Cargolux in an Italian Triangulation.

My Orchids. Phalaenopsis "Triangle". Photo ET

Cargolux in an Italian Triangulation.

A decision by Cargolux to transfer one additional aircraft and 25 jobs to Cargolux Italia SpA rightfully has all the Unions’ radars going off. In the background, reference can be made to an interview by Dirk Reich, the new CEO, that Italian pilots work 25% more than their Luxembourg counterparts, and cost 20% less. Work more for less pay seems to be the desirable goal for Cargolux management. But that is not exactly Union speak. Is it necessary, or just desirable, or should it be even a topic to work more for less? Is the Italy strategy a triangulation strategy to force pay cuts elsewhere in the company down to Italian levels, at Cargolux Luxembourg in particular or even generally in the future Luxembourg “Tripartite” discussions? The idea of triangulation being that disequilibrium in the triangle will eventually be leveled out in bringing down high costs in one corner by shifting them to the more “cost-effective” corner. This way internal competition is created with the owners in the top corner of the triangle providing the arbitrage.

Cargolux Italia runs losses ever since its creation in 2008. The additional aircraft is supposed to reduce losses at the Italian operation. Interestingly the decision to create Cargolux Italia was already a triangulation of another kind. Its purpose was to circumvent restrictions on direct flights to/from Asia and North America using a third country. Crews were Luxembourg crews, until Italian regulations, or so it was argued, imposed Italian crews on the Italian company. This is a surprising requirement in the Common Market where exactly no restrictions on free movement are supposed to be the norm. This rule was maybe not true, but cheaper, and could not be verified yet. In the meantime the reason to operate Cargolux Italia has become obsolete, following new agreements on third country traffic. The Pilots Association ALPL has commissioned an expertise from Janezic & Schmidt Lawyers OG, on the particular aspects that led Cargolux to create Cargolux Italia SpA. It analyzes the need in view of new developments in air services agreements to keep the Italian operation alive at all. The interim report so far seems to confirm that for the main reason, servicing the third countries mentioned at the time, the arrangement in Italy is obsolete.

Why would Cargolux Management then pursue a strategy to consolidate and keep alive a losing and possibly useless operation? Obviously to improve its results, and cut 7 years of losses there. However, if despite the low payroll costs and more work hours, profitability could not be achieved, why persevere in a business that does not help the bottom line? As the pressure tool in the triangulation? The alternative would be to shut it down.

The hope and responsibility of Management is of course to make sure the company operates in a profitable way. It has probably determined that by providing critical mass to the Italian operation, earnings should increase and incremental costs decrease. For the CEO of a “private” company, it would be a normal bet on the future to strive for an effort to reduce costs and increase revenue. If he fails, he bears the blame. However maintaining that Cargolux is a private company is a practical lie to hide political responsibility. Cargolux still is a quintessential Luxembourg company, and its destiny has important national implications on employment at a moment where we hit new records in unemployment, on Luxair, on the airport in general and on the government’s plan to develop logistics as another leg of our economic setup.

So is this maneuver a bootstrapping in view of a capital raise next year, or is it an elaborate triangulation beyond Cargolux to declare war on the tripartite, or is it just kabuki in the context of upcoming negotiations with the unions?

It might be wise to consider an alternative way to make sure present decisions do not make matters worse. Isn’t there a smoother way to go along? Cargolux proudly always could refer to the “Cargolux Spirit”. That spirit is borne by employees. It is worrisome if in a recent companywide survey only about 30% of the employees responded. For those the three most important issues to address at Cargolux are:  Leadership 66.8%, Teamwork 62.5%, and Respect 61.9%. That is a shock to the Cargolux spirit, the shrill warning of a morale problem.

At this moment we hear about losses that are said to be $11 million “below target” (Forson speak to hide the real total loss that I would estimate then at $25.4 million, given that the target was already a loss of only $14.4 million) in the first half of the year. The company also is said to target a total fleet of 30 aircraft, among those 5 aircraft for charter flights, 5 for the China routes including Italian flights, and 5 for wet leases. This is a good but bold move to achieve profitability. The financing of new aircraft is of course a major question, as existing shareholders might not all be fit enough financially to carry their share. And if new shares have to be issued for raising capital, it will of course affect ownership, and the most willing one and capable to jump in could be the Chinese partner HNCA for the financing of 5 new B747-8 aircraft.

Which brings up the future situation that should be better addressed now, the creation of yet another company as a Chinese joint venture down the road. Will this company, let’s call it Cargozhou, be another triangulation, and duplicate the Italian issues at hand? With the Italian operation still in place, it will add yet another corner to the triangle, achieving thus the wonderful squaring of the triangle. It will be another matter of concern to think through now, instead of in two years from now. At the table, the discussions will be around profitability, political will, solutions, and Leadership 66.8%, Teamwork 62.5%, and Respect 61.9%. The sum of it will define the Cargolux Spirit, and its capacity to achieve all expectations.

Upside down in the Middle East

One year later: same story, and nothing learned.
Only some things are reversed and renamed.
Photo ET

Upside down in the Middle East

Today I just wanted to repeat myself, because history is repeating itself. I'm digging out a post from August 31, 2013. It is all about principles, universal principles that have been around for more than 2,000 years, the principles of the art of war. So valid in 2013, 2014, and all the years to come.

One year after the Syrian Red Line outcome, things got much worse. Let me go fetch a credible name with a powerful quote that summarizes the world today. The best so far is Madeleine Albright, the former Secretary of State who served well. In an interview on CBS in July she said: "the world is a mess."

She also added: "What has changed: We don't want to be the world's policeman. The American people don't." Since then events have caught up with the American people who didn't want to be caught up. What do you do in the face of absolute Barbary, as it unfolds under the so-called Islamic State? With direct threats to the US and assassinations of US citizens?

Maybe a quote from Friedrich Schiller in Wilhelm Tell is appropriate thinking. ""Es kann der Frömmste nicht in Frieden leben, wenn es dem bösen Nachbarn nicht gefällt." - Or free translation: "The most pious man cannot live in peace, if it does not please his evil neighbor".

If it is US policy to do nothing, as the official position seems to be, that is called nonchalant status quo. Or benign neglect. It is smartly concocted in today's Op_Ed column in the New York Times by Maureen Dowd: The Golf Address.

If it is US policy to do something, the reactions are so prudent that we have to re-read the principles of war below.

I tried to sound the Luxembourg position as a member of the UN Security Council. It seems that the Luxembourg FM is on vacation too, on his way biking from Luxembourg to Southern France. Unless this is a Facebook Challenge to have the international community move against barbarism, nothing will happen at the UN. In Golf we trust.

Saturday, August 31, 2013

War on Syria: "Drôle de Guerre" and the Principles of War 101

   Dark Clouds. Or Smoke Signals? Photo ET

War on Syria: "Drôle de Guerre" and the 

Principles of War 101

Updated September 10, 2013

President Theodore Roosevelt summarizing US foreign policy's Monroe Doctrine, is supposed to have said: "Speak softly and carry a big stick". It morphed yesterday into: "Speak loudly and and kerry carry an unbelievably small toothpick."

"Drôle de Guerre" or "Phoney War" is the name given to that strange historic event started by the French-British declaration of war against Germany on September 3, 1939. Germany had crossed a red line by attacking Poland on September 1st. After the declaration of war, nothing happened though until May 10, 1940. The Germans, proponents of the concept of "Blitzkrieg" mocked the allies as having declared a "Sitzkrieg" (Seated war).

As a former soldier, I'm of course aware that warfare is an art and very serious business. People die. The quite amateurish posturing of our western leaders made me think back to my years at the Royal Military Academy in Brussels, Belgium, when Professor Henri Bernard dissected military thinking into 3 principles of the art of war. They should be known at least minimally to the civilian leadership, as even private companies have recognized their validity in their daily competitive world. And many versions of those principles have been around, from General Sun Tsu to General von Clausewitz. Those principles are dos and don'ts of the art of war, and breaching only one is most often a fatal mistake. All great military failures stem from the violation of at least one principle.

It seems to me that in the case of the well announced, yet not decided strike on Syria, which was expected to take place before Wednesday, September 4th according to the French President, with a list of targets and a civilian choreography of missile strikes in the sand or across the bow lasting for about 48 hours, all 3 principles and many rules have already been violated.

The leaked narrative of operations to come gives the "enemy" ample assurances that he can win this, by simply sitting it out, taking shelter for 48 hours. Clemenceau, the French President who oversaw the final years of WW 1, is supposed to have said that war is too serious a matter to entrust to military men. Mais mon cher Georges, look at what's going on now. Isn't this a case for military men to reciprocate your wit? War seems indeed too serious a business to entrust it to elected officials.

Henri Bernard had distilled military thinking from Sun Tsu to von Clausewitz into those 3 principles, each with a set of rules. Here they are, a bit popularized, the way even the roughest street fighters understand and certainly use them:

The first principle is: Proportionality between mission and assets, which means don’t even go there if you know, you really have no goal and if you can’t afford it. Or: are you sure you can beat them up?

The second principle is: Freedom of Action, which means never, never lose the initiative, and dissimulate your intentions. Or better, you wait for the right moment at the right place. Then let all hell get lose.

The third principle is: Economy of Forces, which means use them efficiently. Or better strike suddenly, fast and with all your might.

OK, I made it a bit folksy so my crash course students will remember the stuff. If they do, we might actually have a war where no one shows up. But if we still go, I'm afraid the three above principles are and remain violated:

The first principle is being violated, because intelligence is missing, we don't know yet who did it, and on this entangled battlefield we don't always know who is who. Is Al Qaida now an ally, because it is the enemy of our enemy? Is Assad really our enemy, or has that shifted to Assad being an objective ally, because now that our enemy Al Qaida is an ally of our ally, their enemy Assad becomes our ally? I hope I now have confused you, which is exactly my point. Please try again. And what about the mission? I guess it would be the following manifold mission, if we mean serious business: get rid of the Assad regime, defeat Al Qaida, have the rebels win, but only the good rebels, not the ones that will do an Egypt. That would be a mission today with boots on the ground. You know, missiles, drones and planes don't make prisoners. However wouldn't that have been easier 2 years ago, choosing the good rebels before the bad ones even showed up?

The second principle is violated "all you can violate": the details of the intended military intervention are telephoned. No dissimulation, unless all the leaked information hopefully has been leaked intentionally and is very clever disinformation. Or it is begging for no Syrian or Iranian retaliation to an "unbelievably small" action. Assad will watch the fireworks from his balcony, the New York Times' program of events at hand, knowing that it won't last long.

The third principle is violated, because there is no surprise left. We know or will know who will deliver the shot across the bow, when, where, how, and how long. And there is very little backup in theater to mission-creep, or a claim that all options are on the table. Which Syria seems to claim on their side.

So, now it looks as if we have planned for disaster. It won't really be a military disaster, because Syria is no match for Western forces, and the military will dutifully pull the trigger and go home. But it could well become a geopolitical disaster, if Assad's backers see weak action. How can we save face?

First, leave all options on the table. Which means there is no such thing as a limited operation, because a limited operation takes options OFF the table. And Assad's protectors will think twice. Then make one of 4 decisions:

1. Do nothing. The assessment being, that Syrian events are none of the West's interests.

2. Wait for a UN mandate as the sole legal base for action. However even Luxembourg as a member of the Security Council will vote against intervention. Not mentioning the Russian and Chinese veto powers with their own agendas.

3. Claim preponderance of a doctrine, a more or less unilateral rule originated from a position of power. The "Red Line Doctrine", well announced ahead, would be grounds for punitive action if the line is crossed, which seems to be the case, even more so if crossing the line is a crime against humanity.

4. Act upon international outrage of intolerable human rights violations and genocide. A sort of UN mandate without the UN.

So there are two options to do nothing, and two possible unilateral ones. But the international outcry against Assad is not at a level to support military intervention. Therefore there is no good option, only bad ones or worse ones.

Unless you talk to a hawk, which doesn't seem to be the mood of the day. In a hawkish view, you could speculate that there is a strategy that would also achieve other goals, and would go this way: There is military intervention in Syria on humanitarian grounds, Syria's Iranian backers imprudently intervene and retaliate, which gives justification to launch an assault and take out Iran's nuclear sites. For many analysts this would be an overdue reaction to Iran's non-compliance with international demands to stop nuclear programs. The UN in particular, as a forum for international outrage is a lame construction, unable to accede to the level of enforcing its own demands. This would take care of that. Chances are however increasing by the day that there is a war, and no one shows up. And Syria is actively engaged in the propaganda war, the likely ersatz event for the real thing.

As this short overview is a crash course in Principles of War 101, there is a bonus for you having read this far: a summary of Henri Bernard's Principles and Rules of War. Easy to print, cut out and wear in your wallet, if ever you go to War.

THE PRINCIPLES OF WAR

PRINCIPLES	RULES
1. PROPORTIONALITY	INTELLIGENCE GATHERING
2. FREEDOM OF ACTION	COMBINE FORCES SECURE LINE OF COMMUNICATIONS SAFETY DISSIMULATE INTENTIONS
3. ECONOMY OF FORCES	ASSEMBLE MAXIMUM OF ASSETS USE WITH MAXIMUM INTENSITY IN COOPERATION UNDER ONE COMMAND CHOICE OF TIMING CHOICE OF PLACE SURPRISE SPEED CONTINUITY

N.B. The US has the following: The nine Principles of War, as definedin the Army Field Manual FM-3 Military Operations

UPDATE: 08.31.2013 14:50 EST

President Obama has spoken.

Peace has effectively broken out, and you have celebrations in Damascus, Tehran, Moscow and elsewhere. It is a stunning reversal from Secretary of State Kerry's call for action just a day ago. The backdoor escape from action is that though the President has decided to take military action, and though he has the authority to decide this (Presidents Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush did so), he wants Congressional approval. Most observers would say, that's impossible to get.

So the Syrians and their friends celebrate.

Rebels lose morale and hope.

Israel knows it is on its own.

Congress is likely to say "No" on September 9th, which almost everyone assumes.

The US military might be relieved and hope to go back to the principles of war.

The rogue states are emboldened.

The US Presidency is weakened.

US public opinion prevailed, as polls found more than 80% opposed.

Luxembourg also prevailed with its advertised "No" at the UN.

And, Oh mon Dieu, Monsieur Hollande has to go it alone. Beware of the Beresina!

UPDATE: 09.10.2013 09:00 EST

By now the enemy is so confused, that indeed when the war breaks out, no one goes. It is replaced by a vote that will not take place and international control of inaccessible chemical weapons arsenal.

Ennert de Steiler, Luxembourg, or Starbucks?

My Orchids. Cattleya Brassavola nodosa "Latte"
Photo ET

Ennert de Steiler, Luxembourg, or Starbucks?

The Financial Times reported:

"What do Luxembourgers think their country needs most? According to a poll by the country’s national newspaper, it’s Starbucks. The nearest one is a lengthy drive away in neighbouring Germany, so unless you want to take your Luxembourgish business associate on an impromptu road trip, that skinny soy latte is off the cards."

Now of course we are lamenting the missed opportunity that was offered to Luxembourg on a silver platter. We could have had our first Starbucks more than four years ago, when Cynthia Stroum was nominated to be the US Ambassador to Luxembourg. Said the White House: “Cynthia Stroum has been an angel investor in over 20 successful technology, biotechnology and retail start-up companies, including Starbucks Coffee Company.”

She intended to bring a Starbucks along as far as I remember. But then happened that Washington thing with her new job, a tale of a queen size mattress and a handful bottles of wine, and for a few bucks our Star was gone. After the intrigue was over, her replacement probably had to swear to never put a foot into a Starbucks. But could you see the monster success that the opening ceremony of Starbucks Luxembourg would be, with Cynthia cutting the ribbon and the US Ambassador not attending?

Thanks to FT for the story. I didn’t know what else the heck to write either in the midst of August. 

Islamic banking in Luxembourg and the conflict of law

My Orchids. Phalaenopsis "Clash". Photo ET

Islamic banking in Luxembourg and the conflict of law

The financial center of Luxembourg, in its quest for diversification away from former niche banking made impossible through automatic reporting, has turned among others to Islamic Finance. Products formerly unknown are listed on the Luxembourg Stock Exchange, Parliament recently authorized the first Luxembourg Sukuk, and private banking based on Sharia is offered by many financial institutions. We are here at the intersection of Sharia and Luxembourg’s secular law. Conflicts will arise, as they do with much closer jurisdictions and legal systems, such as France or Spain and other western law. The victims of Landsbanki and Madoff have brought lawsuits abroad with dramatically conflicting outcomes with the Luxembourg (very slow) courts.

As a matter of thought for Luxembourg banking, the article referenced below by Nicholas H D Foster is well researched and documented about Islamic commercial law in western secular courts. Sharia compliance conflicts are described with UAE, Saudi, Malaysia, and Indonesia.  

Encounters between legal systems: recent cases concerning Islamic commercial law in secular courts

“The revival of interest in Islamic law prompts a number of questions, including its suitability for the modern commercial world, and the appropriateness of western-style courts for enforcement of the sharia.

This is true even of Gulf states, the regimes of which are based, to a greater or lesser degree, on the sharia. So whether one attempts to follow the principles of the sharia in one’s financial dealings within a Western law context, or one attempts to incorporate rules based on the sharia into a state-based legal system, Western and Islamic legal mindsets come into contact.     o as to permit the sharia to be the applicable law of a contract, as it is not the law of a “country” in the presumed intention of the parties” in the context of “the commercial purpose of the contract.

As a conclusion, the author “submits that the answers to the question posed at the beginning of the previous sub-sections are: No and No.

No: the sharia is not inherently unsuitable for the modern commercial world, even if the process of adaptation is not yet complete.

No: with the possible exception of the UAE assignment case, the decisions discussed herein do not constitute instances of secular, Western-style courts dominating and overturning the sharia. There is no inherent or insoluble dichotomy between the sharia as it concerns financial transactions and Western-based legal systems……

On the conflict point, if a secular, say, English, court did find itself in the position of having to enforce the sharia, whether as the governing law of the contract (if this is made possible by the revised Rome Convention), or as a set of rules incorporated by reference, various issues would arise…..

We can see, therefore, that although the apparent problems of adaptation and conflict are actually not anywhere near as serious as they might appear at first glance, the relationship between the sharia and secular law is far from settled, and will be one of the most interesting and significant topics for legal studies over the course of the next few decades.”

FedEx pleads not guilty to online pharmacy charges

Add My Orchids. Oncidium. Photo ET

FedEx pleads not guilty to online pharmacy charges

As reported by CNBC:

"The shipping company is accused of delivering controlled substances and prescription drugs from illegal Internet pharmacies despite multiple warnings from government authorities, according to a 15-count indictment filed earlier this month. Instead of closing the pharmacies' accounts, FedEx is accused of changing the shipping account classification." says the article.

For insiders, the possibility of government doesn't surprise anymore, since UPS got under similar scrutiny last year. The general public probably is surprised, and needs to learn more about the underlying legislation and regulations.

However unlike FedEx going for a fight, UPS preferred a settlement, and UPS' CFO Kurt Kuehn explains why their preferred solution was a settlement: 

"Our responsibility isn't to inspect packages, but if there is a suspicion that comes up that there may be an illegal activity happening, we need to communicate that and be somewhat diligent in making sure that our network is being used for legal purposes," Kuehn said.

Based on recent enforcement history and level of sanctions, I tend to agree with him, that settlement was the least painful way to go.

'When people are dying, you must come back from vacation'

My Orchids. Oncidium "Leading from Behind".
Photo ET

'When people are dying, you must come back from vacation': French foreign minister seems to slam Obama for golfing while Iraq burns

The quote from French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, originally in French, cannot be well rendered in English. What Fabius said is: «Quand des gens meurent, j'allais dire qui crèvent, on rentre de vacances». He took the verb "meurent", die, to another level, "crèvent", which means to die in absolute misery like an animal. He shows anger at the world's inaction, and you cannot blame France for inaction on the world scene.

He did not explicitly call upon the US President to blame him for inaction, but on the European Foreign Ministers. However trust the clever diplomat: implicitly it was France returning General Powell's comment: "Europe, whom to call?" If not Victoria Nuland's harsher words. Fabius is saying: "Washington, anyone home?" 

Europe starts realizing that they are on their own, that the US is retracting into more isolationism. Someone will fill in the void, and Europe is struggling, just as it did in 1948.

Dunkin' Donuts Opens First Restaurant in Luxembourg

My Orchids. Phalaenopsis "DD Nonnefascht".
Photo: Lux PD

Dunkin' Donuts Opens First Restaurant in Luxembourg

Usually there is that summer lull in the news. How striking however this year's breaking news on exactly August 15, when Europe is celebrating another holiday.

Luxembourg finally, finally gets the recognition that comes with the opening of a first Dunkin Donuts. If I were myself interviewed about this milestone event, I would say something like this: "I'm so excited that finally Luxembourg too has access to Dunkin Donuts' heavenly masterpieces. It's such a relief from Luxembourg's own fatty Nonnefaschten. My preferred donut is still the Boston Cream. People, rejoice, and let the Police Department know the news."

Anyway, good luck DD.

Luxembourg set to debut Islamic bond

My Orchids. Phalaenopsis "Sukuk". Photo ET

Luxembourg set to debut Islamic bond

The Saudi Gazette echoes the news about the upcoming issuance of Luxembourg's first sukuk, in the order of $275 million. Quote: "Luxembourg’s sale would be the second Shariah-compliant bond issue from a European sovereign this year after the UK raised 200 million pounds ($335 million) in June. Borrowers from Hong Kong to South Africa are considering selling sukuk to help tap the liquid and fast-growing Islamic segment."

The article also mentions the generally favorable situation for such a Luxembourg innovation: a similar first for the UK in London earlier this year was oversubscribed ten times, which is a good omen. The other positive that is mentioned is Luxembourg's AAA rating with all rating agencies, one of the few sovereigns in the world with that level of rating.

Background for this project and testing the waters is legislation from July 9th this year:

LUXEMBOURG SUKUK BILL PASSES INTO LAW

On the 9th of July 2014, the Luxembourg Parliament has approved the draft law 6631 on a sale and buy-back transaction of real estate assets necessary to issue an Islamic finance bond. By obtaining parliamentary approval, the Ministry of Finance has now paved the way to the issuance of the "Sukuk" transaction which is a milestone in the continuous development of Islamic finance in the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg.

This approval in Parliament underlines the political will to diversify and develop alternative markets within the financial services industry and to consolidate the Grand-Duchy as an integrative and diversified world class financial services hub. 

Press release by the Ministry of Finance

Cargolux: revised first half 2014 results

My Orchids. Phalaenopsis "Numbers Game", Photo ET

Cargolux: revised first half 2014 results

In an interview yesterday to Luxemburger Wort, Cargolux’ CFO Richard Forson gave a revised number for the company’s results, saying that the reported loss of $31 million was a rumor. This wasn’t really a rumor, but the company’s own initial “estimate”. The revised number is merely a $11 million differential with expectations. The superficial reader will conclude that the revised number is a loss of $11 million, and an improvement of $20 million vs. the “rumor”.

However Forson is really saying that "In Wirklichkeit betrug der Rückstand gegenüber unserem Ziel 11 Millionen Dollar seit Januar". But that ZIEL was a budgeted loss of $14.4 million, and $11 million is the “Rückstand“ on that budget. So there is a loss of $25.4 million. 

There is still some ambiguity here, as one has to extrapolate what was being said. But this is the season: CWA negotiations always call for positioning. But whatever the numbers, there is always a dilemma: if they look too good, it strengthens the employees’ bargaining position, and among others argues against a hiring freeze. If they look bad, the company looks bad.

Cargolux: the lost management effect?

My Orchids. Dendrobium "ABC". Photo ET

Cargolux: the lost management effect?

Are we already witnessing the effects of the loss of top talent at Cargolux earlier in 2014? There are some signals that are discomforting, though not conclusive yet. But they all show in the same direction.

Let’s take as a starting point Cargolux’ business in 2013. CV carried 754,000 tons, an increase in cargo traffic of 16.7% compared to the year 2012 (the Qatar Airways year). Whereas 2012 ended with a loss, 2013 produced a relatively small profit, but a profit.

Then comes 2014. Top managers leave. The first half of 2014 generates a loss of $31 million. Is it the market, or CV and the loss of talent, or the new CV brand allied to HNCA? The second half will show. The new management might get more insight, the market may improve. One element however will add to the earnings crisis: the pre-programmed losses of mandatory flights to Zhengzhou.

According to Radio 100,7 today, Dirk Reich, the new CEO of Cargolux gave the Board the (dire) outlook, as results are below expectations so far, and where he projects the need for another capital injection by the end of 2015. Of course, as the CEO who just took over the reins, he better tells all the truth and the bad news upfront. He can only be a hero if he beats those bad expectations.

Now change of viewpoint. Let’s have a look at Airbridge Cargo, ABC. That’s where Robert van de Weg took his talents, after undeniably having made out of CV a fighting force. Compared to CV, ABC is young, 40 years for CV, 10 years for ABC. In the first half of 2014, ABC forwarded 188,354 tons, according to “The Loadster”. That’s an increase of 16%. Freight ton-kilometers in the 1 January-30 June, 2014 period, rose by 19% (industry 4.4%). And here is ABC’s outlook for 2014, as quoted by The Loadster:

“Denis Ilin, Executive President of Air Bridge Cargo Airlines, said: “The challenges which the global air cargo market continues to face have not held back ABC’s development. We have achieved our goals for the first half of the year and lay down ambitious plans for the second half of 2014, which will include launching of more new routes and increasing our frequencies on a number of existing routes, as well as growing our fleet. We will surely keep focus on our home market, not only by developing additional import business to Russia but also by launching domestic routes using the Boeing 737 freighter fleet of Atran Airlines, another part of Volga-Dnepr Group. We are on track for good 2014 and projecting our total tonnage for the year to exceed 400,000 tons of cargo”.

Should I just highlight once more: Robert van de Weg left Cargolux to join ABC in March 2014, and no one held him back. So did too many others.

The Violation of the Piano's Right. The Video

Damage Control Art and Destruction at MUDAM Luxembourg

My Orchids. Cattleya "De-Struction". Photo Studio Avant-Garde ET

Damage Control Art and Destruction at MUDAM Luxembourg

The ritual piano destruction.

Under the Patronage of the Embassy of the United States in Luxembourg.

Art makes a statement. The art of Raphael Montañez Ortiz, Professor in Visual Arts at the Mason Gross School of the Arts at Rutgers University, has meaning beyond the act. On the occasion of his solo performance on July 11^th at the MUDAM, the artist was clearly speaking through his work, renouncing the too conventional protective eyewear prescribed by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, actively promoting a subliminal cause revealed by this virtuoso of the visual narrative of piano destruction.

Raphael Montañez Ortiz’ Art is an allegory or metaphor – This is art that contains more than one meaning, and possibly several. It uses symbolic imagery to deal with more intangible human issues, and yet the artwork should still work as a visually appealing creation. His solo show jumps at our deepest unconsciousness. In his statement Ortiz claims that his quest is to give integrity to the musicality of the instrument and the complexities of our life. Many have a simple view of life, though things are in another way than they understand them, and the shock, existentially, uncovers the kind of revelation that the piano Concert unleashes. After this clarification, the art speaks for itself in its fulfilled intent, as its meaning lies beyond just the incomparable Maestro’s act, in his improvised performance. 

Whether you are aware of it or not, there does seem to be in that visual narrative, a poetic kind of connotation in the artist’s transcendental exploration of his subject. It starts with a statement, the distinctive formal juxtaposition of a chlorophyllian green axe and the red handled one. They make this work menacing/playful because of the way the aura of the facture makes resonant its essentially transitional quality. The axes’ bleeding edges, playing and titillating the piano’s chords make it difficult to enter into this work because of our own cultural acquisitions, and because of how the mechanical mark-making of the sexual signifier seems very disturbing in light of a participation in the critical dialogue of our times.

The use of a power saw, a depressively blue Makita XRJ03Z 18v LXT Lithium-ion Cordless Reciprocating Saw however is ambiguous and goes beyond average references. The obviousness of the artist’s struggle, his gestures that suggest doubt, the internal dynamic of the gesture amphenated by the machine’s variable speed motor delivering 0-2,900 strokes per minute, contextualize the substructure of critical thinking in a musical discourse spanning from Adagio to Allegro. It has to be mentioned here that the hebeniation of the biomorphic forms, exemplified by Makita’s ergonomic shape, its easy grip and control, and its compact and convenient lightweight at less than 8 lbs, verges on codifying the accessibility of the work. As an advocate of the Synthetic Organic Polymer Aesthetic, I feel that the purity of the saw line visually and conceptually activates the work’s essentially transitional quality, in its expression of desire.

An effeloffiated crowd of connoisseurs witnessed the instrument’s complaints in dark thick timbres, as the performer, wearing bourgeois black tie as if he were in a fictional double occurrence in this ritual destruction. The black tie was conceptually de-amplied by the sartorial protest of the progressive amateurs present, who were not wearing a tie to this liturgical happening. I would have however extended the structural conceptualization to the point where the spectators become an intrinsic part of the event, by dropping their vests and tearing their shirts into pieces, a sort of angstful climax as in a Béjart inspired obsessive Bolero of Ravel.

On a superior level lies meaning beyond just the act, another fictional double occurrence that is also human existential struggle and tragedy. Ortiz and his work are a metaphor for the fragility of US social security insurance that forces this precarious 80 years old to still work for a living. It is a metaphor also of US withdrawal and isolationism, through the sacrilegious destruction an instrument of influence in the world, the self-inflicted unilateral abandonment – the trusses swept away- by the US itself of its perennial world interests.

I’m glad my Luxembourg and my US tax dollars (yes I pay both), were wasted on a needy octogenarian that a failing US social security safety net condemns to make a living while making his desperation known in wasting a piano (made in China).

Egide Thein

Editor in Chief, “Péckvillchen” Cultural Blog. “When I hear the word culture, I grab my Péckvillchen”™

Art Critique, emeritus

NOTICE: Please be advised that piano donations are gladly accepted. Consult with your tax advisor for possible tax deductions.

FINAL NOTICE AND WARNING: This tribute has merged the ethereal sensibility and intuitive communion of all effeloffiated participants in this special point in time warp, and though segregated by a double fictional tri-amplied wall from the sub-effeloffiated category of non-participants, both categories can easily conceptualize the critical thinking of the destructive/constructive discourse polarized herein.