Here

In short, the minority stakeholder in airBaltic is holding the State hostage.

The airline lost money, logically, because its expenses were greater than its income.
Expenses such as maintenance. Catering.  Airplane parts supply.  Fueling. 

The companies that charged for these did earn a profit.  They are owned by Bertolt Flick. Same old story.  Socialized losses, privatized gain.

For better or worse, here’s the update: speaking from his German bunker, Flick wants the state to inject some cash based on an unaudited report. He has called a board meeting to basically threaten the state with the bankruptcy of the airline. According to his press release, “Šādos ignorances apstākļos nav alternatīvu - airBaltic valde jau šo piektdien, 19.augustā, sasauks padomes sēdi, kuras darba kārtībā būs tikai viens jautājums saskaņā ar statūtiem - par būtiskām izmaiņām Sabiedrības komercdarbībā.”

Those who understand Latvian, I’d suggest watching 100.pants tonight (in Latvia). Click here starting at 2120 Latvian time (2:20 pm EDT) for a battle between Vjaceslavs Dombrovskis (no relations to the PM) and Edmunds Sprudzs (ZRP) on one side and the minister of transport Uldis Augulis and the mayor of Ventspils Aivars Lembergs (ZZS) on the other. It should be interesting, especially considering the airBaltic debacle ahead of the election.

Did you watch the program?  I wanted to, but had ‘other priorities’, to borrow a phrase from Dick Cheney. From the little I’ve seen of Lembergs on television, it’s a shame he seems to be such a scoundrel, because he makes a good impression.  Reminds me of Fast Eddie Vrdolyak in Chicago politics 20 or 30 years ago.  Quick, clever, nervy—and thank God he wasn’t elected mayor!

I ended up watching it. It was painful. The host allowed Lembergs to engage in demagoguery. Apparently, the fashionable motif today is “you young people, you don’t know anything.”

Atcelto “airBaltic” lidojumu dēļ mājup no Briseles netiek arī Valsts prezidents

Flick warns of “fatal” situation at Latvia’s airBaltic

For consideration for all readers of this thread:

Reading the article about President Berziņš inability to return to his homeland to carry out his duties there because an airline, airBaltic, that is Majority owned by the Latvian government cancelled his return flight without some compensatory arrangements being made to get him back home somewhere near his originally scheduled return time is more than a little appalling.

This got me to thinking. Even though Latvia has no version apparently of a jet airplane fleet for the President’s use - as does the US with its Air Force 1, Air Force 2. and other jets in that fleet - what would the media or public reaction in the US have been if its President were stranded in neighboring Panama, or Brazil, or Mexico because an airline that is majority owned by the US government simply cancelled his return flight during his out-of-the-country trip? Would that not have been the lead story on the evening TV News? Lead story on the front page of all the major city newspapers? The buzz of all the Internet pundits? Would not some sort of rallying cry erupt from this?

Rightfully so! The ceremonial head of your nation is prevented from returning to his homeland by a “business decision” like that and the cavalier way in which it must have been made? Now, THERE’s a story that would have legs for a while here in the US front-and-center, that would spark a flood of investigative reporters and government snoops to start shaking some very relevant trees until some very big fruits started falling from them and started to offer much needed public explanations. I suspect that there would quickly be some noisy consequences, as well.

The international embarrassment alone of the prospect of coming across like a third-tier banana republic nation for allowing that to happen would light a fire under multiple action steps to flush out who was responsible for causing that kind of public awkwardness.

Will Latvia’s reaction follow such a script or will it author a different script along the line of “It’s just another day in the life of…..Latvia’s business as usual corruption?” - or - is it a matter of situational ethics, i.e. depends on the name of the President that that happened to?

We are left to wonder, what would have the reaction been if this humiliation had happened to Kārlis Ulmanis?

Alberts

Vadonis didn’t have to fly, he walked on water.

but seriously, this is just pre-election agitation…....klutchnik flexing.
flick must have some blat.

maybe the prez needs to find some retired stasis…...........
problem is that there are too many fingers in this pie.

you know, if the americans are so concerned about corruption, they
could find time and place for talking this over mit herr flick,
maybe somewhere in angola…..........

Šī lapa izdrukāta no DELFI portāla
Adrese: http://bizness.delfi.lv/archive/print.php?id=40607937
Par ‘airBaltic’ akcijām samaksājis ar Antonova biznesu saistīts Luksemburgas finanšu uzņēmums
(2)
13. septembris 2011 20:33
Par ‘airBaltic’ akcijām samaksājis ar Antonova biznesu saistīts Luksemburgas finanšu uzņēmums
Foto: F64
Par nacionālās lidsabiedrības “airBaltic” akcijām samaksājis Luksemburgā reģistrētais finanšu pakalpojumu uzņēmums “Trasatlantic Holdings Company”, kas saistīts ar Krievijas izcelsmes miljardiera Vladimira Antonova biznesu, liecina portāla “Delfi” rīcībā esošā informācija.

Šīm uzņēmumam pieder 45% Lietuvas “Snoras bankas” priviliģēto akciju bez balsstiesībām, liecina informācija bankas mājaslapā. Savukārt “Snoras bankas” vairākuma akcionārs ir Krievijas izcelsmes miljardieris Antonovs, kurš vienlaikus ir arī “airBaltic” lielākā kreditora Latvijas Krājbankas valdes loceklis.

Oficiālā Uzņēmumu reģistra informācija liecina, ka “Trasatlantic Holdings Company” amatpersonas ir Zorigto Nikolajevs, Sergejs Jarcevs un Jevgenijs Jakovlevs. Savukārt kāda Vladimira Antonova profils biznesa sociālajā tīklā “Linkedin” vēsta, ka šis Antonovs ir ne tikai dalībnieks “Snoras” bankā un “Krājbankā”, bet kopš 2009.gada - arī valdes loceklis “Trasatlantic Holdings Company”

Par 11% “airBaltic” akciju, kurām saskaņā ar akcionāru lēmumu jau gadu bija jābūt dzēstām, nesen samaksājis Luksemburgā reģistrēts uzņēmums “Trasatlantic Holdings Company”, kurš 1.septembrī ieskaitījis lidsabiedrībai 9,66 miljonus eiro (aptuveni 6,72 miljonus latu) no sava konta “Latvijas Krājbankā”, portālu “Delfi” informēja tieslietu ministrs Aigars Štokenbergs (V).

Štokenbergs pieļāva - to, kas stāv aiz šīs noslēpumainās firmas, varētu noskaidrot kriminālprocesā, kas agri vai vēlu tiks ierosināts. Tad arī varēs skaidrot izcelsmi naudai, kas samaksāta par akcijām, jo, iespējams, Luksemburgas kompānija ir tikai starpnieks, kam naudu iedeva “airBaltic” tuvu stāvošas personas, pieļāva ministrs.

Aviokompānijas prezidents un vienīgais valdes loceklis Bertolts Fliks akciju pārdošanas līgumu parakstījis 1.septembrī. Štokenbergs gan norādīja, ka tas ir visai neticami, jo Fliks jau visai ilgu laiku atrodas ārpus valsts un vairās braukt uz Latviju.

Štokenbergs uzskata, ka darījuma mērķis bija panākt, lai valsts kļūtu par mazākuma akcionāru kompānijā. Darījuma “autori” gan būtu ieguvēji arī tādā gadījumā, ja valsts izlemtu atpirkt šīs akcijas, lai nezaudētu kontrolpaketi aviokompānijā. “Viņi dabūtu naudu, kas atkal pazustu nezin kur,” uzskata tieslietu ministrs.

Jau ziņots, ka “airBaltic” vēsturiski ir izveidojusies nesakritība starp reģistrēto un apmaksāto sabiedrības pamatkapitālu. Pašlaik “airBaltic” reģistrētais pamatkapitāls ir 534 725 lati, savukārt apmaksātais kapitāls ir 475 615 lati - negatīvā starpība ir 59 110 lati jeb tāda paša skaita neapmaksātu akciju apmērā. Lai gan akcionāri jau pirms gada nolēmuši šīs akcijas dzēst, Fliks pašlaik nezināmu iemeslu dēļ nav iesniedzis Uzņēmumu reģistrā (UR) attiecīgus dokumentus.

Savukārt septembra sākumā viņš kā vienīgais valdes loceklis nolēma noslēgts līgums par šo akciju pārdošanu. Pagājušajā nedēļā viņš iesniedza UR dokumentus par šo darījumu, bet oficiāli neatklāja, kas akcijas iegādājās. Pagaidām UR atlicis lēmumu par šo izmaiņu reģistrēšanu.

The overall state of aviation in former Bloc countries is appalling. Even a relatively well-to-do country like Poland had its president killed in the TU-154 crash outside of Smolensk.
Considering the Yak-42 crash with Yaroslavl Lokomotiv KHL team and the multiple Russian civil aviation disasters together with this kind of political posturing regarding AirBaltic, maybe taking the train might be the safer option. But wait, LV doesn’t seem particularly interested in Rail Baltica either.
On the plus side, AirBaltic planes are somewhat reliable even if their business leadership isn’t.

On the one hand this is truly an embarrassment as Garais mentions but it is not worse than the GOP in the USofA politicizing the debt ceiling and FEMA.

Hi Pete and Int !

I agree with your points, Pete, - though even though there’s less traffic lights out there when you’re walking on water….it’s still a long walk. (grin)Even for superheroes. But, I guess the greater point for me is that this just doesn’t LOOK good for us to be seen by the outside world this way. Sure, the Letts have seen that kind of thing before and fully expect to see it again and maybe are comfortable writing it off as just another example of pre-election nonsense - which I’m quite in agreement with you that this likely is.

But, it’s sad to see us coming across on the international stage like the minor leaguers that we apparently seem to be and giving them all a good laugh. That wasn’t really what I was hoping to see and hear when I posed the rhetorical question on LOL months ago: “Don’t Latvians have a sense of humor?”

Yeah, you’re right that Flick acts with impunity because of the cover he undoubtedly has, but to the many out-of-the-country outsider observers that don’t dig deep into the bowels of these maneuverings, the sound bites reduce to: This is a government majority owned airline that just cancelled the flight back home for its own President during his foreign trip. What kind of government is that? Who runs a government like that? It’s not my idea of a government I would want to have. Do I have or should I have confidence in my country’s or my private organization’s business dealings with a government that can’t even prioritize the comings and goings of its own President?

I think a powerful unflattering message has been sent. I’d much rather be seeing such a message staying “down on the farm”.

As for your major point, Int, of course you are absolutely correct in pointing out that an incident such as this pales in comparison to deadly, but perhaps avoidable, loss of life incidents that affected the Polish President or the Russian hockey team, but the sheer public ridiculousness of how this airBaltic thing played out on foreign soil for all to see has potential for lasting damage also, even though lives were spared thank goodness.

As for your last point Int, I believe that the Dems and the Reps likewise have damaged the US’s image to outsiders, too with their numerous posturings and accusations and trumped up issues. It don’t look good for us either when that nonsense happens here as well.

Alberts

Apparently, the second plane that was dispatched to fly
the prez’s party from Hamburg has been called back…........

don’t we have an air force.  we used to when Johnny Carson was on air.

Aleksejs - 13 September 2011 01:53 AM

Flick warns of “fatal” situation at Latvia’s airBaltic

Be nice if Flick ran into a “fatal” situation himself.

There are political considerations related to Presidential travel - or travel by politicians in general. The public sees them as a perk plain and simple.

Lithuania’s former President had the inconvenience of being booked on charters that at times barely existed. The President’s travel budget is set by the legislature and certain political segments weren’t bothered at all if the President’s ability to travel even within Europe was very complicated. The Baltic Presidents are largely ceremonial and their power is getting the word out internationally. Limiting the President’s ability to travel in essence limits their power and influence.

There are plenty of alternatives these days. Fractional ownership of private airplanes is a long standing and growing business. Companies that offer small jet flights via subscription services exist world wide.

It’s not by a lack of flight options that embarrassments come to be. It’s just more political theater.

“airBaltic” ieņēmumi plūst caur Flikam pietuvinātu vācu firmu