Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
SK To Be Sold?  
User currently offlineAbleToFly From Denmark, joined Nov 2006, 118 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 8756 times:

I know this have been discussed before, but this I think this is worth trying again.

Delete this thread if I'm wrong.  

Lufthansa have been rumoured several times to be the most likely buyer, but according to a danish paper, QR or even an asian buyer would be most likely to buy SK, or maybe make more sence?

"A sale to a buyer from outside Europe would probably make significant cuts to European operations" the author says.

I'd say OK. With DY taking over more and more marketshare over the North European and Scandinavian skies, that could be the way of the future of SK. Interesting thought if you ask me.

Would a sale to QR or an other eastern or asian buyer build up a more efficient, or if you like, more conservative fleet?

My source is in danish only so far, I'm afraid:

http://finans.tv2.dk/nyheder/article...etyder-et-salg-af-sas.html?forside

Regards

///Abel

28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3398 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 8715 times:

Did the paper mention that the Danish government is probably the biggest stumbling block to a sale? Norway and less so Sweden have stated many times they are willing to sell their roughly 20% stakes but does no good if Denmark holds out. Who wants to buy an airline they have no control over? IMHO.


"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineAbleToFly From Denmark, joined Nov 2006, 118 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 8413 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 1):
Did the paper mention that the Danish government is probably the biggest stumbling block to a sale? Norway and less so Sweden have stated many times they are willing to sell their roughly 20% stakes but does no good if Denmark holds out. Who wants to buy an airline they have no control over? IMHO.

That's a very good point! The paper did not say anything about that.


User currently offlineSASMD82 From Netherlands, joined Mar 2007, 726 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8183 times:

With Norwegian expanding so rapidly along with the problems that SAS has faced the last decade (and with the recent collapse of Spanair), it seems to be quite logical to me. Should LH buy the whole airline and call it Lufthansa Scandinavia?

User currently offlineMortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3849 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 8097 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 1):
Norway and less so Sweden have stated many times they are willing to sell their roughly 20% stakes but does no good if Denmark holds out

Norwegian Minister of Trade and Industry Trond Giske has recently stated that the Norwegian government may back up SAS again with money, should it be needed, so I am not entirely convinced that a Norwegian sale is that clear.


User currently offlineaffirmative From France, joined Jul 2009, 350 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 7982 times:

QR can't buy SK since the EU law stipulates that European companies can not have majority shareholders from outside EU.. LH should buy SK in my opinion and maybe with some financial trickery with QR or someone else. But on the other hand, why would QR want SK?


I love the smell of Jet-A1 in the morning...
User currently offlineSuperCaravelle From Netherlands, joined Jan 2012, 233 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 7982 times:

Wouldn't QR or any other non-European airline have the same problem they had with Spaniar? I don't think governments would allow the airline to be in non-EU hands as it might be needed for military charters in an uncertain future.

User currently offlinePRAirbus From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2005, 1131 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 7952 times:

I hope BA/IB IAG jumps in here...didn't they also showed interest on TP? Surprising LH hasn't been more proactive with SAS.

User currently offlinecopenhagenboy From Denmark, joined Sep 2001, 597 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 7828 times:

Quoting PRAirbus (Reply 7):

LH has been proactive, already in 2008 there were negotiations, but then something happend: the financial crise.
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2008-09-12-lufthabsa-sas_N.htm

There has also been negotiations between LH and the 3 government shareholders in 2010.


User currently offlineIndependence76 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 238 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 7742 times:

I can see this sale eventually going to LH. Lufthansa Group has already made a vast amount of stake purchases in Star Alliance carriers and I see SAS as no different for this system in the future. SAS's fleet is also fairly similar to that of Lufthansa, Austrian, and SWISS so organizing the operations wouldn't be difficult at all. It would simply be a "SWISS up north."

What really needs to be sorted out is the profitability of their long-haul operations before any other real reforms are made. Alliance connections are already in place and fairly decent (as SAS was a founding member). If Lufthansa Group jumped in and reorganized their financial situation, I can see it being a profitable asset in the next few years.



"In general, pride is at the bottom of all great mistakes." - John Ruskin
User currently offlineaffirmative From France, joined Jul 2009, 350 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 7634 times:

Quoting Independence76 (Reply 9):

To be fair the Long haul division of SK is the only one that makes profit.. Several companies have announced interest in the SAS international part of SK.

The problem with SK is the same as the other old behemoths in Europe. Tired old and worn out organization that prevents and stifles new ideas. Unions doing their best to destroy SK and drain it for money (sure I'm exaggerating a wee bit).. Legislation in the nordic countries promoting old protectionist staff to cling to their position instead of actively employing people with fresh new ideas.. Having seen it from the inside a few years ago I'm really surprised they still exist. Even more surprised they order new planes and announcing to hire new pilots. Either they're just kidding themselves or they found a magic money producing well somewhere.

OK, rant over.. Sorry if I tripped any toes..



I love the smell of Jet-A1 in the morning...
User currently offlinenasco2 From Norway, joined Jul 2010, 64 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 7529 times:

Quoting affirmative (Reply 10):
Either they're just kidding themselves or they found a magic money producing well somewhere.

If you don´t know it, SAS is the company with the gold-pants.
So they relay not need to do the big changes to keep the business going  

I think a sale to China or Middle East will not be accepted by Norwegian government, as SAS is very important for the district infrastructure, we can´have a owner at the other side of the world !, also I know that Giske wants a very good sale price for Norway part.

So I think SAS just have to continue to prove they are a healthy company that some one wants to buy. And I also think the governments can support them with more money, if the reason for empty pocket is extra posts, that do not have anything to do with the operations, as Span air bankruptcy and so on, but only if they continue to do efficiency, finally it can be a well driven company, as Scandinavia deserve a healthy SAS.

[Edited 2012-02-15 11:48:42]

User currently offlineMortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3849 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 7391 times:

Quoting affirmative (Reply 10):
To be fair the Long haul division of SK is the only one that makes profit..

and the Norwegian part. Atleast upp til recently it was the surpluss of the Norwegian part that payed for the Swedish and Danish losses. We are talking thye last 10 - 15 years.


User currently offlinebrissedk From Denmark, joined Nov 2007, 383 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 7190 times:

Quoting Mortyman (Reply 12):
and the Norwegian part. Atleast upp til recently it was the surpluss of the Norwegian part that payed for the Swedish and Danish losses. We are talking thye last 10 - 15 years.

I've heard this many times before, but I have never actually seen any numbers to proof it. I'm not trying to deny it, I'm just really interested in seeing the numbers and get an understanding of it.

In my view, it has always been a mystery why only the Norwegian part made money, in spite of it being the market with the toughest competitor (DY). Possibly the Norwegian part benefits from a more streamlined fleet, better utillisation of equipment, less union trouble, "gold on the street" type of market   Can anyone pinpoint what makes the difference compared to the Swedish and Danish parts?

Cheers,
BJ



Frequent flyer based in CPH - mostly heading to: OSL, HEL, KEF, FAE and EWR
User currently offlineaffirmative From France, joined Jul 2009, 350 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 7099 times:

Quoting nasco2 (Reply 11):
So I think SAS just have to continue to prove they are a healthy company that some one wants to buy. And I also think the governments can support them with more money, if the reason for empty pocket is extra posts, that do not have anything to do with the operations, as Span air bankruptcy and so on, but only if they continue to do efficiency, finally it can be a well driven company, as Scandinavia deserve a healthy SAS.

Hmm.. Continue to prove..? They have to TRY to prove that they are a company that deserves a position in the marketplace. So far they haven't been close. They did one good result the last 15 or so years and that was basically a fluke. It's really not rocket science in any way shape or form. You provide the public with a product they would like to buy and price it according to what the customer are willing to pay. If you add extras that customers want to pay extra for you charge extra, if you take stuff away and still charge the same price something's wrong. In the end you need to make sure that what comes in covers your costs, if not you need to start looking at what you're doing wrong.

SK tried to become a LCC by doing BOB and faster turnarounds and all that crap. Other companies understand that you can never compete with the likes of Ryanair or Easyjet on a level playing field and changed accordingly. They offer a product superior to the LCCs and take out a higher price, and it works. Instead of using its legacy and the power of the brand SK started to compete with fares and once down that road you're doomed. One intelligent man once said that lowering prices is the easiest thing you can do, while raising prices is the absolute most difficult thing you can do. If you try to fight fire with fire you're soon gonna burn and if it wasn't for the incredibly incompetent Nordic governments SK would be a thing of the past. To get SK back on their feet and into a position where they deserve a position in the marketplace it needs to become a market oriented player and not an old dinosaur trying to follow what other are doing just to fail miserably. Looking at DY and how easy it was for them to establish themselves on the nordic market just comes to show how lame and crippled SK really is.

Quoting Mortyman (Reply 12):
and the Norwegian part. Atleast upp til recently it was the surpluss of the Norwegian part that payed for the Swedish and Danish losses. We are talking thye last 10 - 15 years.

They norwegians have claimed this for a while and even though the Norwegian side of SK is less flawed it has it's own problems. And even though they might be better of they wouldn't survive without the Swedish and Danish parts of SK. Braatens is a good example. But herein lies the whole problem. There's a constant fight between the SAS counterpart about who's best in the class and none considers working together. When I was at SK just trying to negotiate with the Norwegians and Danes for whatever reason was insane.. Everybody trying to snatch as big as possible piece of the cake and something that would take one or two phone calls in a normal company took weeks through meetings and committees to get sorted. If you look up inefficiency in the dictionary there should be a SAS logo next to it. And it's both internal and external. Everybody is keeping their cards close to their chest and clinging to their seat.

Jeez.. I need to stop this before my head explodes..  
  



I love the smell of Jet-A1 in the morning...
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3398 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 7063 times:

Quoting nasco2 (Reply 11):
I think a sale to China or Middle East will not be accepted by Norwegian government, as SAS is very important for the district infrastructure,

Norway can sell their part and use the cash to buy Widerøe (WF) so small communities don't get shafted and let DY handle the rest.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineMortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3849 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 6907 times:

Quoting brissedk (Reply 13):
In my view, it has always been a mystery why only the Norwegian part made money, in spite of it being the market with the toughest competitor (DY).

You have to remember that Norway has alot of domestic traffic with airtravel. DY has only been a serious competitor to SAS in the last 5 years or so.

Quoting affirmative (Reply 14):
And even though they might be better of they wouldn't survive without the Swedish and Danish parts of SK. Braatens is a good example.

SAS used proabaly billion NOK to force Braathens out of business, as SAS did with other airlines that got in their way. SAS had for many years monopoly on all international scheduled routes within as well as from and to Scandinavia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braathens_SAFE


Quoting brissedk (Reply 13):
less union trouble

It is primarely the Danish unions that are the troublemakers in SAS and has the most conflicts. ( sorry to say, but it is true ) From what I understand their latest campaign was not populare with their Norwegian and Swedish counterparts.

Quoting affirmative (Reply 14):
When I was at SK just trying to negotiate with the Norwegians and Danes for whatever reason was insane.. Everybody trying to snatch as big as possible piece of the cake and something that would take one or two phone

The Swedes, but particularly the Danes think more about their part, rather as SAS as a multinational airline.


User currently offlinebrissedk From Denmark, joined Nov 2007, 383 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 6634 times:

Quoting Mortyman (Reply 16):
You have to remember that Norway has alot of domestic traffic with airtravel. DY has only been a serious competitor to SAS in the last 5 years or so.

Indeed. But before DY there was Braathens, so there has been competition for quite a while.

Even though the domestic market is huge, that doesn't always translate into profits. Just look at the US legacy carriers, they have a huge market, but due to competition they struggle to make a profit.

Quoting Mortyman (Reply 16):
SAS used proabaly billion NOK to force Braathens out of business, as SAS did with other airlines that got in their way.

Very true, and still the Norwegian business made a profit? Or was this cost split onto all parts of the SAS system?

Quoting Mortyman (Reply 16):
The Swedes, but particularly the Danes think more about their part, rather as SAS as a multinational airline.

That might be so, yet only on the Norwegian SK planes has the "Scandinavian flags" been replaced by only the Norwegian flag. Something that has weirded me out for the past couple of years.


Does anyone have the numbers to break down the SK business on DK, NO, SE and IC?

Cheers,
BJ



Frequent flyer based in CPH - mostly heading to: OSL, HEL, KEF, FAE and EWR
User currently onlineSAS A340 From Sweden, joined Jul 2000, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4227 times:

Quoting brissedk (Reply 17):
That might be so, yet only on the Norwegian SK planes has the "Scandinavian flags" been replaced by only the Norwegian flag. Something that has weirded me out for the past couple of years.

I was thinking exactly the same thing  



It's not what u do,it's how u do it!
User currently offlineSomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3331 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 4176 times:

Quoting brissedk (Reply 17):
That might be so, yet only on the Norwegian SK planes has the "Scandinavian flags" been replaced by only the Norwegian flag. Something that has weirded me out for the past couple of years.

This is being reverted back. When SAS Norway (existed and) had its own AOC the Scandinavian flags was changed to a Norwegian flag. But it's currently being changed back to the normal Scandinavian flags...it just takes quite a long time, and only about 10 aircraft has so far been repainted

Anyway, this sales rumours comes up 2-3 times each year. So nothing new here


User currently offlinearn777 From Sweden, joined Jul 2010, 198 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 4092 times:

Quoting brissedk (Reply 13):
I've heard this many times before, but I have never actually seen any numbers to proof it. I'm not trying to deny it, I'm just really interested in seeing the numbers and get an understanding of it.

I know very much how you like to see proof and facts BrisseDK  so I helped you a bit:

http://www.sasgroup.net/SASGroup/default.asp


User currently offlineaffirmative From France, joined Jul 2009, 350 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3789 times:

Quoting arn777 (Reply 20):

Even looking through the financial result wouldn't make you any wiser since SK is reporting the airline as a whole and not the subsidiaries alone (I couldn't find it). So it will remain an urban myth that SK norway is the part of SK that has the least losses or the only profitable one. However, it all depends on how you calculate and so on.

In the end it makes little difference since it's one company.

Quoting Mortyman (Reply 16):
The Swedes, but particularly the Danes think more about their part, rather as SAS as a multinational airline.

Without trying to start an argument but it's that exact attitude that makes cooperation within SK so difficult. The "can do" attitude is nowhere to be found. And it got even worse when some einstein decided to split up the companies into country subsidiaries. Now they're trying to reverse it again loosing even more money due to another restructuring.

Quoting Someone83 (Reply 19):
Anyway, this sales rumours comes up 2-3 times each year. So nothing new here

Yeah and I've been hoping for "no smoke without a fire" for a while but it seems SK will live on a while longer. Maybe a good thing or DY would become the "New SAS" with a too strong market position. At least SK is trying to fight back..



I love the smell of Jet-A1 in the morning...
User currently offlineMortyman From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3849 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3691 times:

Quoting affirmative (Reply 21):
Even looking through the financial result wouldn't make you any wiser since SK is reporting the airline as a whole and not the subsidiaries alone (I couldn't find it). So it will remain an urban myth that SK norway is the part of SK that has the least losses or the only profitable one. However, it all depends on how you calculate and so on.

In the end it makes little difference since it's one company.

Yes it has gone back to being one company recently. You must look up the older annual reports.


User currently offlinenasco2 From Norway, joined Jul 2010, 64 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3315 times:

What I hope the meeting between the 3 stats was all about, is how to act if SAS ask for more money again, in 2012 - 2013 ?
The point is that SAS have earlier ask for more fill-up, just before the company was bankruptcy, that gave the states short time to act, before all hell brake loose. The only solutions was more money.

This time I hope the states discus long before they will come to same situations, what to do, I think they have different solutions.
1. If the states agree to support SAS ones again, because SAS is shortage of money because of high oil price, the conclusion is that the states pay SAS interest money to keep the Scandinavian populations on old and polluted aircrafts.
And that the fill-up from the stat is a part of the income and balance to SAS year by year operations and results.
2. or how to sell the company, or parts of the company in a restructure plane. Personally I think the best was to sell out Widerøe, and also sell parts of SAS that don´t is profitable, and sell the rest, to private investors, or the some other airliner in Europe. Time will show.

[Edited 2012-02-18 03:45:13]

User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3398 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (2 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3236 times:

Quoting nasco2 (Reply 23):
is how to act if SAS ask for more money again, in 2012 - 2013 ?

Can they ask for more money? I thought that was a violation of EU rules. I know Norway is not in the EU but Denmark and Sweden are.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
25 sweair : Sweden and Norway would like to sell, Denmark with its unions want to keep pouring taxmoney into SAS. I will not shed a tear if its sold.
26 bjorn14 : If sold what would be a fair market valuation or what might be someone willing to pay?
27 Sandager : This is a load of BS... Nothing else. After 10 years of conservative government, we recently had a change in government in Denmark, and as usual it i
28 Post contains links EBGflyer : According to several online media, the Swedish Ministry of Finance rejects rumors about intentions to sell SAS saying it has been misunderstood. http
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...
Durham Tees Valley To Be Sold posted Thu Dec 15 2011 03:40:08 by BD338
Bmi Regional To Be Sold To Undisclosed Buyer posted Fri Oct 28 2011 05:53:08 by LHRFlyer
United/Continental 767-400 To Be Sold? posted Fri Oct 7 2011 13:50:27 by alnicocunife
SriLankan To Be Sold To SIA? posted Mon Aug 16 2010 01:56:54 by KFlyer
SAS Scandinavian To Be Sold To Competition - CEO posted Wed Mar 3 2010 22:34:31 by shanxz
Philippine Airlines To Be Sold? posted Tue Aug 11 2009 08:30:01 by Hugo
A342 Egyptair To BE Sold? posted Fri Jan 2 2009 10:45:12 by Dennys
Thomas Cook To Be Sold? posted Fri Sep 26 2008 10:12:45 by Beaucaire
Argentina - Tango 01 Is To Be Sold posted Wed Nov 14 2007 02:23:51 by Stgs1988
Aeromexico Is Finally Going To Be Sold. Rules Here posted Wed Feb 28 2007 01:15:57 by Pzurita1