British brands
Back to Forum- This topic has 101 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 13 Jul 2015
at 11:06 by BigDog..
-
- Author
- Posts
- Skip to last reply Create Topic
-
canuckladParticipantSchoolboy error AD,
So, continuing on with famous brands
Ballantine’s, Macallan, Grants, Whyte & Mackay and of course, everyone’s pal ….. Johnny Walker
Are just some Scotch friends I’ve spent a pleasant evening with …….Back on topic…..I do actually remember flying on BCal from GLA to AMS via NCL to connect with my CP flights, as a young boy. .. An airline that was destined to fail because it had to compete on BA’s terms…..
On another topic I commented on BA having a privileged position as the incumbent government airline. Let me expand on this point. When BEA & BOAC merged it created a mega carrier, without the consequences of inefficiency being addressed. as a result the nationalised company carried on regardless, whilst the smaller independents like BCal were heavily regulated to stop direct competition with BA, so as to not harm BA.Why I find the this topic quite absorbing is that I agree with both sides of the argument. British airways is in a privileged place, because unlike other nationalised companies that were sold off, BA was allowed to remain intact without fixes put in place to allow and encourage free competition.
And I could argue the point that, at the time of privatization, BA management had so many people directly linked to Maggie and no 10, it’s a surprise Virgin is still flying today. As a result today’s BRITISH Airways is an Oak tree grown from a very protected acorn.As for Maggie and her handkerchief….If there was ever an example of “Little Englander” behaviour it was that !!,
7 Jul 2015
at 09:38
Edski777ParticipantKM on your, no doubt hypothetical, question about BAT’s tax payments: as little as possible.
I scrolled through their 2013 Annual report and on page 38 found the following statements:
Quote
––be open and transparent with tax authorities and operate with
mature, professional relationships;
––seek to optimise shareholder return by structuring the business in a
tax efficient manner;End Quote
They also have a Holding in the Netherlands that employs treasury and tax experts and participates in projects. In the Netherlands this is typically regarded as a euphemism for tax evasion schemes. Please note: a lot of companies have very attractive arrangements with the Dutch tax authorities in order to evade high taxes in their country of origin. It is all based on the enormous amount of bilateral tax agreements between the Netherlands and countries worldwide in order to prevent paying double taxes. Nothing illegal, but highly questionable, as did a commons committee last year in an open hearing.
Totally off topic, but some background information. British doesn’t necessarily mean the highest ethical standards with regards to taxes where taxes are due.
Loopholes are for everybody who can get away with it.7 Jul 2015
at 10:12
MrMichaelParticipantMe again.
KarlMarx, I think you are wrong about BT and their phone boxes. They are spending a lot of money on putting new and bigger ones in on the basis they are wheelchair accessible. As a cynic, I don’t think they give two hoots about people in wheelchairs and mobility scooters being able to access a public phone, but the advertising revenue derived from the structure will do very nicely thank you.
On the subject of tax and the Netherlands. I do not think my regular Starbucks Latte would taste as good without the Dutch side of Starbucks receiving its commission for being the middle man on the export of coffee from Guatemala to the UK. British Starbucks does have a certain ring to it mind you.
7 Jul 2015
at 16:00
KarlMarxParticipantMr Michael
Maybe these particular phone boxes are proiftable ones?
You may find this link interesting:
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/consultations/uso/statement/removing_callboxes.pdf
It would be interesting if airlines had to consult before removing unprofitable routes.
7 Jul 2015
at 16:12
canuckladParticipantWell andystock, there’s the rub I’m afraid…….When the polls suggested the “Yes” campaign would prevail in the referendum, the heavyweights of Westminster descended upon us bearing gifts.
Sadly, these gentlemen ,unlike the 3 wise men of the east, seem to now be going back on their word, and the Chief of the Indian giving tribe , Mr Cameron is IMO is trying to lose or at least slow down the delivery of these promises by dropping them in legislative red tape. I assume ,therefore hoping that we would forget all about their shiny trinkets….And incidentally APD was already set to be devolved, so it wasn’t a bauble in amongst the trinkets ,that the desperate Dan’s appeared with their last minute begging bribes, yet it’s now as far away then ever.
7 Jul 2015
at 21:27 -
AuthorPosts