Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By kanga
#1755752
Red wrote:Aren't most airliners leased from Banks?


<drift> .. as, on first arrival, were the RAF's first (G- not mil-reg) King Airs, replacing Jetstreams. I was amused to note the bank's brass plaque just inside the aircraft door at Cranwell very soon after they arrived :) </>
User avatar
By Red
#1755756
RisePilot wrote:
Red wrote:Aren't most airliners leased from Banks?


No. Most are via lease companies with their majority of funding coming via alternative debt funds and/or CLOs.


Another house of cards then.
#1755765
Red wrote:
RisePilot wrote:
Red wrote:Aren't most airliners leased from Banks?


No. Most are via lease companies with their majority of funding coming via alternative debt funds and/or CLOs.


Another house of cards then.


These funding sources are long term money (pensions & insurance companies mostly), not based on the whims of the clearing or money-centre banks - so far more stable. If you look at the top 10 players (Lease Co's), only two are banks as they are both in Asia where there is a far less developed non-bank financial system than Europe or North America.

Banks haven't featured in lending in a meaningful way since 2007. Should they return, the non-bank sector is well entrenched due to surety/speed of closing a deal and flexibility of structure. Today if you see that a bank has done a loan of 200m, they have probably done 4% hold amount and syndicated 192m - not really a help to the businesses; just there to facilitate as lead arranger and take fees. In many instances, a company will borrow from a bank and see bank people and documentation in the banks name, but 100% of the funding is handed out the "back door" to a fund - in return for a portion of the arrangement fee.
#1756995
Genghis the Engineer wrote:Cabin crew are fit, able to take instructions, trained in first aid and use of certain basic medical devices, hygiene practices, aviation CRM (which isn't all that different to best practice in medical CRM) and bright enough to take instructions. They are not nurses, but they could work under nurses doing relatively unskilled but labour intensive tasks - such as for example keeping a ward full of patents fed.

What am I missing? If "auxilliary nurse" is the wrong term, then, say, medical orderly?

G


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-52085701
User avatar
By Gertie
#1756999
Genghis the Engineer wrote:- Cabin crew rapid re-training as auxiliary nurses (they have most of the skills already)

That is supposedly now happening, to the extent to which one can believe the Today programme any more.
#1757059
the key issue on financial support, for both airlines and airports, must be where their owners pay corporation tax.

And to some extent, I believe the financial support given to employees should also be linked to to this. It seems all to easy to locate a business in a tax haven, then dump the responsibility when the going gets tough.
Nick, AshleyFlynn23 liked this
#1757070
CloudHound wrote:easyJet have stopped flying today so lots of CC potentially available maybe?


No disrespect to cabin crew, but I'm not sure emergency first aid would qualify them for the role of Health Care Assistant they'd be expected to do.

The work supporting the Covid teams is quite distressing and arduous and takes a certain resilience. I would never want anyone to be put into a position where they are put so far out of their comfort zone - some will cope, others won't. And I would never blame anyone for admitting it isn't for them.
Flyin'Dutch', PeteSpencer, RisePilot and 1 others liked this
#1757075
I very much agree with your last sentiment.

That said, cabin crew is trained to deal with stressful situations and those who are cabin crew have demonstrated that they can be trained. Their primary role is to assist with the safety of the passengers and the aeroplane.

I am confident that many will do an excellent job.
#1757081
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:That said, cabin crew is trained to deal with stressful situations...

I think there's a country mile between being trained to deal with a one in several thousand chance of a catastrophic incident and never having to deal with it and facing the trauma of this crisis daily.

Fair play to them for pitching in though. :thumright:
User avatar
By akg1486
#1757089
RisePilot wrote:Banks haven't featured in lending in a meaningful way since 2007. Should they return, the non-bank sector is well entrenched due to surety/speed of closing a deal and flexibility of structure. Today if you see that a bank has done a loan of 200m, they have probably done 4% hold amount and syndicated 192m - not really a help to the businesses; just there to facilitate as lead arranger and take fees. In many instances, a company will borrow from a bank and see bank people and documentation in the banks name, but 100% of the funding is handed out the "back door" to a fund - in return for a portion of the arrangement fee.

Pretty much how many of the high risk mortgage loans in the US used be arranged, except that the funds that actually provided the money didn't know where they ended up. And we all know how well that worked out in 2008.

It's very likely that part of my pension money is indirectly invested in airlines without me knowing it. And possibly without the people managing my pension money knowing it, either.

Regardless of who funds the airlines in the future, the industry will probably come out quite different at the end of this. If anyone knowledgeable about the business would like to comment, I'd love to hear their opinion on how the airline industry will cope with both environmental/climate pressure and the fallout of the 2020 Covid crisis. I can guess, but I don't think I should. Will demand go back to the upward trajectory we've been seeing?