These A340-500/600 aircraft had very short lives at TG having all been parked since 2012-2015.
TG did find a buyer for the A340-500s, it was a Saudia VIP operation, however they offered around 1/3 of their book value and TG returned the deposit on the sale thinking they could do better. In hindsight they should have cut their losses and moved on.
You should read the linked articles. OP posted a quote from them including the fuel guzzler reference.
It is editorial embellishment, it is not a quote attributed to any Thai official or agency.
Yes, it was, even in 2003. Airbus introduced its "4 engines 4 long haul" in 2002 precisely because airline customers were finding the 777 to be more capable and efficient than the A340.
That slogan precipitated from the not to subtle complaint Airbus made regarding the tactics Boeing used to get the high profile SQ 777 placement. Boeing bought all of the A310s and A340s off SQ, some hadn’t even been delivered in exchange for the 777 placement. The 777 was very much an unproven aircraft at the time, and Boeing was very sensitive to any suggestion that twins were unsafe for long overwater operations. Airbus purchased a big billboard at the entrance to the air show and placed the slogan on aircraft at the air show, the suggestion was being made that 4 engines were safer than two. It was the Airbus payback for the SQ deal. It very much had the desired result.
Could be that this had something to do with the anti-corruption settlement deal made by Airbus earlier this year.
More likely regal changes and changes in domestic politics. Thailand was a kingdom, lead by the very popular Former King of Thailand Bhumibol Adulyadej. He was very much respected by everyone, and the airline had the Royal blessing for its activities. The political landscape has changed significantly since his passing with the military regime exposing one sort of corruption or bureaucratic incompetence. It is not my place to describe what it has been replaced with.
The statements about "fuel-guzzler planes" and the airline's widening losses likely come right out of the report from the investigative team.
The two items however are not really connected. The reality is the rise of SQ/MH/TG cane at the expense of many European airlines operating to Asia and Australia, they almost drove every single carrier out with the lower cost base and service model.
The reality is however at the same time we saw the significant rise of the ME3, which did to SQ/MH/TG/QF (particularly with premium traffic) what they did to the many European carries in the previous decades. They offered price and service advantages, and drew significant market share away from SQ/MH/TG/QF. SQ/TG/QF all looked at ULH flights, SQ/TG started them as a way to secure their future bypassing numbs. QF in the early 2002s passed on the A340-500 for direct LHR flights and revisited it recently as project Sunrise.
It’s a distortion of the facts to represent an A340s asset that only had a listed combined value of of around 70 million dollars as the reason they were bleeding much larger sums. The real reason for their losses is their traditional passengers sent their money to the ME3.
They also discovered a discrepancy on operating leases on eight B787s. The panel believes that the price gap was used to funnel in some $7.2 billion in bribes paid by Rolls-Royce.
They are Aercap/ILFC leases from memory, not sure how RR would be involved.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News