Fuel Consortia Case

1091 Words 5 Pages
Register to read the introduction… There was a risk brought up involving cross border travel with parts and materiel being delayed or lost because of customs laws in different countries, to mitigate this a strategy of only working with countries with stable governments and fair laws was proposed.Rough handling of parts causing damage in transit was another risk mentioned with the mitigation strategy being for employees to be trained to handle packages with care. Parts theft and data compromise were also singled out as risk with the proposed mitigation being the implementation of a new IT system that uses hardware and software tools to not only cut down on that but also protect company data.The risk of extreme weather shutting down a parts suppliers ability to ship was also stated with a mitigation strategy of having parts either pn hand in quantities or having multiple suppliers. Weather delaying flights was another proposed risk with the mitigation proposed being equipping planes with accurate navigation tools while also guiding rerouting them to avoid inclement weather if …show more content…
[ERNIE sign in is required.] Analyze the tradeoffs (benefits and risks) associated with an aviation fuel consortia and discuss your justification for using or not using this logistics planning strategy. From my perspective the sole trade off or risk that airlines face by using fuel consortiums is the possibility that the shared fuel storage facilities break down or are in some way rendered inoperable effectively stranding airlines in the area due to lack of fuel. The benefits on the otherhand are just too good for any company to pass up. For a market where up to 30 percent of revenue is spent on fuel alone the decreased fuel price is a godsend.Giving the airlines shared control over the fuel storage helps them set prices that are economically better for them helping companies with their bottom

Related Documents