So the government do that to 3 airlines, then a cruise ship company and a windfarm or 2, the buses need help as well oh and trains...… where does it stop ? It was a very poorly run company that ran out of money. It is far too simplistic to say keep running TC until everyone is home.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Thomas Cook
- Thread starter flyer
- Start date
So the government do that to 3 airlines, then a cruise ship company and a windfarm or 2, the buses need help as well oh and trains...… where does it stop ? It was a very poorly run company that ran out of money. It is far too simplistic to say keep running TC until everyone is home.
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
No matter how good their order book is the fact is they are failing as a business by not making profits.
The banks recognise this and are calling in their loans before the debt gets bigger and they lose even more money.
I have no idea where their losses occur but managements job was to make profits not to be busy fools filling ones order books with loss making flights.
If the market place requires low prices then they should have cut their costs or they are in the wrong sector of business. To expect the banks or the government to cover for their inability to understand their jobs is not the way it works.
The banks recognise this and are calling in their loans before the debt gets bigger and they lose even more money.
I have no idea where their losses occur but managements job was to make profits not to be busy fools filling ones order books with loss making flights.
If the market place requires low prices then they should have cut their costs or they are in the wrong sector of business. To expect the banks or the government to cover for their inability to understand their jobs is not the way it works.
So the government do that to 3 airlines, then a cruise ship company and a windfarm or 2, the buses need help as well oh and trains...… where does it stop ? It was a very poorly run company that ran out of money. It is far too simplistic to say keep running TC until everyone is home.
Was it poorly run, or was it as in most cases the unacceptable side of capitalism, i.e.
1-Buy a company with the banks cash
2-Cut costs thus hurting the operation, to make the company look like EBITDA is soring increasing the asset.
3-Leverage the company and pocket all the cash.
4-Sell the company
5-The company now struggles to pay loans and goes bust.
6-The tax payer pays.
jazzy
Well-Known Member
I noticed the union who wanted the tax payers to put £200 million in , didn't offer to put any of their own cash in
I noticed the union who wanted the tax payers to put £200 million in , didn't offer to put any of their own cash in
We will probably end up paying a lot more in benefits, and costs.
Ifwecouldjust.......
Well-Known Member
Fair enough about the Fosun deal not going through, but aren't they saying it's now £100 million to get everyone home?
TC have had problems for years, and while I'm not saying it's had no impact, blaming Brexit is just deflection tactics. It seems to me that a lot of their issues are down to mismanagement
Getting everyone home isn't just it tho.... its the additional funds required to shore up ATOL as well so anticipated final cost to taxpayer £600 million
Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 20,751
No matter how good their order book is the fact is they are failing as a business by not making profits.
The banks recognise this and are calling in their loans before the debt gets bigger and they lose even more money.
I have no idea where their losses occur but managements job was to make profits not to be busy fools filling ones order books with loss making flights.
If the market place requires low prices then they should have cut their costs or they are in the wrong sector of business. To expect the banks or the government to cover for their inability to understand their jobs is not the way it works.
I don’t know enough about how Tommy Cook’s business to say if the Government could or couldn’t have done more to help them. I doubt anyone does on here? However, your comment about it’s not the “way it works” is inaccurate. The banks that have pulled the plug on Tommy Cook’s were themselves bailed out by the Government.
I’m more interested in the staff than political political arguments.
Getting everyone home isn't just it tho.... its the additional funds required to shore up ATOL as well so anticipated final cost to taxpayer £600 million
+ benefits for 9000 people out of work
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
Certainly true if the redundant employees are unable to find any other employment.We will probably end up paying a lot more in benefits, and costs.
Somehow I think the good employees will benefit existing profit making companies.
TheRemainsOfTheDave
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 16 Mar 2017
- Messages
- 6,491
People will get new jobs, especially the airline crew and those with specific skills to the market, because demand won't drop. The shops would have to close anyway at some point because they're rarely profitable these days. They might need help for a while but most people can't live on benefits so they will find new work.+ benefits for 9000 people out of work
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
Perhaps it is their way of ensuring they don't need Gov. money again by continuing to back lost causes as they see it? In fact this time doing their job.I don’t know enough about how Tommy Cook’s business to say if the Government could or couldn’t have done more to help them. I doubt anyone does on here? However, your comment about it’s not the “way it works” is inaccurate. The banks that have pulled the plug on Tommy Cook’s were themselves bailed out by the Government.
I’m more interested in the staff than political political arguments.
Certainly true if the redundant employees are unable to find any other employment.
Somehow I think the good employees will benefit existing profit making companies.
People will get new jobs, especially the airline crew and those with specific skills to the market, because demand won't drop. The shops would have to close anyway at some point because they're rarely profitable these days. They might need help for a while but most people can't live on benefits so they will find new work.
The demand is not there anymore, hence why retail and service sector companies are struggling. The issue is distribution of wealth. Poor pay, and increasing utility bills has stopped the demand.
Dubai Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 15,425
If their future order bookings of 500,000 are true, there's plenty of demand out there. The problem seems to be with the model they have employed to service that demand.The demand is not there anymore, hence why retail and service sector companies are struggling. The issue is distribution of wealth. Poor pay, and increasing utility bills has stopped the demand.
Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 20,751
Perhaps it is their way of ensuring they don't need Gov. money again by continuing to back lost causes as they see it? In fact this time doing their job.
They may well be the case.
TheRemainsOfTheDave
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 16 Mar 2017
- Messages
- 6,491
People adapt. I used to work in the printing industry and it died a death in the nineties/early noughties. Profit margins went from 20% to 5% over that period (we used to tender for government work at x% under cost at times because it was guaranteed income - they weren't going to not pay the bill). That industry lost tens of thousands of people, they didn't just sit around waiting for their weekly giro (or whatever it is called these days).I hope so. Feel for them today must be devastating not knowing how you will afford to put food on the table and keep a roof over your head.
Was it poorly run, or was it as in most cases the unacceptable side of capitalism, i.e.
1-Buy a company with the banks cash
2-Cut costs thus hurting the operation, to make the company look like EBITDA is soring increasing the asset.
3-Leverage the company and pocket all the cash.
4-Sell the company
5-The company now struggles to pay loans and goes bust.
6-The tax payer pays.
It has nothing to do with the 'unacceptable face of capatalism' All business except those owned by the state is part of capitalism, that is the way most of the world works. Are you saying the state should run every business ?
Perhaps it has more to do with greedy individuals who insist on the cheapest possible price whereby business have to constantly try and drive down prices. These same customers then moan like hell when the service is crap. Someone has already posted that TC were cheaper than Virgin to fly to America there is a simple reason why they were. They were flying to Egypt when no one wanted to go there, they ran high street stores that no one went into. They are just another Woolworths, BHS, Monarch, if people insist on paying the lowest price for everything whilst wanting to be covered for every eventuality, flight cancelled- I want £300 and a hotel etc etc etc.
If their future order bookings of 500,000 are true, there's plenty of demand out there. The problem seems to be with the model they have employed to service that demand.
Or the 500,000 bookings are all paying £10 each less than it costs TC to be profitable. If customers demand cheap fares/hotels and TC run at a loss, no amount of forward bookings will make them profitable.
Scottyboi
Well-Known Member
Didn't they over extend themselves when Monarch went tits up? Bought their planes and flights expecting it to bring in more money, the opposite happened.