Butch gives AA deal thumbs up

[Time]

Sounds ok to

The more it's explained the more I oppose the deal.

The govermnent simply trying to guarantee a profit in the 65% to 75% borderline range.

... we need to cut Air Ja off the book and them a simliar deal but give them a wider range since they provide huge employmen for Jamaicans.

[Lazie]

EDITORIAL: Airlift deal sensible, but ...
published: Tuesday | September 9, 2008

The dribbling controversy over Jamaica's revenue-guarantee deal with American Airlines is symptomatic of what happens in the absence of transparency and when governments, unwittingly or otherwise, fail to trust people with the facts.
Or, perhaps it is that the tourism minister, Edmund Bartlett, is genuinely not in command of the information rather than being deliberately opaque. In any event, the behaviour would be just as egregious, given the responsibility of governments to keep the citizenry properly informed.
Economy dependent on tourism
The development, insofar as it has been pieced together, is that Jamaica, whose economy wrests primarily on tourism, wants to ensure maximum airlift into the island. That is an eminently sensible policy goal. At issue is how to accomplish this in a soft global economy, which is having a negative impact on international travel, and high oil prices that have caused a spiral in the cost of aviation fuel.
The upshot is that several of the world's leading airlines are losing money by the bucket loads. They have been attempting to stanch the red ink by cutting flights and reducing services. American Airlines falls within this bracket, reducing frequency on many of its routes and slashing several in the Caribbean.
Jamaica, in this environment, has decided, over a one-year period, beginning in November, to compensate American Airlines to maintain, or increase flights to the island, rather than risk a reduction in frequency. The agreement includes a new direct service to Jamaica from Texas' Dallas/Fort Worth Airport and increased frequencies from Miami and Chicago, the latter being routes on which the government-owned Air Jamaica currently flies.
There are questions, however, about the precise structure of the deal and what will be the impact on Air Jamaica, which taxpayers now support to the tune of around US$300 million a year, taking into account direct subsidies and coverage of its losses. So, while on the face of it, the arrangement is worthy of support, there is need for more and better particulars.
For example, Minister Bartlett declared in a statement issued by his ministry: "As part of the agreement, American will not fly to Jamaica if less than 65 per cent of the seats are taken. Jamaica will therefore only be required to pay the 10 per cent revenue if the load factor is less than 75 per cent."
Is this to suggest that from one day, or one week to another, flights out of Dallas/Fort Worth will be on or off, on the basis of whether American meets or fails to meet the 65 per cent load factor? This, of course, would be ludicrous, causing chaos for travellers and, it would appear, undermining of the very intent of the deal - an increase in the availability of seats. This seeming illogic demands clarification.
Another issue deserving of amplification is Air Jamaica's load factors on those routes on which it flies but are to be subject to the deal with American Airlines. Does the agreement imply that there is room for both, even with an expanded capacity? We can only assume that the Government is intent on doing what is in the best interest of Jamaica, which it can assure people by laying out all the facts.

http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/glean...cleisure1.html

[Lazie]

Well, listening to Paul Pennicook, his only contention about the deal is the Chicago route.

He did knock back argument that Air J is unreliable to support the tourism industry. He pointed out that for 2007 Air J transported 520,000+ tourists while AA transported 260,000+.

[Don1]

you can say whatever you want. At the end of the day if it result in 200,00 more tourist then it is worth it.

If id don't then it aint worth a damn.

The fact is Jamaica may benefit from a US recession

If you believe this giveaway will result in 200,000 more tourists.. I have a very flat bridge to sell you.

It's time you apply critical thought to the statements of politicians and not accept their line, hook or sinker.

you even advocated paying American Airlines when their planes are virtually full

[Assasin]

It easy fi look pon the face but a the end result me look pon.

I am not saying it is good or bad I will take a wait and see attitude.

[Shatta]

So then when mi ask them fi a "chump change" $100,000US fi sponsor the concert series that in turn will serve as a means to channel tourists, and investors to Jamaica and in turn boost our exports it shouldn't be a problem now should it?

I mean after all just look at the return on investment and the social possibilities from the reduction in crime based on the creation of jobs

To di World!! dat dem a say okay then

[Lazie]

I certainly hope y'all were watching World News Tonight on ABC. There was a news item how airlines, including AA are cutting flights throughout the USA. Some small airports are going to have to close down and some travellers will have to travel about 200 miles to reach an airport.

One man called the deal Extortion 101. Talk bout going to extremes.