Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SQ Rejects QF Merger To Get Pacific Route  
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 5304 times:


Singapore rejects Qantas merger to get Pacific route

SINGAPORE Airlines has ruled out a merger with Qantas as a means of securing access to the Pacific route to Australia.

SIA chief executive Chew Choon Seng said yesterday that the cabinet committee reviewing aviation policy must base its decision on Singapore's bid for access to the Pacific route on the merits of the arguments SIA and Qantas have put.

"The fundamental arguments on both sides are unchanged. It is very much a question of the committee having to weigh and balance the various options."


http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au.../0,5744,16877135%255E23349,00.html



A slip of the tongue of SQ? This will probably have some follow-up statements..

33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 5090 times:

The OZ government should do what is best for OZ (not for Qantas) and open up as much competition as possible. Unilateral Open Skies has done wonders for Dubai. It would do wonders for OZ too.

User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3322 posts, RR: 20
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4965 times:

Of course SQ does not want to merge with QF.

Over the next six months, QF will apply to take a major stakeholding in NZ... perhaps 35%.

That will then open the door for SQ to operate on the trans-Pacific.
You will also see NZ move from Star to oneworld within 5 years...

watch this space...


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4952 times:

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 2):
Of course SQ does not want to merge with QF.

Over the next six months, QF will apply to take a major stakeholding in NZ... perhaps 35%.

That will then open the door for SQ to operate on the trans-Pacific.
You will also see NZ move from Star to oneworld within 5 years...

Of course, you do realize SQ has sold it's stake in NZ?????


User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3322 posts, RR: 20
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4919 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 3):
Of course, you do realize SQ has sold it's stake in NZ?????

Perhaps you should read my post again...

QF will take a 35% stakeholding in NZ, NOT SQ!

The NZ Govt no doubt wants back some of it's $885 million that it put into NZ went it almost collapsed.

I think the New Zealand and Australia regulators will give the merger the go-ahead this time around, and this will open the door for SQ to enter the trans-pacific...


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4855 times:

Personally, I don't think the acquisition or equity stake in NZ will make any difference at all. I think there will be enough pressure brought to bear on the current administration that the decision will be made.

SQ has already committed to spend another US$15million/year for tourism in OZ and the quid pro quo was if they were allowed the OZ-US route they would spend a significant amount to promote OZ-US tourism.


User currently offlineAC787 From Canada, joined Mar 2005, 337 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4741 times:

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 2):
You will also see NZ move from Star to oneworld within 5 years...

I would be very sad if NZ rlly did leave star and went to one world. Would rlly give oneworld the strangle hold on south pacific. I love SQ and all, but id rather fly to new zealand and austalia from SFO or LAX instead of going to singapore and then back tracking.


User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3322 posts, RR: 20
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4667 times:

Quoting AC787 (Reply 6):
I love SQ and all, but id rather fly to new zealand and austalia from SFO or LAX instead of going to singapore and then back tracking.

AC787...

The QF stakeholding in NZ would open the door for SQ to fully utilise the Singapore-Australia open skies agreement, in which case SQ would operate non-stop between the USA and Australia. There would not be a need to travel via SIN.

Probably SYD-LAX, then MEL-LAX, then BNE-LAX, then probably followed with services ex-SFO.

I think you would find that when QF takes a shareholding in NZ, NZ would continue to operate ex-AKL to north america, and would expand by taking over QF's AKL-USA sectors. QF would then operate solely ex-Australia to north america, competing with SQ and UA.


User currently offlineRichardJF From New Zealand, joined Mar 2001, 792 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4617 times:

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 4):
Perhaps you should read my post again...

QF will take a 35% stakeholding in NZ, NOT SQ!

The NZ Govt no doubt wants back some of it's $885 million that it put into NZ went it almost collapsed.

I think the New Zealand and Australia regulators will give the merger the go-ahead this time around, and this will open the door for SQ to enter the trans-pacific...

This would be just insane for NZ.

While Dixon has been throwing around such ideas there's no way NZ needs QF any more.

When they tried for an alliance 3 years ago there was a very strong logic for NZ. They needed to neutralise QF when DJ was small (10 737's). ssssh...... don't tell anyone but this should be seen as a stalling tactic by NZ and little else.)

QF could have used it's position at that time to devastating effect against NZ and I'm not sure why they didn't.

Dixon looks around see's Air Canada and every other carrier that looks like QF and is sounding really desperate.
QF's current profitability is unsustainable and based around Ansett collapsing giving them the entire Australian business market.

DJ is now logically repositioning into these more lucrative markets.

These are the first three things QF needs to do

1. Get new management
2. Get new management
3. Get new management


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 8861 posts, RR: 75
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4603 times:

Quoting Keesje (Thread starter):
SINGAPORE Airlines has ruled out a merger with Qantas as a means of securing access to the Pacific route to Australia.

Seen comments like this in the press before, then two weeks later the airlines are merged.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlinePER744 From Australia, joined Mar 2003, 405 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4562 times:

Has everyone forgotten the legislation in place preventing foreign ownership of Qantas above a certain level? That would make a merger illegal. SQ can hardly reject something if they wouldn't be able to legally do it anyway.

User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3322 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 4510 times:

Quoting PER744 (Reply 10):
Has everyone forgotten the legislation in place preventing foreign ownership of Qantas above a certain level? That would make a merger illegal. SQ can hardly reject something if they wouldn't be able to legally do it anyway.

Agree PER744, although it should be noted that since Warren Truss became the new Transport Minister, there is an internal review at cabinet level in Canberra.

A policy announcement is expected in about 2 months, which I think will include:

- Permission for SQ top operate trans-tasman
- in principle agreement for QF to negotiate in a major stakeholding in NZ (although this is happening at the moment behind closed doors)
- QF's foreign ownership cap lifted to 49% perhaps?


User currently offlineNickofatlanta From Australia, joined May 2000, 1485 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4481 times:

Hey 6thFreedom -
Would that be permission for SQ to operate transpacific or transtasman? Can't imagine SQ would be all that keen to operate transtasman with all the competition.


User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3322 posts, RR: 20
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4451 times:

Quoting Nickofatlanta (Reply 12):
Would that be permission for SQ to operate transpacific or transtasman?

SQ has the rights to operate trans-tasman now if it wants to...
obviously there is little point in operating the sector since there is ample capacity and an array of LCC's, full service and a number of other international carriers (EK, LA, AR, BI, GA, TG).

So SQ is seeking permission to fly between Australia and the USA.... a decision on the trans-pacific is expected within a couple of months. SQ is tipped to operate B773ER's on the SYD-LAX sector to begin with..


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4379 times:

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 13):
SQ has the rights to operate trans-tasman now if it wants to...
obviously there is little point in operating the sector since there is ample capacity and an array of LCC's, full service and a number of other international carriers (EK, LA, AR, BI, GA, TG).

So SQ is seeking permission to fly between Australia and the USA.... a decision on the trans-pacific is expected within a couple of months. SQ is tipped to operate B773ER's on the SYD-LAX sector to begin with..

1) SQ currently operates 744F from SYD-AKL twice/week.

2) As far as the 773ER, it all depends on the timing. Right now, you'd see a 744 placed on the route. In fact, the plans are long term for the 744 to be replaced by the 380 or 747A


User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3322 posts, RR: 20
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4349 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 14):
2) As far as the 773ER, it all depends on the timing. Right now, you'd see a 744 placed on the route. In fact, the plans are long term for the 744 to be replaced by the 380 or 747A

Australia's SQ management is of the opinion that the sector would be on B773ER no earlier than June 2006, even if the rights were granted tomorrow.

Given fuel costs, it would also make sense to operate the B773ER from a cost perspective.

2007-08, once SQ starts operating the A380 SIN-SYD and establishes an A380 base in SYD, it would make sense to operate the A380 on SYD-LAX as well...


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4266 times:

Who wants QF & SIA to merge?

Is there a push for a SQ/QF merger with the promise of Pacific access rights & ANZ (NZ government) doesn't want be kept out of the game?

QF is obviously not free do do what it thinks is best (Qantas Sale Act..) & the Singapore government is always behind the scenes..

SIA Lobbying Hard For Prized Australia-US Route
http://sg.biz.yahoo.com/051010/15/3vj31.html


User currently offlineRichardJF From New Zealand, joined Mar 2001, 792 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4117 times:

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 11):
- in principle agreement for QF to negotiate in a major stakeholding in NZ (although this is happening at the moment behind closed doors)

How on earth do you get to this assumption?
It would have to get over all soughts of hurdles
1. NZ surely wouldn't want it even though the Govt might.
2. Impossible because of NZ domestic.
3. Would nulify the whole direction NZ's taking which is competing with QF.

Although I guess with NZ Finance Minister Micheal Cullen practical anythings possible.


User currently offlineIowa744Fan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 931 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3360 times:

Not to get off the subject a little, but can someone remind me is BA sold their stake in QF or do they still control 25%? sorry, but I don't remember and I was just curious if any potential merger or equity stake would involve this 25%. Thanks.

User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3231 times:

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 15):
Australia's SQ management is of the opinion that the sector would be on B773ER no earlier than June 2006, even if the rights were granted tomorrow.

Given fuel costs, it would also make sense to operate the B773ER from a cost perspective.

2007-08, once SQ starts operating the A380 SIN-SYD and establishes an A380 base in SYD, it would make sense to operate the A380 on SYD-LAX as well...

One of the problems with the 773ER is the F/C cabin. SQ wants to make sure the premium cabins are competitive with QF. Right now the 773ER wouldn't be.

With respect to the 380. A SYD base? That's a new one. In addition, there is a range problem with the 380 on the LAX-SYD route. Right now that is at the no wind limit of the 380's range. Add headwinds in and you're looking at payload restrictions. The SQ 744 can do it with a full load.


User currently offlineAirtropolis From Singapore, joined Apr 2000, 142 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3113 times:

Quoting Philsquares (reply 19):
"One of the problems with the 773ER is the F/C cabin. SQ wants to make sure the premium cabins are competitive with QF. Right now the 773ER wouldn't be."

I thought that the 773ERs will have the same cabins as the A380s and would thus be competitive or even surpass the QF product across the Pacific. As for the A380 making the range requirements of SYD/MEL - LAX vv, isn't it Qantas' intention that the A380 would inaugurate with a MEL-LAX flight and therefore should have the ability to fly that route unless Airbus has failed to meet the promised range and performance targets for the aircraft?

In any case, I do not think that SQ will have enough A380s based on its current order to operate all the SIN-LHR/SYD flights it wants as well as an OZ-LAX service unless they operate less flights with the aircraft to LHR or SYD.


User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3322 posts, RR: 20
Reply 21, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3010 times:

Quoting PhilSquares (Reply 19):
In addition, there is a range problem with the 380 on the LAX-SYD route. Right now that is at the no wind limit of the 380's range. Add headwinds in and you're looking at payload restrictions.

That's interesting... because QF has already announced MEL-LAX as one of its first A380 sectors, making it one of the longest in the world...

SYD-LAX is about 380nm less than MEL-LAX, so how would QF be able to do it, but not SQ.

PS. Just confirming that I am not being sarcastic. With your flying experience and knowledge you may know...


User currently offlinePhilSquares From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2916 times:

The 380 will have a no wind range of around 6700NM. If you look at the great circle distance, you will see the range is approaching that number. Add in winds and now you have a problem. To resolve it, you takeoff payload.

Time will tell.


User currently offlineRichardJF From New Zealand, joined Mar 2001, 792 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2888 times:

6thfreedom - sorry my first posts were silly.

Quoting 6thfreedom (Reply 11):
- in principle agreement for QF to negotiate in a major stakeholding in NZ (although this is happening at the moment behind closed doors)

Do you think the New Zealand Government has been trying to get the election out of the way before making this known or is your QF buy in just guesswork?


User currently offline6thfreedom From Bermuda, joined Sep 2004, 3322 posts, RR: 20
Reply 24, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2753 times:

As far as i know, there has been a lot happening between QF and the NZ Govt over the last couple of months.

The election has most definitely slowed things down a little bit.

AFAIK, the fact that the Govt has been returned to office but without a majority is a bit of an issue in terms of getting the deal over the line....

I would imagine QF is lobbying in NZ at the moment, to try and get the deal over the line...

Some people have commented that Air NZ would not support the deal.

That might be the case, but it is worth remembering that it is the NZ Govt, not Air NZ, that has $885 million tied up with a national carrier which should ideally be operating as a private entity...

One would also expect that the return to NZ taxpayers would be quite healthy given NZ's excellent turnaround since 2001-02.


25 Aerokiwi : I'm willing to bet my meagre savings that you will NOT see a QF stake in NZ during this government's life. Here's why... New Zealand First (political
26 RichardJF : Well hang on a minute........United Future New Zealand one of the minor parties new absolutely nothing about this. We're Qantas executives talking to
27 Aerohottie : What on earth does United Future have to do with anything??? Minor party not likely to have any power in the next government thus far.
28 Aerokiwi : If negotiations between the Govt. and QF were going on before the election and were at quite an advanced stage, then Clark and Labour are going to hav
29 6thfreedom : I will be interested in re-visiting this thread in about 3 months time... I'll put a reminder in my diary to do so!
30 Aerokiwi : Oh don't get me wrong, I'm not doubting that some form of communication is going on between the airlines. What I'm saying is that once it's brought pu
31 6thfreedom : I am not saying that the shareholding will be completed within 3 months... But i think you will find that although NZ has produced some reasoanle res
32 RichardJF : If there was any remotely serious talk it would have to be available to the electorate. I personally think Cullen would treat such an approach by QF
33 RichardJF : Furthermore QF management should focus on running their business rather than flying around the world delivering long rambling speeches about Governmen
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
QF Rejects SQs Challenge To Key US Route posted Wed Jan 12 2005 05:44:25 by 777ER
Air NZ Makes Changes To Unprofitable Pacific Route posted Wed Oct 25 2006 05:26:28 by NZ748
How To Get An Upgrade On QF N Class To USA? posted Wed Jan 11 2006 03:17:31 by Simpilicity
Boeing - SQ Must Buy Boeing To Compete With QF? posted Mon Dec 26 2005 21:06:14 by Halibut
Air India To Get Another Ex SQ 747-412 posted Mon Sep 12 2005 13:55:26 by NA
QF To Get Challanged By Long-haul Carriers posted Mon Jan 31 2005 06:48:04 by 777ER
SQ From SIN To EWR, Which Route Will They Fly? posted Tue Nov 25 2003 14:36:35 by Mozart
Accc Rejects QF/ANZ Merger posted Thu Apr 10 2003 02:22:05 by Bd1959
SQ MAN Service To Get 772s posted Thu Nov 28 2002 17:30:55 by David_itl
Ansett To Get 4 A340 From SQ posted Sat Mar 24 2001 05:48:38 by QFTJT