AirNZ April fools a day late

[stillalbatross]

So you start with a healthy company, you mismanage it into insolvency, sending the share price on a one way trip to Worthlessville, you don't actually sell off it's assets as you should so investors can get a return, you bring in some archaic nationalistic law that allows the govt to issue 90% more shares and take control. Wiping debt and valuing assets including goodwill at zero. They throw in billions (plural) care of the taxpayer while investors ponder how they haven't got a cent back, their shares are worth a tenth, and 90% of any future dividends will go to the govt. Larger investors like the Sing govt writes off its $700mill shareholding and then a few years later you announce

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10501574

You have a billion or so up your sleeve, didn't you do well.:D

Only in NZ..........................

[KRUSTY 34]

So whatever happened to Sir Whatisname', the incompetent achitecht of that whole fiasco?

[ramyon]

So you start with a healthy company, you mismanage it into insolvency, sending the share price on a one way trip to Worthlessville

So air NZ was mismanaged on purpose? Airlines fail all the time, businesses fail all the time, business is tough....especially the airline business.

you don't actually sell off it's assets as you should so investors can get a return,

If the assets of the company were liquidated you can guarantee it wouldn't be investors getting the money it would be all the other creditors first. Investors would be left with the crumbs if they were lucky....


If Air NZ was left to go under, Shareholders would have been completely out of pocket. Not to mention how much would it have cost the economy, and the tax payer, until another airline took a year or two before it could ramp up significant capacity to replace Air NZ?

So Air NZ has had a turn around and now has alot of money in reserve would you have preferred that they were strugging?

[27/09]

Ramyon

Take a look at other posts by Stillalbatross.

When if comes to Air NZ he/she has a chip on the shoulder the size of a giant kauri. Also doesn't understand the difference between an investment and a handout.

Krusty

Would you be referring to Sir Selwyn C***ing by any chance. His actions and those of the Brierley Group in the Air New Zealand/Ansett debacle deserve close scrutiny.

[puma pants]

This bloody socialist government should have let the airline go broke, instead of gambling with our tax money. The "investment" made on our behalf by Clark and Cullen is still risky in the extreme.
To stash away $1b of our money is criminal.

[max rate]

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn, Loser:zzz:

[27/09]

The "investment" made on our behalf by Clark and Cullen is still risky in the extreme.


Well they could sell out now at quite a tidy profit. If the truth be known they probably have already got a fair proportion of their inverstment back in dividends

[Split Flap]

Not to mention PAYE :{

[puma pants]

Sell out now ??
Who'd buy it??
If there's a buyer, why hasn't it already been sold??
Don't see the private equity funds lining up to take this one on!!
Why is the taxpayer carrying the risk??
Sheltered workshop methinks.

[Spinner69]

Cant be doing too bad a job. The Big man just got a 69% payrise....and still a little nelson/eagle pilot waits..........

[hoss58]

HI Guys

Let me be upfront by saying i'm ex Ansett ground ops.

From my point of view the best outcome at the time would have been for SQ to buy the second 50% of AN as they seemed pretty keen on doing. History will show that ANZ exercised their preemptive rights for the purchase of the second 50% of AN as was their right under the terms of the first sale.

Having said that two words spring to mind "due diligence". I can't for the life of me understand what possessed the ANZ management to make the purchase (nearly sending ANZ to the wall in the process) if they were fully aware ot the state of AN's books. I'll be the first to admit that the cupboard was bare and the value of the assests questionable in the overall scheme of things at the time.

I'm not suggesting that the sale to SQ was a done deal. I,m also not naive enough to realise there were probabily serious political issues involved in the process.

Don't get me wrong, i'm not bitter and twisted and with the exception of one person i hold no grudges and have moved on.

Best regards to all.

Fly safe and play hard.

Hoss58

[27/09]

Hoss

Yep, the Singapore deal was probably a better option.

A few points that might help you understand why things happened the way they did.

Air New Zealand got dicked by the OZ government when they back pedalled on the open skies agreement and stopped Air New Zealand operating in OZ. The NZ government was to spineless to do anything about it, and whats more allowed Ansett to operate in New Zealand

Air New Zealand's way into OZ was to buy into Ansett. When the other 50% came up for sale it made sense on the face of it to buy that too.

The fly in the ointment so to speak was Brierley Investments, who had their own reps on the Air NZ board, and wanted to sell their shareholding in Air New Zealand. Singapore Airlines were an obvious purchaser. By blocking Singapores way to buy Ansett they thought they would force Singapore's hand to buy their Air New Zealand shareholding. So Brierleys were keen to push Air NZ into the Ansett deal.

I think Air NZ were aware of Ansetts risks and could have made it work except for more political interference in Australia which resulted in Ansett being partly or completely shutdown at two crucial times.

There were parties in Oz keen to see Ansett fold, even to the point as has been suggested by some, to try and influence the decisions of the New Zealand goverment- see below.


puma pants et al

What you forget is that when the s**t hit the fan Singapore Airlines was keen to take a substantial shareholding in Air NZ which would have ensured it's survival post the Ansett debacle and may have saved Ansett as well, but our government blocked that from happening.

After doing that, where was an investor to come from to buy Air New Zealand?

The government had backed themselves into a corner and had no option but to bail out Air NZ.

[puma pants]

27/09. Fair point and a good synopsis.
Brierleys were a Singaporean company then (as they still are).
I still believe that the airline should have gone into receivership at the time and then let the true value emerge as a "pheonix".
It would have been an ideal opportunity to rid themselves of the deadwood that maintains a stranglehold on the operational management. Maybe that would be too much to expect.

[hoss58]

27/09 and Puma Pants.

Yep you both make some very good points. Time dulls the memory somewhat and i had forgotten some of the details you mentioned.

It was still a tragedy (for some people literally) to see the demise of an Australian icon.

Best regards to all

Fly safe and play hard

Hoss 58

[27/09]

It would have been an ideal opportunity to rid themselves of the deadwood that maintains a stranglehold on the operational management.

Puma, You are probably right, but the government couldn't risk the massive fallout that would have come with it, especially since they could be held up as one of the major contributors to what happened.

It was still a tragedy (for some people literally) to see the demise of an Australian icon.


Hoss, Couldn't agree more, especially when it happened due underhand actions.

[puma pants]

Sigh!! Yep!!

[pakeha-boy]

Quote 27/09.."Air New Zealand got dicked by the OZ government when they back pedalled on the open skies agreement and stopped Air New Zealand operating in OZ. The NZ government was to spineless to do anything about it, and whats more allowed Ansett to operate in New Zealand"

thankyou!!!!:D

[27/09]

Pakeha Boy,

Only refreshing peoples memories of the facts. I feel like a stuck record sometimes. You may well be better informed than I.

Twas a sad time on both sides of the ditch, which should never have happened.

There has been plenty of outside political interference in the airline scene in NZ.

Going further back in history to when Air NZ was floated, British Airways wanted a piece of Air NZ. They were natural partners as neither competed head on, and their routes were complimentary. If I remember correctly Air NZ management wanted the BA partnership. The Oz government along with Qantas pressurred the New Zealand govt "in the spirit of ANZAC brotherhood" into selling to Qantas instead of BA. Our spineless government caved in and sold to Qantas. As history proved, it was a bad business decision for Air NZ.

[pakeha-boy]

27/09

actually mate,its refreshing to read someones views and come away with the thought that they actually know the plot....like you say,just refreshing the facts and I find your "take" accurate and similar to mine

.....the 89 sagarso was nothing short of sabotage by over zealous mgt types(another story)

..... AirNZ has lived a vicious life....I talk to many expats who have either flown for or managed for AirNZ.....plying their trades overseas.....not all the discussion drags the Airline through the mud,but the stories regarding our govts actions,just about makes you piss blood...........different day,different time......but history,that never goes away.....