Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Air Canada is taking off? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: swidnik who wrote (850)	9/24/1999 3:15:00 PM
From: check737	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1033

I don't think whether or not this is a good deal going forward is the issue. The issue is paying $2.00 for bankrup Canadian with all it's baggage and $ 8.25 for Air Canada with its momentum, cash and labor stability. This is very bad for AirCanada shareholders like me. I have 6000 shares that I bought 3 years ago for a long term investment. Now AMR wants to steal them and pay Onex as a broker. I feel it is time for an AirCanada shareholder group to form get voting proxies and go public and tell Onex where to go and to show support to the Aircanada managment. Canadian says the Asian routs are worth two bilion but if the Canadian goverment gave AirCanada rights to Asia it would be worth nothing. Canadian is worth $00.00.

To: swidnik who wrote (850)	9/26/1999 12:50:00 PM
From: Luke12_15	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1033

Dude ! The only reason two major international carrier's cannot operate in Canada is because one company is not economically viable. The Mgmgt at CA has FAILED......MISERABLY........ And now you think its a good idea to put these people in charge of a proposed merged airco....??????? C'mon Buckwheat. You better shake the straw from your head and come in from the barn!! Do you seriously believe that the only job loss will be early retirement????? You sir are completely ignorant of the facts. Your last sentence proves that you fail to understand the depth of this proposed deal. You said " In other words, stop playing peoples emotions (i.e.job losses), and start discussing business." Don't you realize that job loss is MAINLY what this is all about. Why do think the Government is involved? HELLO HELLO ? Do you not read the papers? Schwartz told everyone that he would NOT promise that MORE than 5000 people WOULD lose there job! Still he has convinced the Government that his plan continues to employ more Canadians than would be employed if CA goes under. DO THE MATH. Schwartz will HAVE to fire way more people in order to bring the two debt heavy companies together. In other words, Schartz(the geek) has offered himself as the lesser of two evils. In fact he would like us too believe that he will save us all with his grand gift of airline unification..... Beware of geeks bearing gifts The point is that the Government thinks this will save the most jobs and is not concerned with whose job is saved. Proponants of the deal say AC has been run poorly so this is your chance to get out.... HUH? IF AC is so badly run how come CA is about to go BANKRUPT!!!!!! THE FACT IS AC went through a restructuring just a few years ago and laid off thousands in order to turn things around.Some of those people were OUT OF WORK FOR FOUR YEARS to enable thier employer to get back in the black and hire them back........ And now that AC is making money you intend to fire those same AC employee's who have sacrificed so much and replace them with more senior CA employee's who have helped run CA into the ground.........hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm One more point to ponder. The Asian routes are not that important to AC's ability to make money. UNLIKE CA, AC has been MAKING MONEY without those routes. It is the redundancy of routes Nationally that is a bigger problem for both Airlines. Too much capacity. And yet AC survives.....In the Black no less..... Why is that??????? ITS BECAUSE THEY HAVE SUPERIOR MGMT. Don't listen to the propaganda listen to the facts. DIG, do your due dilligence, Look at what has been proposed and what has been promised. And above all ignore StephenO as he is completely wrong and offers no real evidence to back up his banal diatribes. Stephen J