the other hand will follow a separate course: it will continue to be held by the Govt and run like a Nav-ratna. An IPO can be planned for IC and upto 49% of the stake can be divested.
This plan is much more sensible than the hare-brained plan being worked out by Pee Pee and his corrupt colleagues in Rajiv Gandhi bhavan.
Jaysit: I am deeply touched by an American citizens heart bleeding for Indian Taxpayers money. But your concerns should be addressed to the American govts subsidies to American legacy carriers dont you think? |
Cougar, i do happen to know the difference between partial disinvestment and privatization. And Privatization is what i meant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karatecatman
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 12:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Back to the topic:
The A330-200 (2) were formerly with Air Luxor and have done the rounds with a variety of operators.
But are still young aircraft. Have done about 23,800 and 22,680 cycles each.
Happened to see a forthcoming IA tender that was sent to me (calling for certified parties interested in cabin maintenance of the new fleet). IA has clearly stated and clubbed cabin maintenance of the A300 and A330 together --- could IA be planig joint operations of the two widebodies?
Note: Pics of the actual aircraft are in the "Aviation Photography" section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COUGAR
Member
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 986
Location: Bangalore
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| deaphen wrote: | | Cougar, i do happen to know the difference between partial disinvestment and privatization. And Privatization is what i meant. |
You do? but do you UNDERSTAND the difference?
Retaining IC as a separate entity and divesting a percentage of it separately will ensure that the govt retains a foo tin the door in the aviation market and 2 fetch a better return on investment.
Sellngoff AI separately as a stratgeic sale will also get the Govt a superb valuation: much more than what the govt can expect through the current route.
Guess the children on this board who get all excited about getting to fly the Super-Jumbo courtesy of knowing the ministers spoilt brat dont understand things like business valuations and the like!
_________________
http://www.cougar-rides.com
<B>Live to Ride - Ride to Live</B>
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deaphen
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 933
Location: India
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
*****deleted by myself as was irrelevent to the topic********
Last edited by deaphen on Fri May 11, 2007 4:16 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COUGAR
Member
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 986
Location: Bangalore
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Understand Nitin. But you do understand that mental age is different from physical age!
_________________
http://www.cougar-rides.com
<B>Live to Ride - Ride to Live</B>
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boeing7xx
Member
Joined: 23 Dec 2006
Posts: 477
Location: WSSS
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I admit I never grew beyond 12, maybe that's why they won't let me fly real people  ( |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ameya
Member
Joined: 09 May 2007
Posts: 3671
Location: Pune,Maharashtra
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GUess govt. should treat the national carrier like Maruti
DIvest some equity
& continuing doing that 10% at a time so that left backed unions dont shout n go on strike..
few years down the line, its private !!
Left leaders are dumb,,, havent understood that strategy with maruti yet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tayaramecanici
Member
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 648
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 5:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| COUGAR wrote: | | deaphen wrote: | | Cougar, i do happen to know the difference between partial disinvestment and privatization. And Privatization is what i meant. |
You do? but do you UNDERSTAND the difference?
Retaining IC as a separate entity and divesting a percentage of it separately will ensure that the govt retains a foo tin the door in the aviation market and 2 fetch a better return on investment.
Sellngoff AI separately as a stratgeic sale will also get the Govt a superb valuation: much more than what the govt can expect through the current route.
Guess the children on this board who get all excited about getting to fly the Super-Jumbo courtesy of knowing the ministers spoilt brat dont understand things like business valuations and the like! |
I fail to see any logic in the govt trying to retain a foothold in INDIAN AVIATION INDUSTRY as a investor, only to prop up a disabled airline at the cost of the whole industry not to mention the Economy. The longer GOI vacilates over its decision to pvt this rotten assest, increasing competition (thats if the GOI plays fair) will kill the remaining residual value.
The ills of IA are rooted in their incompetent management which again stems from the ownership structure i.e. State owned. In your earlier post you mention the example of AirLanka as model for pvt. Once again you exhibit your ignorance, AirLanka pvt was a management control deal wherein EK got a 10yr management control of the airline for a one time fee of $40m. And the first thing the new clever management did was to order 9 A330 out of Airlankas coffers. A discount of $5m on each (less than 10% of listed price) amounted to EK pocketing $45m even before they started managing the airline.
IA needs to be stripped and the assests sold off, routes, planes, infrastructure. The brand is so effing dull its more like the proverbial Kutte ki dhum rather than any Nav ratna that you project it to be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COUGAR
Member
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 986
Location: Bangalore
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
@KCM:
Once again you show your bias in favor of a specific state-owned airline: as if that airlines brand is associated with "world-class" and your ignorance of basics of the airline business.
For one: IC is not a "disabled" airline. It is aprofit making airline that has made sustained profits in an industry which has seen ALL players, inculding your naked maharaja Air India, making losses. This does not come from Govt subsidies ro anything, but from good management.
You cannot compare the IC mgmt of the pre-1980's to what it is today: there is a big difference. 16 years of sustained and punishing competition from private carriers has turned IC into a very different animall
I am aware of the intricacies of the Airlanka/Emirates arrangement, but I guess you arent. I suggest you educate yourself a little bit about that first rather than going by hearsay (as is shown by that $45million statement!). Anyways I think a modified version of this agreement would do well for Air india with the key difference being that the govt slowly offloads it stake to the identified stratgegic partner in a pre-decided calendar, in such a manner that within 5 years Air India would be a completely privately held airline.
As for IC: the Govt can continue to retain it as a separaetlty held entity operated through a SPV. It can then start divesting equity from this SPV into the OPEN MARKET but continue to retain 51% or 26% (depending on the govts priorities) . 26% is the minimum % reqd to retain veto powers.
Why is this improtant? For one: this 2-pronged approach would fetch the govt better valuation overall. And Two: it woudl enable the govt to retain a foothold in the industry.
Why is this so important? Remember inthe 90's there was a similar aviation boom which soon fizzled out. Can you imagine the situation if there had been no IC to "balance" things out. The Govt by its mere presence ensures a stabilizing influence on the market. Otherwise its pre-1953 situation again.
Its easy for a US based queen to speculate about Indian aviation. even easier for children playing "plane-plane" to speculate: because neither of them have either an understanding or care for how things will play out. But to those of us who do it is a different story! Its easy to say "Privatise everything etc etc". But not so practical when you sit down to weigh the pros and cons. Which i think many including KCM are unable to do.
India is NOT america that we have to keep copying them in whatever they do. The Indian situation is different and needs it own solutions. I dont think many here appreciate that.
Do you see how the Sri-Lankan govt has now started setting up another state-owned airline called Mihin? There is a reason behind this decision. And do you see how the Govt there is having to start from scratch?
Private enterprise is a good thing. However we must temper that sentiment with a realistic assesment of the ground situation.
KCM: your last statement about stripping off IC's assets and selling them off lock-stock and barrel betrays not just your bias but also your shocking ignorance. That same statement applies more to AI which is deep into losses, has a "brand" value is questionable at best.
The IC management today is a lot more professional than those idiots running your favorite airline.
_________________
http://www.cougar-rides.com
<B>Live to Ride - Ride to Live</B>
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VABBy
Member
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Posts: 823
Location: DEL
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jaysit wrote: | | Why does IC need to be funded with tax payer funds? |
Indian tax payers dont mind funding an airline as long as it makes profit. Secondly we all know that whatever taxes we pay as an individual we dont have the authority to decide where that money goes and where it should be utilized thirdly since you are not an indian tax payer mate why worry abt it... 
_________________
Expeditors- You'd be surprised how far we will go for you www.expeditors.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COUGAR
Member
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 986
Location: Bangalore
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
how much subsidy did IC recv? except for a share out of carriage of Haj passengers (majority of which went to AI anyway), NOTHING.
A majority of its revenues and profits came from optimum utilzation of its resources and improved yied management. iC has managed to holds it position in the face of competition. And it serves the useful function of linking the countrys far reaching corners profitably. Now contrast with the porrly managed, loss making Air india. AI plays no useful role and has been pereniially losing money. Inspite of being proetcted from competition, getting subsidy in the form of monopoly on Haj traffic. In addition it also receives the lease fees for the 4 747-400's, inreturn for which it needs to set aside just ONE 747-400 as hot-reserve. This is also subsidy in another form. Finally Govt officials are no longer restricted from flying on official business on pvt carriers domestically. However intl travel HAS to be on AI. This is a captive market, and again a form of subsidy.
Thinking as a tax-payer: Ic represents a better investment of govt resources than AI, because Ai is not returning anything on investment.
_________________
http://www.cougar-rides.com
<B>Live to Ride - Ride to Live</B>
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tayaramecanici
Member
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 648
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| COUGAR wrote: | how much subsidy did IC recv? except for a share out of carriage of Haj passengers (majority of which went to AI anyway), NOTHING.
A majority of its revenues and profits came from optimum utilzation of its resources and improved yied management. iC has managed to holds it position in the face of competition. And it serves the useful function of linking the countrys far reaching corners profitably. Now contrast with the porrly managed, loss making Air india. AI plays no useful role and has been pereniially losing money. Inspite of being proetcted from competition, getting subsidy in the form of monopoly on Haj traffic. In addition it also receives the lease fees for the 4 747-400's, inreturn for which it needs to set aside just ONE 747-400 as hot-reserve. This is also subsidy in another form. Finally Govt officials are no longer restricted from flying on official business on pvt carriers domestically. However intl travel HAS to be on AI. This is a captive market, and again a form of subsidy.
Thinking as a tax-payer: Ic represents a better investment of govt resources than AI, because Ai is not returning anything on investment. |
You always skew the facts to paint a rosy picture of IC. Compare IC to DN. Gopinath has been in business for less than 5yrs and has managed to topple IC from its position as #2 dom airline, mind you he does fly to every godforesaken corner of the country.
IC has all of its resources paid for by the GOI. This week Airbus and Jupiter aviation have partnered IC to take over its MRO division. This was part of the OFFSET deal for purchase of 30-40 A320s. I wish DN had this luxury of a sugar daddy to sweeten its purchase deal. On the contrary DN now will have to get its maint done at this MRO at a price set by this troika, even if it can do it at a lower cost itself or get it done abroad at a lower cost. In this bullying IC will have the assistance of its Sugar daddy the GOI thru its incompetent arm the DGCA. And when DN folds up because of these impediments in the path of its growth and ops, muppets of GOI will claim ''we said so......GOI needs to be in aviation so that the industry doesn't fold up''.
Cougar tell me something i remember you mentioning in the past about working in Revenue management, do you have any dealings with IC ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Birendra
Member
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 1411
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 7:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@Cougar
| Quote: | | Do you see how the Sri-Lankan govt has now started setting up another state-owned airline called Mihin |
Any pictures Cougar or any links |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
COUGAR
Member
Joined: 01 Jan 2007
Posts: 986
Location: Bangalore
|
| Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tayaramecanici wrote: |
You always skew the facts to paint a rosy picture of IC. Compare IC to DN. Gopinath has been in business for less than 5yrs and has managed to topple IC from its position as #2 dom airline, mind you he does fly to every godforesaken corner of the country.
|
DN is NOT the No.2 airline in terms of traffic. Lets get that straight. In terms of RPKMS and pax carried (volumes) IC is still very much Number 2. This is a problem that can be attributed to the way traffic carriage is measured by the DGCA which i sbased on a system developed years ago that assumes traffic flow is only between 8 or so cities in the country.
The No.2 carrier issue has been discussed before: DN is Number 2 on the routes that it competes with other carriers. It doesnt take into account overall capacioty and all that jazz.
| tayaramecanici wrote: |
IC has all of its resources paid for by the GOI. This week Airbus and ....
|
Undoubtedly being the state-owned carrier IC has the benefit of having its loans under-written by the Indian Govt etc. Without a doubt that has been a benefit. However you forget that AI has had these and other benefits as well. However AI is deep in losses while IC is not! (This despite the higher yields AI enjoys on international routes! The average yield per passenger on a international route is around 8000INR while it is 1/4th that on a domestic flight.) AI also enjoys other benefits like the monopoly over the Haj transport (where it treats IC like a hamaal carrier). This is basically subsidy for AI in disguise. Despite that AI is facing HUGE losses, a poorly maintained fleet etc etc. Ever wondered what causes this difference? The difference is in piss-poor management by the RC-Parsi-Madrassi gang at Air India. Are you going to deny that?
| tayaramecanici wrote: |
Cougar tell me something i remember you mentioning in the past about working in Revenue management, do you have any dealings with IC ? |
I have some knowledge of *err* Software for Airlines. But i rather not comment on that.
As for IC: I do think they are one of the best managed airlines in India today and as an investor IC makes for SOLID VALUE. Merging this airline into the shithole that is Air India, with all its work culture problems and poor professionalism is like throwing good money after bad.
To reiterate: The govt should just sell of Air India to a private investor through the strategic sale route (which alone will fetch it atleast 50% more than an IPO of the combined entity).
For IC: it should remain in majority control of the govt, but the govt should release upto 49% of IC into the stock market through an IPO. The valuations for IC in the stock market are much higher than for AI!
The "brand value" that some people think AI has is only notional or to be more correct: SENTIMENTTAL. However there is no place for sentiments in business.
AI as a brand has ZERO value. Shitty people, shitty processes, shitty planes and Shitty airline.
_________________
http://www.cougar-rides.com
<B>Live to Ride - Ride to Live</B>
-- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
