Jump to content

Recommended Posts

.... have apparently resolved the ownership issues.

 

And the 'apparent' is all to which we'll ever be privy. Whatever machinations and convolutions of share structure the U.S. owners have engineered in order to, quite likely, continue to circumvent the ownership requirements will remain beyond our ken. There is simply no meaningful transparency for the public on these issues. Whatever the reality, we're simply not given to know, and that, my friends just ain't right when the rest of the helicopter operators in the country have to live within the letter and the spirit of the regulations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I understood from it......

Alpine applied for a new licence with a new ownership team, but initially, that wasn't allowed by the CTA.

So they increased the team's Canadian percentage to suit the CTA's ruling, and that was approved.

 

But because the "new" Alpine was yet not established as a legal corporation by December 31st, the "old" Alpine was given 'another' extension to it's licence to operate until Feb 15th. (but to fly for CMH Heliskiing only).

Note; "old" Alpine is a sister company to CMH. Both are owned by Intrawest (a US corporation) so it's not like "old" Alpine 'under-bid' any other company to get that work.

 

If the "new" Alpine gets established as a legal Canadian corporation soon, the CTA will give them an Ops Certificate, and they will be able to continue business just like any other Canadian operator.

 

Who the new Canadian owners actually are is in the "confidential Appendix".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify a couple of things that have come out of this. (Sorry O-T)

 

Air Operators Certificates are issued (and taken away) by Transport Canada on behalf of the Minister of Transport. This ensures legal regulation through compliance with CARs and the Aeronautics Act.

 

Once an AOC is issued, the Canadian Transportation Agency then issues a Licence for the Operator to provide an International or Domestic service, and is totally independent of the Department of Transport. This provides for economic regulation and this is why Alpine fell foul of the US ownership laws.

 

Good luck with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not wanting to start any poo flinging, another question arises, if this was a smaller less "connected" company would the treatment and consequence have been the same? I know this will be pure speculation, is this a fore shadowing of the times to come with the governmental body directed to administer the laws seeming to have been held at bay?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...