Only Slightly OT - Virgin win EDI & ABZ Heathrow routes
#121
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The home of tennis
Programs: BA bronze
Posts: 1,470
This just seems like a costly mess, I reckon they won't last long beyond 3 years. Don't get me wrong I hope it does succeed though.
Why didn't the Competition regulators just give the slots directly to Aer Lingus instead of this confusing arrangement? EI is a semi-LCC so would probably be cheaper without a costly wet leasing and Virgin branded excersize.
Why didn't the Competition regulators just give the slots directly to Aer Lingus instead of this confusing arrangement? EI is a semi-LCC so would probably be cheaper without a costly wet leasing and Virgin branded excersize.
#122
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: City of Kingston Upon Hull
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 4,936
This just seems like a costly mess, I reckon they won't last long beyond 3 years. Don't get me wrong I hope it does succeed though.
Why didn't the Competition regulators just give the slots directly to Aer Lingus instead of this confusing arrangement? EI is a semi-LCC so would probably be cheaper without a costly wet leasing and Virgin branded excersize.
Why didn't the Competition regulators just give the slots directly to Aer Lingus instead of this confusing arrangement? EI is a semi-LCC so would probably be cheaper without a costly wet leasing and Virgin branded excersize.
So the cynical would say it is so they can hold the slots with minimal investment until they can convince the authorities to let them use the slots for long haul routes. The less cynical view is that once they have proved the routes are viable they will buy their own airframes and employ their own staff, we'll see....
#123
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: City of Kingston Upon Hull
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 4,936
Mr WW doesn't seem to think the Virgin brand will last long...
http://www.businesstraveller.com/new...-may-disappear
http://www.businesstraveller.com/new...-may-disappear
http://www.virgin.com/richard-branso...going-anywhere
Usual childish rubbish from SRB, has he not heard the adage that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Be interesting if someone took up the 49% stake on offer and then decided that they wanted the airline run their way. I know that SRB has an effective veto with his 51% share however I cannot imagine a buyer becoming a sleeping partner.
My money FWIW, is on WW long term.
Last edited by kanderson1965; Dec 10, 2012 at 1:28 pm
#124
Moderator: British Airways Executive Club, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges and Environmentally Friendly Travel
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 22,200
If BA were to price match VS on these lead in fares, the net fare would be around 70p each way. What's the bus fare from Castle Street to Holburn Junction these days?
#126
FlyerTalk Evangelist, Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Somewhere between 0 and 13,000 metres high
Programs: AF/KL Life Plat, BA GGL+GfL, ALL Plat, Hilton Diam, Marriott Gold, blablablah, etc
Posts: 30,348
From the Bloomberg wire: " The average fare between Glasgow and Heathrow has increased 34 percent since BMI dropped flights and left the route to British Airways, Virgin Atlantic said. An assessment by the European Union antitrust regulator found that competition out of Londons Gatwick and City airports did not seem to constrain the ability of IAG to increase its prices significantly on the Heathrow-Glasgow route, even for economy restricted fares.
#127
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Aberdeen
Programs: BA Silver BD Silver
Posts: 305
If BA were to price match VS on these lead in fares, the net fare would be around 70p each way. What's the bus fare from Castle Street to Holburn Junction these days?
#128
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The home of tennis
Programs: BA bronze
Posts: 1,470
Usual childish rubbish from SRB, has he not heard the adage that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Be interesting if someone took up the 49% stake on offer and then decided that they wanted the airline run their way. I know that SRB has an effective veto with his 51% share however I cannot imagine a buyer becoming a sleeping partner.
My money FWIW, is on WW long term.
My money FWIW, is on WW long term.
218
#130
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: City of Kingston Upon Hull
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 4,936
Usual childish rubbish from SRB, has he not heard the adage that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Be interesting if someone took up the 49% stake on offer and then decided that they wanted the airline run their way. I know that SRB has an effective veto with his 51% share however I cannot imagine a buyer becoming a sleeping partner.
My money FWIW, is on WW long term.
My money FWIW, is on WW long term.
218
Best thing to do is sell the 49 % back to SRB, as he is so passionate about "his" airline, and let him sink or swim.
#131
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The home of tennis
Programs: BA bronze
Posts: 1,470
If that is the case what would be the point of investing to such an extent? I expect this will be the outcome, no one will want a 49% non controlling share, too much risk with too little control. The alternative, a larger number of minority shareholders with shallow pockets and potentially less interest in the business due to lower stake.
Best thing to do is sell the 49 % back to SRB, as he is so passionate about "his" airline, and let him sink or swim.
Best thing to do is sell the 49 % back to SRB, as he is so passionate about "his" airline, and let him sink or swim.
Branson owns 51% Unless he decides to sell enough shares to give someone else a controlling interest...he will be the majority shareholder.
Those are the facts.
#132
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: City of Kingston Upon Hull
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 4,936
If that is the case what would be the point of investing to such an extent? I expect this will be the outcome, no one will want a 49% non controlling share, too much risk with too little control. The alternative, a larger number of minority shareholders with shallow pockets and potentially less interest in the business due to lower stake.
Best thing to do is sell the 49 % back to SRB, as he is so passionate about "his" airline, and let him sink or swim.
Best thing to do is sell the 49 % back to SRB, as he is so passionate about "his" airline, and let him sink or swim.
Branson owns 51% Unless he decides to sell enough shares to give someone else a controlling interest...he will be the majority shareholder.
Those are the facts.
I am not disputing the facts, however I personally would not find holding such a large share in a company without having any control of it an attractive investment.
We can only speculate as you say as to why SQ found it attractive at the time but obviously it is no longer attractive to them, and in the present economic climate, probably anyone else.
Maybe the Chinese may want to take a punt, but would any established airline want to? I can't really see what they would get for the money, they couldn't even liquidate the slots without a controlling interest.
#133
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The home of tennis
Programs: BA bronze
Posts: 1,470
I am not disputing the facts, however I personally would not find holding such a large share in a company without having any control of it an attractive investment.
We can only speculate as you say as to why SQ found it attractive at the time but obviously it is no longer attractive to them, and in the present economic climate, probably anyone else.
Maybe the Chinese may want to take a punt, but would any established airline want to? I can't really see what they would get for the money, they couldn't even liquidate the slots without a controlling interest.
We can only speculate as you say as to why SQ found it attractive at the time but obviously it is no longer attractive to them, and in the present economic climate, probably anyone else.
Maybe the Chinese may want to take a punt, but would any established airline want to? I can't really see what they would get for the money, they couldn't even liquidate the slots without a controlling interest.
#134
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New York
Programs: BA, LH, VS, Hyatt, SPG
Posts: 3,813
But that's not what DL is going to be. If the off the record briefings are correct, the investment is a pre-cursor to a joint transatlantic business between DL and VS. That business depends not only on regulatory approval but the quality of the relationship between the two parties and if DL is expected to be treated as a silent partner the joint-business will sink. DL is not buying into a heavily loss making business facing major strategic issues to be a silent equity partner.
#135
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: City of Kingston Upon Hull
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 4,936
I am not disputing the facts, however I personally would not find holding such a large share in a company without having any control of it an attractive investment.
We can only speculate as you say as to why SQ found it attractive at the time but obviously it is no longer attractive to them, and in the present economic climate, probably anyone else.
Maybe the Chinese may want to take a punt, but would any established airline want to? I can't really see what they would get for the money, they couldn't even liquidate the slots without a controlling interest.
We can only speculate as you say as to why SQ found it attractive at the time but obviously it is no longer attractive to them, and in the present economic climate, probably anyone else.
Maybe the Chinese may want to take a punt, but would any established airline want to? I can't really see what they would get for the money, they couldn't even liquidate the slots without a controlling interest.