Talk:Frank Lorenzo

Comment

This biography is loaded with one sided and unsourced claims. Not even close to unbiased or fair. Pburns07 (talk) 12:19, December 12, 2006

This is no longer true (05 Jan 2009); too much more detail and this will become a 4mb bio. The biography appears to be reasonably well balanced, on the basis of historical evidence. Neither labor nor Lorenzo and his friends will ever be wholly satisfied with it; but it DOES now appear much better. It is, in my view, an A-level bio. I have recently reviewed many others with higher ratings that are less salutary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redstoneranger (talk • contribs) 18:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey, RedstoneRanger, your transparent attempts to look fair and balanced don't fool anyone. I.E. "Neither Lorenzo and his friends..." Nice try. Lorenzo's critics ARE NOT THE UNIONS. His critics are anyone who likes to see capitalism thrive- i.e. people who like to see airlines run profitably. Lorenzo walked away from the industry with tens of millions of dollars despite having never left an airline in a profitable condition. He destroyed shareholder value on an epic scale. He fits the mold of a corporate raider, not the executive of a company. Besides, his bio shouldn't even be this long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.219.4.187 (talk) 16:58, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I love that one ("Lorenzo's critics ARE NOT THE UNIONS."). Thanks for that----I haven't had an occasion to laugh that hard for quite awhile. Saying that the UNIONS are not the critics of Lorenzo, is akin to saying that the Democrats were not the critics of George W. Bush. Back to REALITY: I never heard of any that hated Lorenzo more, than the typical militant Union guy---whether a Union boss or just a rank-n-file type. EditorASC (talk) 14:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Funny then that the people who pushed Lorenzo out of the airline business were the Bush 41 Department of Transportation. And how he was tarred in public by none other than William F. Buckley, that scion of organized labor.

Here's the link- http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n18_v42/ai_8859948/ But if you can't wait, trust me, the opening lines suffice. "I wish there were an insurance policy one could take out in defense of capitalism. I could imagine that the premiums would have been oversubscribed to an Adam Smith Fund to Retire Frank Lorenzo. Or to a Ludwig von Mises Fund to Protect the Market from Frank Lorenzo." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.86.112 (talk) 12:58, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikilore Edits

I have added properly documented material relevant to Frank Lorenzo's biography. I note that user 'Wikilore' undid these edits. Can any users who monitor this page shed light on why this is? Please note that I will continue to edit this page to provide an unbiased and accurate accounting of this man's career and impact on the airline industry. Mikewelch7 (talk) 01:38, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I totally agree. Wikilore = Redstoneranger = Frank. Someone needs to call this guy out for sockpuppet behaviour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.219.235.234 (talk) 18:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, upon looking it up, Redstoneranger stopped posting within a couple of days of Wikilore starting to post. Both seem to have an interest that is 90% related to Frank Lorenzo or wherever he has worked. This is clearly sockpuppeting and fraudulent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.219.235.234 (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

It should be pointed out...

That almost across the board none of the airlines Lorenzo oversaw (or in fact any of the ones his proteges did either) were ever very successful in the business they were operating in (compare People's Express to say Southwest, the collapse of TWA under one of his proteges, the collapse of Eastern, and the generally poor performance of Continental until it was brought under new management). Most, if not all of the "success" of Lorenzos tactics were mostly in often byztantine and favorable corporate raids and financial dealings, and not in fact, having anything to do with the companys operations at all. SiberioS 06:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

=

This commentator has poor knowledge of the actual facts, and seems ignorant of the circumstances that propelled Eastern, TWA (and other carriers Texas Air sought to purchase) to the grave. These carriers were "walking dead" airlines. They had unsustainable business models, fatal labor economics, and hidebound managements. With or without Lorenzo and Texas Air, they would have failed. It was the obdurate opposition of entrenched managements and unions that caused these carriers, quite literally, to choose suicide over a sustainable economic future. Frank Lorenzo is neither saint nor cherub, but he understood economics. Just as the vineyard worker cuts away dead wood in order to preserve the living vines, Lorenzo and other like him tried to force these airlines into the modern age. Eastern's unions preferred to kill their company than to work on a plan to save it. Their view of what the future could be was dead wrong. The industry Lorenzo foresaw is the one we have today.

And, oh by the way, Continental was "overseen" by Lorenzo. It survived; and today it is the strongest and most highly-regarded carrier in the U.S. trunk airline industry. Eastern too, would have survived if its employees had paid closer attention to the truth concerning their situation. And, oh by the way, Lorenzo never ran People Express. That company was run by Donald Burr. It was Frank Lorenzo who SAVED People Express after it had gone bankrupt (it was at the time by far the largest airline in the New York metro area); and thereby saved thousands of jobs.

The other airlines (and their managements) you deride created the environment which permitted the changed industry we have today. Most of the men and women who began these firms are still employed in positions of high responsibility in the industry. I know many of them personally.

Get a handle on your facts, and, more importantly, your analysis. (redstoneranger)

The facts say otherwise. Gordon Bethune turned Continental into the great airline that it is today. Like a vineyard worker? Please... then let's praise the captain of the Titanic for making room for other ships like the Queen Mary to come around. Lorenzo wasn't as awful as I'm sure some of the unions say he was. And he was facing a difficult situation, but he did very little to make the situation better. He was not the genius that this bio makes him out to be.

It should be pointed out...

This entry is a inaccurate portrayal of Frank Lorenzo and fails to credit him accurately with the bankruptcy and divesture of Eastern and the subsequent bankruptcy proceedings of Continental, in which the Court determined he was unfit to head the airline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.190.224.130 (talk) 00:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. The page hardly mentions the fact that Lorenzo bankrupted nearly every airline he came into contact with. Who wrote this article? Frank Lorenzo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.64.111.117 (talk) 19:32, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and great- I made a series of relevant and well sourced additions to the article that mention a few of Lorenzo's less-than-admirable accomplished. They were all deleted... by a user named... Frank. Great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.186.213 (talk) 03:46, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

This page is very misleading and presents a one-sided, overly-flattering view of Frank Lorenzo. It also fails to mention that Lorenzo was effectively banned from owning or operating another airline in the United States ever again. He did not quietly retire in 1990 as is implied. He was kicked out of the industry forever. That this article omits these facts leads me to question its neutrality and accuracy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.72.19.178 (talk) 16:44, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

An attempt at remediation and fairness

I have worked for Continental, Texas Intl., New York Air, as well as other airlines and financial industry firms. I am personally acquainted with Mr. Lorenzo, in all his moods. I've gone through this article and attempted, in an even-handed fashion, to elucidate some of the more heavily-contended points cited by previous reviewers. While it is true that Lorenzo was truculent and inflexible in many of his dealings with labor, it is equally true that, if an industry ever needed rapid change and re-birth, it was the U.S. airline industry of the 1980s. Lorenzo's sword cuts both ways. The industry today is, and I am in a peculiarly unique position to know this, far better off in terms of adaptability, flexibility and realistic financing than it was 25+ years ago. Much of the credit for this innures to Frank Lorenzo. It is equally true that his roughshod manner trashed the hopes, dreams, and lifestyles of many airline industry employees. That is a legacy that Mr. Lorenzo appears to have chosen to live with. On balance, I believe that we as a nation are better off having a resilient and financially-well-grounded airline industry; but that conclusion may be best left to our children or grandchildren to decide. One Lorenzo legacy is indisputable: whether you like it or not, he, more than any other individual since 1980, has planned, maneuvered, and succeeded in imposing his vision of airline economics and network operating philosophies on the U.S. airline industry--although his goals at the time may have been much more limited. American (AA), Delta (DL), Northwest (NW), United (UA), US Air (US) and even post-deregulation carriers flying European and Asian skies are direct beneficiaries of the bruises, bumps and lacerations of the Lorenzo era.

As concerns one commentator's remark that, "(the article) hardly mentions the fact that Lorenzo bankrupted nearly every airline he came into contact with", it ought not to need be, but appears to need be commented that Delta Airlines, Northwest Airlines, and United Airlines, all large legacy carriers at whose helm Frank Lorenzo has never sat, have in recent years endured bankruptcy. Pan Am and TWA, once the crown jewels of American international aviation, both wound up dead, with American having to rescue TWA from the same fate as Pan Am. Texas International was never a bankruptee; and National Airlines might have avoided its bankrupt fate after absorption by Pan Am if it had preferred a merger with Texas International in 1978--although we will never know. There are other carriers "untainted" by Lorenzo's brush that have also fallen bankrupt, I cite "new" Frontier to name but one. Bankruptcy is, in American law, not a bad but a GOOD thing: it affords companies (or individuals) in difficult circumstances another chance at building a successful franchise (or lives). What is wrong with that? "redstoneranger" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redstoneranger (talk • contribs) 01:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

All of which still glosses over and fails to address that Lorenzo was found to be unfit to run an airline, and is the only individual I am aware of who is BANNED from doing so. Lorenzo is devoid of any redeeming virtues, and is in fact the prototype for those who have created the financial crisis we are currnetly in (2009). 76.252.16.113 (talk) 18:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Tristar

Dubious Deregulation Credentials

Sure, Lorenzo did "break the unions" and made sure that a company with the same name as Continental (and whatever other airlines that he led) flew again some day after bankruptcy(or not- i.e. Eastern Airlines). I don't see how he deserves any credit for deregulation. Deregulation mattered because the companies that came out of it were profitable. Lorenzo gutted companies of some of their inefficiencies (and some of their profitable units) but never led a profitable airline, or led an airline towards profitability. The fact remains that Congress, and not Frank Lorenzo, passed the airline deregulation acts. Rollin King and Herb Kelleher, the geniuses of Southwest Airlines, realized low fare air travel profitably years before Lorenzo was even a chief executive at an airline. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.127.86.16 (talk) 06:50, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to make this biography more complete, since as it stands, at no point (until I edited it) does the artible make any mention of the fact that Lorenzo was banned by the US government from working in the airlines again. Furthermore, this biography does not reasonably address Lorenzo's role in the bankrupcy of Eastern or Continental. This page is obviously a public relations shill at this point for Mr. Lorenzo. In general, why does Mr. Lorenzo gave a biography that is this long?!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.219.4.187 (talk) 17:12, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

A call for peace and factual debate

All - I have been making edits as you well know in an attempt to take point of view (POV) comments out of Frank Lorenzo's page. Of course, folks on the other side of the table likely feel the same way about their edits. I urge us all to try a novel approach and stick to the facts and only the facts. I suggest we debate the facts in this discussion board, come to an agreement that excludes all POV and then implement this agreed upon data into the page. If we stick to the facts, I have no problem representing those in Frank Lorenzo's page.

Thus, in following I suggest we tackle the following first: currently the page has a heading that says "Banned by U.S. Department of Transportation." Frank was never banned by the US Department of Transportation. If anyone disagrees, I suggest they provide government documentation to support this claim. The facts are that an application by a company called ATX Inc. was submitted and was declined by the US Department of Transportation under the newly elected Clinton Administration, which is well documented. Frank was a Director and investor in ATX, Inc. He was never banned and such language paints a negative picture. Please provide further factual edits to the following below with a view to posting it once we all agree:

"ATX Inc. Lorenzo was part of a group of executives that formed ATX, Inc., a startup airline, and applied for an aviation license. He was a director and investor in ATX, Inc. Under the newly elected Clinton Administration, ATX's application was declined and the airline folded as a result."

I look forward to hearing others' constructive input and hope we can edit Frank's page with factual data only rather than opinion. If we stick to the facts, regardless of what they are, I have no problem leaving them on the bio.

Sincerely,

Wikilore —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikilore (talk • contribs) 18:49, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I would caution that we keep in mind that Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. "Facts" can be as slippery as the "truth", so let's make sure we stick to verifiable information from reliable sources.  Frank  |  talk  18:56, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Besides, Wikilore, when your changes include putting back the "www.dw" typo at the start of the article, it's clear you aren't even reviewing what your doing. Get verifiable facts and source them before adding them back. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:06, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

And another thing we should keep in mind is WP:NPA.  Frank  |  talk  19:08, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Ricky81682 and Frank - do either of you have an issue with eliminating the "banned" piece and replacing it with what I have suggested? Thanks, Wikilore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikilore (talk • contribs) 19:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree the title should be changed, as it needlessly expresses a point of view.  Frank  |  talk  19:28, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

And would require a citation to be left "as is" anyway. If he wasn't banned, we can't say that he was.  Frank  |  talk  19:31, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and rewritten this section in what I hope is a more balanced fashion. In particular, I've removed any reference to "banned" as the citation doesn't support it. If there is something that does support such wording, please post it here and we can incorporate it into the article.  Frank  |  talk  20:22, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm aligned with the change of the heading title with the understanding that a thorough edit of this article will be forthcoming with all material properly sourced, factual, and lacking POV. This article appears to be continuously edited by persons who have significant COI. Are the parties editing this article willing to allow for a thorough and factual description of Frank Lorenzo's business practices with relation to Eastern Airlines? This is not properly reflected in the current article. Mikewelch7 (talk) 20:39, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I certainly support that; a year ago it was a much better article, in my opinion.  Frank  |  talk  20:58, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

A year ago, this article was still a complete shill for Frank Lorenzo. It contained tons of completely unsourced claims about Lorenzo's intimate life that could frankly only been known by Lorenzo himself or his very close family. Used to sell neckties and drive coca-cola trucks? Please! Frank, you yourself reverted well sourced additions of Lorenzo's biography to previous edits that were probably done by editors who are in Frank Lorenzo's family, Like Barcelona_wiki. (Lorenzo is a second generation immigrant from the Barcelona area). Frankly, Frank, I suspect you and Wikilore don't only cross paths on wikipedia entries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.86.112 (talk) 17:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I confess I haven't paid such close attention to this article lately, but if you can show the diffs for the edits you are referring to, I'll certainly be happy to be a part of moving this article to more neutral and cited ground. (I'm ignoring the rest, which has nothing to do with building this article.)  Frank  |  talk  18:18, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Airguy using multiple accounts?

In case the same person who used the Airguy account returns to this Talk page, please read the note that was left for you at User talk:Airguy#Your possible use of multiple accounts. If you write down your password there is no reason why you can't use one account consistently. This helps others take your contributions seriously. EdJohnston (talk) 22:05, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Please note (also posted on Airguy's talk page): I notice I have been named above in error since I don't know Airguy. I have been doing research on the airline industry after deregulation. Lorenzo has seemed to play a big role in this evolution, both negatively and positively, which is why I have incorporated some of my findings on Continental and have been looking at the contentious Eastern case as well. My changes have no bearing on Airguy's opinion. -DavidDaws —Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidDaws (talk • contribs) 03:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Frank Lorenzo/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 14:50, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   I feel that an info box , using the Template:Infobox person should be provided at the head of the article.

   There are a large number of one sentence paragraphs.

   Amid the negative publicity that followed, Barbara Walters dubbed Lorenzo "probably the most hated man in America" in a 1989 interview, which he denied, blaming the unions for the bad press. Unclear grammar

   The Lead does not adequately summarize the article. Please read WP:LEAD and apply those guidelines.

   From 1972 to 1978, Lorenzo and his management team turned a $6.3 million loss on $63 million in revenue into a $13.2 million profit on $158 million in revenue. How?

   TIA's attempted takeover of the much larger National "surprised a lot of people". Why?

   Although mostly well written the prose is choppy and somewhat disconnected. Needs work to make a smooth flowing narrative, whilct remaining encyclopedic in tone.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   References check out OK

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   There is a lot of coverage of the individual companies which Lorenzo has been involved with, much of this material would be better in the company articles rather than here. Remain focussed on the article subject.

   Little or no coverage of his life outside of business.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   On hold for seven days. Please comment here as I have watchlisted this page. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC). Hold extended for three more days (19 Nov). Jezhotwells (talk) 13:44, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Update

I think I covered most of the points above; would appreciate another look at it and any further comments. Thanks!  Frank  |  talk  03:25, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• I have had a long hard look at this and I feel that the main problems is this: Is this artcile about Frank Lorenzo or about Jet Capital / Texas Air /Eastern or Continenetal? At persent large parts of the article make no direct reference to Lorenzo, but are about the machinations of various company boards, in which Lorenzo undoubtedly played a part. I would recommend that you havee a long hard think about this. You may well have material for two or more articles here on aspects of the US airline business. I am not able to list this as a good article at present as the article is not sufficiently focussed on the purported subject, Frank Lorenzo. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:16, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

A fair point; I would say in response that the whole reason for Lorenzo's notability is his single-minded focus on the machinations of the airline industry for over 20 years. I can't say whether or not he pursued other interests in that time, but they certainly don't appear to be reported. His polarizing effect on companies, especially with respect to unionization and cost-cutting, are still legendary.  Frank  |  talk  13:41, 18 November 2009 (UTC)