Have Cowen and Coughlan been telling the truth about Ryanair offer of 500 jobs?

[bokonon]

Did they try to buy the lease back from Aer Lingus? No.
Before Aer Lingus bought the lease off the DAA, did they try and get it for Ryanair? No .

why didn't michael o'leary try and buy the original lease from aer lingus?

Is this about right?

[orbit]

why didn't michael o'leary try and buy the original lease from aer lingus?

cowen and coughlan lied about the competition, ps i checked it hasn't brought up in dail again yet.

i havn't taken a pro-government line i just don't believe o'leary, if you had the read the entire thread you'dve seen that.

tonic is the only one defending the government

Ok, I explained this before, but it is a long thread.

In normal circumstances, a large multi-national about to create a pile of good jobs, doesn't just go out and buy the facilities it needs. It goes to the government (via the IDA) and says,

"We're thinking of creating 500 jobs. What are they worth to you? The German government is offering us €10 million*. The Spanish are offering €12 million*."

That is why Ryanair wouldn't want to deal with Aer Lingus (or even the DAA). They would want to deal directly with the state and its job creation arm (the IDA) because those are the people with the interest in seeing the jobs being created.

As it happens, Ryanair were prepared to pay for the hangar. But Aer Lingus would still have had to be paid off, and that is where the state would come in.
[SIZE="1"]
* These figures are made up[/SIZE]

[The Field Marshal]

1]Who legally owns the freehold on hanger 6?

2]What are the current terms of the leasehold arrangements on Hanger 6?

3]Who are the parties named on the leasehold agreement?

The answers are

1] Aer Lingus
2] Leasehold terms that largely favour & protect Aer Lingus as tenant.
3] Aer Lingus and the DAA.


[This is why Mueller asked himself every day why Aer Lingus was renting a building from itself .]


This extremely unorthodox and peculiar unethical arrangement between Aer Lingus and the DAA was established formally last December.

The purpose behind the establishment of this new lease last December was primarily to prevent Ryanair from getting the use of hanger 6.



The government have tried unconvincingly to cover up and bolster this situation.

Ryanair smelt a rat and sought intervention from the government which was refused



The country has lost 500 new high tech jobs as a result of government intransigence and in- house collusion between a state body: the DAA, and an ex semi state body :Aer Lingus.


There was no competition ever for this lease entered into last December.

[Limerick Lad]

Ok, I explained this before, but it is a long thread.

In normal circumstances, a large multi-national about to create a pile of good jobs, doesn't just go out and buy the facilities it needs. It goes to the government (via the IDA) and says,

"We're thinking of creating 500 jobs. What are they worth to you? The German government is offering us €10 million*. The Spanish are offering €12 million*."

That is why Ryanair wouldn't want to deal with Aer Lingus (or even the DAA). They would want to deal directly with the state and its job creation arm (the IDA) because those are the people with the interest in seeing the jobs being created.

As it happens, Ryanair were prepared to pay for the hangar. But Aer Lingus would still have had to be paid off, and that is where the state would come in.
[SIZE="1"]
* These figures are made up[/SIZE]

Ryanair didn't say to the German or Spanish Governments "You know that hanger that the airport authority have leased to our major competitor in your market, arrange to have them moved on even though they have a valid lease then lease or sell it to us and if we can't have that specfic hanger we're not interested"

[bokonon]

1]
This extremely unorthodox and peculiar unethical arrangement between Aer Lingus and the DAA was established formally last December.

And some more of the details are emerging. From today's Indo:

The Irish Independent understands that Aer Lingus and the DAA have been working on a deal that will result in Aer Lingus being allowed to terminate leases on the two buildings early without having to pay a cash penalty that could have run into millions of euro.

Aer Lingus tries to quit lease deals at airport - Irish, Business - Independent.ie

[Limerick Lad]

Seems like normal business practice, Aer Lingus have leases on two buildings from the DAA that are surplus to their requirements while holding a long lease on some land that the DA wishes to acquire and are negotiating a deal to satisfy both parties.

[orbit]

Ryanair didn't say to the German or Spanish Governments "You know that hanger that the airport authority have leased to our major competitor in your market, arrange to have them moved on even though they have a valid lease then lease or sell it to us and if we can't have that specfic hanger we're not interested"

No they didn't because the same situation didn't arise. Let's say it did....

Say they had their eye on a particular unused hangar in Madrid. The airport authorities get wind of this, and do a hasty deal with Ryanair's competitor so that Ryanair can't get it. What would they do then?

They'd say "F**k this for a game of soldiers. We'll put our jobs somewhere else"

[bokonon]

Seems like normal business practice, Aer Lingus have leases on two buildings from the DAA that are surplus to their requirements while holding a long lease on some land that the DA wishes to acquire and are negotiating a deal to satisfy both parties.

Why are they foregoing the penalty? Isn't this what the penalty clause is for?

From the article: "It's understood that the DAA was interested in re-acquiring this land as it can be redeveloped at some stage in the future. "

That kind of whimsical nonsense is not a business case and is not "normal business".

God almighty.

[The Field Marshal]

Aer Lingus owns the freehold on hanger 6.

There was no way upstart Ryanair were ever going to get in there even if it was lying idle for most of the time.

Ryanair sought government help to [temporarily] get into hanger 6 and also create 500 jobs.

The Irish government refused to help Ryanair on this matter

[Limerick Lad]

Why are they foregoing the penalty? Isn't this what the penalty clause is for?

From the article: "It's understood that the DAA was interested in re-acquiring this land as it can be redeveloped at some stage in the future. "

That kind of whimsical nonsense is not a business case and is not "normal business".

God almighty.

So you think that Aer Lingus are wrong to try and negotiate the best deal they can in the circumstances, that would hardly be best business practice.