Originally Posted by
43Inches
This doesn't do much to control the product luring the passengers into their product. It's a start, but remember at one stage QF had a codeshare and connection with SQ and they got ditched and moved to a middle east partner. From SQs point of view they would want a stable partner in the Australian domestic scene that they can plan long term with.
Pretty sure that was BA (not SQ), which also had a 25% equity stake in QF at one point prior to QF hooking up with EK.
Originally Posted by
43Inches
Having significant controlling shares is the issue. SQ wanted to buy out Ansett and was blocked by AirNZ as they wanted to control the company. SQ was not allowed any board positions in its stake holding so had not much to do with Ansetts woes, the NZ gov was blocking SQ investment in turn for share increases that could have changed Ansetts fortunes earlier. The hookup with VA was in similar circumstances where SQ had very little say in the running of the business and AirNZ and Etihad controlled enough shares to make sure the partners shared traffic flow, but by having three completely different airlines in bed does not work well to provide synergy with one partner, as well as Virgin Group having its say in proceedings.
Fair points on NZ/AN and VA. The CEOs of the airlines with stake in VA also were known to have considerable egos - e.g the then-EY CEO was BFFs with Borghetti where both shared the same views. SQ just wanted the 'feed' for their own carrier. NZ's CEO at the time was clearly the third wheel in the VA 'relationship' where he ended selling out.
However, SQ did try to get into the Australian market (again) by wholly-owning Tiger Airways Australia (via Tiger Airways Holdings). It did not end well for them, plus they were operating in the LCC space rather than the full service space.
Originally Posted by
43Inches
Nothing to do with being a 'Saviour', it's about good business. SQ needs a good partner in Australia, has the money to capitalise, and a network to major international destinations. A lot of the shuffling in Australian aviation has giant egos making decisions that make only marginal business sense. AirNZ offers an Australian partner very little. Connections to the US via NZ, when everyone is going more direct, and poor Europe and Asian connections where the business is booming.
Pretty sure SQ were on record stating that India is their primary focus for international traffic and is the larger revenue market, hence keeping the Vistara India stake. Whilst Australia is up there, it's not SQ's top priority.
VA has UA (replacing DL) and AC for connections to North America. The partnership on the UA end is an extensive codeshare/FF deal that replaces the former DL Joint-Venture.
The Queensland Government also got inolved by throwing taxpayer subsidies to effectively 'charter' a UA 789 to start BNE-SFO, as originally UA wasn't going to start that service and were planning to send BNE pax via SYD or MEL.
If Air NZ is hoping for Australian connections via VA, they will be low yielding at best and would add very little to their 'back of the bus' traffic.
EY has effectively been replaced by QR as the second westbound partner.