Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SQ Demands Better Terms In AI Divestment  
User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 3 months 21 hours ago) and read 851 times:

According to the Economic Times, India, SQ is now asking for a 40% control of AI with the caveat that they will establish a new domestic carrier out of Bombay for hub and spoke operations feeding into AI's international network....(Damn good idea in my book - pity that the dimwitted Government babus couldnt think of it before). However, it's rather strange that SQ upped the ante at this late stage of the divestment because it has left the TATA group flumoxed and engaging in damage control, and has caused the usual coterie of swadeshi-saffron thugs and mahila mandal types to be even more incensed with their usual "anti-foreigner" diatribes.

I suppose it really does expose the perfectly ridiculous terms of divestment that the Indian govt put up - would any sane person on God's green earth wish to buy into a loss-making monolith that is still 49% + controlled by the usual cabal of UP babus and their cohorts? Hell, no ! However, it's absurd that both SQ and Tata went along with this farce for as long as they did. Does SQ really think that being the only player in the game would allow it to demand a better deal at this stage of the game? Does anyone know? Whenever you have the Singaporean government and the Indian government involved in a deal, there has to be more than meets the eye !!

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineIndianGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 790 times:

According to Economic Times, SQ was asking for a 49% stake. Even the Tatas are having problems with that as they are privately telling reporters that they would like to see an Indian led bid for AI.

I think SQ's reluctance is understandable in the sense that in the proposed arrangement, they would have ended up with barely 19% while the Tata's would own around 21%. 19% is too less a no to pull any strings and SQ cuold have ended up in a disadvantageous position.

Another reason for their change of mind could be a shift in priorities for SQ. I had always questioned the amount of money that SQ would be actually willing to invest in AI. Since SQ is also looking at ANZ (and hence Ansett Australia), both of which require substantial investments themselves, and which are more important for SQ overall, they would have very little left for AI if at all!

As far as the Domestic airline idea goes, i dont think that SQ should be allowed to run a domestic airline in India. No country on earth allows that and we shouldnt either, and i think they realise it jsut as well. I feel this is bogey that they are raising to get out of the agreement. A proposal that could be looked at is that the Tata's could set up a domestic airline feeding the AI network which could be jointly owned.

But i doubt if the Naresh Goyal lobby (of Jet Airways) is going to let that happen.

Jay: Swadeshi is a concept that has been hijacked by some miscreants, but that does not reduce its importance in anyway. While i dont support the "India for Indians" brand of swadeshi, i think that understanding swadeshi in its truest sense is the only way ahead for India.

As for the other elements like the mahila-mandals opposed to divestment, i have for long been campaigning to get the Indian brand of Feminism (u know the behenji kind) banned. U know what the Mamta's and now the Jayalalitha's are doing to this country dont u?


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 773 times:

I hardly think that SQ would own the domestic carrier. However, it would be to its advantage to have one established, because IC's feed to AI is ridiculous. The babus who run both don't seem to understand that if you're flying from Nagpur to Kuwait, you don't wanna hang around two airports for 10 hours, and have to fight the traffic between Sahar and Santacruz, or whatever theyre called now.

Also, while the TATAs may have managed AI in the 1960s they have been out of that arena since then. The airline industry has changed and SIA is one of the few airlines that has contributed significantly to that change. How much $$$ could SQ invest in AI? Who knows? But clearly they could arrange for preferable lease arrangements through their own leasing subsidiaries.

And as far as swadeshi goes, I think that having an international carrier of some prestige would go a long way in ridding "swadeshi" of it's apologetic "Jhopad patti'd, yet proud" self-aggrandized nonsense. Case in point: it appears that India's noise-producing politicians are more proud of Indian silicon valley entrepreneurs and Indian Miss Worlds than they are of all the Gandhisms and all the billion miles of scratchy khadi undies state textile mills have produced in the name of swadeshi.


User currently offlineSkychuck From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 769 times:

I've always wondered why Indian and Air India weren't merged years ago. I've read many articles on the two and Indian aviation in general. Indian politics leaves me perplexed, to say the least...

User currently offlineB747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 752 times:

Gossip coming out of AI is that SQ were paid off by the Hindujas to make unreasonable demands and scuttle the bid process. Based upon what I knew about the SQ/Tata bid structure, it is the only thing that would make sense. Ah well....

User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 731 times:

So, I guess its back to the drawing board?

It's ridiculous for SQ to post such demands at the near closure of the deal. If 49% were awarded, the deal would have been far more attractive to other players..


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 722 times:

And as a totally urrelated question....when did they remove PTVs from their 747-400s?

User currently offlineB747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 725 times:

when did they remove PTVs from their 747-400s?

They haven't been removed. The system is still in place, but Sharad Yadav has forbidden its use for some vague dehaati reason (something to do with the invasion of the phirangi culture and censorship yada yada yada). As a result, the screens are sealed into the armrests and the 5 extra VCRs on the IFE system by 2L are left unused. Only in India....


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 715 times:

What an imbecile !!
But yet, they continue to show Hollywood films, American sitcoms, et al on their flights. Do any rev pax still fly AI First/Business Class...or are they all Govt of India upgrades? And to think I'm doling out close to $ 4000 for this...


User currently offlineB747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 715 times:

Do any rev pax still fly AI First/Business Class...or are they all Govt of India upgrades?

It is not all Govt. upgrades. There are a fair proportion of AI staff in there too Big grin


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 704 times:

LOL...

S o whats the buzz? Is the divestment plan derailed for good now?


User currently offlineAI744LR From Thailand, joined May 2001, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 698 times:

What an imbecile !!??

Imbecile?? You're too kind Jaysit! I'd use different words in combination for such a character! For obvious reasons, I'm refraining from doing that here!

Isn't "flying" an invasion of the phirangi culture?? Or did he invent that on his farm while milking cows! How on god's earth do illiterate people like this guy become the minister of civil aviation! Beats me!

All that remains for him to do now is to ground all desi airlines (including AI) siting "invasion of the phirangi culture." Trust me, he must have this cooking somewhere in the back of his mind!


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 692 times:

I guess its called democracy.

For a guy from some miserable village in UP, being the local "daada" over a Rs. 1500 crore operation is really quite an achievment. I bet he doesn't even understand why people look at Indian airports and carriers and see the Third in Third World. To him, its all really quite fabulous !


User currently offlineAI744LR From Thailand, joined May 2001, 106 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 677 times:

I think it's favoritism rather than democracy coz I can't believe that we don't have a better qualified person for the job than this moron.

Unfortunately, this ideology prevails throughout our 'good for nothing' government back home! So, unless and until that is abolished, we can't really expect AI to get any better coz after Sharad Yadav, there will be others following his footsteps. I promise...  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Think about what's happening up north in J&K. Do you think the gov is giving an appropriate response to what's happening? Hell no! It's the same thing like the the ministry of civil aviation. Just let the things go the way they are going and enjoy the "ghoos" while you can.


User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13745 posts, RR: 19
Reply 14, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 674 times:

I don't know. I say that if SQ gets AI, good for them. Very good. Just give us the LHR - JFK slots!!!

hehe. But seriously, if SIA can't buy AI, who will? EK? No, well duh! They dropped out. Hindujas? Let's not talk about them.



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 671 times:

Which brings me back to the original question....will this mess ever get sold to someone who knows how to run it? Or is the divestment plan totally derailed for good. I can just see the government saying that in the wake of the UTI scandal (which only occurred because UTI should never have been run by the govt in the first place....financial markets always have a way of exposing schemes used to prop up the stock market), AI should continue under all the government goondas.

User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 668 times:

The LHR-JFK route is the primo feather in AI's cap - I doubt if they will ever give it up. Besides, I think they are statutorily required to fly it with their own metal.

User currently offlineIndianGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 660 times:

Hey i didnt know about the PTV's in economy class bit. Thanx fo rtelling me.

This is about the limit man. I know those bihari types in the Ministry were mcbc's, but this is plain stupid! Foreign Culture? Then why doesnt he ban all these foreing channels? Remember our CA Minister's tirade about "bal kati mahila" (women with bobbed hair)?

He deserves to be dunked into the Yamuna with a stone around his neck.


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (13 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 651 times:

Well, they can start with banning all airplanes, electricity and modern bathrooms. Ooops, the latter two already have a partial ban on them....

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...
Airlines Sued For Unfair Terms In Europe posted Tue May 19 2009 05:08:02 by AF2323
TAP Shows Better Numbers In April ( Int'l ) posted Thu May 7 2009 15:58:20 by LipeGIG
Secondary Airports & Budget Terms In China posted Thu Oct 23 2008 07:46:58 by Pe@rson
What If SQ Had Bought AN In 2001 posted Sun Apr 27 2008 17:19:02 by Nicholaschee
SQ To Put PC In Every Seat On A380 posted Mon Aug 27 2007 01:04:11 by WGW2707
SQ To Sell Stake In VS posted Mon Jul 9 2007 07:41:21 by YOWza
SQ 777 Emergency Landing In PEK: Engine Fire posted Wed Jan 24 2007 06:10:34 by Jimyvr
SQ's Second A380 Order -- In Jeopardy? posted Fri Sep 22 2006 16:20:42 by N328KF
SQ A380 To Fly In 2007? posted Thu Aug 24 2006 04:28:02 by Alaskaqantas
What Happend To SQ 747-400 Today In ZRH? posted Sat Feb 25 2006 18:50:59 by RootsAir