Readers’Views

Money used to prop up SAA could be better used elsewhere

The article, “Africa stands to lose if SAA sinks. So does Joburg” (May 27) refers. Wonderful and emphatic, but the truth is that SAA is a failed business and a drain on the country.

Johannesburg will not collapse, believe me, and other airlines will be happy to cover all international routes in no time. And make a profit.

Ethiopian Airlines is a good example.

Imagine if the R350-billion used to prop up SAA were used instead for housing and social upliftment!

Pierre Jordaan, on Businesslive

The very first statement, “Derided at home and loved abroad”, while catchy, is no longer correct.

I know a few Canadians and some Brits who have booked on other airlines to South Africa but, when they discovered that through code share they are not on BA or Air Canada but on an SAA flight, will cancel or change it.

Ricky X, on Businesslive

Joburg and SADC will definitely be losers. However, SAA must accept it is not business as usual and must change, fast.

Letlhogonolo Mogashoa, on Businesslive

Why the hullabaloo about spazas?

It was disappointing to read Ferial Haffajee’s column, “Xenophobia’s wrong but so is the takeover of township economy” (May 20).

I don’t understand the hullabaloo about spaza shops when the profit margins are slim.

All the noise is akin to fighting over breadcrumbs when the real money is in the funeral or taxi business, for example, which foreigners don’t dominate.

So I take issue with the reductionist assertion that migrants dominate township economies.

It takes a special kind of entrepreneurial breed to run successful spaza shops — the kind that wanted to make the African Continental Free Trade Area work.

It is worth noting that Nigeria and South Africa, Africa’s biggest economies, are coy on signing the accord, even though they are likely to benefit the most from it.

In the latter’s case, it can help ease tensions between local and foreign businesses.

Mike Idagiza, by e-mail