Re: Orders for Airliners in 1997

Date:         11 Feb 98 04:26:42 
From:         Marc Hookerman <mh727@ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Netcom
References:   1 2 3 4 5 6
Followups:    1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1998.220@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
	kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) wrote:

>>And what is different from what I said.  ATR was a 50-50 partnership
>>with Aerospatiale which is a major partner with Airbus.  And how did
>>that not make ATR a part of Airbus Industrie?
>
>I own stock in both Southwest Airlines and UAL Corp. (United's parent).
>By your logic, that makes Southwest a division of UAL.
>
>Sorry, but just because the same company owned a piece of both ATR and
>Airbus doesn't make one a division or any other part of the other.

I used to be a route planner and scheduler for TWA and AIA, and my
sources tell me that ATR and Airbus Industrie were partners with
Aerospatiale.  We are talking about Aircraft Manufacturing corporations,
not airlines.  They all were tied together to form the Aerospatiale
group.  Everything from the concorde to the guppy was considered part of
Aerospatiale.  Making ATR, Airbus, and Bae a european aircraft
manufacturing group.  Of course...if you run XXX airlines, and you have
a piece of YYY and ZZZ, you therefore are apart of each other.  Take
Star Alliance for instance.  All airlines in that net work together to
help and better one another.  I see where your coming from...and I can
grasp what your saying, but I still feel that ATR was just as much a
part of Airbus and Airbus was a part of Aerospatiale...etc...etc.

Marc