Arion640 wrote:

If BA have reduced it to one weekly then it's practically being set up to fail.

However, a net gain into Africa for BA with Durban being launched along with JNB going 3 daily on some days of the week. Also the addition of the extra Marrakesh flight from LGW.

berari wrote:

So they are using the $ they have in LAD to fill up the tanks, as in, spend the $ locally.

I have always wondered about this, what options other than transferring the $s back to the home country, do airlines have in such circumstances? What other options do they have beyond fuel and aircraft maintenance that could be paid for locally? Could BA pay locally for a service that a third party wants in LAD (that's not necessarily aviation related) and that third party pays BA in LHR, or would that constitute money laundering?

Cunard wrote:

Arion640 wrote:

If BA have reduced it to one weekly then it's practically being set up to fail.

However, a net gain into Africa for BA with Durban being launched along with JNB going 3 daily on some days of the week. Also the addition of the extra Marrakesh flight from LGW.

The additional RAK flight is from LHR, BA already fly from LGW to RAK 5 weekly.

evanb wrote:

berari wrote:

So they are using the $ they have in LAD to fill up the tanks, as in, spend the $ locally.

I have always wondered about this, what options other than transferring the $s back to the home country, do airlines have in such circumstances? What other options do they have beyond fuel and aircraft maintenance that could be paid for locally? Could BA pay locally for a service that a third party wants in LAD (that's not necessarily aviation related) and that third party pays BA in LHR, or would that constitute money laundering?

Wouldn't be money laundering, but what services would they procure locally in Luanda? Fuel is one, but there risks attached to it. Easier for KLM or BA to do than say SAA since SAA would need to land an aircraft heavy in JNB and even then with more fuel than they might need for the next leg, but it's a cunning idea!

berari wrote:

I'm imagining a third party that's purchasing something else. Imagine Harrods purchasing $5 million worth of scarves from Angola (work with me.) Could Harrods pay that sum to BA in London, whereby BA pays the scarve dealer in Angola in local $, thus having to avoid directly repatriating funds out of the country?

EvanWSFO wrote:

mast2407 wrote:

TC957 wrote:

BA used a 789 to LAD, so hardly surprising they want all serviceable 789's freed up.
Also, BA is cancelling NRT for nearly 3 weeks 8 - 27 June which again should allow for 789 engine work.

Cancelling NRT completely, or just one frequency? That seems extreme!

Can you not tell from the comment you quoted?

mast2407 wrote:

EvanWSFO wrote:

mast2407 wrote:

Cancelling NRT completely, or just one frequency? That seems extreme!

Can you not tell from the comment you quoted?

No. I cannot. Now if I had checked, I’d have learnt that BA only seems to have one frequency a day, but anyhow. We live and learn.

Apologies that you were so anguished that you had to reply. I won’t do it again.

Peace.

berari wrote:

airbuster wrote:

KLM will reduce to 2x weekly this winter. They also have problems repatriating cash. Plane leaves with a maximum fuel load so as to ship out fuel iso cash.

So they are using the $ they have in LAD to fill up the tanks, as in, spend the $ locally.

I have always wondered about this, what options other than transferring the $s back to the home country, do airlines have in such circumstances? What other options do they have beyond fuel and aircraft maintenance that could be paid for locally? Could BA pay locally for a service that a third party wants in LAD (that's not necessarily aviation related) and that third party pays BA in LHR, or would that constitute money laundering?