Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chippy_boy said:
What an embarrassing letter.

Factually inaccurate and basically just whinging. What a complete tool. "My competitor hasn't gone bust. boo hoo hoo, poor me".

Remind me to avoid flying Ryanair wherever possible (a good policy if ever there was one, btw).

On a different note, the government really is damned if it does, damned if it doesn't in these matters isn't it. Is there anyone who can seriously claim that the Labour opposition would not have been up in arms had the government just let FlyBe go bust, with the corresponding loss of jobs?
Click to expand...

I have zero interest in Flybe and zero interest in whether they are saved or not. The letter amused me so I posted it. It had a touch of the ‘Arkell v Pressdram’ about it.

I do however note your sudden conversion to the cause of saving failing British firms at the taxpayers expense :)
 
BobKowalski said:
I have zero interest in Flybe and zero interest in whether they are saved or not. The letter amused me so I posted it. It had a touch of the ‘Arkell v Pressdram’ about it.

I do however note your sudden conversion to the cause of saving failing British firms at the taxpayers expense :)
Click to expand...

What expense would that be? Delayed payment terms, rather than getting no money at all, is not an "expense". In fact it's the opposite.

And neither is it different from normal commercial practice, which is why it is not a government bailout nor against competition regs.
 
Chippy_boy said:
What expense would that be? Delayed payment terms, rather than getting no money at all, is not an "expense". In fact it's the opposite.

And neither is it different from normal commercial practice, which is why it is not a government bailout nor against competition regs.
Click to expand...

I’m not convinced that allowing to delay payment is the ‘opposite’ of an expense. I would have thought paying the sums owed would be the opposite of an expense. Nor do I see loaning money to a ‘consistently failing business’ as the most fiscally prudent move either.

That all said I still don’t really give a toss either way.
 
BobKowalski said:
I’m not convinced that allowing to delay payment is the ‘opposite’ of an expense. I would have thought paying the sums owed would be the opposite of an expense. Nor do I see loaning money to a ‘consistently failing business’ as the most fiscally prudent move either.

That all said I still don’t really give a toss either way.
Click to expand...

Well you'd be wrong then.

Winding a company up and getting 1/10th of your money back, or less, is definitely not preferrable to allowing a bit longer to pay a debt back. Which is why such extensions are granted all the time.

Life 101 really.

And who said they were "consistently failing", not me. Was it their main - disgruntled - competitor? I'm guessing it was.

Glad you don't give a toss.
 
Chippy_boy said:
What an embarrassing letter.

Factually inaccurate and basically just whinging. What a complete tool. "My competitor hasn't gone bust. boo hoo hoo, poor me".

Remind me to avoid flying Ryanair wherever possible (a good policy if ever there was one, btw).

On a different note, the government really is damned if it does, damned if it doesn't in these matters isn't it. Is there anyone who can seriously claim that the Labour opposition would not have been up in arms had the government just let FlyBe go bust, with the corresponding loss of jobs?
Click to expand...
And I thought you were a Tory.
 
west didsblue said:
And I thought you were a Tory.
Click to expand...
Just Johnson sycophants it seems. Far more jobs riding on Thos Cook and more chance of a return for a bailout. Even citing this as a "good" example of using state aid .... (and linking it to what Corbyn or any Labour government would do).

Free market Tories my arse.
 
Vic said:
Just Johnson sycophants it seems. Far more jobs riding on Thos Cook and more chance of a return for a bailout. Even citing this as a "good" example of using state aid .... (and linking it to what Corbyn or any Labour government would do).

Free market Tories my arse.
Click to expand...
Vic, wind your neck in mate. I know your arse is still sore after the GE shambles, but really.
 
Ban-jani said:
No, Patel definitely isn’t I agree.

She’s the cabinet member that isn’t apart of the modern liberal movement. Johnson goes which way the wind blows so we’ll see but the Tory party generally cease to be proper conservatives.
Click to expand...
We'll see, but I have no doubt their true colours will coming steaming out soon enough.
 
bluejon said:
We'll see, but I have no doubt their true colours will coming steaming out soon enough.
Click to expand...

Well the Tories have been in power for a decade and it’s clear for anyone to see, with any shred of political knowledge, that they are the new liberal party.

Windrush aside, which was a monumental cock up, they are just an extension of New Labour’s social policy.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Well you'd be wrong then.

Winding a company up and getting 1/10th of your money back, or less, is definitely not preferrable to allowing a bit longer to pay a debt back. Which is why such extensions are granted all the time.

Life 101 really.

And who said they were "consistently failing", not me. Was it their main - disgruntled - competitor? I'm guessing it was.

Glad you don't give a toss.
Click to expand...

I assume the ‘consistantly failing business model’ was a jibe at the seemingly endless amount of guises, partnership deals, makeovers, rebranding and loss making etc the company has undergone over the last decade.

Branson and co bought it on the cheap with the idea of pumping in investment only to find its still shit and now wants to suck on the public teat with a Govt welfare program which may or may not fall foul of state aid rules. Apparently now this is not a public expense but a positive boon for the taxpayer :)
 
Ban-jani said:
Well the Tories have been in power for a decade and it’s clear for anyone to see, with any shred of political knowledge, that they are the new liberal party.

Windrush aside, which was a monumental cock up, they are just an extension of New Labour’s social policy.
Click to expand...
Eh? Austerity bumming the poor, selling off public services as fast as they possibly can, throwing a little bit of racism in there to help get them elected etc etc They are definitely not the liberal party.
 
bluejon said:
Eh? Austerity bumming the poor, selling off public services as fast as they possibly can, throwing a little bit of racism in there to help get them elected etc etc They are definitely not the liberal party.
Click to expand...

I don’t think you know what liberalism is. Austerity is liberal economics.
 
BobKowalski said:
I assume the ‘consistantly failing business model’ was a jibe at the seemingly endless amount of guises, partnership deals, makeovers, rebranding and loss making etc the company has undergone over the last decade.

Branson and co bought it on the cheap with the idea of pumping in investment only to find its still shit and now wants to suck on the public teat with a Govt welfare program which may or may not fall foul of state aid rules. Apparently now this is not a public expense but a positive boon for the taxpayer :)
Click to expand...
The caring voice of your typical "pro business" Labour supporter.

And people wonder why your party is unelectable. People just smell your hatred of successful people and it puts them right off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top