Thursday, May 29, 2014

BNP Paribas > $ 10,000,000,000




































My Orchids. Phalaneopsis "Lys de France". Photo ET

BNP Paribas > $ 10,000,000,000

In an article today, the Wall Street Journal carries a lengthy report about BNP Paribas’ problems with the US Justice Department and regulators. It is an elaboration on former news, where the bank faces allegations of doing business with sanctioned entities, such as Iran or Cuba. In the time frame of 2 months, expectations about possible fines went from $1.1 billion, to $ 5 billion to now more than $10 billion. That is $ 10,000,000,000. The bank is expected to withstand that shock.

It is not clear yet if criminal charges or a guilty plea are considered. Though the mood is leaning more towards tougher punishments, and critics have coined the expression “too big to jail”, playing on the other idiomatic expression “too big to fail”.

The WSJ also reproduces the following graph of the most important fines financial institutions incurred for violating the OFAC sanctions list or other money laundering provisions:
























Sunday, May 25, 2014

Memorial Day 2014


















My Orchids. Brassavola nodosa "Dama de la Noche". Photo ET


Memorial Day 2014



















SSGT Day G. Turner
American Military Cemetery, Hamm, Luxembourg. Plot E, Row 10, Grave 72 that says: Day G. Turner, SSGT 319 INF 80 DIV, Pennsylvania Feb 8 1945, Medal of Honor


Saturday, May 24, 2014

The US giving up its archaic measurement system for the Square Luxembourg





















My Orchids. Phalaneopsis "Phobos". Photo: ET



The US giving up its archaic measurement system for the Square Luxembourg

Here is the Daily Beast explaining why:


Of course, the US is not going to switch to the rest of the world's metric system. But slowly the "Luxembourg" makes its way into the daily calculations. As for the icebergs, splitting from the polar ice caps into the polar seas are calculated in Luxembourgs. Or a wildfire in California is half the size of Luxembourg? Did you know that the total surface  of Phobos, one of  Mars' two moons has a total surface of 0.6 times Luxembourgs only? So if you suffer from claustrophobia in Luxembourg, don't go on Phobos.

Actually, Phobos in just some hundred million years will either be disintegrated by Mars or crash on it. 

The real mystery to me is why the US didn't switch to the Rhode Island. Simply because  1 Luxembourg = 1 Rhode Island (without the water surface).



Monday, May 19, 2014

Cargolux, The Rise of the Dirk Reich, and the Fall of the Song





















My Orchids. Phalaneopsis "Duplicity". Photo ET

Cargolux, The Rise of the Dirk Reich, and the Fall of the Song


"The Loadstar" got good sources reporting about the new CEO's Dirk Reich "falling out" with Robert Song, the overworked Senior Vice-President of Cargolux, who "brokered" the controversial deal between Cargolux  and HNCA.

Good job, but just say things as they are: some people messed up big time, and the new CEO has to fix it. Get the VP Compliance involved too. The Loadstar doesn't know all yet. The "dual hub" has become a duplicity hub.

Don't yet load the City of Zhengzhou for the inaugural flight on June 14. There is more to come. Come on Loadstar, you can tell us even more. 





Friday, May 16, 2014

Cargolux Inaugural Flight to Ghengzhou Delayed Again




































My Orchids. Oncidium "Ghengzhou Square Dance". Photo ET


Following HNCA's acquisition of 35% of the Luxembourg airline, an inaugural flight was scheduled for April 24th. As everyone knows the flight of the "City of Ghengzhou", ready to go, was aborted 4 hours before takeoff. Cargolux was not in possession of the required rights. Minister Bausch who had traveled to China to witness and celebrate the arrival  of the first flight had to take the frustration, the criticisms and also the entertaining comments at his expense.

Another date for the inaugural flight was set on May 29, so to allow for ample time for the bureaucratic hurdles to be cleared. So far they are not.

The breaking news sound like a broken record: the inaugural flight had again to be delayed, this time to June 14th. For an intransparent reason.


There is in my opinion good news in this new delay. These are that there will be a positive effect on the 2014 results, as these flights will be money losing flights in the foreseeable future.  



Wednesday, May 14, 2014

Qatar-Luxembourg signs agreement on cultural cooperation






















My Orchids: Paphiopedilum Sheherazade. Photo ET


That's nice. As seen in the Gulf Daily Mail, Luxembourg's Minister of Culture Maggy Nagel nailed the agreement on May 12th, with Qatar's Minister of Culture, Arts, and Heritage Hamad Abdel Aziz Al Kuwari.




Monday, May 12, 2014

Cargolux - HNCA: Unions relieved but vigilant


















My Orchids. Phalaneopsis "Inaugural Flight". Photo ET

Cargolux - HNCA: Unions relieved but vigilant

The antecedents are well known: HNCA, an economic development agency of the Chinese Province of Henan is a shareholder of Cargolux. One of the main objectives is for Cargolux to develop flights between Luxembourg and the airport located at Zhengzhou.

So far no flight took place. In an almost comical event, the Luxembourg Minister of Transportation had traveled to Zhengzhou to welcome the first CV flight on April 24th, the aircraft baptized "City of Grevenmacher", zealously painted over as "City of Zhenzhou".  That didn't help and the Minister waited in vain, as the flight was canceled due to unexpected authorization problems. These seem to be major, as the second attempt for the inaugural flight will be only on May 29th. If all goes well.

After that startling hiccup, another piece of news trickled in, that the airport of Zhengzhou was actively pursuing partnerships with the airports of Hahn and Leipzig. Unions were rightfully alarmed at this second breakdown in the relationship, as there was no prior knowledge about this, though one of the Chinese signatories is now a Cargolux Board member. Was Hahn going to drain away business from Luxembourg with Chinese support, though we already expect that the venture will be losing money?

Minister Bausch was able to assuage the Union's fear. The Hahn agreement was qualified as only a PR stunt of a loser airport hanging in the ropes. The agreement is merely talking about cargo flights increasing from 2 to 4 flights a week. But it is rather an MOU than a contract. There would be no incidence on the Luxembourg airport's operations. None at all.

The Minister agreed that there has been some miscommunication. We already understood this,  as one can imagine that a Green member of the government would not gratuitously increase his carbon footprint by traveling to China for an event that didn't take place.

We haven't heard yet why the Zhengzhou airport officials didn't sign a similar agreement with the Luxembourg airport. Even if it were only an empty MOU, it would have been nice. Why not sign it when Mr. Bausch was over there? He would not have come back empty handed. We all know that appearance in politics counts.


We also don't yet know if another Luxembourg delegation  will travel again to Zhengzhou for the second attempt at the inaugural flight.



Friday, May 9, 2014

Cargolux and the Three Headed Dragon




































My Orchids. Phalaneopsis "Three Headed Dragon". Photo ET

Cargolux and the Three Headed Dragon

I hoped that the Cargolux story had reached a point of relative calm, though an uneasy calm, because of the lack of visibility, of a bad deal, (1) and of obvious uncertainties. I thought though that the story was moving in a pattern of circles, with repeating scenarios, with inadequate Luxembourg posture, where you had to wonder: is this incompetence, naiveté or worse? Whatever the response to that question is, fact is that the pattern of circles is tridimensional, and is actually a spiral downwards. Here is the wild ride:

1. The partnership with QR was poorly negotiated, and was a mistake.

Imagine, we sold 35% of a company that has 40 years of experience, the best qualified workforce in the industry,  the newest, large fleet of the best aircraft, major, major clients and a route network that is the envy of the other cargo airlines. How much did QR pay for those 35% in ownership? $117.5 million, and that is from QR, a competitor. Who came up with that miserable valuation?

Of course once onboard, QR slapped Boeing in the face, cannibalized clients and routes before going home with the loot, and the bad deal collapsed.

2. The partnership with HNCA was poorly negotiated, and turns out to be a mistake too.

There are too many perplexing hiccups in the HNCA partnership, as we discover day by day, for this venture to be successful. First of all, why did this deal mimic the QR deal, when it comes to the order of magnitude of CV's valuation? And other provisions, such as the right of the new minority shareholder to veto majority decisions? Then who can explain that surprising bait and  switch strategy away from HNA, that was bidding for the partnership, to HNCA? HNA is a Chinese airline from the wealthier coastal areas, HNCA is an economic development agency from a poor interior Province.

The Luxembourg government, a sovereign State, was negotiating with a sub-entity of a Chinese Province, and thus could be rebuked by both the Provincial government and vetoed by the Chinese central government? One had to expect that difficulties would arise from the fact that we were relying on the good grace of three (uncoordinated, or more machiavellian, coordinated) entities: the Chinese government, HNCA and Zhengzhou airport. We should have evaluated the realm of possibilities, when negotiating with a three-headed entity, and comprehend how these seemingly independent instances would play together. Instead, I'm afraid we believed in promises and assigned wishful good intentions to all three of them. Which is testimony to our fair minded and innocent approach.  Trust is good, but put it in writing. Who engineered this?

It becomes more unsettling even, if you consider that the former Luxembourg government, heavily criticized for its poor handling of  the Cargolux situation had framed this deal, and that Mr. Wiseler, Minister in charge made efforts to rush it through before the new government was in place. Incredibly, the new government actually almost  blindly supported it.

The rush to sign this deal remains mysterious, mostly considering the subsequent delays and still unresolved problems on the Chinese side. What takes them so long? Has Mr. Song's power and hence his new position been overvalued, if a piece of bureaucracy between the three heads is insurmountable? I would expect that a really credible and influential representative for CV could have resolved any bureaucratic bottleneck with a phone call. Instead of a new delay of 5 weeks for a flight that was anticipated on the Luxembourg side with almost childish expectation. In view of present developments, the rush might have been a costly mistake.

3. Is Cargolux check and mate?

We already know that HNCA has a veto right. We watched in awe how the inaugural flight scheduled in late April has been a flop, with a Luxembourg advance team headed by a Minister waiting in vain for CV to land in Zhengzhou.

The excuses about clerical and bureaucratic encumbrance don't fly. Because let's face it, there are not many choices as for the reasons: it is either incompetence that those things were not taken into account, or it is naiveté that things would be OK all by themselves, or that the new partner would be so obliging and well intentioned as we are, and bend backwards to get rid of any obstacle in our way. And hopefully, there is no worse reason such as corruptive expectations, still quite common in the area, and the accompanying retaliation if one does not oblige.

I would warn that this last one comes to mind again, when we hear about another surreptitious event on behalf of the Chinese side, that comes like a warning shot across our bow: The signing with an airport to airport agreement with Hahn. And then with Leipzig. Signed by people in the know, because involved with both, the Zhengzhou airport and the Cargolux Board. No one should even dare to explain that we should be schizophrenic about this, that it is unrelated, because HNCA is not the same entity as the airport. Everyone and everything is related to the State in a directed economy.

By the way, why isn't there a similar agreement with the Luxembourg airport? Why would it be needed, or not needed?

4. What is the way out?

So far none. CV is check and mate. CV has lost its freedom of action. HNCA has veto power.

If all these disturbing actions get no good explanation, even then a QR bis, a divorce and the unwinding of the HNCA deal is unlikely. Why would HNCA ever want this to happen? They won a pretty good deal, their obligations are minimal, and they can and do ratchet up pressure by creating foreseeable problems, and invoking alternatively either the Province, or the airport, or Beijing as the source of the problem. HNCA was and is playing chess, our guys marbles.

There are only two satisfactory ways out:

The first one is that the Chinese side finally plays nice, and performs according to the Luxembourg phantasm of an idyllic partnership. And HNCA forgets that Luxembourg forgot to get a non compete agreement in place.

The second one is that CV diversifies its own partners, if that can be done without a veto from HNCA. Or create a new Luxembourg JV "Luxcargo", with the Luxembourg stakeholders in CV, if HNCA continues to be a problem. Maybe now is the time to look around for other carriers for CV to take over, as some went out of business, or others may be available. In the US it is well known that might actually be the case for Martinair, cargo activities of which have become redundant with KLM's and Air France's cargo capacity on full bodied passenger planes such as the A 380. Others are confronted with similar strategic challenges, a possible opportunity for CV.

5. The standalone option

If the Chinese partnership fails, an escape forward as indicated would be costly. But it would be the price to pay to preserve the concept of the great Luxembourg logistics center. Two past questionable partnerships would plead this time for a standalone.

But, remember the many theories and demonstrations advanced  in the past to show that a standalone was not possible?  Including the argument, that the European regulations did not allow the government to remain a shareholder, and that turned out to be a lie? Apart from the fact that once in a while, we have to fight the European Commission's unreasonable pushiness, it remains a lie, as the State remains as a shareholder even today. Or maybe we finally just pushed back successfully. In both cases, a false argument eliminated the most viable solution in the past.

Also doubting the survivability of a standalone is a myth. CV did not do well with a partner, QR in 2012. As a standalone last year it did well. OK some old engines were sold and contributed to the numbers. But maybe we could have a look at Profit and Loss in the first quarter of 2014, or the first four months, to verify how everything worked out until the best managers left. Adjust for seasonality. I'm sure OGBL will see those numbers in an upcoming feel good meeting with the Minister of Transportation, who might give up his obsession with a new tramway system for Luxembourg City, at a cost of almost half a billion Euros. Budget those for CV's survival.







Frankfurt-Hahn Airport Enters “World Cargo Airport Alliance” With Zhengzhou Airport




















My Orchids. Oncidium "Judas". Photo ET

Quote from Cargoforwarder:

" Now, the Chinese airport, again supported by Henan province has entered into a so called “World Cargo Airports Alliance” - in short “WCAA,” with Frankfurt- Hahn airport in Germany.

This was made public and signed today (9 May) at a press conference called by both airports in Hahn. It was stated by the Chinese delegation that this is the first agreement of its kind with an airport in Europe."


Is this really the case?

Wow! What the heck is this? For the Cargolux deal, seriously wounded by all the recent events, there will be a lot of explaining to do. On both sides.

How come we look like total idiots?

How come they look as totally untrustworthy?




Thursday, May 8, 2014

Bank of China plans yuan bond in Luxembourg


















My Orchids: Phalaneopsis. "Renminbi". Photo ET


Quotes from the South China Morning Post:

"The bonds, the first to be listed in the euro zone by a Chinese firm, will be issued by BOC’s Luxembourg branch and carry a maturity of three years.


Luxembourg is the third city outside China where the state-backed bank has chosen to issue an offshore yuan bond."



Note: The three cities are London, Singapore and Luxembourg.