It never ceases to amaze me why some small Pacific nations without decent and strong economies are prepared to spend mega-bucks on their airlines.
Samoa is one example where owning a somewhat lesser but more than capable aeroplane rather than leasing an expensive aeroplane would make better business sense. Decent 737-800's, for example,can be bought second-hand for far less capital outlay than this new beast and, even with borrowed money to pay for it, would most likely be a more affordable option.
Air Kiribati is another example where a nation is splashing out a quarter of a billion dollars on two new aircraft - their efforts with the ATR were a disaster and why they seem to think this will have a better outcome is intriguing.
The Solomon's leased aircraft cost them a monty when the aeroplane was recently grounded extensively on maintenance. Those lease payments continued in addition to paying others for replacement capacity.
Air Niugini has a long history of dabbling with leasing and often with less than favourable outcomes for the bottom line.
Air Nauru, on the other hand, has owned aircraft (or was paying them off towards ownership) for a long time and managed to grow from several to 4 or 5 as a result of the monthly loan payments gaining them assets rather than lining the pockets of leasing companies. At least, with aircraft owned outright, when they are sitting on the ground the leasing costs that are not supported by income don't have to be met - and that's not even mentioning being saddled with any "return from lease" costs which are generally significant. Having said that, the word is that it's likely to change in that regard and they are looking at leasing.
.
Last edited by patagonianworelaud; 21st Jan 2019 at 08:50.
Reason: Oops, apparently it's no longer Air Nauru but rather Nauru Airlines - go figure!!