#11
|
|||
|
|||
I'd suggest it mightn't say what you think it does. Virgin may have asked for it to be removed due to factual inaccuracies, non-public information, etc.
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
The article contained over 10 factual inaccuracies hence it was removed. One inaccuruancy that stood out was the number of aircraft that the article stated VA owned. The article stated they owned 8, when they actually own 60. So simple facts like that were not checked by the author(s) before it was published.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
The CEO has written to employees linking to that article refuting much of what it says, point by point. In this case I am inclined to believe (some of) what he says.
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
An article on AFR: http://www.afr.com/brand/rear-window...0161102-gsgjrl
The article claimed Virgin had "limited options" for raising equity and suggested it would have issues financing its debt in the future. Virgin has dismissed the article, which is suspected to be a hoax, as factually wrong. Attempts to contact the author were unsuccessful as the phone number and address linked to the website were fake. Australinea later removed the article at the request of Virgin, which presumably had its lawyers firing off a tersely worded email. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Where there's smoke there's fire. IMHO - a line-by-line internal email refuting the claims gives the article (& author) a measure of validity. It's not a secret Virgin is not going great....but JB will never admit failure of his plan to turn the airline around. If only he didn't have that chip on his shoulder. You can read more about it in Matt O'Sullivan's book - Mayday: How warring egos forced Qantas off course |
|
|