firstly parmigi you should re read my post. i mentioned fuel as a major input cost, amongst many. fuel costs cannot be controlled by users. fuel costs as an impact on cut price, non full service carriers can be devastating as the client base is ultra price sensitive. nowhere have i stated that fuel, 'per se' is the reason why KFA has not turned a profit.

secondly, you state that,'gas prices haven't changed in decades' [plural]. to suggest that aviation fuel prices have been static for over twenty years is patently absurd.

in light of the second point i have made i can only presume that the reason why as a percentage of expenditures the fuel component appears to be within a small range of deviation, expressed as a percentage, is that the cost of capital by way of increased funding has altered the rates by comparison.interest may be taken up as an expense therefore altering all other ratios which as any businessman will tell you are never static.

yes, management may have contributed to a drop in performance vis-a-vis returns. this conjecture has not been tested though as far as i can tell.only a full forensic examination would be able to deliver a verdict.

as to the alleged criminal actions entered into by mallya or his agents regarding your accusation of fraud/ theft...where is your evidence? fraud usually carries with it a charge of 'intent'. you are alleging that mallya borrowed heavily via kingfisher then funnelled those funds directly into FI with no intention of repayment by way of M&P?

that is a pretty heavy indictment to make. please note that i have refrained from any personal attacks here.

i have no problem re your comments jay. they may well be right and then again without intimate knowledge of the workings of KFA they may well be wide of the mark. i have an open mind and am just debating the issues without making extravagant claims re possible criminality on behalf of the FI/KFA business entities. that is an area which i would not canvas in my wildest dreams.