FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1945
1945 - 0529.PDF
and AIRCRAFT ENGINEER FIRST AERONAUTICAL VMEEKLY IN THE WORLD .• FOUNDED /POP Editor C. M. POULSEN Monaging Editor G. GEOFFREY SMITH, M.B.E. Wor Correspondent JOHN YOXALL Editorial, Advertising and Publishing Offices = DORSET HOUSE, STAMFORD STREET, LONDON, S.E.I Telegram* : Truditur, Sediit, London. COVENTRY : BIRMINGHAM, 2 : S in CORPORATION ST GUILDHALL BUILDINGS,8-I0, CORPORATION SI. N A v I G A T I O N S T. Telegrams: Autocar, Coventry. Telegrams : Autopress, Birmingham. Telephone: Coventry 52I0. Telephone: Midland 297I (5 lines). Telephone: Waterloo 3111 (IS line*). MANCHESTER. 3 : GLASGOW, C.2 : 260, DEANSGATE. 26B, RENFIELD ST. Telegrams : Iliffe, Manchester. Telegramt: Itiffe, Glasgow. Telephone: Blackfriars 4412. Telephone: Central 4857. No. 1891. Vol. XLVII. Registered at the G.P.O. as a Newspaper. March 22nd, 1945 Thursdays. One Shilling. We Outlook Monopoly CubedT HREE monopoly corporations instead of one. That appears to sum up the Government's plan for British Air Transport. Two are to operate, if possible, without subsidies, being given routes which, by taking the rough with the smooth, should enable them to gain on the swings what they lose on the round- abouts. In the case of the third, the Commonwealth and North Atlantic, apparently it is not thought that the "smooths " will suffice to compensate for the " roughs," and B.O.A.C. will continue as the monopoly subsidy company. So that we shall have one company which has a monopoly of both operation and subsidies, and two companies which have monopolies of operation. That is a rather grim thought, but it appears to represent the facts. We know, of course, that we shall be told that these monopolies relate to agreed scheduled routes which will form the nucleus of the network, and that others which may be established later may be awarded to subsidiaries of the '•' Big Three " or even to " outsiders " ; but does anyone seriously believe that any outsider is likely to be able to compete for a route with such a triumvirate ? The few independent operators who have managed to retain their independence (most of them were absorbed some time ago) are not even to be paid anything for their goodwill. True, the White Paper does state that "the new air transport Corporations will be entitled to acquire at a fair valuation from existing airline operators any physical assets which are needed for the new ser- vices." But what is likely to be the value of such physical assets ? Only one of the independent operators, Allied Air- ways, has continued to operate during the war. The aircraft are obsolete, and even a very fair valuation is not likely to rate them verv high. Other companies which have not been able to operate during the war did good work in different parts of the country. It could certainly not be argued that they were all small beer without sufficient capital to ensure efficient operation. Scottish Airways, for instance, had and has ample back- ing. And Whitney Straight, for example, has great resources. Quite frankly, we cannot see that people such as these, and others who could be mentioned, are to receive a fair deal. When the independent bus operators were absorbed by London Transport, they were at least given some compensation. The offer that independent operators may be allowed to take up shares either in a main corporation or in a subsidiary is not likely to be snapped up. One aspect which impresses us as being somewhat dangerous is that under the new scheme there is likely to be what will almost amount to a technical dictator- ship. The railways have some experience, the shipping companies none, so that it is logical to assume that both will, in varying degree, obtain their technical advice from B.O.A.C. Not that we doubt the judgment of that corporation, but just now we are, technically, at the beginning of a new period of development, and the B.O.A.C. cannot have, nor, we are sure, would they claim to have, any monopoly of technical acumen. There is truth in the old saying that two heads are better than one. No YardstickI N our issue of March 8th we commented on the need for rivalry—as distinct from cut-throat competition —in order to provide a yardstick with which to measure the efficiency of any particular route. The only provision made for this in the White Paper is a reference to a judicial tribunal to be set up. How such a tribunal is to judge the efficiency of a route is not clear
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
