yeah, i saw this as well. Amazing.
Forum members might not know that TW had been blackisted by MOD due to business malpractices and was re-instated in 2004-5.
Another important link, nephew of an Ex PAF chief is partner in this company and also heading its pakistani operations.
and yet another and most important link. A Pakistani company 'LaGuardia group' has recently entered into a partnership with TW. This Pakistani company has links to the most influential personality of the country, I know what most of you are guessing, but you are WRONG.The TW website shows that the company is basically a trading company. Has not shown any approval by the acft manufacturers and or OEMs and has no repair or overhaul facilities. In its website the company claims to support almost every civil or military, aircraft and helicopter under the sun. (Only brokers do that).
Leaving aside everything else, why should a major airline opt to go through a dealer/trader/broker for aircraft parts? All acft manufacturer (mainly airbus and boeing for PIA) have their product support agreements with the OEMs which provide guidelines for quality, costs, warranties and AOG support.
May be another first in airline industry?
WTF is happening?
---------- Post added at 02:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:23 PM ----------
Another little fact for the members. This came from a PIA 747 Captain himself.
Even if PIA seats 200% of the aircrafts' capacity, it will still be in a loss, but if Emirates seats 40% capacity, it is in profit. All due to better management. We have a old fleet of aircraft, which are not certified in many parts of europe. Grossly overemployed. And with incompetent people in every post.
---------- Post added at 02:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:26 PM ----------
A new development.
PIA asked to declare spares contract as
PIA asked to declare spares contract as ‘mis-procurement’
By Amin Ahmed | From the Newspaper
(11 hours ago) Today
Pakistan International Airlines (PIA). – File Photo
ISLAMABAD: The Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) has asked the PIA management to declare the reported award of $200 million contract to a Dubai-based company for supply of spare parts for five years as `mis-procurement` because it is a violation of Public Procurement Rules of 2004.
In a letter written to PIA Managing Director Capt Nadeem Khan Yousafzai, the head of the advisory committee of Transparency International Pakistan, Syed Adil Gilani, referred to reports that PIA had awarded a Rs18 billion contract to Transworld Aviation without inviting public tenders.
“This acknowledges and confirms that the PIA has appointed Transworld Aviation exclusively with first right of refusal for a period of five years for all services pertaining to normal supply of aviation spares and repair/overhaul management of rotables, consumer material, chemicals and life limited parts with aggregate value of not less than $40 million annually,” the letter says.
Quoting Rule 47 of the Public Procurement Rules, Mr Gilani said: “As soon as a contract has been awarded the procuring agency shall make all documents related to the evaluation of the bid and award of contract public. However, the reported contract is not displayed on PPRA website.”
The Transparency International urged the PIA to make this and all other procurements in accordance with the requirements of Public Procurement Rules, 2004.
“In case this procurement is made contrary to the requirements of PPR 2004, Rule No. 2(f) will be applicable for collusive practice among bidders (prior or after bid submission) designed to establish bid prices at artificial, non-competitive levels and to deprive the procuring agencies of the benefits of free and open competition,” the Transparency International said.
Mr Gilani referred to the violation of rules four (principles of procurements), seven (integrity pact); eight (procurement planning); twelve (methods of advertisement); thirty-five (announcement of evaluation reports) and forty-seven (public access and transparency).
The Transparency International has sent copies of the letter to the chairman of Public Accounts Committee of the National Assembly, the minister for defence, registrar of the Supreme Court, the auditor general and the managing director of Public Procurement Regulatory Authority.
