Originally Posted by
AN_Boy
If oyu look at the Virgin Blue prospectus - there is nothing about SQ blocking the name. It is actually Virgin Group (which has no SQ ownership) that has the restrictions on the Virgin Blue brand licensing.
...
So no mention of SQ blocking anything (wives tale)
If it were true, I would still have been at least a bit surprised to see it mentioned in a prospectus.
The prospectus no doubt states the true legal position.
But SQ's clout through its part-ownership of VS would give it ample political power to persaude Virgin Enterprises to block any wider licensing of the Virgin name. You wouldn't expect that to get written up in a prospectus, would you?