|Quoting jetfuel (Reply 109):|
With Skymark refusing a partnership, Mr Nishikubo said, Airbus wanted an "outrageous" cancellation fee "beyond the realm of common sense".
Skymark said it had been in discussion with Airbus since Apr-2014 about changing the order due to "the deteriorating management environment from weak yen and harsh competition
Negotiation is not making good progress," Mr Nishikubo said, explaining, "It is mainly because Airbus proposes a condition for us to go under wing of a major airline company in order to change the contract of aircraft order. Otherwise the aircraft maker needs us to pay outrageous amount of penalty beyond our common sense." The reference to "go under the wing of a major airline company" likely refers to a partnership, joint venture or alliance, which CAPA has supported in the past. Delta, for example, does not have a trans-Pacific partner and was likely interested in working with Skymark but has lost interest and is now pursuing Korean Air.
Skymark's partnerships are limited to an extremely simple and one-way arrangement with Delta Air Lines whereby Delta frequent flyer members in Japan can redeem miles for Skymark tickets. Skymark could potentially receive domestic feed from international carriers, building a small but nice business
So negotiating makes no good progress- I imagine-
Basically: It is Skymark who wants to change the contract.
2 Frames are completed, so that only the inerior installation may not be completed yet.
Not sure how much of Plane 3 and 4 has been started yet.
So for plane 5+6 (not yet started) they could probably find an alternative deal: buy 4 A330 instead of Plane 5&6. It would not be nice for the announcement but manageable.
For plane 3&4 , probably in parts preparation phase - there could be a solution with some reasonable penalty and an exchange in different planes.
But for the Planes 1 & 2: Skymark's negotiation position is a very low one. So Airbus would have the position: You have to pay what you have ordered and some year ago you gave us the ‘build authority’ when we started the frames.
I think Skymark wanted a better deal then it was fixed in the contract and Airbus doesn’t agree with it.
Airbus (I guess practical) proposals for solution are hard points for Skymark’s independence strategy and Ego – so the parties do not come together.
Probably the payment Airbus already got is enough to compensate conversion costs to other customers and other expenses – so that Airbus decided: enough now- It up to Skymark now to make the move.
: Somehow I remember the Suzuki/ Volkswagen conflict 2 years ago – also two parties and two egos with different expectations of a deal