OzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2597 posts, RR: 4 Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2357 times:
I think this is good news because Qantas has much greater presence and stature in aviation history maintaining its identity than by being reduced to a successful 'deal' and merely integrated into the capital 'plasma' of clever bankers. Spare us hard nosed economic rationalist arguments: none of us are on this site out of our love of economics......
When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
Antskip From Australia, joined Jan 2006, 883 posts, RR: 6 Reply 2, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2281 times:
Quoting Planemanofnz (Thread starter): he offer coming in around analysts expectations, the airline says the offer of $5.50 a share is 'not acceptable'.
Further report expands on decision: http://www.theage.com.au/news/busine...bid/2006/12/13/1165685719967.html.
'"The proposed offer price is $5.50 per share and incorporates a number of complex conditions, the requirement for unanimous support by Qantas directors and a break fee," the airline said in a statement. The off-market bid also has a 90 per cent minimum acceptance condition. "The non-executive directors consider that the terms of the proposal are not acceptable," Qantas said.'
Antskip From Australia, joined Jan 2006, 883 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 2182 times:
An item on the Australian ABC mid-day news a few moments ago suggested that the $5.50 offer was but an opening, and not to take too much out of its rejection. The report said that QF are looking more for A$6 a share, and that one should expect a further offer, which once at an adequate level from QF's perspective, will finally be accepted, before the Christmas break. The report also said that once the takeover is completed, expect QF to become eventually a much bigger airline globally, serving not just the Australian market.
Baroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 60 Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2109 times:
Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 1): I think this is good news because Qantas has much greater presence and stature in aviation history maintaining its identity than by being reduced to a successful 'deal' and merely integrated into the capital 'plasma' of clever bankers. Spare us hard nosed economic rationalist arguments: none of us are on this site out of our love of economics......
Happy to spare you that OzG, but what in position does this place Dixon and co, that is the executive directors who appear by difference to support the offer? This could turn into a shambles.
There should be some prohibition on directors trying to sell companies from under the shareholders?? Once again, I can see the shareholders getting very little say in the fate of the company.
Antares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 41 Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2066 times:
Lots of variables, chaps.
There will be another offer, I think. There will be a huge political bun fight if or when the board accepts as the government can disallow.
There is a possibility, mentioned in some quarters, of a raid on Toll on the rebound, and so on. Toll did split its operations today in a move that makes an LBO more difficult. Pure coincidence to be sure.
Time to enjoy the fireworks for a few days and see what emerges from the smoke.
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 6, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2033 times:
Baroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 60 Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1932 times:
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 6): Seems to me that Dixon & Co have no problems selling QF out if the price is right...
TBRM (too bloody right mate!) except that if the previous talk was correct, they are part of the buying consortium with all sort of "incentives". If this were international trade, they would be called bribes and both parties would end up in jail, but no this is finance!
Not happy, but as Antares & Antskip forecast, they are back again tonight (Wed night Aus time), and the Treasurer has the role of the Fat Lady in this one.
It is all a bit strange, with a main aircraft lessor to Qantas being part of the bid.
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1897 times:
Quoting Baroque (Reply 7): TBRM (too bloody right mate!) except that if the previous talk was correct, they are part of the buying consortium with all sort of "incentives". If this were international trade, they would be called bribes and both parties would end up in jail, but no this is finance!
..and I wouldn't be surprised if there is some legal "loophole" in this...that is how the financial markets work..be it Australia, Europle, United States, etc.
Dixon & Co. will make hay if QF get bought out..its as simple as that.....
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1855 times:
Quote: CORPORATE raiders last night struck a deal worth $11 billion to take over Qantas, after sweetening an offer that was rejected by the airline's board earlier in the day.
If correct, could warrant a new thread....
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
Planesailing From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 802 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1841 times:
Quoting Baroque (Reply 4): There should be some prohibition on directors trying to sell companies from under the shareholders?? Once again, I can see the shareholders getting very little say in the fate of the company.
Surely they had that say when the shareholders voted the directors onto the board?
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 11, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1804 times:
Quote:
CORPORATE raiders last night struck a deal worth $11 billion to take over Qantas, after sweetening an offer that was rejected by the airline's board earlier in the day.
If correct, could warrant a new thread....
Thanks for the link....VERY interesting indeed...I for one am a bit surprised as to how low the new offer is...guess Antares was right on this one...
Antares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 41 Reply 12, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1749 times:
Given the massive variables at play, starting with an election year and the need for government approval, and working our way down through the details of the bid as they seep out, being right or wrong is going to be like the roll of the dice.
Even if the revised offer is accepted this morning, we don't know whether this deal will fly or die, and the final word may be some time in coming.
The Australians coverage of this is outstandingly good this morning. I even recommend the editorial for its concise references to the concerns being made about the appearance of a private equity 'bubble' in world markets. I believe at least one of the writers in today's reports is reflecting doubt within QF at a very high level. Call it a hunch on my part. All of the links are at the top of the page at www.theaustralian.com.au
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 13, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1687 times:
There was another thread reporting on the alleged QF takeover. What happened to it? I had starred it, but can't find it. Can someone please point me to it?
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
Antares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 41 Reply 14, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1663 times:
Well whatever doubts may exist at board level, it presented a unanimous endorsement of the revised offer (as it had to) in the ASX filing.
The real debate is now on, and needs to be further informed by the wider strategy that may be pursued by the consortium, who would have to be aware of other opportunities to get engaged in the sector in the Asia Pacific region.
The comments from the government so far are favourable. But this will go on for some weeks, so we need to be ready for other surprises, including a lot of turf protection by employees, industry stakeholders in tourism and travel retailing, and renewed attempts by Singapore Airlines to gain access to the trans Pacific routes.
I don't like this deal for the risks it poses to Qantas. But as always, I'm happy to be wrong if only good outcomes occur.
Baroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 60 Reply 15, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1615 times:
Quoting Planesailing (Reply 10): Quoting Baroque (Reply 4):
There should be some prohibition on directors trying to sell companies from under the shareholders?? Once again, I can see the shareholders getting very little say in the fate of the company.
Surely they had that say when the shareholders voted the directors onto the board?
Well I did not vote for them as it happens, but take your own government, if they decided to sell out the country (I know you are going to tell me they already did that) and then you discover that the PM is getting 60 million for doing the selling. Even if he gives it to charity, I don't suppose your comments would be all that charitable would they.
"Yes Tony, sell us out, and by all means you take some personal benefits from doing so. Good on yer mate!!" - I don't think so PS.
PanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 3987 posts, RR: 93 Reply 16, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1414 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW COMMUNITY MANAGER
Quoting Antares (Reply 14): Well whatever doubts may exist at board level, it presented a unanimous endorsement of the revised offer (as it had to) in the ASX filing.
Exactly, I ask that any further discussion take place in the following thread as this topic has been over ridden by the content of the referenced post.
Sponsor Message: 
From New Zealand, joined Sep 2005, 1653 posts, 
From France, joined Nov 2004, 2597 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2006, 883 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 802 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
