|
Before the fisticuffs, here's my $0.02 piece on the soapbox:
In the CX debate I side with JvdK this time. If they have the biggest crisis the chief can remember in his lifetime, and they still choose to undergo a massive cash outflow, they should shut up and stop crying out for concessions and threaten to ground their whole fleet as a pressure tactic. (Or those that are being threatened should simply call their bluff and open the doors of HK to new airlines, not necessarily HK-"based").
They have chosen a certain quality + high price positioning strategy (though sometimes the quality is hype - the only quality I truly give them credit for is their safety record stemming from this same strategy) compared with other airlines. And they have to live with the consequences. The benefit they have recd from CLK not built at their cost has been enormous. They should just shut up and take it on the chin like everyone else. Assume they aren't going to get anything from government, or CLK, or anyone, and then decide whether they can afford the massive cash outflow or not. Agreed, Paul has a vested interest in what CX are hollering for, but trying to settle the debate by getting JvdK to sell out by becoming a shareholder too only trivializes it.
Conceded there are issues with cancellation of dividend that an AGM announces and its knock on effect on trust of AGMs in general, but in the face of self-admitted unprecedented cash-flow crisis, it's not out of bounds. It just adds another rule to share-holder risk (after Enron and Worldcom etc) - an announced dividend is not a given until you cash the cheque.
|