Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 24565
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 7:50 pm

2nd2none wrote:
Tell me about one single deal made by Thai (whatever), corruption was not a part of the game, and I would be surprised and tell you that I think that is impossible, sorry that is a fact, I have lived there long enough to know better!

The issue isn't just the corruption, it's the fact that companies like RR have reporting requirements.

There is allowance for various "fees" with regard to securing business, but the need to be reported.

If not, RR could lose the ability to sell to various governments.

RR has a large defense business, so if this is a case of unreported "fees", they could be in a bad way.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
2nd2none
Posts: 87
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2018 8:05 am

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:02 pm

Revelation wrote:
2nd2none wrote:
Tell me about one single deal made by Thai (whatever), corruption was not a part of the game, and I would be surprised and tell you that I think that is impossible, sorry that is a fact, I have lived there long enough to know better!

The issue isn't just the corruption, it's the fact that companies like RR have reporting requirements.

There is allowance for various "fees" with regard to securing business, but the need to be reported.

If not, RR could lose the ability to sell to various governments.

RR has a large defense business, so if this is a case of unreported "fees", they could be in a bad way.



If RR is in trouble, more or less the the whole aviation industry is in trouble except those contracts not involving state enterprises where the real price is the factor.
10 to 20 % is the normal "fees" as you call it!
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15144
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:19 pm

LAXintl wrote:
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.

mercure1 wrote:
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.

ScottB wrote:
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.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:
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.

ScottB wrote:
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.

mercure1 wrote:
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
 
Antarius
Posts: 2491
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:27 pm

zeke wrote:
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.


Desired result? I feel like I'm fact checking spin daily on this site. The order book does not imply any such desired result. :roll:

zeke wrote:
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.


They certainly are related. Its not the sole cause, but buying aircraft with no resale value to fly flights that cannot make money, ever, most certainly contributed to their losses.

TG made 2 mistakes - 1. Thinking BKK is somehow comparable to SIN 2. Buying a340-500s
Last edited by Antarius on Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8230
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:31 pm

Revelation wrote:
2nd2none wrote:
Tell me about one single deal made by Thai (whatever), corruption was not a part of the game, and I would be surprised and tell you that I think that is impossible, sorry that is a fact, I have lived there long enough to know better!

The issue isn't just the corruption, it's the fact that companies like RR have reporting requirements.

There is allowance for various "fees" with regard to securing business, but the need to be reported.

If not, RR could lose the ability to sell to various governments.

RR has a large defense business, so if this is a case of unreported "fees", they could be in a bad way.


Rolls Royce Holdings has ADRs that are traded in the U.S., and so is subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. They may want to lawyer-up. The Dept of Justice has a handy guide!

Where corrupt intent is present, the FCPA
prohibits paying, offering, or promising to pay money
or anything of value (or authorizing the payment,
offer, or promise).76 By focusing on intent, the FCPA
does not require that a corrupt act succeed in its
purpose.77 Nor must the foreign official actually
solicit, accept, or receive the corrupt payment for
the bribe payor to be liable.


Everybody does it is a poor rationalization that is permissive toward corrosive corruption.

It's more than ability to sell to the U.S. government that is at risk. There can be civil and criminal penalties, and forced disgorgement of profits.

https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/ ... urce-guide
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15144
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:51 pm

Antarius wrote:
Desired result? I feel like I'm fact checking spin daily on this site. The order book does not imply any such desired result. :roll:


The desired result was to turn the short term marketing gain Boeing used by saying a blue chip customer bought what was then the unproven 777, and the desired result was a short term marketing win when Boeing had to come out in public and justify that twins were safe to fly over water. Have a look at the news articles from the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Antarius wrote:
They certainly are related. Its not the sole cause, but buying aircraft with no resale value to fly flights that cannot make money, ever, most certainly contributed to their losses.

TG made 2 mistakes - 1. Thinking BKK is somehow comparable to SIN 2. Buying a340-500s


It’s inaccurate to say the flights cannot make money, every flight had passengers and cargo, and its inaccurate to say the aircraft had no resale value, they had a buyer for them years ago and rejected the offer.

Keep in mind if the ME3 didn’t grow like they did, that passenger demand that drove the ME3 growth in large would likely have been carried by TG/MH/SQ/QF/BA.

Where are the posts from before the time TG bought the aircraft predicting that the ME3 would get so big and decimate their market share ? The posts don’t exist, as no one predicted what happened.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
Antarius
Posts: 2491
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 8:57 pm

zeke wrote:
Antarius wrote:
Desired result? I feel like I'm fact checking spin daily on this site. The order book does not imply any such desired result. :roll:


The desired result was to turn the short term marketing gain Boeing used by saying a blue chip customer bought what was then the unproven 777, and the desired result was a short term marketing win when Boeing had to come out in public and justify that twins were safe to fly over water. Have a look at the news articles from the late 1990s and early 2000s.


Fair enough. From a marketing side, yes. We are still talking about it, so it evidently had some effect.

zeke wrote:
Antarius wrote:
They certainly are related. Its not the sole cause, but buying aircraft with no resale value to fly flights that cannot make money, ever, most certainly contributed to their losses.

TG made 2 mistakes - 1. Thinking BKK is somehow comparable to SIN 2. Buying a340-500s


It’s inaccurate to say the flights cannot make money, every flight had passengers and cargo, and its inaccurate to say the aircraft had no resale value, they had a buyer for them years ago and rejected the offer.

Keep in mind if the ME3 didn’t grow like they did, that passenger demand that drove the ME3 growth in large would likely have been carried by TG/MH/SQ/QF/BA.

Where are the posts from before the time TG bought the aircraft predicting that the ME3 would get so big and decimate their market share ? The posts don’t exist, as no one predicted what happened.


I don't think either are inaccurate. The flight obviously won't make 0 revenue, but BKK-LAX will not end up in the black. They do not have the premium demand. Even SQ ended their run on the a345 until they had a better aircraft, and Singapore is a much much higher yielding market with real business connections.

The second statement, yes they had a buyer. But it was at a fire sale price. Everything can be sold at the right price, just like BKK-LAX can be full at 600 USD round trip. That doesn't make it a viable frame to buy because you will never make your money back; the depreciation is huge.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
Antarius
Posts: 2491
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:32 pm

zeke wrote:
Where are the posts from before the time TG bought the aircraft predicting that the ME3 would get so big and decimate their market share ? The posts don’t exist, as no one predicted what happened.


But there are many threads pointing to the decision being unwise and a money sink. Here is one from 13 years ago viewtopic.php?p=5835177

The ME3 didn't change the fact that BKK-USA is not a high yielding destination. And that's all that's needed for a ULH flight.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 24692
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:36 pm

Launching ULH service to the U.S. was nonsense for TG and many on this site said so at the time.

Yes, Thailand certainly wants U.S. visitors, but running ULH operations in mostly a lower fare leisure market made zero sense even when industry titans from much more premium markets like Singapore struggled.

Add in the fact that TG North America management was hardly airline types, but rather friends or family members of senior TG executive sent to the U.S. to man its offices and enjoy life.

When TG finally dropped its North America service entirely in 2018 they confirmed that after 35 years of service, they never turned a profit!
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
AntonioMartin
Posts: 710
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:58 am

Re: Police: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:58 pm

Antarius wrote:
SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Launching flights to the US from BKK did not make sense, ever.

I can see a case for BKK-LAX maybe.....Im not sure how many Thai's live in California however. But if thai improved their service, perhaps they could fill those planes with transit to other Asian destinations?
 
Antarius
Posts: 2491
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Police: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:06 am

AntonioMartin wrote:
Antarius wrote:
Launching flights to the US from BKK did not make sense, ever.

I can see a case for BKK-LAX maybe.....Im not sure how many Thai's live in California however. But if thai improved their service, perhaps they could fill those planes with transit to other Asian destinations?


To fly a flight that long, you need yield premium. People who are willing to pay hundreds to thousands more to fly direct, vs stopping midway. As soon as you add a connection, you are competing with SQ, CX, JL, NH, UA, BA, LH, AF etc etc etc. there simply are not enough people who will pay whats needed to support a BKK-LAX flight nonstop.

BKK is neither. People will not pay more to fly LAX-BKK-KUL vs LAX-HKG-KUL; the latter is supported by HKG being a major business city with a ton of demand, and CX being a major carrier. If there was only one of the two, it wouldn't work.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Topic Author
Posts: 24692
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:13 am

Its not just BKK-LAX.

TG also tried even more distant BKK-JFK nonstop. That only last 3-years before having the plug pulled.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
User avatar
SheikhDjibouti
Posts: 2272
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 4:59 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:19 am

Antarius wrote:
zeke wrote:
Where are the posts from before the time TG bought the aircraft predicting that the ME3 would get so big and decimate their market share ? The posts don’t exist, as no one predicted what happened.

But there are many threads pointing to the decision being unwise and a money sink. Here is one from 13 years ago viewtopic.php?p=5835177
Zeke asked for posts from before TG bought the a/c.
Your link is too another thread where too many people are discussing the failure with the benefit of hindsight. Although it does have it's merits too (see below)
Besides I'm not sure I see it quite as you do. I'm seeing a thread from 2007 that discusses whether it had (originally) been a good idea or not, with a mixed bag of answers, pretty much like this thread.

However I did find two items of particular interest within that thread;
it (purchasing Airbus a/c e.g. A340 & A380) was part of an agreement to appease the EU in order to prevent the EU from banning Thai shrimp imports (due to inadequate inspections).


Thai had ETOPS problems during that time with too many air turn backs and they voluntarily reduced their ETOPS flying instead of having it revoked by the authorities. I would attribute this plus the lower purchase price as main reasons for Thai ordering the A340.

Here's one more from 2007, just for LOLs
I've posted at least a dozen times about how TG's marketing strategies focus on the Thai ethnic community and nothing else. TG has demonstrated time after time over the past decade that it hasn't the first clue how to reach out to other market segments other than the ethnic community.
Nothing to see here; move along please.
 
Antarius
Posts: 2491
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 12:38 am

SheikhDjibouti wrote:
Antarius wrote:
zeke wrote:
Where are the posts from before the time TG bought the aircraft predicting that the ME3 would get so big and decimate their market share ? The posts don’t exist, as no one predicted what happened.

But there are many threads pointing to the decision being unwise and a money sink. Here is one from 13 years ago viewtopic.php?p=5835177
Zeke asked for posts from before TG bought the a/c.
Your link is too another thread where too many people are discussing the failure with the benefit of hindsight. Although it does have it's merits too (see below)
Besides I'm not sure I see it quite as you do. I'm seeing a thread from 2007 that discusses whether it had (originally) been a good idea or not, with a mixed bag of answers, pretty much like this thread.

However I did find two items of particular interest within that thread;
it (purchasing Airbus a/c e.g. A340 & A380) was part of an agreement to appease the EU in order to prevent the EU from banning Thai shrimp imports (due to inadequate inspections).


Thai had ETOPS problems during that time with too many air turn backs and they voluntarily reduced their ETOPS flying instead of having it revoked by the authorities. I would attribute this plus the lower purchase price as main reasons for Thai ordering the A340.

Here's one more from 2007, just for LOLs
I've posted at least a dozen times about how TG's marketing strategies focus on the Thai ethnic community and nothing else. TG has demonstrated time after time over the past decade that it hasn't the first clue how to reach out to other market segments other than the ethnic community.


This thread is 2 years after they received their a345. If your plan fails in 2 years and you aren't making money, it wasn't a good plan to begin with. I'm sure there are others before, but 10+ year old threads arent as easy to find.

The point was, there were lots is skeptics. Not that somehow the idea was perfect but the ME3 upended it like Zeke was claiming. These flights by virtue of their route and plane type were going to fail no matter what.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
filipinoavgeek
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:18 am

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:01 am

People keep repeating on A.net that TG can't do well on the transpacific market because Thailand is a "low-yielding VFR market". How come PR is able to survive on transpacific routes and has been doing so for decades, despite the Philippines and Thailand being similar in that they're both mainly VFR with regards to US flights, and even though Thailand has a larger economy? It's not like it's solely because of the Philippines' previous colonial relationship with the US since VN wants to do transpacific flights too and their inability to do so has more to do with regulatory issues than the market.

2nd2none wrote:
Tell me about one single deal made by Thai (whatever), corruption was not a part of the game, and I would be surprised and tell you that I think that is impossible, sorry that is a fact, I have lived there long enough to know better!


Even the A380s?
Last edited by filipinoavgeek on Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:12 am, edited 2 times in total.
RIP 9V-SKA
2007 - 2019
 
BAeRJ100
Posts: 443
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:49 am

Re: Police: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:07 am

filipinoavgeek wrote:
An airliner frame being scrapped after just 10 years of operation, like what happened to 9V-SKA and 9V-SKB, is highly unusual in the modern airline industry right?


It's not as simple as that when talking about those two particular aircraft. It's not unusual at all for SQ to have disposed of them after only 10 years, but on first glance it is unusual for them to not have been picked up by another airline. That is until you realise, aside from the fact that practically no one wants A380s, that the earliest frames have many variances dating back to their production (eg. wiring systems) that make them even more undesirable.
B737/738/739/744ER/752/753/763/77L/77W/788/789
A223/320/321/332/333/346/359/388
MD82/MD88/717/F100/RJ85/RJ100/146-100/200/300
E175/190/CRJ700/900
 
Antarius
Posts: 2491
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:25 am

filipinoavgeek wrote:
People keep repeating on A.net that TG can't do well on the transpacific market because Thailand is a "low-yielding VFR market". How come PR is able to survive on transpacific routes and has been doing so for decades, despite the Philippines and Thailand being similar in that they're both mainly VFR with regards to US flights, and even though Thailand has a larger economy? It's not like it's solely because of the Philippines' previous colonial relationship with the US since VN wants to do transpacific flights too and their inability to do so has more to do with regulatory issues than the market.


PR doesn't try to be SQ. PR also is geographically better suited to fly to the US as the flights aren't as long.

No one is saying TG can't make money. They just can't do it acting like SQ or CX because BKK isn't SIN or HKG
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15144
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 3:10 am

Antarius wrote:
The second statement, yes they had a buyer. But it was at a fire sale price. Everything can be sold at the right price, just like BKK-LAX can be full at 600 USD round trip. That doesn't make it a viable frame to buy because you will never make your money back; the depreciation is huge.


They actually had 3 buyers over the years, South African, Emirates, and the Saudi’s VIP, they turned them down thinking they would get more. Each time the offer was lower.


Antarius wrote:
But there are many threads pointing to the decision being unwise and a money sink. Here is one from 13 years ago viewtopic.php?p=5835177


That thread/article was after they had them in service, however confirms what I had stated above, “Fierce competition on the so-called Kangaroo route _ flights from Australia and New Zealand _ especially by Dubai-based Emirates _ may force THAI to cut flight frequencies, he said. “

Antarius wrote:
The ME3 didn't change the fact that BKK-USA is not a high yielding destination. And that's all that's needed for a ULH flight.


They did actually, the ME3 cut into what SQ/TG saw as they key feeders for the US East and west coast, that being the traffic feed in from a Pakistan and India. The ME3 made large inroads into those markets and people stopped traveling via BKK and SIN.

filipinoavgeek wrote:
People keep repeating on A.net that TG can't do well on the transpacific market because Thailand is a "low-yielding VFR market". How come PR is able to survive on transpacific routes and has been doing so for decades, despite the Philippines and Thailand being similar in that they're both mainly VFR with regards to US flights, and even though Thailand has a larger economy? It's not like it's solely because of the Philippines' previous colonial relationship with the US since VN wants to do transpacific flights too and their inability to do so has more to do with regulatory issues than the market.


You have raised a good point, PR was able to make it work due to proximity, they are geographically closer and thus able to carry more payload.

Antarius wrote:
No one is saying TG can't make money. They just can't do it acting like SQ or CX because BKK isn't SIN or HKG


You are not being truthful in your posts, up until 2008 TG had been profitable every year.

Image

What is also nit being acknowledged is for state owned airlines like TG they were used as instruments of government policy, the airline was used as a vehicle to attract investment and tourism, the aircraft was the conduit for government trade policy.

What is also not being talked about now also is the key trade win Thailand gained from the A340 purchase, a key point of the deal was the opening of the EU markets to Thai seafood exports, particularly prawns in exchange for the aircraft purchase. https://www.cheshire-live.co.uk/news/lo ... ow-5303802
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
luckyone
Posts: 3103
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:43 pm

filipinoavgeek wrote:
People keep repeating on A.net that TG can't do well on the transpacific market because Thailand is a "low-yielding VFR market". How come PR is able to survive on transpacific routes and has been doing so for decades, despite the Philippines and Thailand being similar in that they're both mainly VFR with regards to US flights, and even though Thailand has a larger economy? It's not like it's solely because of the Philippines' previous colonial relationship with the US since VN wants to do transpacific flights too and their inability to do so has more to do with regulatory issues than the market.


There are about ten times as many Filipinos in the US than there are Thai, which makes filling those seats a lot less of a challenge. They also benefitted from sheer luck, because in the past they were able to use HNL as a stopover, which also has a large Filipino population.
 
avier
Posts: 1122
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:38 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 7:19 pm

It seems like many such carriers from these developing countries have had such shady deals with Airbus.
Air India had that with their Airbus order and so did Sri Lankan airlines. And I guess South African airlines too.
https://m.economictimes.com/industry/tr ... 408100.cms

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/ ... ettlement/
 
chrisp390
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 6:37 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 8:07 pm

What is it with Airbus deals being the ones that keep getting caught paying bribes and being involved in corruption?
 
Antarius
Posts: 2491
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:27 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sat Sep 05, 2020 8:14 pm

chrisp390 wrote:
What is it with Airbus deals being the ones that keep getting caught paying bribes and being involved in corruption?


Because they did it and got caught. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airb ... SKBN1ZX2MW . As a result of this, additional probes are being launched that are finding more things. They paid 4 billion as a settlement.

As more stuff comes out from that time period, we will likely see similar concerns and issues. But it is the same time period and scandal. So nothing new really.

Airbus screwed up - they fessed up, paid up. So it is what it is, but it's in the past.
2020: SFO DFW IAH HOU CLT MEX BIS MIA GUA ORD DTW LGA BOS LHR DUB BFS BHD STN OAK PHL ISP JFK SJC DEN SJU LAS TXL GDL
 
User avatar
adambrau
Posts: 334
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:44 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sun Sep 06, 2020 3:56 am

luckyone wrote:
filipinoavgeek wrote:
People keep repeating on A.net that TG can't do well on the transpacific market because Thailand is a "low-yielding VFR market". How come PR is able to survive on transpacific routes and has been doing so for decades, despite the Philippines and Thailand being similar in that they're both mainly VFR with regards to US flights, and even though Thailand has a larger economy? It's not like it's solely because of the Philippines' previous colonial relationship with the US since VN wants to do transpacific flights too and their inability to do so has more to do with regulatory issues than the market.


There are about ten times as many Filipinos in the US than there are Thai, which makes filling those seats a lot less of a challenge. They also benefitted from sheer luck, because in the past they were able to use HNL as a stopover, which also has a large Filipino population.


I work at JFK T1 and speaking to jet-brige operators and security agents, apparently PR loads to NYC are horrendous and getting worse. Not that anyone is doing well these days and it's truly heartbreaking to see some of these flights go out with horrible load factors. Not on topic but I'm not sure how well PR is doing overall on TransPac routes.
JFK Friendly
 
filipinoavgeek
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:18 am

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sun Sep 06, 2020 5:23 am

adambrau wrote:
luckyone wrote:
filipinoavgeek wrote:
People keep repeating on A.net that TG can't do well on the transpacific market because Thailand is a "low-yielding VFR market". How come PR is able to survive on transpacific routes and has been doing so for decades, despite the Philippines and Thailand being similar in that they're both mainly VFR with regards to US flights, and even though Thailand has a larger economy? It's not like it's solely because of the Philippines' previous colonial relationship with the US since VN wants to do transpacific flights too and their inability to do so has more to do with regulatory issues than the market.


There are about ten times as many Filipinos in the US than there are Thai, which makes filling those seats a lot less of a challenge. They also benefitted from sheer luck, because in the past they were able to use HNL as a stopover, which also has a large Filipino population.


I work at JFK T1 and speaking to jet-brige operators and security agents, apparently PR loads to NYC are horrendous and getting worse. Not that anyone is doing well these days and it's truly heartbreaking to see some of these flights go out with horrible load factors.


Is this pre-COVID or post-COVID?

adambrau wrote:
Not on topic but I'm not sure how well PR is doing overall on TransPac routes.

As for TransPac, that used to be their bread-and-butter but in recent years they've had intense competition from East Asian carriers in that market. I heard some anecdotes claiming that at one point their Toronto flights had good load factors to the point that lines at check-ins were very long, but I don't know if that's true or not and if those load factors translated to good yields.
RIP 9V-SKA
2007 - 2019
 
User avatar
adambrau
Posts: 334
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:44 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:43 pm

filipinoavgeek wrote:
adambrau wrote:
luckyone wrote:

There are about ten times as many Filipinos in the US than there are Thai, which makes filling those seats a lot less of a challenge. They also benefitted from sheer luck, because in the past they were able to use HNL as a stopover, which also has a large Filipino population.


I work at JFK T1 and speaking to jet-brige operators and security agents, apparently PR loads to NYC are horrendous and getting worse. Not that anyone is doing well these days and it's truly heartbreaking to see some of these flights go out with horrible load factors.


Is this pre-COVID or post-COVID?

adambrau wrote:
Not on topic but I'm not sure how well PR is doing overall on TransPac routes.

As for TransPac, that used to be their bread-and-butter but in recent years they've had intense competition from East Asian carriers in that market. I heard some anecdotes claiming that at one point their Toronto flights had good load factors to the point that lines at check-ins were very long, but I don't know if that's true or not and if those load factors translated to good yields.


It was yesterday.
JFK Friendly
 
AntonioMartin
Posts: 710
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:58 am

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Mon Sep 07, 2020 12:10 am

This reminds me a bit of ANA and Lockheed back in the day.

Back to the topic at hand, I'd just like to point out there are 319.000 Thai Americans which is about half the amount of Japanese-Americans....now, you also have to weight in economics etc, like how well off are Japanese and Japanese-Americans compared to Thais and Thai-Americans and the fact both Japan and the US are super rich economies with common interests,...but if ANA, Japan Airlines, Delta, American, United can all fly Japan-US, surely we could see one airline between Thailand and the US? Or no?
 
filipinoavgeek
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:18 am

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Mon Sep 07, 2020 3:06 am

adambrau wrote:
filipinoavgeek wrote:
adambrau wrote:

I work at JFK T1 and speaking to jet-brige operators and security agents, apparently PR loads to NYC are horrendous and getting worse. Not that anyone is doing well these days and it's truly heartbreaking to see some of these flights go out with horrible load factors.


Is this pre-COVID or post-COVID?

adambrau wrote:
Not on topic but I'm not sure how well PR is doing overall on TransPac routes.

As for TransPac, that used to be their bread-and-butter but in recent years they've had intense competition from East Asian carriers in that market. I heard some anecdotes claiming that at one point their Toronto flights had good load factors to the point that lines at check-ins were very long, but I don't know if that's true or not and if those load factors translated to good yields.


It was yesterday.


Could be mainly due to COVID.
RIP 9V-SKA
2007 - 2019
 
luckyone
Posts: 3103
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Mon Sep 07, 2020 3:19 am

AntonioMartin wrote:
This reminds me a bit of ANA and Lockheed back in the day.

Back to the topic at hand, I'd just like to point out there are 319.000 Thai Americans which is about half the amount of Japanese-Americans....now, you also have to weight in economics etc, like how well off are Japanese and Japanese-Americans compared to Thais and Thai-Americans and the fact both Japan and the US are super rich economies with common interests,...but if ANA, Japan Airlines, Delta, American, United can all fly Japan-US, surely we could see one airline between Thailand and the US? Or no?

In addition to the scale of linking the largest economy to the third or fourth (depending on how one counts the EU), there’s also the fact that with one notable exception (Miami) Japan can be easily reached from the major US hubs with standard long haul aircraft that don’t require special models, configurations, or the cost of carrying extra fuel, and that has been the case since the early 2000s. That was certainly not the case with Thailand/Singapore-US at the time Thai was flying those routes. Now, the technology has advanced, but the routes still require special considerations and the aircraft are operating at the edge of their abilities—which is cool from an AvGeek perspective.
 
AB330
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 4:02 am

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Mon Sep 07, 2020 7:45 am

filipinoavgeek wrote:
Could be mainly due to COVID.


I wonder if the population of filipinos in the east coast is large enough to support PAL MNL-JFK direct flights in the long run?

No doubt the West Coast has enough demand to contiune to support direct flights between PH and US and may even grow once this crisis subsides. For Canada I expect little to changed since a lot of filipino are immigrating in the large cities like Toronto and Vancouver.
 
AntonioMartin
Posts: 710
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:58 am

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:22 pm

luckyone wrote:
which is cool from an AvGeek perspective.

But not from an airline's perspective... :)
 
lawair
Posts: 245
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 10:59 pm

Re: Thailand: Corruption in Thai A340 aircraft deal

Mon Sep 07, 2020 11:59 pm

Not sure why we're talking about PR, but US-Thailand traffic is not VFR at the level the US-Philippines is. Thailand from the US is tourist traffic. Every TG flight I've been on from the US has been mostly American tourists, with some returning Thai tourists (having visited the US) and returning Thai students sprinkled in. A huge number of passengers on the evening NRT-BKK routes on NH are American and Canadian tourists. The evening NRT-BKK TG flights are mostly North American tourists going to Thailand and Thai tourists returning from Japan. (This is before all the recent HND changeover.) The levels of Thais living in the US are so minimal and spread out that VFR is basically insignificant for air traffic, with the exception of maybe the LA area (but even then that's a low amount).

Contrast that with the huge numbers of Filipinos living in the US and the balikbayan boxes piled up at check-in counters to head to the Philippines that you can see how different the markets are.

Like others said, distance also plays a large part, which is why TG is so strong to Europe where PR is weak, and vice versa to North America.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos