Community
Wiki Posts
Search

IAG acquires 4.61% stake in Norwegian

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Apr 13, 2018, 7:19 am
  #121  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: OSL
Posts: 2,643
Originally Posted by PUCCI GALORE
I really do smile at who comes out to air their wings during these sorts of threads.

Some of you talk about buying airlines if you cannot compete with them as if it were something novel. BA bought BCAL and Dan-Air (and all their debts and pensions problems) years ago, and BMI a few years ago. All were on the verge of collapse. From what you say about Norwegian - which may or may not be accurate - the same may be true. BA does not like competition in its own back yard. I cannot bear Richard Branson, but had he not had the guts to stand up to Lord King, Virgin would be a thing of the past as well.

This is history, it is not speculation. What will, if anything, happen is within the knowledge of no one here.

Unless one of you happens to posting here happens to be Mystic Meg
I don't quite understand your point. Are you saying that BA was the white knight? The competitive landscape and corporate culture has changed massively in the last 30 years, and quite significantly in the last 10.

If this happens, it is a horrible outcome for European consumers.
GUWonder likes this.
dodgeflyer is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 7:21 am
  #122  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,246
Originally Posted by PUCCI GALORE
I really do smile at who comes out to air their wings during these sorts of threads.

Some of you talk about buying airlines if you cannot compete with them as if it were something novel. BA bought BCAL and Dan-Air (and all their debts and pensions problems) years ago, and BMI a few years ago. All were on the verge of collapse. From what you say about Norwegian - which may or may not be accurate - the same may be true. BA does not like competition in its own back yard. I cannot bear Richard Branson, but had he not had the guts to stand up to Lord King, Virgin would be a thing of the past as well...
Yeah, know all that. Next you’ll be telling us there are no BA flights from LHR T1 and BA is a premium apologising airline.
FlyerTalker39574 is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 7:30 am
  #123  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 38,644
Originally Posted by dodgeflyer
If this happens, it is a horrible outcome for European consumers.
Would it be less horrible for European consumers if Norwegian were simply to go bust of its own accord? That is not a certainty, of course, but there seems to be widespread commentary about how it is a real possibility.
Globaliser is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 7:32 am
  #124  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: United Kingdom
Programs: FlyingBlue
Posts: 51
The real question is, why does Norwegian make a loss, when Vueling, and Easyjet make profits? What can IAG do to Norwegian, to make it work?
George Moore is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 7:41 am
  #125  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: OSL
Posts: 2,643
Originally Posted by Globaliser
Would it be less horrible for European consumers if Norwegian were simply to go bust of its own accord? That is not a certainty, of course, but there seems to be widespread commentary about how it is a real possibility.
That's true, it is in that case a choice between two evils. Based on its currents trajectory it is a real chance they run out of cash; the next time they breach debt covenants, the equity market may not be willing to bail them out. If there's an actual cash squeeze it is hard to see them being able to get funding quickly enough. And at one point you have to ask why put money into an airline which doesn't have that clear of a strategy except grow. When you're publically equity funded in a market with established players you need to have a convincing story, not just low cost, long haul... This isn't a tech start up where "unicorns" exists.

In my view, DY releases far too little information to the market, making valuing them hard. You can value lack of cash, you can't value a black hole...

Originally Posted by George Moore
The real question is, why does Norwegian make a loss, when Vueling, and Easyjet make profits? What can IAG do to Norwegian, to make it work?
Its full accounts are only out on Monday, so hard to say, but believe it largely comes down to CASK being higher than RASK, largely as a result of overexpansion, ie yields/load factors not good enough.
dodgeflyer is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 9:25 am
  #126  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Arizona
Programs: BA (GGL G4L), AA (Gold), HH (Diamond); Marriott (Gold)
Posts: 3,011
Not only might IAG be interested in acquiring DY, but a purchase like this makes it even more difficult for someone else to buy them. Given how they did not end up with Niki or Air Berlin, it seems like a smart move to give IAG more leverage. Or if someone else does make a better offer, then IAG profits as well.

So from my perspective no matter what happens with DY (sale to IAG, sale to another airline, becoming insolvent, or becoming a profitable airline), IAG wins.
dylanks is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 9:38 am
  #127  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: DEL
Programs: Mucci du Miel d'Or
Posts: 2,374
Originally Posted by PUCCI GALORE
I really do smile at who comes out to air their wings during these sorts of threads.

Some of you talk about buying airlines if you cannot compete with them as if it were something novel. BA bought BCAL and Dan-Air (and all their debts and pensions problems) years ago, and BMI a few years ago. All were on the verge of collapse. From what you say about Norwegian - which may or may not be accurate - the same may be true. BA does not like competition in its own back yard. I cannot bear Richard Branson, but had he not had the guts to stand up to Lord King, Virgin would be a thing of the past as well.
Agree. I think those historic BA purchases were as much about ensuring competitors didn't enter BA's key UK market; wasn't SAS trying to buy BCal? My hunch is that there is a similar motivation here. If other businesses assess that Norwegian''s business model is sound (and it is just the finances that are letting it down), surely others would likely step in if the airline collapsed. If so, this appears more like a calculated move to pre-empt that scenario.

As for the frothy talk of brand consolidation etc, I doubt BA will have looked at this properly and will want to make a fuller assessment of the value of the Norwegian brand.
dylanks likes this.
Dan72 is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 11:13 am
  #128  
Fontaine d'honneur du Flyertalk
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Morbihan, France
Programs: Reine des Muccis de Pucci; Foreign Elitist (according to others)
Posts: 19,172
Originally Posted by dodgeflyer
I don't quite understand your point. Are you saying that BA was the white knight? The competitive landscape and corporate culture has changed massively in the last 30 years, and quite significantly in the last 10.

If this happens, it is a horrible outcome for European consumers.
I'm sorry - I know what I mean but sometimes I am not sufficiently explicit. No - some might view them as White Knights and indeed probably I should as without them I doubt that BCAL would have been able to keep going, and then where would I have been? I'd no more go skivvying for a Low-Cost than I'd stick a red light on the door (even though this option was still far away at the time). Nevertheless, they relentlessly destroyed the competition or allowed the competition to beggar itself. What competition is left in Germany after the demise of Air Berlin? In France TAT, Air Liberté are gone and UTA was gobbled up years ago. It's happened in the USA and now three behemoths rule (I'm grossly over-simplifying but you get my drift).

No - my point was all these pundits and people who seem to have IAG's company accounts to hand suddenly appear and seem to know the lot. Clearly we have a Forum full of Clairvoyants, so could anyone give me the numbers for the next Euro millions lottery please? I'll tell you if I win anything.
PUCCI GALORE is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 11:16 am
  #129  
Fontaine d'honneur du Flyertalk
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Morbihan, France
Programs: Reine des Muccis de Pucci; Foreign Elitist (according to others)
Posts: 19,172
Originally Posted by richardwft


Yeah, know all that. Next you’ll be telling us there are no BA flights from LHR T1 and BA is a premium apologising airline.
No. I never tell anything to anyone who is that knowledgeable.
PUCCI GALORE is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 11:17 am
  #130  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by Globaliser
Would it be less horrible for European consumers if Norwegian were simply to go bust of its own accord? That is not a certainty, of course, but there seems to be widespread commentary about how it is a real possibility.
Yes, to answer the question.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Apr 13, 2018, 1:17 pm
  #131  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,246
Pucci G, you appear to be simply ignoring that a lot of forumites have considerable airline business knowledge and can remember in detail why, when and what has happened on a global scale and are well aware of the nature of the airline business.
FlyerTalker39574 is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2018, 2:00 am
  #132  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Programs: BAEC GGL/CR; Hilton Diamond; Mucci des Puccis
Posts: 5,602
Norwegian are a great airline to fly precisely because they are in a market share grab phase and aiming (and largely succeeding) to delight, this is also why they're losing money when the other LCC are profitable, they haven't tightened up their business model yet. That would come one way or another eventually. At the moment we're in an artificial situation where consumers are essentially getting something for nothing.

It'll be interesting to see how IAG consolidate their low cost portfolio. At present it's confusing, with Level, Vueling, maybe Iberia Express, and bits of BA. There's no clear IAG low cost brand to counter Ryanair and EasyJet. With Norwegian that could change, it's got excellent brand equity. So for me this is a very sensible and sound strategic move.
bisonrav is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2018, 4:49 am
  #133  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Surrey, UK
Programs: BA Gold....er now Silver...er now Bronze....er now Blue
Posts: 3,507
I don't think Norwegian is viable long term - but it would be hugely preferable for someone with less UK presence to take them over. I can't see any upside to UK passengers if IAG take them over and would hope the EU regulators would take the same view.
irmster is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2018, 7:55 am
  #134  
Moderator, Iberia Airlines, Airport Lounges, and Ambassador, British Airways Executive Club
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Programs: BA Lifetime Gold; Flying Blue Life Platinum; LH Sen.; Hilton Diamond; Kemal Kebabs Prized Customer
Posts: 63,769
I will just put in this partial extract from an Financial Times article, since it points to a number of other scenarios for consideration by all the lovely armchair CEOs here gathered.

In the battle for the skies over the Atlantic, International Airlines Group is eyeing another co-pilot. The owner of British Airways has taken a 4.61 per cent stake in Norwegian Air Shuttle, the low-cost airline whose launch of ultra-cheap US flights from Europe has led to a scramble among established players to mimic offerings or risk losing passengers. [...]

IAG, which also owns Vueling, Aer Lingus and Iberia, brings with it financial muscle to help patch Norwegian’s wounds, which include deep losses and a NKr22.3bn ($2.9bn) debt mountain. But its investment, or even a full takeover, does not solve the Scandinavian carrier’s most fundamental problem — how to make money flying passengers across the Atlantic for under £70. “Unless you have the right business model, deeper pockets only help you fund losses for longer,” says Jonathan Wober, analyst at CAPA Centre for Aviation.

IAG has timed its approach as its quarry looks to raise badly needed finances to help it nurse increasing levels of red ink. Norwegian booked a NKr299m loss last year, against a profit of NKr1.14bn a year earlier — its third year of losses in the last four. Michael O’Leary, chief executive of rival Ryanair, even went as far as to predict last September that Norwegian would run out of cash in “four to five months”. The move also comes at a time of consolidation among European airlines, driven by a brace of corporate failures as years of discounting drives the need for scale to thrive. [...]

In its brief statement on Thursday, IAG offered little insight into the rationale for its move, leaving analysts and industry insiders to speculate over the myriad reasons it may want to invest in another low-cost carrier. BA, which missed out on the low-cost short-haul bonanza in Europe by selling its cut-price Go brand to EasyJet, is keen to avoid a similar mis-step when it comes to the lucrative long-distance market. IAG has launched Level, a Spain-based low-cost service offering hand luggage-only flights to the US, but the fledgling operation remains a long way behind Norwegian in its share of the budget market. “Growing that to scale organically is very, very difficult,” says Daniel Röska, an analyst at Bernstein.

IAG may also bring a degree of business restraint to Norwegian, whose years of rapid growth have seen it plan ventures as varied as domestic flights in Argentina and leasing aircraft to other carriers — on top of operating its existing European short-haul network while pioneering long-haul budget travel. Mr Wober at CAPA says: “They have been fighting battles on many fronts for too long.” The move may also give Norwegian the chance to offload some of the 200 new aircraft it ordered in 2012 to other IAG brands, Mr Röska at Bernstein suggests.

Norwegian’s strategy of avoiding larger airports and flying “point to point” from cities such as Edinburgh or Dublin avoids the costs of the “hub and spoke” model offered by larger players, but leaves potential customers the headache of reaching those second-tier airports. IAG’s network of short-haul flights would offer additional travel options, regardless of whether the businesses fully merge. At the same time, Norwegian has built a formidable presence at Gatwick, rivalling BA’s position at the UK’s second-biggest airport.

Mr Röska wrote in a note on Thursday: “A partnership that looks to maximise the synergies of the two networks, minimise duplications of capacity and investment on key routes, and use IAG’s travel management capabilities to improve Norwegian’s expertise in this area, could all provide some of the benefits of consolidation without the likely high cost of a deal.” He said he believed IAG would be gambling if it bought the airline outright because it had no proof that synergies would work and the business could be run profitably. But the risk in creating synergies now is it drives up the value of the business — making it even more expensive if IAG does want a full takeover.

Ultimately, the move brings Norwegian funding at a time when it was looking to raise more capital by selling some aircraft and putting its frequent flyer scheme up for sale. Stephen Furlong at Davy says: “Norwegian has been doing in low-cost long-haul what Ryanair did in low-cost short-haul. The difference is that Ryanair did it with conservative financial leverage. “Norwegian needed a partner with muscle. Perhaps this is it.”
corporate-wage-slave is offline  
Old Apr 14, 2018, 8:14 am
  #135  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 8,764
Originally Posted by corporate-wage-slave
I will just put in this partial extract from an Financial Times article, since it points to a number of other scenarios for consideration by all the lovely armchair CEOs here gathered.

Ultimately, the move brings Norwegian funding at a time when it was looking to raise more capital by selling some aircraft and putting its frequent flyer scheme up for sale. Stephen Furlong at Davy says: “Norwegian has been doing in low-cost long-haul what Ryanair did in low-cost short-haul. The difference is that Ryanair did it with conservative financial leverage. “Norwegian needed a partner with muscle. Perhaps this is it.”
Not sure I get this. The move thus far hasn't brought any funding, no? IAG bought from existing holders, not from the company. It only brings funding if a deal is actually done.

I suppose the rise in share price helps it in seeking funding, but the author appears to be suggesting more than that.
dylanks likes this.
Ldnn1 is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.