Sing Air ponders domestic route

[Airtart]

SingAir ponders domestic route
By JOHN MASANAUSKAS
27aug02 Daily Telegraph (Sydney)

MELBOURNE airport could become the hub of a new domestic airline being considered by Singapore Airlines.


Airport managing director Chris Barlow said yesterday that he had met an evaluation team from the airline.

"They were over the moon about the airport. They thought it was terrific," Mr Barlow said.

"We'd like to think they would be based here."

Singapore Airlines has been discussing terminal gate access with major Australian airports, but the carrier is yet to confirm a bid to challenge Qantas and Virgin Blue on domestic routes.

Some aviation analysts believe Singapore and an Australian partner could launch a new carrier in early 2003.

Mr Barlow said the airport had a very good relationship with Singapore, which he said might increase its daily international services from two to three.

The privatised airport yesterday announced a maiden pre-tax profit of $3.6 million and a 1.3 per cent rise in international passengers, despite the September 11 terrorist attacks.

But it suffered a 5.5 per cent drop in domestic travel, mainly because of Ansett's collapse.

Virgin Blue, which moved into Ansett's former terminal on Sunday, yesterday announced it had started legal action against Sydney airport over access to its old Ansett terminal.

Virgin chief executive officer Brett Godfrey said Sydney had reneged on a deal made in April.

"What they're asking for now is an outrageous cost to add to the travelling public," he said.

Mr Godfrey said Virgin had started proceedings in the New South Wales Supreme Court and was also considering taking action under national competition laws.

Sydney airport spokesman Peter Gibbs said a Federal Government review of the April deal had not backed Virgin's claims.

"We are keen to have Virgin Blue in our terminal and the door is always open (to negotiations)," he said.

Virgin Blue has out grown its $9 million home in the domestic express terminal at Melbourne Airport and moved into Ansett's former facilities.

Mr Barlow said another use would be found for the terminal building, probably for freight.

The gate lounge area will be dismantled and put up for sale.

Virgin Blue yesterday celebrated the opening of its new terminal.

The airline last month signed a 10-year lease on the terminal.

[skystar1]

Thanks Airtart

Just as our early pioneers pondered the 'riddle of the rivers' some of us are doing exactly that now. What may lie ahead? After reading other posts it is still uclear as to what will occur in our skies.

It isn't half obvious that we need some SERIOUS competition here in OZ as the the pigs continue to mingle at the trough. DJ have not, and probably will not, EVER raise the bar. I hope they do. When Mr Dixon convinced our government that a SQ/AN/NZ deal would crush them, who would have believed that NZ would seemingly now become the fodder as the pigs continue to feed.

Whatever the outcome I just want to see healthy competition here in OZ.

[shakespeare]

Skystar.

Raise the bar in relation to what?

[Whiskery]

SQ have been "pondering" the Oz aviation domestic market now for close on 10 years but what are they pondering on ? They have had many opportunities to get on board and at bargain prices.

He who dares wins.

You just ain't got it have you SQ !!!!!!

[Ramboflyer]

They will start, they will be sitting back watching QF and DJ fighting internally , offering a substandard service,borrowing lots of US dollars or diluting there own shares.
But oh what the Tesna Aircraft are due off the production line in September so by December there will be enough Aircraft to start up and well if you can pay cash for them and the maintenace is cheap for at least 3 years then the oncarriage should keep them at least break- even until the people move over to the far superior operation .
There will be no competition just a better Airline For QF and Dj to match but they have got interest payments to worry about.
If QF is lucky SIA will let them live only so the people can really see how good they are going to be.....
If SIA dont do it i will its too Easy.............:D :D

[BlueEagle]

The last really serious effort by SQ to 'get on board' was when they wanted to buy, (and save?), Ansett, they were thwarted then by ANZ who may well have been acting at the behest of QF.

SQ certainly 'have it', just a case of when, I suspect.

[Keg]

Rambo, wan't it a MoU, never an order. If that were the case, what TESNA a/c?

[Buster Hyman]

Keg. My memory may be a little rusty & I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I recall something about the Tesna aircraft being cancelled orders. A similar deal to the AA/QF 738's. I think the A320's were rolling down the production line without owners, hence the deal on the MoU, but like the administrators, I doubt Airbus got a deposit!!

[Wirraway]

AsiaPulse Thurs 10:27am AEST

Australian State Urges Singapore Airlines to Set up Shop

MELBOURNE, Aug 29 Asia Pulse - Victorian tourism operators have urged Singapore Airlines to locate in Melbourne amid speculation the airline will launch into the Australian domestic market.
The Victorian Tourism Industry Council (VTIC) said the Victorian government and Melbourne Airport should do all they could to encourage the airline to locate its domestic base in Melbourne.

VTIC chairman John Button said Melbourne was Australia's only airport without a curfew and was closer than Sydney to key Asian cities.

"Melbourne's distinct advantages as a location for an airline headquarters would provide Singapore Airlines with everything it needs to develop not only a regional hub, but a domestic base from which it could operate a competitive domestic service," he said.

"With the departure of Ansett a year ago, there is still a vacuum for a second major carrier, and all the infrastructure is here in Melbourne."

Mr Button's comments follow reports yesterday that a Singapore Airlines evaluation team had met with Melbourne Airport managing director Chris Barlow.

"They were over the moon about the airport. They thought it was terrific," Mr Barlow told the Herald Sun.

"We'd like to think they would be based here."

But a spokesman for federal Transport Minister John Anderson today said the minister had not been approached by the airline about launching a domestic service.

"We don't know what they are proposing, if in fact they are proposing anything," he said.

But he said Mr Anderson generally welcomed more competition on the domestic market.

Qantas chairwoman Margaret Jackson yesterday said Singapore Airlines would be "brave" to enter the domestic market.

"If they want to lose a lot of money I guess they can come down here," she said.

ASIA PULSE

[Keg]

They've been 'pondering' now for just shy of 12 months. I wonder if they are ever going to bother making the 'D'.

[Boeing Belly]

Surprise, surprise....Margeret Jackson does't think it would be a good idea that an airline with more money than QF should start up a green-fields carrier in Australia. All of that Star Alliance on-carriage is obviously helping her bottom line somewhat.

[strobes_on]

I wonder whether Branson's legal action against SACL would temporarily preclude them (SACL) from awarding gates in the Sydney Ansett terminal to a prospective new entrant.

If it does, SQ may be in for a bit of a wait.

[Boeing Belly]

It didn't stop them giving them to QF.

[oicur12]

I think you will find SQ are in the advanced stages of securing terminal space.

Without it, they would have left the building months ago.

Mrs Jackson should watch this space - and her bottom line - closely.

[cirrus driver]

I agree with oicur
Cirrus

[TIMMEEEE]

The Singaporeans tried and often off-set approach of sitting back,plotting (all supposedly) carefully analysing the market for the long-term outcome has failed them dismally in the past several years with the outcome being not only a loss of face but also the loss of hundreds of millions of $.

They have failed to correctly analyse and interpret certain contingencies critical to the final outcome - mainly to do with understanding people and interpreting attitudes of their adversaries so to speak.

The Ansett/Air NZ debacle is a case in point.
They failed to anticipate the moves of not only the QF board but also the NZ government,Brierley investments as well as the Air NZ board (which they themselves were a member).

It was handled carelessly by SQ and with great manipulative skill and cunning on the part of Geoff Dixon and his team at QF.

The purchase of 49% of Virgin Atlantic has caused numerous headaches for Dr Cheong also - particularly in the wake of 9/11 and almost caused Virgin Atlantic to go into administration early in the peace.

Numerous other ventures have come under criticism also in Singapore.

I agree - SQ have had numerous good opportunities in this country and have let them go by the wayside with disastrous consequences.
Clearly their approach is in need of rectification.

To start up an airline just to provide on-carriage seems inappropriate and the securement of terminal space in Oz is also critical.
They could have purchased the AnNsett Sydney terminal and derived income from that for a relatively most $190million.
Now they will have to pay through the nose and share the less modern portion of the terminal with someone else as QF has secured the modern B concourse.

A lot of wishful thinking but once again its going to cost them alot and for what?????

[Richard Kranium]

I agree, and I find it hard to believe that they could have missmanaged the situation in this way...Why didn't they pick up Ansett on the 14th Sept 2001, or right after the Tesna deal fell through...I just feel that the Howard Govt. had a lot to do with this especialy Anderson...I remember a reporter in Singapore saying that SQ was confused why the Victorian Govt. was up there trying to get them involved and they hd no response or approaches from the Federal Govt....and yes the terminals are crucial...because of the 30 year leases Ansett and Qantas had could make life difficult for new starts...I'd love to know the real truth behind all of this...:(

[strobes_on]

I believe Branson's clever and timely court action may effectively shelve any current plans SQ have for a domestic operation. I would imagine the courts would prohibit SACL from negotiating any further terminal leases until a decision is reached on Virgin's claims. SQ will not commence without iron clad guarantees.

Timing is everything.

Yet again, the good doctor may have missed his sampan.

[Whiskery]

SQ will not commence without iron clad guarantees.

should read
SQ will not commence.............!
:D

[eisle s]

If SQ were to start up, they would be putting forward a Premium Airline with business and first class travel. Apart from Melbourne, where they could lease some gates, what other terminals are they going to operate from. There is nothing left. In Brisbane, Virgin have bought the Ansett terminal, therefore only leaving the common user area, (hardly suitable for a Premium airline), In Sydney there is no telling how long that will take to sort itself out, (and SQ wont just jump in and pay the going rate just to get in quick), In Adelaide, Virgin will be moving in there later in the month of September, leaving the International SHED that they operate out of currently. Again, hardly high quality stuff.
There are a lot of guys on this forum who desperately want/think that SQ are about to start up just so they can get a job, but guys, don't go and get the A320 endorsement just yet.;)

[strobes_on]

eisle s

It's pretty academic now that Sydney access is on hold, but I understand the concept was to provide premium business and economy class - no first class.

There is no doubt that pissed off / frustrated customers from QF and Virgin would have provided substantial A320/1 loads up and down the east coast and across to PER.

On the BNE terminal side; exactly what has Virgin leased? From memory, there are far more gates available than Virgin could use.

[digi2]

Eisle just to clarify a few points.
VB has not purchased the terminal at BNE it presently leases less than 50% of the capacity there.
Adelaide same deal only using a few gates, and the new terminal which will be common user is on the way.
Sydney, who knows i just can't see operators being able to lock up the infastructure, commen user being the most likely outcome as per part of the QF deal at SYD.

[Buster Hyman]

Ok. Hypothetically, IF SQ get something going here, I doubt that Terminal space will be an issue. SQ & DJ via ANZ were going to go against QF together until Dick tore up the cheque. That plan could still be in place.

Whichever way you look at this, SQ WILL get into bed with DJ in one way or another, it just depends how up front they want to appear.;)

[Kaptin M]

How about SQ and Air New Zealand? :eek:

"God Forbid it!", the ex-An'ers cry.
Sorry guys and gals, but for MY money that presents a far better option for SQ (and Air Sheep).
I'm not trying to be abrasive by that statement, but merely ask YOU to consider what YOU would do if YOU were SQ.

QANTAS is in a strong financial position and would almost certainly want to dictate the rules to SIA.
SIA will want to be The Boss, in any venture/merger they enter into. QANTAS does NOT give them that option.

On the other side of the coin is Air New Zealand. They have an old fleet, and are in desperate need of a BIG injection (or use of someone else's equipment) to move forward.
In spite of their recent bonus payment to staff, I'll BET that this was a "power play" by Air New Zealand upper management to try to get more say in the running of their airline WHEN it is taken over.
New Zealand (Gov't and shareholders) simply don't have the BIG $$$'s needed.
Air New Zealand has access to all of the international routes that SIA are interested in obtaining over the next 10-20 years.

Air New Zealand also has access to Australian domestic routes.

That's MY call.

I'd be buying Air New Zealand shares if I were you, as once SQ enters there, the value will at least triple.

[Buster Hyman]

How about SQ and Air New Zealand?
Errr....they're already there Kaptin!

I guess you must be referring to SQ/ANZ operating domestically in OZ. Sounds plausible to me, but would Joe Q fork out the hard earned to fly with them? Both are carrying a potential "legacy" over the AN demise & I'm sure QF & DJ wouldn't let the punters forget. Probably cheaper to set up too!

And, before you ask, no, I wouldn't apply! ;)

[strobes_on]

SQ won't be buying seriously into Air NZ any time soon.

The most likely scenario is for SQ to have some sort of commercial tie up with Virgin and QF to buy into Air NZ.

This would still mean a "new" full service carrier. But it would be tied commercially to Virgin. This would be QF's worst nightmare, having to compete once again on a more level playing field.

The other advantage of this scenario is that any issues over terminal access would evaporate, with Virgin and the "full service" carrier sharing gates Australia wide.

It would leave Virgin Blue intact as a low cost operation, but with the capacity to expand and compete directly against QF's Australian Airlines as it unfolds it's domestic network next year.

Corrigan can see huge dollars in this. Why was he in Singapore recently? You can bet it wasn't just to see the sights.

The doctor will aslo be fairly keen to retire with at least one successful deal under his belt.:D

[Airtart]

Branson prepares the shock tactics

31.08.2002


SYDNEY - He did it against British Airways. Now flamboyant British billionaire Richard Branson is bringing his shock PR tactics to bear on an Australian bank he says wants too much money to let him use a Sydney airport terminal it owns.

In a campaign reminiscent of the "No Way BA-AA" that emblazoned the tailfins of Virgin Atlantic aircraft when the British giant and American Airlines were mulling a tie-up, Branson vowed to paint "Macquarie - what a bunch of bankers" on his local Virgin Blue fleet.

He accused Sydney Airport of backing away from a handshake agreement on access fees to the terminal of collapsed Ansett Australia before the airport was bought by a Macquarie Bank-led consortium for A$5.6 billion.

"If we give in to this sort of extortion, the costs of this airline will go up, and if the costs of the airline go up, air fares will go up and that's something we won't let happen," Branson, 52, said.

"Macquarie, stop the Sydney airport rort" will be another slogan carried in an aggressive campaign to embarrass Macquarie.

Sydney Airports Corp wants to run the second terminal as a common user facility, leaving space for any new entrants.

Qantas, which operates out of the other main terminal, has agreed to take six slots in the 18-gate terminal and SAC spokesman Peter Gibbs says talks are taking place with Singapore Airlines.

Virgin Blue is 50 per cent owned by Australian firm Patrick Corp.

- REUTERS


:confused:

[Boeing Belly]

I must admit that the lead story on the Channel 9 National News today made me sit up and take notice!!

[skystar1]

Just arrived home

What were the details of the story??????????

[Airtart]

Ansett revival possible
September 03, 2002

SINGAPORE Airlines could be considering a proposal to revive the collapsed Ansett airline.

Less than two week's short of the anniversary of Ansett's failure, Channel Nine tonight reported a proposal to revive the airline would be put to Singapore's board.

Singapore Airlines consultants in Australia began secretly assembling a proposal for a full domestic competitor to Qantas about six months ago, with the proposal completed about a week ago.

Sydney Airports Corporation Ltd spokesman Greg Russell told Nine he believed Singapore was serious in its Australian domestic airline bid.

"We have every reason to believe this is being considered very seriously indeed," he said.

It is believed the Singapore domestic fleet in Australia would comprise 24 Airbus aircraft.

The Singapore proposal found the Ansett brand name still had strong support among Australians.

However, Ansett lawyer Leon Zwier said tonight there had been no discussion with Singapore Airlines.

"We're not sitting down to talks ... we're not doing deals with Ansett names or parts," he said.

"Although if they want to talk to us they would be welcome."

An Ansett administrators' spokeswoman would not comment on any speculation the airline was seeking a "domestic airline solution in Australia".

[Boeing Belly]

SQ have their Board Meeting on the 11th and are "almost certain to give the go-ahead for an Australian operation". 24 Airbus aircraft initially, full-service. Apparently they have done market research and determined that the name "ANSETT" is still held in high regard. Lets wait and see I suppose.

[Airtart]

YA HOO !!!!!
More Jobs !!!

[Airtart]

Singapore Airlines is not confirming or denying a report that it is interested in reviving Ansett.

Channel Nine has reported that Singapore will soon consider a plan to launch a new Ansett using 24 airbus aircraft and employing around 3,000 staff.

A spokesman for Singapore Airlines says Australia is a market of interest for the airline, which operates 70 flights a week into the country.

The spokesman says Singapore is keeping its options open for the Australian market.

From ABC News

[ozopsboy]

Have just returned from Singapore and caught up with some people. Word is and don't be surprised if SQ teams up with DJ operating dedicated acft on dedicated routes

Time will tell

[Capt Claret]

Can someone please explain to me, why SQ would wait for a year or more to resurrect AN. All the while allowing the old customer base to erode, and QF & VB to become more entrenched?

Surely if SQ really were interested, the time would have been soon after the AN collapse, or, after M&M failed to get Tesna to proceed at the latest. :confused:

[Wirraway]

AAP

Ansett revival possible
By Karen Michelmore and Jane Williams
September 03, 2002

SINGAPORE Airlines could be considering a proposal to revive the collapsed Ansett airline.

Less than two weeks before the anniversary of Ansett's collapse, Channel Nine reported a proposal to revive the airline would be put to Singapore's board on September 11.

Singapore Airlines refused to confirm or deny the report, but said it was keeping its options open.

It stressed Australia remained an important market.

"Our position remains the same," Singapore Airlines told the AFX-Asia wire service.

"We are keeping our options open in the Australian market."

Speculation has been circulating about the entrance of a third carrier into the domestic Australian airline market for several months.

Singapore Airlines consultants in Australia began secretly assembling a proposal for a full service domestic competitor to Qantas about six months ago, with the proposal completed about a week ago.

The Nine Network said it believed the Singapore domestic fleet in Australia would comprise 24 Airbus aircraft.

Sydney Airports Corp Ltd spokesman Peter Gibbs confirmed an evaluation team had come out to look at the former Ansett terminal.

"We believe their assessment was very serious and very measured," Mr Gibbs told AAP.

"We have had ongoing discussions with them, but what they propose to do as far as setting up an airline is entirely up to the Singapore Airlines' board.

"We know nothing more than we did a couple of weeks ago."

Administrators have retained Ansett's heavy maintenance facility, a number of aircraft and a chief pilot with an air operators certificate enabling the aircraft to keep flying.

Singapore Airline was touted as the possible saviour of Ansett in the weeks before Ansett's collapsed last year when it owned a 25 per cent interest of Ansett's parent company Air New Zealand.

Later that year Singapore Airlines agreed to help Ansett administrators set up a viable business proposition for potential buyers.

It also agreed to speak to Lindsay Fox and Solomon Lew about taking on a role with Tesna, the pair's failed bid to relaunch the carrier.

Singapore Airlines is a member of the world's major airline team-up, the Star Alliance, which was left without an Australian domestic connection when alliance partner Air New Zealand cut Ansett adrift.

Ansett lawyer Leon Zwier said tonight there had been no discussion with Singapore Airlines, although talks "would be welcome".

An Ansett administrators' spokeswoman would not comment on any speculation the airline was seeking a "domestic airline solution in Australia".

An analyst said a third airline did not make commercial sense.

"There is a general sense out there that it is complete commercial madness for them to give it a go, but that has never stopped people in the past," he told AAP.

"The whole market is pretty well served at the moment."

Qantas shares were 12 cents lower today at $4.15.

AAP

Dow Jones 11:14 AEST

[Dow Jones] SIA spokesman offers no comment on renewed talk carrier preparing to set up domestic operations in Australia. But reiterates long-term interest in Australian market; "we are always looking at all options available for our long-term development in this market." Also denies speculation SIA has or will purchase former Ansett's domestic airline operating certificate.

[SOPS]

Revive the name, for the perceived good will, that I can sort of understand. Revive the whole airline..........???? somehow I doubt it.

[Wirraway]

Wed "Sydney Morning Herald"

Qantas dips on new entrant talk
September 4 2002

Singapore is tipped as wanting to take on the Flying Kangaroo - if it can find a mate, writes Mark Todd.


Rumours that a new entrant had secured terminal space at Sydney Airport as a precursor to launching a domestic service were back again yesterday. Predictably, Qantas shares were sold off on fears of what a third operator would do to the cosy duopoly the airline shares with Virgin Blue.

It's hard to see anything happening soon. Singapore Air, the most likely to set up in Australia, has a board meeting later this month. The matter will get an airing then.

But Singapore Air isn't anxious to start a business here on its Pat Malone after burning a pile of cash in Ansett. It is thought the Asian carrier is trying to sound out the views of other potential investors.

There are signs that competition is already on the rise in Asia, with Cathay Pacific last week announcing it would add flights to Melbourne and Brisbane. And Qantas has applied to boost capacity to Hong Kong.

This will pretty well lock up the Hong Kong route.


Shares in Qantas eased 12c to $4.15.

[Wirraway]

Just checking out the flights on the
DJ site under schedules,check this out:

01/9/02-26/10/02

SYD-MEL = 17 flights a day
SYD-BNE = 12 flights a day
MEL-BNE = 7 flights a day

27/10/02-29/03/03
SYD-MEL = 11 flights a day (down 6 )
SYD-BNE = 10 flights a day (down 2 )
MEL-BNE = 6 flights a day (down 1 )

Not sure whether this is due to the terminal
problem at SYD, the maitainance problem or
making way for a 3rd airline.

Wirraway

[Gadget]

Wirraway,

I think thats an old schedule from October on as it does not have PER/SYD etc. No idea why they leave stuff that is not current on the site.

Try requesting a flight after Oct and see how many flights come up.

Cheers

[Wirraway]

Tried your advice and came up with:

7th Oct SYD-MEL = 17 flights
5th Nov SYD-MEL = 13flights (down 4)

Have not got time to check the rest.

Wirraway

[B'ar]

I find it interesting that the hot source for the media is in fact the Sydney Airport Corporation Spokesperson. Hello there must be some negotiations going on or maybe a court case around the traps. As for Ansett having a good name almost all of my friends in business lost heaps of points in the collapse and were less than impressed with the Star Alliance for not honouring anything. If it smells like a dead carcass it probably is! If Singapore want to lose a lot more money then they already have in this area let them go right ahead and set up. I found it interesting that they are talking competitive workplace agreements (i.e Virgin pay rates). I wonder if Ramboflyer will go back to his former airline for less money or will he take his own advice and stay on the dole.

[Rackin'it]

This forum never ceases to amuse me. I am forever deep in belly laughs thanks to the never ceasing anti-QF comments on this board.

Bring in SIA? Is that what the feeling is? Of course, yes, get them in faster. It will bring QF into line won't it?? Stop QF from rape and pillaging the australian aviation scene like so many of you accuse. How interesting.......I love the way we Australians knock the tall poppies. Over time I have come to believe that the majority of anti QF comments come from those who were unsuccessful in selection with QF. Tough - life goes on, and you look elsewhere for a job.

But to openly welcome SIA onto the scene only a fool would do. If you want to see rape and pillaging of the Australian aviation scene then just standby for SIAs arrival....

Hey, here's an idea - lets get SIA in to destroy QF so that all the profit can head back to Singapore. Yes - that will be better for Oz lets get even more of our money heading overseas! Of course. And we'll all feel better about ourselves because Qf will have got their 'just deserts'......

Fools.:rolleyes:

[Wizofoz]

To right Rackin'it!!!

A Government protected monopoly is by far the better option!!

Back to the two airline policy I say, only make it one this time!!

These are the fools that let in competition against Telecom!

Far better to pay twice as much and have employees heading to the pub at 11am than risk that sinful competition!!

And think of all those poor slobs who might be forced off the dole if we got back to an efficient, competative industry!!

Goverment instrumentalities running the factories, industries and businnesses I say. Ban all foreign imports, ban all foreign investements. It's the only way!!

Just ask ANY North Korean!!

(Sighs as he looks at a portrait of Pauline Hansen)

[Raider1]

The fact that SQ is advancing options for an Australian domestic operation comes as no surprise to me. In fact I dont think they have ever been totally out of the picture.
To take over Ansett as an on going operation simply did not make economic sence. Too much debt and unwanted baggage re awards and conditions with some of the groups such as airport workers. Much simpler and considerably cheaper to wait until the wind up of Ansett is fairly advanced then start with a clean slate.
SQ has access to modern aircraft at the right terms and could certainly fast track a start up date.
A survey on MSN today reflects about a 2:1 majority indicating support for the Ansett brandname. SQ would have others options as well.
As for demand any business traveller would tell you yes more choice is needed. DJ is doing well in the visiting friends and rele market but business travellers can't adjust to what is limited options on some routes with DJ

[Al E. Vator]

Wizofoz...nice post, made me chuckle. Nice retort to 'Rackin it's' sillyness.

Without competition, Qantas risked/risks becoming Australia's Aeroflot. Aeroflot was reknowned for surly flight attendants who never smiled, cr@p food and an ethic of 'If you don't like it - walk'.
Perhaps a degree of commonality between the two?

Fortunately Qantas don't let passengers bring pigs with them yet!:)

[Torres]

Claret. The reason is simple - and pointed out on this morning's TV news. Ansett is now much cheaper - SQ can pick and choose what they buy at bargain basement prices and that won't include staff liabilities and presumably, any staff.

To those that shout "Yipee - more jobs", think carefully. There is just so much water in the bucket and it's now to be spread around three carriers. The SQ backed "full service" operator will not generate any significant and new market, as Virgin did in the beginning when it very significantly cut fares. And I think reduced fares (and a fare war) would be the last thing on SQ and QF's corporate mind.

I would envisage SQ starting an efficient operation, minimal and contract staff in order to minimise losses. This will force QF to rationalise, probably thu Australian's lower cost operation.

I would think industrial mayhem at QF may be a decided advantage to SQ!

But that's just my un biased opinion of a probable scenario.

[Ramboflyer]

SQ gave QF and DJ 1 year to prove how good they are and they both ****ed it up , so now they will be caught with there pants down.
Australia is a big place with a small population, long sectors and its really worth the extra $$ to travel in comfort, especially if your company is paying for it.
In Europe its ok, short sectors and lots of people, Australians are a spoilt race and will pay for better service, so how the hell is SQ wasting there time they will be a mighty force long term against QF and DJ , if its still here may be the new competitior to National Jet.
To BAR, if i get a job back at least i wont have to pay for the Airbus Endorsement.
Good news for all and eventually they will have more Qantas pilots working there than An pilots in QF..
Watch all the smart QF f/os start applying for EK ,Dragon and other real jobs were a command is possible one day....

Oh and what good is the DJ service you get all the eye-candy but none of them to play with, or is that not on the list , ****them paying for water when the aircraft is built with fresh water tanks...

DJ is GA in JETS!


:eek:

[Boeing Belly]

Patricks' share price took a hit today....down .59c when I last looked.

[oldhasbeen]

Me thinks Ramrod is sadly attempting to give ex AN drivers a bad name.Not too sure whether or not he actually worked there but someone with that sort of vitriol is gonna have a hard time getting back ( or for that matter getting anyware!).Would love to see how he'd go at the EK lovegames:eek:

[Ramboflyer]

Hasn't inflicted any abuse on the AN guys i have, always sypathized with them and am truly glad most of them will work again.
I'll be the poor permanent S/O in QF but thats fine by me and i dont think the new Ansett will recruit people with S/O time , i truly believe QF and the new AN will co-exist for a long time so if who cares which one you work for...
:D

[Casper]

Watching yet more money go out of Australia, tax free money at that due to their accounting proficiency, is most definitely NOT good for the country. Singapore Inc will get the gold mine while Oz gets the shaft!

Can any of you imagine trying to start up an airline in competition with SQ on THEIR TURF????

Pitiful!

[Wirraway]

ABC News Online

Posted: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 16:32 AEST

Singapore Airlines yet to approach Govt: Anderson

The Federal Transport Minister, John Anderson, says the Government has not received any approaches from Singapore Airlines about entering the Australian domestic market.

Singapore Airlines says it is keeping its options open on expanding its Australian operations, but is not confirming or denying a Channel Nine report that it is considering reviving Ansett.

Mr Anderson says new entrants in the domestic market could be accommodated, but he says any move will not see a revival of Ansett, because the carrier no longer exists.

"Should it be the case that Singapore wants to fly an Australian airline, we would certainly look at that on its merits and broadly speaking we welcome new entrants," he said.

"If they chose to use the old name, that would really be a matter for them, but it wouldn't be the old Ansett, although hopefully it might offer employment to some Ansett people who have not yet found jobs."
======================================

Wednesday September 4, 5:06 PM (Singapore)

Analysts play down SIA take-off in Australia
By Sophie Hares

SYDNEY, Sept 4 (Reuters) - Speculation Singapore Airlines Ltd could launch an assault on the Australian market resurfaced on Wednesday as the Asian carrier decides whether to snap up space at Sydney's domestic airport terminal.

Badly burnt by its recent Antipodean ventures, analysts say there's a slim chance SIA could make the expensive move into a domestic market dominated by Australia's biggest airline Qantas Airways Ltd .

SIA says it is keeping its options open, despite racking up heavy losses from an investment in Air New Zealand

and backing away from a plan last year to recapitalise failed Australian carrier Ansett.

"Our position hasn't changed from what we stated previously. We are keeping our options open on the Australian market. It's an important market to us," an SIA spokesman said.

Sydney Airports Corp Ltd (SACL), which has converted the former Ansett domestic terminal into a common user facility, is in talks with SIA over access to terminal gates after a recent inspection by an SIA team.

"We judged that their assessment and their evaluation of the potential for a third domestic carrier was very measured and very serious," said Peter Gibbs, a spokesman for SACL.

The terminal talks have sparked renewed media speculation of an imminent move into the Australian domestic market, with theories ranging from a reborn Ansett to a tie-up with Richard Branson's Virgin Blue [VA.UL] , which has 20 percent of the market. On Wednesday, shares in Qantas dropped six cents or 1.5 percent to A$4.09, while SIA closed unchanged at S$11.30.


ALLIANCES

Analysts have long deemed Australia's domestic market only big enough for two players, and say any new entrant would struggle for profits given the stranglehold Qantas exerts over 80 percent of the market.

But they say SIA wants to bridge the gap in the Star Alliance created by the failure of Ansett almost a year ago and wants to secure feeder traffic for its international routes.

Any move by OneWorld alliance member Qantas to take a stake in its Star Alliance rival Air New Zealand could also jeopardise Air NZ's Star Alliance membership and leave SIA with no alliance partner in the region.

"The market's fairly soft at the moment, which makes it a challenging market for any prospective new entrant, other than someone who has a defined network feeding into the system like SIA," said Ian Thomas, Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation analyst.

SIA would also likely demand government concessions to make it easier to compete effectively in Australia.

"I know they want to be in, the odds are high they'll go in," said an Asian airline analyst who declined to be named.

"The ability to compete effectively in Australia is what they want. If there's no viable option, they'll walk," he said.

However, speculation SIA might look to revive Ansett was swiftly played down, with SIA likely use its strong balance sheet to raise capital to buy new planes rather than used the failed airline's ageing aircraft.

SIA, whose attempt last year to break into the Australian market was rebuffed by the government, has not reopened official negotiations, said a spokesman for Transport Minister John Anderson in Canberra.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) also said it has held no discussions with SIA about obtaining the necessary paperwork to run an airline which would take a minimum of four months to complete. And Virgin Blue reiterated it has no plans to tie-up with SIA, which owns 49 percent of its sister airline Virgin Atlantic.

"There's nothing going on between us and them," said David Huttner, Virgin Blue's commercial head.

(Additional reporting by Belinda Goldsmith in Canberra and Peh Soo Hwee in Singapore)

($1=A$1.82)

[bentandtwisted]

Alliance Airlines will play a major part in any SQ/Star Alliance domestic operation. Their two class F100s operation will continue to expand and will 'fill' in the gaps, ie operate to smaller/leisure centres such as OOL, MCY, RKY, MKY,TVL,ASP etc.

[dirtylittlefokker]

They still don't seem to be listening B and T!!!

[Buster Hyman]

The only full time jobs will be those that need suits. And they will probably be "Armani" suits made in Orchard Rd.:(

[Wirraway]

Thurs "Australian Financial Review" 5/9/02

Singapore talk puts Qantas stock into a spin
Sep 5
Jane Boyle

Shares in Qantas and Virgin Blue's half owner Patrick Corporation slipped yesterday amid speculation that Singapore Airlines could launch a third domestic carrier.

Qantas shares fell 6¢ to $4.09, sparking concerns for the retail component of its $800 million rights issue, which opens on September 9 and closes on the 27th.

The airline is seeking to raise $200 million at $4.20 a share, the same price as institutions paid in a heavily oversubscribed $600 million bookbuild, before which the stock was trading above $4.60. The retail issue is underwritten to $100 million.

Patrick shares dived 59¢ to $15.

A Singapore Airlines spokesman said the airline was keeping all options open.

"Yes, we are interested in the [Australian] market, obviously, but that interest doesn't equate to us doing anything immediately," he said.

The airline is monitoring other potential opportunities to establish a presence in the Australian market, including a partnership with Qantas if cornerstone shareholder British Airways sells out.

Patrick chief executive Chris Corrigan is understood to be interested in bringing in Singapore Airlines as a partner in Virgin Blue.

Industry observers believe Singapore Airlines could be dangling the prospect of a third carrier as a tactic to put pressure on the incumbents, particularly since Qantas is in talks to buy 25 per cent of Air New Zealand, which could result in Air NZ leaving the Star Alliance, of which Singapore Airlines is a member.

Airport operators said talks with Singapore about setting up a third domestic carrier were continuing, and the airline's board was receiving regular status reports. But many industry experts were sceptical, saying a start-up would take at least six months, potentially cost billions and would be a high risk strategy.


While the collapse of former partner Ansett has hurt Singapore Airlines , the airline's spokesman said yesterday its load factors out of Australia were "pretty full".

And Virgin Blue, which does not have sufficient maintenance capacity to cope with a fleet expansion, will bring in two senior maintenance specialists from Boeing to work on a solution.
===========================================

Thurs "Sydney Morning Herald" 5/9/02

Singapore Air not an airhead
September 5 2002
Edited by Mark Todd

Of course not. So why would they want to start another airline in Australia?

The words of Sir Humphrey Appleby spring to mind when it comes to Singapore Air entering the domestic aviation market: such a move would certainly be a"courageous" decision.

The talk of Singapore Air starting up down under was rife again yesterday. But tellers of the tale have overlooked a few little details, such as the lack of substance to the speculation.

For a start, Singapore Air hasn't approached a single key supplier, such as unions or fuel companies, about an Australian service. It has had some very preliminary talks with Sydney and Melbourne airports, but that's about it.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has no applications before it for an air operators' certificate, and it takes 12 months anyway to issue one of those things. If Singapore Air is to decide at this month's board meeting that it will go ahead with a new domestic carrier, it will do so from a distinct state of unreadiness.

At best, you'd say Singapore Air is doing a rough back-of-the-envelope job on the alternatives to taking a stake in Qantas.

The real concern is that if Singapore Air did establish a domestic service it would tend to suggest they're not completely rational. And no one wants to compete against madmen, hence the 6c fall in Qantas yesterday to $4.09.

It would need at least $2 billion and a minimum 20 aircraft to make the idea fly. Merrill Lynch has noted before that the story only works if the start-up can win 30 per cent of the corporate market in double time. But Qantas has 100 per cent of that market locked up in two and three year deals.

And there's really no incentive for Singapore Air, especially as it already has an interlining deal with Qantas. It allows Singapore customers to buy seats on Qantas planes at the same price as can passengers of Qantas's Oneworld alliance partners British Airways and Cathay Pacific.

If all that weren't enough, Qantas is sitting on about $800 million in new equity and is more than ready for a price war.

Good luck, Singapore Air.

===========================================

[Casper]

Bentandtwisted,

You are right on the target!! Both the name and connections are very relevant.

[oldhasbeen]

All these so called " journalists" and " industry observers" wouldn't by chance have a sh*tload of Qf shares now would they? Or am I just being the cynical b*stard !!!

[Wirraway]

AAP

Virgin slams Ansett hype
September 05, 2002

UNCONFIRMED reports of a Singapore Airlines-led revival of Ansett are irresponsible and give false hope to former staff, Virgin Blue has argued.

Less than two weeks from the anniversary of Ansett's collapse, reports have circulated that a proposal to revive the airline will be put to Singapore's board on September 11.

Singapore Airlines has refused to confirm or deny the report, but said it was keeping its options open and stressed Australia remained an important market.

Virgin Australia chief executive officer Brett Godfrey told Channel 7 today he did not believe Singapore Airlines would choose Ansett as a vehicle with which to enter the Australian domestic market.

"I think it is irresponsible and its probably unconscionable for people to be suggesting that there will be 24 jets flying in Singapore colours in the short term," Mr Godfrey said

"I just don't believe it and I think it's probably about time that we see Singapore come out with a statement to support it or otherwise."

Mr Godfrey said Ansett's great brand reputation had suffered before its collapse and a new domestic player would need a fresh start.

"Ansett had, once upon a time, a wonderful brand reputation but it didn't at the end," he said.

"It had a couple of serious maintenance concerns and ... the reputation wasn't quite what it was five or even 10 years ago.

"I'm not a brand expert but I would have thought if somebody was going to come in, whether it was Singapore Airlines or anybody else, they would try something fresher or newer."

Mr Godfrey said he believed there was room for a third domestic airline.

"But I think some of the comments bandied around about a revised Tesna-type bid is just irresponsible and really just gives false hope to those people who lost their jobs nearly 12 months ago.

Mr Godfrey said he had held no discussions with Singapore Airlines over a possible deal with Virgin Blue.

"I've had no discussions with Singapore Airlines along those lines at all."

[Aladdin]

bentandtwisted & casper, do Alliance have singaporean investment?

I would have thought if Sia start an operation here REX would be a sure target for an agreement considering they are now 40% owned be singaporeans with two on the Board.

With 31 regional and metropolitan destinations in New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania and Based in Sydney Sia would have it covered.

[fruitloop]

Quote

"Ansett had, once upon a time, a wonderful brand reputation but it didn't at the end," he said.

"It had a couple of serious maintenance concerns and ... the reputation wasn't quite what it was five or even 10 years ago.


Something about glass houses. :rolleyes:

[Richard Kranium]

I find the comments made by that blabber mouth, Mr. Godfrey so shallow...if he thinks that raising hope for exAN people is not fair..then whats fair about the NO HOPE exAN people have with Virgin...AN had very experienced staff with a great reputation...737 drivers with 1000's of hours experience, cant get a look in because of the "Home and Away" culture and prejudice with the infamous list...There is NO WAY Mr. Godfrey would want to see another Airline start here...especialy SQ behind it...the maintenece problems were brought upon by that country of pestulence accross the Tasman...When AirNZ took over it was like the "Black Plague" of 16th century London had descended on Ansett...but they called the shots and the purse strings....they just did nothing and the Ansett staff carried the airline under difficult circumstances despite Air NZ management's stupidity...I say bring on the new airline and get lots of that wnderful AN staff back...as they sure as hell paid their dues, that Virgin does not want to recognize................:(

[Buster Hyman]

I always thought mentioning another airlines' safety record was tabboo amongst the airlines? :mad:

[bentandtwisted]

Aladdin,

Yes REX maybe 40% owned by "singaporeans", but they are "singaporean" businessman. They have nothing to do with SQ/SIA. I do think they (REX) will play a part in providing a regional feeder to any SQ/SIA domestic operation but Alliance will play a "MAJOR" part.

At this stage SQ has no direct investment in Alliance but they do have an indirect investment. One of Alliance/QAHs shareholders is Aeromil. Aeromil have just started their 10 year contract with SQ, to provide support for the advanced flying training in the LR45s at MCY. Also a few weeks ago, Sunshine Express (owned by Aeromil) operated a charter flight from MCY-BNE-MCY. This flight carried had some very senior people from SQ on board. They flew down to inspect the Alliance Airlines facilities.

dlf and casper,

true, I've been saying this for over a month now! One day they will see the big picture.

People look outside the square! SQ do not need a new AOC.
I'm sure it's much quicker to add the A320 to a current HCAOC then to apply for a new one:D

[Whiskery]

Dick - get your facts straight before opening your gob!

737 drivers with 1000's of hours experience, cant get a look in because of the "Home and Away" culture and prejudice with the infamous list...

VB have employed over 50 ex ansett guys and a couple of them have already been upgraded to Command!

If you think that Virgin has an obligation to employ EVERY AN driver just because they lost their jobs, you are the proverbial dreamer.

Keep the faith:]

[zone]

Has there bveen any ex Ansett Airbus drivers employed by Virgin?

[Dehavillanddriver]

Bent,

There is no difference between adding A320's onto an existing AOC and setting up a new AOC.

Both require the same amount of work as the AOC review and issue process needs to be completed in both cases.

I can assure you that the Alliance infrastructure is such that adding a fleet of A320's would be difficult - not impossible - but difficult and would take in the order of 6-12 months from pushing the button.

Having said that there is nothing to say that the button wasn't pushed 6-12 months ago - but I see no evidence of that thus far.

[on the buses]

Have Virgin employed any pilots from the 89 list?? I don't think so.

[Sopwith Pup]

Now this was reported in today's SMH, another media slant on the topic!

"Singapore Air not an airhead
September 5 2002

Of course not. So why would they want to start another airline in Australia?


The words of Sir Humphrey Appleby spring to mind when it comes to Singapore Air entering the domestic aviation market: such a move would certainly be a "courageous" decision.

The talk of Singapore Air starting up down under was rife again yesterday. But tellers of the tale have overlooked a few little details, such as the lack of substance to the speculation.

For a start, Singapore Air hasn't approached a single key supplier, such as unions or fuel companies, about an Australian service. It has had some very preliminary talks with Sydney and Melbourne airports, but that's about it.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has no applications before it for an air operators' certificate, and it takes 12 months anyway to issue one of those things. If Singapore Air is to decide at this month's board meeting that it will go ahead with a new domestic carrier, it will do so from a distinct state of unreadiness.

At best, you'd say Singapore Air is doing a rough back-of-the-envelope job on the alternatives to taking a stake in Qantas.


The real concern is that if Singapore Air did establish a domestic service it would tend to suggest they're not completely rational. And no one wants to compete against madmen, hence the 6c fall in Qantas yesterday to $4.09.

It would need at least $2 billion and a minimum 20 aircraft to make the idea fly. Merrill Lynch has noted before that the story only works if the start-up can win 30 per cent of the corporate market in double time. But Qantas has 100 per cent of that market locked up in two and three year deals.

And there's really no incentive for Singapore Air, especially as it already has an interlining deal with Qantas. It allows Singapore customers to buy seats on Qantas planes at the same price as can passengers of Qantas's Oneworld alliance partners British Airways and Cathay Pacific.

If all that weren't enough, Qantas is sitting on about $800 million in new equity and is more than ready for a price war.

Good luck, Singapore Air"


Anyway it gives another view. Although I could be wrong, but I agree with the article and don't believe SIA will operate domestic here in the near future.

[Airtart]

SINGAPORE - Singapore Airlines (SIA) has sent teams to Australia to explore the domestic flight market, but any plans it has for "Down Under" are still up in the air, a company spokesman said today.

Asked about rumours that SIA has designs on failed Australian domestic carrier Ansett Airlines, spokesman Rick Clements said the Singapore carrier was "ruling nothing in and ruling nothing out".

"Australia is an important market and we are keeping our eye on its domestic market," he said, adding that the airline had sent teams to Australia to "explore the environment" over the last three weeks.


Nicholas Ionides, a Singapore-based editor at aviation industry magazine Air Transport Intelligence, said Singapore Airlines was clearly studying the possibility of setting up an airline in Australia.

"But you would expect them to. They've long harboured aspirations for Australia," he said.

For decades, Australia's domestic industry was dominated by Ansett Airlines and Qantas Airways. But Ansett collapsed a year ago after a price war with Qantas and newcomer Virgin Blue.



From Singapore Business Times as Latest News 05.09.02:D

[Boeing Belly]

The only Airbus pilot I know of getting a start with DJ is a young FO who by co-incidence is the boyfriend of one of the Captains. Female Captain I hasten to add.;)

[Richard Kranium]

Whiskery...you seem angry and that I don't know what I'm talking about ...but I can assure you that there are ex AN drivers with 1000's of hours on 737's and they do not get a look in because they are on "THE LIST!!!" I know of some that became instant Captains but they were the good boys that went back to Ansett after the AFAP lifted the sanctions and said you can go back and get your jobs...I can asure you that NOT ONE exAN driver is with virgin who is on the "THE LIST". I didn't imply that virgin has to employ every exAN driver because he/her lost their job...I just stated the facts....

I have been told straight out by a virgin pilot that no exAN driver on "THE LIST" will be employed by virgin....why would that be Whiskery?...as I have told the story to many people and they are in disbelief of this pathetic bloody minded attitude...the problem is that not everybody agreed with the AFAP and what they were doing in 1989...the AFAP was screwed by Hawke for not joining the accord...at the time the Govt, the public, and companies were against the AFAP...and when there was a move by guys back to work all of the membership had resigned...the courts awarded around 6 mill in damages to the companies...those that did not want go back to work didn't...those that wanted to go to work did......its a free country...and not a dictatorship...no one has the right to ruin their company...if you don't like the heat in the kitchen...then you know what to do...........:(

[SOPS]

At the risk of hijacking this thread............. all of a sudden there seems to be a lot of concern about a "list". And the fact that a lot of really great, experienced, pilots are not getting jobs because they appear on this "list".

It makes me think........what about all the experienced pilots, around about 800 in total, who reapplied for their jobs in early 1990 with Ansett, at the direction of the AFAP?

They were all, selected and trained by Ansett,trained to the airlines standard, and willing to work for them. But except for a number less than 20. all were decreed as not suitable for Ansett any longer. Many of these pilots went on to obtain even more qualifications and experience outside of Ansett, and continued to apply for a job back with their old employer, but always to no avail.

That was Ansetts right, I am sure they did not have a list, they just found that despite a person who may had previously flown for them for 10 or 20 years, incedent free, and was now more qualified than before, the person just did not meet the company profile that was currently required. And the flight staff in AN, set the standards, as was their job, and these were applied.

So why is is such a problem now, that other airlines, are applying thier own standards, and regardless of so called "experience", saying that " we are sorry, you dont meet our profile".

Every airline is different, each knows what it wants. Ansett decided what it wanted, and employed those people. Other airlines have the same right to decide who they want, and employ the same.

[SydGirl]

When Mr Godfrey was on yesterday's Sunrise and came out with his comment of "It had a couple of serious maintenance concerns and ... the reputation wasn't quite what it was five or even 10 years ago." I nearly choked on my croissant.

Indeed glass houses and stones do not go well together. Whether in his opinion all he said was truth, I still don't think it's appropriate for him to say it on national TV. Bagging the (albeit former) opposition's safety record is a big no-no, but I guess VB are known for their unconventionality (is that a word?).

SG
:)

[Casper]

SOPS

Right on!

[Whiskery]

Dick, I am not angry with you mate - just stating the facts. Virgin Blue have taken ex Ansett pilots. Now they may not have taken you or some of your mates, but that was NOT what your complaint was:

if he thinks that raising hope for exAN people is not fair..then whats fair about the NO HOPE exAN people have with Virgin...

Virgin have given more than "hope" to many ex AN people.

[BlueEagle]

I think you will find that:

1. SIA already has contracts with all the necessry suppliers at all the major airports here in Australia.

2. The original Ansett AOC is still active with a chief pilot still being employed so it would more than likely be a case of CASA simply having to decide if SIA and their still-to-be-appointed staff were suitable to continue with it.

[Gnadenburg]

Boeing

I know of at least three ex-AN A320 drivers at VB.

The couple you mentioned great people and am sure their new colleauges agree.

[Richard Kranium]

I see what you are trying to say SOPS...Ansett advertised for Tech Crew and said quite specifically that "ex Ansett staff are wecome to apply"..a lot did and guys joined...the door was slammed shut for most because they would not apply until the AFAP lifted sanctions...As I've been told that Ansett was within days of going over the edge, because of that dispute...so if I were the Big Kahouna...why would I employ people that were so vindictive and just about sent me out of business...they are just as likely to do it again....and then I have 800 guys that hate my guts...I couldn't run a business with a gun at my head.

This was a test of who was loyal to who...so where does your loyalty lie was what management wanted to know...I like others answered the ad...and like others had nothing to do with that dispute....but someone has decided to put me on "THE LIST", and by the way I know of some that should be on the list and aren't...As I have said many times...my loyalty is to my company and family, not to a union...I do not follow union directive if it will be destructive...

and Whiskery...ok I'll buy your argument, yes virgin have given some AN staff hope, and are employed by them, I just resent the fact I can't get employed because someone has put me on some list...I did not cause or had any part in causing Ansett and Australian for that matter lose millions of dollars, subotaged the economy, and sent many businesses broke, my biggest crime in life is that I answered an ad............:(

[stable approach]

Richard Kranium

Would these ex AN guys on " the list " you refer to, be the same ones that rushed to the courts to prevent their ex colleagues from returning to their former jobs on the grounds that it would be unsafe for the two groups to coexist in the same cockpit?

[oldhasbeen]

I think some of us are on the wrong thread:confused:

[Woomera]

Please regain track by the next post, it's not hard, you dont even need an FMC :rolleyes:

[bentandtwisted]

dehavilland,

True it does take a long time to add an aircraft to an AOC and I don't think they would use the Alliance AOC, but Alliance will be a big part of the operation. I was just trying to get people thinking outside the square.

[Airtart]

Rival scoffs at Ansett talk

06.09.2002
By GREG ANSLEY Australia correspondent
CANBERRA - The Australian aviation industry yesterday remained sceptical of rumours that Singapore Airlines plans to resurrect failed Air NZ subsidiary Ansett.

Reports of a proposed new Ansett fleet of 24 Airbuses surfaced after Sydney Airports Corporation confirmed it had been in discussions with Singapore, and followed months of speculation that the airline intended to launch a domestic carrier in Australia.

Singapore had wanted to buy Ansett before the Air NZ takeover, and suffered heavily from the airline's collapse last year through its stake in Air NZ.

But Singapore remains a partner with Air NZ in the Star Alliance, and both carriers have been without an Australian alliance feeder since the disappearance of Ansett and the failure of several bids to put the airline back into the air.

Analysts have suggested that Singapore may be allowing rumours of a resurrected Ansett to circulate to keep its options open and to maintain pressure on Qantas and Virgin Blue.

Singapore is understood to be concerned that Qantas will succeed in winning a 25 per cent stake in Air NZ, creating a larger and more potent rival and possibly removing the New Zealand carrier from the Star Alliance.

But with the massive start-up costs involved in putting a large fleet of aircraft into operation, and the disastrous history of new airline ventures in Australia, analysts doubt that Singapore is seriously considering relaunching Ansett.

Virgin Blue yesterday dismissed the reports of a born-again Ansett.

Virgin Australia chief executive Brett Godfrey said Ansett's brand had been hammered by its collapse and it was unlikely that anyone would try to again fly under it.

Talk of 24 jets in the air soon was "irresponsible", and he challenged Singapore Airlines to confirm or deny the reports.

Singapore Airlines spokesman Innes Wilcox said the carrier was keeping the door open.

"Australia is obviously a market of interest to us because we have almost 70 services a week into Australia," he said."We obviously are keeping our options open."

[jupiter2]

In January 2000, I was present at a meeting of Ansett management in Melbourne, to discuss a relaunch of the "Ansett Australia" brand, prior to the Sydney Olympic Games.
The scope of the project included a strategy to reduce costs and rationalise the route network.
The vision of the new network would have seen Ansett aircraft fly only SYD-MEL-BNE-PER and key ADL & CBR flights.
To my surprise, it was openly discussed that Virgin would service every "leisure" sector in strategic co-operation, from the Ansett terminals.
Later, the nature of these projects were changed, due to the purchase of Ansett by Air New Zealand.
The new entrant in Australian skies, began its life I believe, at that time.
The same format of operation has since been reflected by the TESNA bid and speculative SQ reports.

[SOPS]

Well I have to be short, otherwise Woomera will lock me.

All Iam saying RK is, AN used standards for its employment criteria, and as you say, "loyalty" was one of them. That was their right.

I believe it is also the right of any other airline to use their own standards. If airline ABC wants all pilots to have green hair, that is their right. Ansett decided that loyalty of a pilot was displayed by a certain group of actions, another airline may decide differently. I cant see a problem. We all know of people who missed out at ABC ( because their hair was pink), but got a job at XYZ.

There is more to employment than lots of hours in a log book, and dedication to a previous employer. As I said before, each airline has its own "make-up" ( not only in OZ, but world wide). That make up is influenced by many things, and as a new intake pilot (which regardless of how much experience a pilot has, he will always be), the company must decide if the new pilot will fit into its Company make-up and "culture".

If you do great, if not..well thats how it goes. A pilot may have fitted very well into the AN culture, but in the opinion of ZDB airlines, have no hope of fitting into theirs, thats the way it is.

Well its not short, so I guess I face a lock, I will post at my peril

[oldhasbeen]

I thought I had no life! But getting out of bed at quarter to four to post on PPrune has to take the cake.:eek:

[Airtart]

From correspondents in Singapore
September 07, 2002

SINGAPORE Airlines (SIA) is in talks with an Australian domestic airline, a Singapore report said today.

The report has fuelled speculation that the Singapore carrier is actively seeking a slice of Australian domestic travel.

Discussions on an "interline" agreement with SIA began about a fortnight ago, Armon Hicks, a spokesman for Australia's newest airline Regional Express (Rex), told the Straits Times.

The deal, if it goes through, would allow passengers landing at any of the five Australian cities now served by SIA to go on to 31 other destinations in the country without having to check in their bags again or make separate bookings.

An SIA spokesman treated the latest talk of an Australian venture the same as recent market rumours, saying the airline will "rule nothing in or out. We are leaving our options open with regards to the Australian domestic market".










Among various market rumours has been a suggestion that SIA was considering a proposal to revive Australia's collapsed Ansett airline.

Sydney Airports Corp Ltd spokesman Peter Gibbs told reporters that an SIA evaluation team had inspected the former Ansett terminal at Sydney Airport.

But Ansett lawyer Leon Zwier said this week there had been no discussion with Singapore Airlines.

"We're not sitting down to talks ... we're not doing deals with Ansett names or parts, although if they want to talk to us they would be welcome."

Ansett provided a feeder service for SIA passengers before its sensational collapse last year.

Since Ansett's demise, the Star Alliance group of airlines, including SIA, has lacked a presence in the Australian domestic market, which analysts estimate is costing the Singapore operation hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

Analysts have put the total value of the Australian domestic airline market at nearly 10 billion Singapore dollars ($A10.6 billion).

Qantas has now picked up about 80 per cent of the Australian domestic market, with British tycoon Richard Branson's cut-price carrier Virgin Blue picking up the remainder.

Aviation analysts say that even if SIA seals an agreement with Rex it would not fill the vacuum left by Ansett, as Rex has only two per cent of the market and does not fly key routes such as Melbourne-Sydney.

Rex spokesman Hicks said the new carrier was also in talks with both Qantas and Virgin Blue.

[bentandtwisted]

From ABC online today.

Melbourne and Sydney duel over new airline

Melbourne and Sydney Airports have confirmed they are competing heavily against each other to convince Singapore Airlines to base a domestic airline in their ports.

Singapore Airlines has completed a detailed feasibility study into the viability of a third Australian domestic airline, and has held talks with both airports.

It is proposing a two class carrier to fill the niche between Virgin and Qantas, with regular flights between Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and possibly Adelaide or Perth.

Melbourne Airport's Chris Barlow has told ABC's Inside Business there is a lot of competition between the local airports to secure the much-talked-about airline.

"We're all in competition with each other," he said.

"I mean, I'm all the time trying to grab some traffic from Sydney and I'm sure in reverse that's what's happening as well.

"I'm sure any airline that wanted to start an operation in Australia, we here in Melbourne will be very keen to have them," he said

[gaunty]

Now I know we are all mad.

Melbourne Airport's Chris Barlow has told ABC's Inside Business there is a lot of competition between the local airports to secure the much-talked-about airline.

"We're all in competition with each other," he said.

"I mean, I'm all the time trying to grab some traffic from Sydney and I'm sure in reverse that's what's happening as well.

"I'm sure any airline that wanted to start an operation in Australia, we here in Melbourne will be very keen to have them," he said

I suppose this must be one of the "benefits" of "privatisation".

We get to fight amongst ourselves, or at least see who will bend over quicker and how deep they will cop it, so that a foreign owned entity can come and play merry hell within our domestic airline sector in a way that would be verboten in their own country.

What price a few jobs eh.:rolleyes:

And all this is benefiting who???:mad:

[Boeing Belly]

Who are you talking about Gaunty......Virgin Blue???

[Gnadenburg]

Gaunty

You turn coat.

When a foreign owned VB entered the market you thought it terrific for Australian aviation.

Your stance clearly anti-Singaporian,anti-Ansett but pro-Virgin Blue.

Only a Nazi could better use cheap nationalism as vindication for their own personal views.

[gaunty]

Gnadenburg

I still think VB was/is good for Australian aviation now and in the context of their entry to Oz aviation.
They came into the market way before AN went tits up and worked their plan which worked dragging AN and QF screaming into the real world with a fair structure and strategy that actually stimulated or increased the market as a whole.
As a result we now have travel opportunities of which we could only dream.
That was then this is now.
Notwithstanding that, I am, actually, a QF FF and only a sometime VB user.

SQ had the same opportunity but they chose to try and play a spoiling game in the process of which outsmarted themselves.

Anti Ansett where did you get that idea from, I used to be a huge fan of AN, with a wad of AN boarding pass stubs that would choke a horse, until the arrival of Mr Abeles and his retinue of thugs, notwithstanding their then superior service.
I did not fly them again (the clients choice) until about 9 months before their demise and was really truly shocked at how far down the ladder they had slid after his and Rods depredations.
After that flight, Easter and the end was no surprise at all.
The staff did not deserve the Tesna fiasco, or the union inspired ditching of the bona fide buyer in the first weeks.
One can only hope that one day it will all be aired in court and some people brought to justice, when the staff finally realise just how badly they got "handled".
AN got half the the very high, gauranteed and protected revenue for all those years and p!ssed it all up against the wall. Of course they could afford to be the best when they were gauranteed a profit.

So I'm not entitled to a personal view it appears, nationalist, you bet your a&se, you can call it cheap and you can even invoke the nazi spectre if you wish to diminish yourself and the argument, but personally, I'm sick and tired of Australia and Australians being defensive about our relations with our northern neighbours or anyone else for that matter in the cause of dollars.
I'll let you into a little secret but a few colleagues and I and a couple of other Oz companies actually helped put SQ on the map, way way back and fought a guerilla war with QF who were the IATA area Gorilla in the process. This allowed them to utilise their reciprocal landing rights more fully and add if I recall well over 50,000 seats per year out of Oz in their transition from B707 to B747. We did this by selling seats out of Oz to London return for getting close to half a Perth Sydney fare.
We made money, they made money and we all parted happilly.
This was Kangaroo Route revenue that QF would not believe existed until we showed em how and they came into the game. The revenue out of Australia always "belonged" to QF, but by the time they woke up SQ had a fairly good grip on a good part of it.
That was then this is now.

Australia is over represented in most areas of sport, finance, business, science you name it. We are also respected for calling a spade a spade.
Why then do we just sit and cop it, calmly discussing what would be in most self respecting countries, unthinkable, yet be mortally afraid that we should upset anyone.

I nearly puked when I read the self serving claptrap in the Singaporean article about the "cleverness" of the Singaporean investors deal in Rex.
If that is the best we can do with an important regional communication asset then we are really in trouble as a country.

I just happen to believe that SQ as an airline or culture has nothing of value to add to our national transport infrastucture, that will or cannot be provided by the natural growth of the incumbents.

I thought Blind Freddy could see that the last thing we need right now is another carrier repatriating transport profits overseas, and yes I include VB and QF, at a time when we desperately need it to rebuild our infrastructure.

I also happen to believe that our airline infrastructure is an essential part of the fabric of our national social structure (there goes that nazi again) and would resist any further sell down of QF for that reason.
Australia like the US is a big country, Australia unlike the US has a small widely dispersed population that nonetheless relies like the US on air services as the main form of communication.
That more than 2 thirds of it is or would be controlled by foreign entities is unthinkable.
Likewise Telstra and the Commonwealth Bank.
I seem to recall having to prove that I was British, in the days before we became Australian before I could be issued with an Australian pilot and Flt Radio Telephone Operators license, how prescient were they then given the approach of 9/11.

The US with all of its industrial and economic might guards its airline, systems, control and ownership as jealously as it guards its defence assets and its freedom.
I suspect they have good nationalistic reasons to so do.
I'd like to see you call them nazis, guilty of cheap nationalism as vindication, because this is so.
I'd like to see SQ or any non US entity try and set up a domestic operation there anytime soon.

Can anyone give me a good reason why they should be allowed too here.:confused:
If that makes me a nazi then I guess I must be.

[zone]

Competition Gaunty

Virgin only offer competition to Q on a handfull of routes. The flying public and buisnesses will suffer the gouging of Qantas on the rest.

[Sopwith Pup]

With reference to all the speculation last week about SIA possibly reviving Ansett, this was part of an aricle in this morning's "Australian":

"A YEAR after the dramatic collapse of Ansett, the failed airline's administrators are wasting no opportunities to milk whatever money they can from the shell of the Australian airline."

AND

"They are even trying to sell the tainted Ansett brand name, although administrator Mark Korda said he had heard nothing from Singapore airlines, who were rumoured at one stage to be seeking to revive it."

Mark Korda seems to have sunk that rumour.

[strobes_on]

The two Marks are hardly likely to publicly canvas any options (either way) over the sale of Ansett related brands.

So I would not read anything into Korda's comments about a so called "lack of contact" with SIA.

[Gnadenburg]

Appreciate the lengthy reply.

One good reason.

Because you can`t move the goalposts because they are Singaporian.

A British owned VirginBlue started here.Without any substantial investment in aviation infrastructure.

Agree with you the nation needs a strong airline,with a strong investment in infrastructure-enter QF.And in the national interest the goalposts get moved for QF.

Let VB and the third airline fight it out.No great loss if one falls over.QF will be protected.

Agree with your concerns over our northern neighbour.Disintegration on the Indonesian archipelego always a headache for us and Singapore.

Abdication of regional defence responsibilities by the New Zealanders and an over committed US has seen a natural alignment of us and the Singaporians.Explains their warplanes buzzing the beaches here last week.

Haven`t seen much of the British since the very fall of Singapore,so as unnerving as it is for you,a close economic and defence relationship between Singapore and Australia maybe the very key to regional security.