CommunityAir: A legitimate point of view
Joe
You have become such an apologist for
Porter
Airlines and the Toronto Port Authority that no amount of analysis,
research or
simple common sense will move you to say that, yes, we have a point, the
Porter
Preliminary Prospectus is a flawed document.
After a careful analysis of the
prospectus, members of CommunityAIR became convinced that there were
material facts that were not disclosed in the document. Our submission
to
the Ontario Securities Commission was an attempt to bring those
deficiencies to the attention of the public. We presented factual
arguments based in three general areas.
- Porter's operations on the Island violate the terms of the Tripartite Agreement in significant ways and could lead to a shut down of their operations on the Island;
- the arguments and facts presented in the prospectus about the future profitability of the company are deeply flawed because they ignore the impact of competition and the limits on the expansion of the Island Airport; and
- there is mounting opposition in the community to the Island Airport Expansion because of noise, excessive pollution, traffic and safety concerns and that opposition could lead to a political decision to close the airport. That would have a significant impact on Porter.
Yes we have a point of view. Brian
Iler's
letter that accompanied our submission, that was also published on the
blog,
points out that CommunityAIR is opposed to the Island Airport
expansion.
We have a point of view and we admit that. That is the honest thing to
do. But our point of view does not detract from the validity of our
arguments.
Please try and give us a little credit,
Joe.
Our opposition to the Island Airport is based on concern for our
communities but
that does not make us blind to Porter, its operations at the Island
Airport and
even the possibility of the future profitability of the company.
We do know something about these things and our point of view is
legitimate.
Bill Freeman
Comments