The Qantas Loses In Bid for Air NZ is a speculative rumour and from what I hear is that Air NZ will be deferring their annual loss announcement by a week due to resolution of ownership and funding issue before going to markets as it needs to clearly demonstrate to investors the future plan for the airline.

If Air NZ/Ansett cannot revitalise itself with the assistance of SQ or QF, it will fall to the pits and from what I hear, SQ is not the answer to their problems as SQ's cash reserves are drying up and they will be moving to a net borrowing status very shortly as a result of cash used in buying a 49 per cent stake in Virgin Atlantic (which was over paid by 2 times).

From the rumours I hear, I believe SQ is not happy about its entitlement of 35 per cent ownership as this will not provide them with the influence that they would like over the affairs of Air NZ/Ansett matters. The negotiations are tough between the NZ Govt and the parties involved. QF's offer is still on the table and it will be interesting to see if SQ pulls the plug on Air NZ as a result of frustration over the matters. SQ is desparate in moving to grow its presence in this part of the world but only to the constraints of Govt regulations.

SQ has been unsuccessful in several proposals, the likes of South African Airways, China Airlines, Air India, direct investment in Ansett Australia. The only two they have been able to move into without any proposals have been VS and NZ because Branson knew that these Singaporeans are desparate and would pay anything to buy a stake in his airline which he might buy it back at half the price...he must have kept his BUSTING OUT IN LAUGHTER kept tight as SQ really has paid well above the market rate for VS. I believe Virgin's value is down by 50 per cent ever since SQ became a shareholder.

In conclusion, it can be said that with all these speculative rumours about Air NZ and SQ at the moment, it is not official and only time will tell as to what the outcome will be. If SQ gets 35 per cent stake in Air NZ,they will not be HAPPY with it because their aim is 49 per cent and I believe this could lead to some problems on its own as SQ will only facilitate capital injection if it gets 49 per cent stake.

Fingers crossed fellow airliners.net forum readers. Only TIME will tell and that will be very shortly! Please sleep tight and not long before we know the win-win solution for Air NZ/Ansett Group.

When I saw the heading I thought this may have been written by someone with some knowledge. Instead it is just another bitch about SQ by ANZETT. Technical Analysis it ain't!!

I think this is a spectacular piece of information about the "TRUTH" into the matter. It is not a bitchy little commentary but the commercial reality behind the politics of airline management.

You have to take into consideration that Singapore_Air is a little kid who doesn't understand the fundamentals of management and economics of running an airline. All is is concerned about is how pretty a seat looks like and this was evident when SQ launched their new J class product. He was so excited that every second post was his message stating, I am very excitied that I am speechless...give me a freakin break Dr Evil! I personally thought the new SQ J class seats looked UGLY and not very aesthetic looking.

That is my 2 cents worth!

I wonder who is more evil...
1. AirNZ first they lobbied the govt. to block SQ's 50% purchase proposal for AirNZ... Now they're crying foul at the govt. and SQ after running out of cash (which have been seriously draining since 1994)
2. SQ for trying to take over AN... (and the world)
All in all, the victims are Ansett employees... desperate for a rescue package and got forced integration with AirNZ instead...

Anzett, SQ's cash reserve is still growing (read the ING Barings report). Ever thought of other reasons for Virgin's loss in value other than SQ ? Ever thought Branson needed the cash to raise for his other operations? Ever heard of fleet renewals ?
He sold Virgin Atlantic because he was almost bankrupt in 1998 with his other ventures... he needed the money... His bankers told him he needed more cash due to his business psychology...

The SQ Virgin deal looked overpriced because it included heaps of other hidden deals behind it. Hear Branson's interview with CNBC and you will know what I mean.

Win2 solution is for AirNZ to dump AN for SQ's taking, and QF takes AirNZ... then we get a very nice duopoly in Australian Long Haul market...

Mandala499

Since AirNZ/AN actually have cash reserves, perhaps SQ's better credit rating (is it, it would seem obvious - maybe someone could correct me), SQ's greater borrowing potential would be ok, if not good (considering SQ make multi-hundred million profits all the time).

I agree, it's not technical at all.

For it to be technical is has to include stats etc. Unfortunately, that's the domain of airline managers and hence commerically sensitive.

The Coachman

I think this is a spectacular piece of information about the "TRUTH" into the matter. It is not a bitchy little commentary but the commercial reality behind the politics of airline management.

You have to take into consideration that Singapore_Air is a little kid who doesn't understand the fundamentals
of management and economics of running an airline.
----
Oh really? Well I'm bigger than you think my dear. And I do actually know the fundamentals thank you very much my dear. The economics though they seem quite daunting at the beginning became very clear when I received SIA's Annual Report for the last financial year. I read it with great interest and I have a good understanding for a person of my age about business and economics unlike some who talk drivvle and blast things way out of proportion, like you my dear.
-----
All is is concerned about is how pretty a seat looks like and this was evident when SQ launched their new J class product. He was so excited that every second post was his message stating, I am very excitied that I am speechless...give me a freakin break Dr Evil! I personally thought the new SQ J class seats looked UGLY and not very aesthetic looking.

Oh really? Well all this anti-SIA posting seems to have originated from the date that you found out that Singapore Airlines' SpaceBed was bigger than CX's seat. What a shame my dear. I am not Dr. Evil actually, another thing you have got wrong. The aesthetics, however you look at it is someone's opinion and therefore, your opinion is only one in many my dear.
----
That is my 2 cents worth!

That is my €0.02 worth!

Xinjiabo Air...
I think that 2 cents you spent was a waste...
It seems Anzett's mental maturity declines with everypost whenever it comes to SQ.

As Gordon Bethune said, some will always be ... Let the fly with someone else, we're better off looking for ...

Mandala499

for goodness sake singapore air grow up and see the wood fromt he trees-SIA isnt the be all and end all of aviation and one day will fall flat on its face.

virgin was over-priced when singapore bought it and brnason sold the stake to finance the fleet upgrade because virgin altantic had been cash-strapped by dicky B transferring money to loss makign ventures like vrigin cola and virgin fashion.

Dicky B then needed more money so has morgaged his stake of to llyods tsb, therefore it must be stated that singapore have bought themselves trouble.

when open skies kicks in in the UK, sigapores investment will look even worse, one because the british government will find a way to block singapore flying to new york and two because its virgin, not BA who stand to lose the most.

singapore air should actually fly with singapore for a few times,rather than praise an airline on the other side of the world to him.

Go Canada should actually stop trying to bash me and the airline that is on the other side of the world to him.

People keep saying that VS is too expensive! It's loss making! blah blah. Piss on those comments to be frank with you lot. FFS it's not a buy at £600 mil, the next year it's worth £700 mil sell sell sell! It's a long term investment and you and others do not realise that. A shame that the fundamentals of business and equities is not taught at secondary school (unless you do business studies). (secondary school = high school)

Virgin is a brand and will continue to grow. I hope they do something good with their A346s coming.

So my dear SIA haters, who want it's new Business CLass to drop into the fuel tank to having it fall flat on it's face, let's cut the crap and think long term instead of short term drivvle which is not what business is about.

The airline industry is one of the worst performing industries. Most particularly because of government constrictions. The good airlines (namely VS, SIA, AMR, UAL, EK, CX), will have to continually innovate, invest long term in smaller airlines with potential to survive. As QF Geoff Dixon says. He predicts that in the long term, there will only be around 60 players in the airline industry, because consolidation will ocurr.

UAL good airline?? Used to be..Please elaborate...

Cheers
mikey

ANZETT, my problem with this post is not that you have an opinion, it is that you labelled it a technical analysis when it is just an opinion with little factual back up. If you are really a Business Analyst youwould know that technical analysis is based on facts. Comments such as "I thought the seats looked ugly" would not be acceptable.

Singapore Air,

I did ask you a couple of weeks back why you so adored SIA. I mean, Singapore is 13 000km away from London. It's just about the furthest you can fly from London non-stop. And we are no longer the bastion of the East, impregnable fortress, crown colony of the British Empire whose sovereign is Her Majesty the Queen, The Empress of India blah blah blah blah blah.

I do show keen interest in SIA because Singapore is my country and SIA's business is my business. It has managed to transform itself, on its own merit, into a world class carrier. And the biggest feat of all is, how SIA is known for its service when customer service in Singapore is deplorable. Shop assistants NEVER offer assistance, and if one were to ask them for help, the first reply will instinctively be "NO STOCK!" or "OVER THERE!" or "TRY NEXT WEEK" or, if they're in a better mood, they might role their eyes and point you in the right direction.

But why do you, as a teen in the UK, display such a keen interest(to put it very mildly) in SQ? The only possible link you might have with SQ is that it's the airline of your country's former colony. Or perhaps, it owns half of your kingdom's 2nd largest airline. Or perhaps it's your national carrier's fiercest rival. Or perhaps, you have a Singapore PR, (which I highly doubt)

I really am curious to know why a 14 year old English boy adores the airline of a country thousands of miles away from his home. THere's no sarcasm or anything here, it's just that, I really wanna know what's driving this "I adore SIA thing" behind you.

Mandala499: What were the other hidden agendas behind the SQ-VS deal? THat's interesting.......

Oh god
Somebody stop this from turning into a personal war.

I'm not too happy myself with the outcome of SQ being allowed to take more in AirNZ.
I really dont understand how CEO of SQ could approach QF with a deal to sell off some of AirNZ in return for Ansett, then speak nothing of it and pretend that QF is the culprit.
That rotten Dr. Cheong is one evil man with only one thing on his mind - world domination!

Forget the deal, wait till Australian Airlines comes

Regards
QantasAirways

QF: hehe.

Docpepz: I will e-mail you soon.

Ok... first post...

Ignoring Anzett's e-mail which doesn't really say anything meaningful, I am becoming increasingly curious about the finances of SQ, especially given the recent crisis that SwissAir is facing. I know that the company is current sitting on a large cash-pile (US$800m) and that 49% of ANZ is estimated to cost around US$500m, leaving it with plenty of cash, but how will it finance the rebuilding of Ansett's fleet which I last understood needed completely replacing? Is this another potential SwissAir, especially given their interest in Air India? Although the company is immensely cash generative and has significant ability to become more leveraged, i.e. incur more debt, does anybody see similarities between SQ's strategy and SwissAir's?

Anyway, potentially interesting...

PS. Singapore_Air... I also don't quite understand your obsession with SQ. As somebody who lives in Sg, and travels regularly on SQ and knows many people who works for the airline, I don't quite understand why you are so fascinated to it to such an extent...!

There is a similarity yes, However ANZAN is an international carrier and it can be rebuilt. As to AI, it has a vastly growing market in India and SIA wants to exploit it so to speak and get as much money from it as possible. At to the maths of the case. Most of SIA's purchases are from cash-flow anyway, so the surplus is there to make it look nice.

Please leave Singapore_Air alone, he loves his airline and if it give him pleasure in bragging about it then so be it.

Even if he is a little bitch ('my dear').

No offence to anyone!! (Especially S_Air.)

Cheers guys,


mb

***Absolutely Ansett***

Yes but the question is why does singapore air love SIA so much, ive flown with them, they are good, granted, but they are no better than other major airlines.

their skysuite or whatever isnt much different from bAs bed, they are meant to be cash rich but they over paid for virgin, it isnt a strong brand name anymore, open skies is coming to whisk it away and singapores left with an airline that cant fit into a major global alliance and is 51% owned by a british bank that would have a clue if jumped up and down and did a stock market floation!

Singapore is largely going to be responsible for the task of upgrading the fleet at ansett and anz, thats a lot of money, ist going to have ansett bleeding it because ansett needs a hell of a lot of cash.

anz needs cash
virgin needs cash
air india will need cash

four airlines draining singapores purse,no sign of the british ever letting singapore fly to ny from heathrow and it still being government control.

doesnt sound invincible does it?

Virgin is a strong brand name actually. Maybe not where you come from of course. Here, when I ask people what airline they would consider to fly to Florida or LAX, they immediately say VS. I try and look surprised and ask why, and they say because of those PTVs and service. So obviously, it's still around.

ANZAN will need cash. ANd who said SIA was invincible? Not me my dear Go Canada. I don't know why you don't think SIA won't get a return on it's investments. The Australian market is lucrative and if SIA gets a strong foothold in that, then it will make a lot of money provided that people want to fly AN. AN, let's face it, has an ageing fleet to put it mildly. I don't want to fly on SIA's A310s, but I have to when I go to SGN. If AN can keep it's great service (which it obviously has judging from the comments from you Ozzies), and introduces PTVs on it's international and maybe domestic aircraft, then I'm sure it will go down a treat.

Yeah actually I was wondering why SQ wants to buy airlines that need money. But to buy 3 airlines which are hard-up for cash? Maybe the return to investment might materialise in many many years......but still....

And I don't think SIA being able to fly LHR-JFK would add a significant amount of money to their profits. It's just but ONE route.And anyway, BA, UA, AA and VS fly there numerous times a day, and SQ's once a day flight will not be popular with businessmen who require flexible schedules. And they want to fly it more out of prestige than anything else. Anyway, Singapore and Holland have an open-skies agreement, and most of their future flights to the East coast of USA/Canada will go via AMS. We already have AMS-EWR and AMS-ORD. Next year, there'll possibly be a AMS-YYZ or AMS-MIA flight started.

There's this big hoohaa about Singapore companies buying up Australian strategic assets, with SQ getting AN and Singtel buying Optus. I can understand why Singtel bought Optus. There's money to be made there. It is profitable and reliable (YES OPTUS! Oh when I was in Australia, I realised that there was YES time between 8pm and midnight, where one could call anywhere in Australia for free. Hey, you Aussies out there, does that mean I could call a friend in Hobart from Darwin and talk for free for 20 minutes? And you Aussies haven't told me if you'd like Optus to be called Singtel-Optus...I think that's horrible.) In its present setting, NZ and AN passengers are alread feeding into SQ to get to Europe. All SQ flights from Oz and NZ have AN and NZ codeshares.

My 2cents worth

Docpepz: Between you and me, I think that one flight a week is a front! I mean, one flight a week. Maybe a cause for fireworks across the Thames. However, I don't think businesspeople who want to fly on the other 6 days of the week with SIA would be too impressed.

Anzett,for goodness sake,stop picking on Singapore_Air.At least he is smarter than you and does not pick on any airline that he doens't like.

You have proved yourself to be immature by constantly bashing SQ. why must you make a big hoo-ha about a punctured tire on a SIA jet why you don't respond to the post on the Air Transat emergency landing.

Sometimes,I wonder if you are really a financial consultant, Gina Madrid. I think that you are not even fit to be one!
----------------------------------------------------

SIA is rather rich and QF lost out to SIA because the Kiwi government know that SIA is smart enough to buy an airline when it has funding. NZ will not last long on SIA's funding. SIA's role in NZ is to help it earn money, not let money be siphoned from it.

9V-SVA  

Nobody has lost out to anybody just yet. The decision by the NZ Govt has from all reports been postponed by 1 week!
Go to the other thread running here and read the article posted from todays "Australian" newspaper.
They report the Aust Govt can block this if NZ goes along with the SQ deal if they think it may be anti-competitive.

Docpepz:

I am with Optus and YESTIME is from 8PM to midnight 7 days a week from Optus mobile to Optus Mobile, and theres YESWEEKEND call any mobile on any network for 20cents for 10 minutes.

If SingTel take this away from the company and customers I'll cut their nads off. The marketing slogan of "Buy Australian owned" in Australia is really doing businesses well. Such as Big Kev and Dick Smith products. I really hope this is a deterant for new customers signing to networks to stick with Telstra, as I for one do not want to make the SINGAPORE Government richer.

Aduum.