View Full Version : SQ domestic confirmed??????

27th Sep 2002, 02:03
If you believe the YSSY message board, SQ is now a certain start-up for early 2003.

Anyone have more to add?

More specifically:

* * *

"A most reliable upper industry source" has informed me this morning that Regional Express (REX) has been in deep discussion with Singapore Airlines. The tom-toms are saying that SQ will be flying domestically within Australia by April 2003. Their fleet is going to be 24 x Airbus aircraft, for cockpit commonality. The A321, A320, A319, and possibly A318.

* * *

Bob is correct. Not sure on the dates however my information comes direct from the Ansett Administrators not through Regional Express. This will definitely happen.

27th Sep 2002, 02:29
Have been told by a very reliable source that SQ have approved the business plan for the new Airline. As recently as last Friday , There was a team of SQ personal in Melbourne around the Ansett Flight Dept.Apparently they have had a Business plan approved by the SQ board , but a start up date is being kept very quiet. Another source believes the 4th April is going to be the date. Lets hope something comes of this , to create more jobs in Australia.

The Flying Lad
27th Sep 2002, 03:25
Anyone have any idea about the new name? Any chance of the name Ansett coming back from the grave?

Personally, I think it still has value - in fact, I think SQ backing helps alleviate the bad baggage it had in its later days - ie. old, "cracking" planes - new fleet. No money, about to collapse, crass management - SQ, fairly rich, seem to doing quite well business wise - perhaps not in the HR side of things, from what I hear.

I think SQ backing gives it a sense of reliability.

27th Sep 2002, 03:53
I hope you guys are right.

Just remember the size of the rumour factory. It's probably working overtime.

Buster Hyman
27th Sep 2002, 05:34
Perhaps the start date should be April 1st. Especially if "Clown & Clown" administrators have anything to do with it!

I hope it gets up though. Especially for all those who are still struggling out there. For me, I doubt if I'd even consider it now.

AN's name, I think, still has worth in this market. As more is revealed about the last few years of AN's running, it could even be beneficial to any future strategies. Consider the fondness for the underdog in Oz. DJ are enjoying the benefits of this phenomenon, and, once you get them on your seats, if you've got the product right, they'll more than likely stay with you.

27th Sep 2002, 06:48
I just hope 'SHAVE' gets a positive call from EK and M.R. takes his 777 in Singa before start-up or it will be "ground-hog" day!

27th Sep 2002, 07:19
Shave has had a negative call from EK.

And hopefully the former chief pilot will not be a part of any new operation. I think the SQ management would have more sense than to put on any of the former management drones.

Hope so for the sake of the airline.

27th Sep 2002, 09:51
Can anyone out there confirm that in the last week, A320 and A321 parking lines have appeared on the tarmac at the old ansett terminal at Sydney airport ?
I think S.Q will have to eventually enter the australian market. The star alliance is unrepresented in the market here and the economies of scale that stem from this alliance should be enough incentive alone for them.
They had a very big role in the crew and staff awards for the failed tesna bid. These awards , according to the authors of " ansett - the collapse " were apparently looked at very carefully by a certain C.E.O of QF.
Let's face it , given the level of customer dissatisfaction and deteriorating service levels at Q.F , any cashed up competitor who were prepared to compete with Q.F in the business market would be likely to pull 10 to 15% market share off them overnight!
It is also interesting to note that Q.F has built up a very large casual and part time ( read disposable ) workforce. I reckon that they believe S.Q will eventually have a try.
It would be interesting to see how they would cope with this as they have never faced a seriously cashed up domestic competitor ever. Ansett was always cash strapped after the merger of Australian and Q.F and the subsequent public float.
I believe there is more blood to be shed in the aussie domestic market yet !

27th Sep 2002, 11:49
If you take a close look around you will also notice the following in addition to the above : B717, B747( gate 49), B146 DH 8, B1900 plus a few others . I do not believe that one can read anything into what is marked on the NEW T2 Terminal area Probable just edging their bets !!!!!!

27th Sep 2002, 13:10
yeah , thanks airbournespanner, unfortunately I don't live in Sydney so I don't have the opportunity to take a look around., that's why I was seeking knowledgable info .
Will be an interesting next 12 months or so in the aus aviation industry though

Going Boeing
27th Sep 2002, 13:58
Normally, when a new domestic airline starts up in Australia, the airline that suffers the most is the weakest (financially & marketing) of the incumbents. I believe VB management are very worried which is why they have been trying to get exclusive rights to the AN terminal in SYD. If they are still operating out of their current terminal in SYD when SQ starts up then they are in serious trouble.

27th Sep 2002, 23:51
I can just see the SQ board at the meeting to decide if they are going to go ahead with a domestic airline;

"right gentlemen, its agreed that we will start and we will push for about 6 months from now"

"does anyone have any final questions?"

"yes, we better make sure that we get some stop lines painted at Sydney airport right away, its the most important thing we have to do and we cant go any further until thats done"

"great point, I would not have thought of that. A hearty bonus coming your way"

28th Sep 2002, 00:09
From the fact side of the argument apparently CASA and SACL are always the last to be advised of any impending operation.
This was the statement from a government official some months back when the media was jumping on the bandwagon about SQ resurrecting AN and the CASA and SACL reps said "we have been told nothing about this!"

Rumours always abound about Asian looking gentlemen wandering around Terminal 2 (the old AN terminal) inspecting along with paint-lines etc etc.
What a crock!

They have done absolutely zip in terms of any marketing,recruitment or anything else important that would have to be done by now.

I ask you these questions and if you can answer them all then I just may believe these guys may be interested.

Do they have a confirmed AOC?
Have they secured terminal space?
Have they recruited the requisite staff?
Have they commenced to advertise in advance?
Have they set up an operations base from which to run this mysterious airline?
Have they sought any tax concessions from the state or federal govts to date?

All the above things take time and money and I dont think they can be achieved before April 03.
As always people believe what they want rather than the true facts.

28th Sep 2002, 04:24
A friend who flys for VB passed this info my way a few days ago.

He said that the mgt had published a notice to the pilots, and probably all staff, which said that there would indeed be a third airline, but it wouldn't be SQ.

They didn't speculate on who it would be though.

Perhaps VB pilots could comment on this notice.

28th Sep 2002, 05:49
Sounds interesting ....

I know that this topic has been touched on before ...

I was wondering what people think about - if there is a third airline that enteres Oz, how will DJ and QF stand with a 3rd ??

Will DJ keep going strong ?

Will QF/Australian buckle ??

Interesting topic ..... love to hear what people think ...

28th Sep 2002, 06:32
The third Airline will be VB International, not as silly as it sounds.

28th Sep 2002, 13:17
Damn shame, SHAVE...... Damn shame.

Burning bridges last forever more......

Now if we could get M.R. to open a pilot shirt shop.....!!

29th Sep 2002, 01:27
How all the information is out there but nobody believes it is going to happen .
I also believe the media is making up the QF/ SQ Rumours to thow us off track, why would the 2 get together when SQ can create a QF equivalent all on there terms, hard work but will pay massive dividends long term.
Im very nervous about being on the tail end of QF seniority.:(

Cessna Capt
29th Sep 2002, 01:36
The third airline might use the name Silk Air :eek:

Silk Air is the regional wing for SQ and does alot of runs around the South East Asian Region.

Silk Air also operates an all Airbus fleet!!!!!

Makes senses:cool:


Boeing Belly
29th Sep 2002, 01:38
Speaking of SilkAir, I heard from a mate up there that they intend to start services to Cairns and Darwin in the not too distant future.

Airspeed Ambassador
29th Sep 2002, 05:37
Dear Ramboflyer,

Do you really work for Qantas? Please tell us how you got through the QF psych tests without setting off the alarm bells. A search and read through your contributions to PPRUNE leads to the conclusion that you are a total fraud.

Nervous about being on the tail end of the QF seniority list! Get real!!

Am I the only one that thinks this guy is bogus?!:rolleyes:

29th Sep 2002, 07:27
The third Airline will be VB International, not as silly as it sounds.

jetblues, heard the same thing!

Starting with Asia first (mid next year) and then expanding!

Could be very interesting!


Truth Seekers Int'nl
29th Sep 2002, 07:45
jetblues - that rumour is also doing the rounds up here in Hong Kong. came out of the sim centre in Gatwick according to a British pilot I had a beer with two weeks ago.

29th Sep 2002, 11:27
Well....If VirginBlue are to become the next major carrier here in Australia who is going to put up the money? Certainly not Virgin Blue in their present format.

Who do we know that has the ability to set up a 24 aircraft airline in a short space of time using existing facilities and infrastructure backed up by their own existing infrastructure?

Knowing something of the SE Asian culture I would be surprised to see them run with the Ansett name,

1. Because their superstitious nature would tell them not to become associated with failure, and

2. To fly around with the Ansett name on your aircraft would be to invite a writ being nailed to the mast anytime an aircraft touched down somewhere where any money was owed. The name would have to be changed to, for example. 'Ansett 2003 Pty'.

If it is SQ that are to be the founders of the next airline then a lot of the stumbling blocks mentioned have already been overcome, things like catering contracts, fuel contracts, ground handling, engineering and (possibly) AOC etc. and their financial power alone will probably ensure reasonable terminal access.

Eastwest Loco
29th Sep 2002, 11:48
Dicky Branson made one very very large error - He tore up the SQ cheque very publicly.

That is something you just do NOT do to Asian businessmen as it it is percieved that they have lost face.

Stand back sportsfans - SQ is on the way and he first target will be DJ - and then when honour has been restored the job of redirecting the market away from the rat wll commence.

We are in for some very interesting times.

29th Sep 2002, 12:19
Ummm didn't he tear up the AN/ANZ cheque?? And doesn't SQ hold a large share in Virgin Atlantic???

Eastwest Loco
29th Sep 2002, 12:28
Yes stormy - you are correct - but just who do you think was bankrolling that little operaion??

This whole disaster has been orchestrated by the Lion and they are far from finished.

Best all


29th Sep 2002, 13:05

Perhaps, but you know what was at the end of the Yellow Brick Road.

And this as sure as hell ain't Kansas.:D

29th Sep 2002, 13:34
EWL, as usual, I think you speak with great insight. I think interesting times may lay ahead. Any tips on a start date?

If SQ really start, and want to get serious, things may get awful interesting in Kansas

Buster Hyman
29th Sep 2002, 14:27
Blue Eagle.

Perhaps, if they did run with the AN name, it would be Ansett Airlines of Australia. No legal or financial legacy, a name synonymous with our reputable aviation history, no full stops, no golden ashtrays, no 89 baggage (both ways).

A name linked to the good times in Oz aviation. Push it hard in the media & hey presto, you're up & running!

I don't think it's for me though. I'll keep the memories of an airline I was proud to work for and move on...

29th Sep 2002, 18:58
jetblues, wouldn't any international VB be the FOURTH 'major' airline in Australia currently?

QF, VB, Australian and........= FOUR! :D ;)

In that case, it seems very silly trying to be the third!! :cool:

Boeing Belly
29th Sep 2002, 23:04
S.A.L.E have 30 A319/320/321s on order and still to be delivered. I wonder if some of them could be for the third airline?:confused:

29th Sep 2002, 23:45
Guys - all I hear on this thread are if's, buts, maybe's and the standard "my butchers brothers wife who has a brother in England" etc etc etc.

I listed some hard requirements on page 1 which would have to be met in order to achieve a start up date.

SQ has had more than ample opportunity to start and now that there is available space at the old AN terminal which isnt going to get cheaper and which may go away then why haven't they started?

As time goes by regaining market share from QF/VB will be more difficult and they have not any confirmed contracts with companies, govt, large business enterprises etc etc.

The clock is ticking, we hear rumours and if you believe the ex AN airbus drivers a start up is imminent but in my opinion until those conditions I listed on P1 are achieved then its all just hot air and wishful thinking on their behalf.

I figured the ex AN guys would have learnt as they trusted SQ to be their Knight in shining armour some 18 months ago and it just didnt happen

Also Dr Cheung (who has little face left) will have to endure what could possibly be a sustained period of heavy losses just to fill in a gap in the start alliance.
Is it worth it?
He has come under very heavy fire in the Singapore Press of late and the pressure to suceed will have to be enormous.

Also SQ are in the throws of negotiating a deal to purchase part of South African Airlines which has the stamp of approval by everyone concerned.
That'll be where the A320's etc will end up.

If they are going to do it why not get going now to achieve sales over easter (the busiest period in the year) but in my opinion a tie-up with someone is in the making and more realistic.

The rest is a smoke screen at this stage and failure in any shape or form is not an option for Dr Cheung.

Boeing Belly
29th Sep 2002, 23:52
I don't really think they'll start either, but if they did they would already have a $200 million per year contract.....Star Alliance on-carriage. That goes a long way to complying with one of your points. Not to mention dis-gruntled QF passengers.

whipping boy
30th Sep 2002, 00:06
So much talk about yellow lines on aprons in SYD but what about the rest of Oz.

VB are in all the ex AN terminals around the country and if a new entrant was to arrive they would be in the old VB areas(ex SYD).

SQ operating out of tents and tin sheds?

30th Sep 2002, 00:09
Let's face it, it will effect VB but nowhere near as much as it will affect Qantas. I'm still yet to be convinced that SQ will even start up. I find myself agreeing with most of what TIMMEE says. (as unbelievable as that may seem)

30th Sep 2002, 01:09
From Crikey.com
Singapore goes to polls on Nov 3
Government run Straits Times
Friday, October 19, 2001
Bertha Henson
Associate News Editor

NOV 3 is Polling Day, nine days after Nomination Day on Oct 25.

The announcement comes just a day after the new electoral map was made public, making the 2001 election the snappiest of all snap polls Singapore has held.

The President, on the advice of the Prime Minister, dissolved Parliament yesterday and issued the election writ.

A flurry of other announcements followed: There will be 10 nomination centres, the election deposit is S$13,000 [A$14,107] for each candidate, and Home Affairs ministry deputy secretary Tan Boon Huat was named the Returning Officer.

For the first time, aspiring MPs must obtain a Political Donation Certificate ststing that they had not received any foreign funding.

Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong told reporters yesterday that he planned to call the GE early next year, but changed his mind after the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States.

He wanted it out of the way quickly so that the country can focus on bigger issues, especially on creating jobs during the deepening recession.

He was also concerned about Singapore’s security. “The risk at the moment is very small for Singapore, but we never know.”

PM Goh, the People’s Action Party chief, is in Shanghai for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit. He will return Monday.

Yesterday, his party introduced its first four new candidates out of a slate of about 27. PAP’s first assistant secretary general Lee Hsien Loong described the batch as “at least equal, probably better than” the 1997 one.

The four are: Neurosurgeon Balaji Sadasivan, 46; Madam Halimah Yacob, 47, Assistant Secretary-General of the NTUC; Madam Ho Geok Choo, 45, Vice-President of Human Resources in SIA Engineering Company; and Mr Raymond Lim, 42, Managing Director of Temasek Holdings.

Like PM Goh, the Deputy Prime Minister also noted the sober circumstances in which the elections were being held.

Their remarks appear to confirm talk that the PAP would pitch itself to the two million voters as the party best able to lead the country in these uncertain times. It will unveil its manifesto today.

A Nov 3 General Election comes as no surprise to political observers, who had noted the heightened activity at the PAP grassroots and the “window” in the Government’s calendar of activities.

Opposition politicians also sniffed an early poll, when they described the recently announced S$11.3-billion [A$12.6-billion] off-Budget package to help Singaporeans cope with the downturn and the New Singapore Shares as PAP “vote-buying” tactics.

Still, they appeared to have been caught off-guard and, to a man [sic], yesterday accused the PAP of bullying tactics.

Said National Solidarity Party’s Steve Chia, who will contest the Chua Chu Kang seat: “They are afraid of losing, and cannot afford to lose. That’s why they are using such underhand tactics by not giving the opposition any preparation time.”

The opposition now has seven days to settle its slate of candidates and where to field them – no mean feat given that the boundary changes were announced only on Wednesday.

The Singapore Democratic Alliance said last night that it will field eight candidates, in one five-member Group Representation Constituency and three single-seat wards.

As in past elections, it will be a hectic nine-day campaign period, the minimum provided for under the law.

Polling Day, a Saturday, is a public holiday.”


A Singapore watcher responds

I don’t know where to begin commenting on this piece - I think there’s a giggle in nearly every paragraph there, from the ludicrous timescales, gerrymandering, registrations, to the PM being out of the country and the one-sided journalism.

I'm sure you'd have more to say in comparing this to Australia’s electoral policies. As you probably know, Singapore’s political system is the most one-sided democracy in the entire world, but the people are happy with it that way.

It’s often been said the Singapore public are relative automatons, following the path the government has laid out for them, creativity and entrepreneurship stifled, but generally happy, safe, well-fed and economically strong. Marx eat your heart out.

So we really ought to encourage them to come and mess with our aviation marketplace.:rolleyes:

30th Sep 2002, 05:16
You'll all find that when the news is released, SQ has signed an on carriage deal with Qantas apparently at better rates than what Qantas offers one world partners.

But one must remember this is a rumour network :rolleyes:

Boeing Belly
30th Sep 2002, 05:36
I've heard that as well. I don't think it's a rumour. As far as the third airline is concerned I think it's all over red rover.:(

30th Sep 2002, 06:57
If you had a close look at the cheque that Richard Branson tore up, it was actually from the Qantas Credit Union.

30th Sep 2002, 08:02
Has anyone considered the possibility of a financial alliance between v.b and S.Q?

How would Q.F react to that ?

30th Sep 2002, 08:38

Seeing as you have asked your questions twice I guess you want an answer!

Do they have a confirmed AOC? Alliance Airlines have
( international too!)

Have they secured terminal space? Alliance Ailines have.

Have they recruited the requisite staff? Alliance Airlines have.

Have they commenced to advertise in advance? Alliance Airlines have the groundwork done.

Have they set up an operations base from which to run this mysterious airline? Alliance Airlines have.

Have they sought any tax concessions from the state or federal govts to date? Alliance Airlines have.

So the answer must be...................

30th Sep 2002, 10:03
Keg point taken re 3rd airline, thankfully I'm not the only punter to get it wrong.

Someone mentioned a possible tie-up between VB and SIA. This has been discussed to death some time ago on pprune. Yes SIA did buy 49% of Virgin Atlantic some time ago, and have lost a fortune through this investment. I could be wrong however I understand VB is a stand alone company in the Virgin Empire. As such SIA could invest sure, however why start an airline to compete against an empire you are an investor in ? Shoot yourself in the foot ?

30th Sep 2002, 10:15
TIMMEE - You have a habit of repeating points as facts that have already been successfully rebutted!

Just one for now. The reason SQ didn't buy Ansett when they wanted to was because ANZ stopped them by exercising their right to buy the remaining 50% that they did not already have.
SQ didn't withdraw, they were never allowed to compete.

30th Sep 2002, 10:55
Spot on Qduck.

30th Sep 2002, 11:10
:cool: Great sign-off Gaunty from a legendary show.

30th Sep 2002, 11:16
I'm yet to see evidence of direct singaporean funds behind alliance, unlike rex which is now over 35% owned by singaporean investors, and in major talks with Sia..... can somebody explain why Sia would use a few F100’s and a braz to enter the domestic market here.
Wouldn’t they be more interested in through traffic to a destination like Canberra rather than gladstone and rocky????

30th Sep 2002, 21:45
BlueEagle .

The points I raised were extremely relevant and were repeated because nobody could provide anything of real substance.
After much rumour/innuendo and blatant laughabale rumour mungering finally Q-duck answered my questions.

Blue Eagle - the points you made about Air NZ/SQ are a piece of obvious history which is dead and buried and common knowledge to one and all (especially those 16,000+ Australians that lost their careers).

Thanks Q-duck for answering the questions I asked.

Can anyone give a web-site for Alliance Airlines perhaps?

30th Sep 2002, 22:37


30th Sep 2002, 23:24
From what I've been told Alliance have plans for many more F100 routes, but they need more aircraft. Once another 2 - 4 aircraft arrive than they will announce further routes. Another reason SIA would use Alliance and their F100's, is the F100's are fitted with Business seats.

There are many things happening in the background and the owners/investers in Alliance have been in the game for many years. From what I've seen they will not announce anything until it's signed and in the bag:cool:

30th Sep 2002, 23:39
TIMMEEEE – you asked (referring to Singapore Airlines) :

“Do they have a confirmed AOC?”

Yes – they do.

Australian AOC number F503421-08 (http://www.casa.gov.au/casadata/aoc/download/F503421-08.pdf) was issued 30-May-2002 and is valid until 31-May-2005.

Although this AOC does not explicitly authorise domestic operations, and although the smallest aircraft type currently listed on the certificate is an A310-300, the variation of an existing AOC is generally much less painful (and is much faster) than obtaining a new AOC from scratch.

luna landing
1st Oct 2002, 03:39
Virgin expects 30 pc
By Megan Neil

LOW cost airline Virgin Blue expected to have 30 per cent of Australia's aviation market by the end of 2003, its half owner Patrick Corp said.

Patrick managing director Chris Corrigan also said the stevedoring and logistics group would not sell down its 50 per cent stake in the airline if Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Group went ahead with a float of Virgin Blue next year.
Mr Corrigan told investors in New York that Virgin Blue now had 20 per cent of the market, up from 10 per cent a year ago.

Qantas Airways Ltd currently held around 78 per cent, he said.

"We have aircraft on order which will be delivered before March of next year, which should take us to a 30 per cent market share we believe by December of 2003," Mr Corrigan told the Merrill Lynch Australasia investment conference.

But he said the target was dependent on better terminal access, particularly at the former Ansett terminal at Sydney airport.

"Hopefully reason will prevail there and we'll get access to the old Ansett facility there and that will allow us to expand," he said.

"It's not critical for us in the next 12 months but obviously the sooner it happens the better."

Mr Corrigan said Patrick did not have "any particular interest" in selling down its Virgin Blue stake, acquired for $260 million in March, but he noted that the Virgin Group was pursuing a secondary sale of its interest.

"If that occurs or not I don't know but it wouldn't surprise me if that occurred some time in the first half of next year."

He later told journalists that Patrick had an obligation to sell down five per cent of its stake if that occurred, but did not know if the company would be required to do so and it would not divest a greater share.

The airline was currently servicing 19 of the top 20 routes in Australia, which represented 85 per cent of all passenger movements in Australia.

The last - the Sydney to Canberra route - would follow when Virgin Blue gained access to the Ansett terminal in Sydney, Mr Corrigan said.

There has been talk of a third airline entering the Australian market, with Singapore Airlines the subject of much speculation.

But Mr Corrigan did not think a third carrier was likely.

"Do I think it's likely, no I don't think it's very likely but the airline business does seem to be notoriously unpredictable."

privacy © The Australian

1st Oct 2002, 05:24
I think you are drawing a long bow there BIK. That AOC is specifically for International operations and is the same one that any International airline gets.

A domestic operation is quite different and would probably require a specific AOC.

1st Oct 2002, 07:49
What about Virgin teaming up with someone like SIA and/or redefining/refining their product?

At the same time, negotiate a great deal from one of the manufacturers and/or various leasing companies for continued expansion?

The 737NG does an excellent job but would the A320 be a better choice if you had modified your business model to include a dual class service, similar to what Alliance is offering, i.e. a full business product plus a 'low cost' service in Y?

I think it would be hard for anyone to justify starting a sizeable (new) airline in Oz at the moment (or elsewhere!) however it would be a lot easier to slightly amend your product to allow higher yield pax to travel with you - as opposed to the competition. Just need to be careful about not spoiling what you already have...

1st Oct 2002, 10:19
TIMMEE - Your post said:

"I figured the ex AN guys would have learnt as they trusted SQ to be their Knight in shining armour some 18 months ago and it just didnt happen "

Quite what are you getting at? You mentioned 'trust' and imply that SQ let Ansett down and therefore possibly shouldn't be trusted in the future, not so, ANZ let Ansett down and yes, everybody, with the possible exception of yourself, knows this.

Buster Hyman
1st Oct 2002, 11:54
So, how is QF's AOC written? Do they have 2 AOC's for DOM & INTL or 1?

Domeair. Don't forget that DJ would never, ever want the loyal Aussie battlers to pay a cent more than they have to! It's why they are so charitable & in there fighting for us. That reminds me, can registered charities apply for an AOC??:rolleyes:

1st Oct 2002, 22:20
Qantas Airways Limited - AOC SY 216147-36 (http://www.casa.gov.au/casadata/aoc/download/SY216147-36.pdf)

Qantas Limited - AOC SY 503021-14 (http://www.casa.gov.au/casadata/aoc/download/sy503021-14.pdf)

and just for completeness :

Virgin Blue Airlines Pty Ltd - AOC BN 567591-37 (http://www.casa.gov.au/casadata/aoc/download/BN567591-37.pdf)

3rd Oct 2002, 09:20
Judging by an article in the Fin Review today, it looks like SQ is waiting to see the result of a QF stake in Air Nz.

If Air NZ goes to One World, chances are that SQ would start in its own right domestically. According to the report, this would cost Air NZ around $ 40 million and forms part of the QF - Air NZ talks.

On the other hand, if QF can be lured to Star Alliance, forget any direct SQ domestic operation in Australia.

Anyone have other ideas on the subject ?

3rd Oct 2002, 10:33
Is there a realistic chance of QF being lured to the Star Alliance? Would BA, with their holding in QF, be able to block it?

4th Oct 2002, 09:40
I have still got a case of Crown Lager in my shed, that says Singapore Airlines don't have the cods to start a new airline down here in Oz.

Any takers?

:D :D :rolleyes:

4th Oct 2002, 13:39

Nup my case and yours are fairly safe methinks.;)

4th Oct 2002, 17:33
All this talk is about QF leaving OW and joining Star... what about the reverse, SQ joining OW??

Have they ever really looked comfortable in Star??

Buster Hyman
4th Oct 2002, 18:17
Never mind Oneworld and Star, SQ will create their own alliance & it will be full of airlines it controls!

Eastwest Loco
5th Oct 2002, 08:13

Dr Cheong received a huge slap in the face and lost face when Dicky Branson gleefully tore up his cheque.

The ox is slow but the earth is patient.

He will regain face on this particular battlefield.

One does not do that to a powerful Asian wihout retribution.


5th Oct 2002, 10:54

That assumes that there is anybody about who really cares.

My favourite scene of all time is in the Indiana Jones movie where this HUGE guy dressed all in black arab gear, burnous and all waving this ENORMOUS Scimitar around steps out of the crowd, who all melt away around him, leaving Indiana facing him alone.

Simple, ....Indiana rolls his eyes shoots him dead and gets on with saving the girl.

The good Dr does not seem to have learned that whilst the ox may be slow and the earth patient, the rest of the world is getting on with it and all the inscrutable gameplay isn't worth a hill of beans. Eventually you have to front and put your money where your mouth is.
Ads they say in the used car business "money talks bulls hit walks"

Oh and BTW in case he didn't learn it in Business school 101, retribution is the very last thing on which to base your business plan. It will gaurantee failure.

Buster Hyman
5th Oct 2002, 12:03
...Ahh, yes Gaunty, but don't you remember, in one of the sequels, Indy tries it again, but there was no gun in his holster!

Having a cheeky grin & being cocky, only gets you so far in business these days. Almost time to move on Sir Dick eh?

6th Oct 2002, 11:23
If the 'Dear Doctor' in Singapore really wanted to slap young Richard down all he would have to do is sell his stake in Virgin Atlantic to BA!:D

6th Oct 2002, 13:47
SQ is the biggest joke in the Aviation world. A city state island
carrying on as one of the worlds premier airlines. Their meagre
population barely supports patronage of their ZOO, as nice as
that is!
2 million odd people who through their mandatory government
provident fund run airliners around the world on semi-slave
wages and conditions. SQ's success is underwritten by the
public of Singapore not by true competition with commercial
airlines. Not much debt means high profits, especially with crew
now reposing in economy seats for crew rest. The world of
aviation will one day awake to SQ's sham. They actually use
Australian scenery to advertise their product. Wake up folks...

7th Oct 2002, 00:27
Are they interested......maybe.
Are they confirming it..........NO .

BlueEagle......nice thought but would BA have the cash! :D

Skinny Dog
7th Oct 2002, 08:32
People / pilots all seem to get excited by “on carriage” and alliances albeit Star or One World etc.
On carriage really means very low yield seats to smaller carriers like VB, Southwest Airlines, Ryanair etc, if they participate or become part of any alliance. Without sophisticated yield management software and smart business planning you can go broke (As did AN), flying around FULL airplanes and providing on carriage seats to big airlines.
No carrier is going to pay VB or any other new carrier for that matter, $300-400, Economy, to fly someone from Sydney to Melbourne return when they have to fly the same pax to the other side of the world, and back, for about $1500-$1800.
Obviously the yield would be higher Business Class but that market is also shrinking. A recent survey in the US indicated that over 60% of business were considering trying to reduce travel costs, ie using low cost carriers in the US like Jet Blue and Southwest.
Companies like Southwest and Ryanair (and probably now VB) are successful because they avoid on carriage and alliances and generate a satisfactory yield while maintaining a low cost structure, carrying their own passengers.
The aviation scene in Australia has now changed forever. Any new carrier will have to be low cost to have any hope. The public now have a taste for low fares regardless of what we as pilots think or feel and airline should be.

Boeing Belly
7th Oct 2002, 09:34
Low fares......crap!!!!! You can fly on QF for the same price as Virgin nine times out of ten.

7th Oct 2002, 12:03
Phlap1 - You sound awfully like a chap called 'Titan' that used to post a lot of very anti SIA stuff on PPRuNe, any relation?

Singapore has a population of five million and it may not pay top dollar but it certainly isn't in the slave trade either.

Does it matter that they are an island state running an international airline? They manage to run it very well from the commercial point of view and make a whole lot of money too.
SQ make no bones about the fact that they are a state run airline with some private interest, paticularly since 50% of the profit goes back to the Government/State/People.

You may dislike them but the fact is they are out there and doing well and I don't think there is much of a 'sham' for anyone to wake up to.

7th Oct 2002, 21:13
And often cheaper Boeing Belly. Check the websites daily, and notes the seemingly illogical differences.

8th Oct 2002, 00:42
BB and Citizen XX

That's bloody funny. Can I have some of what you're on:D

Skinny Dog
8th Oct 2002, 02:03
BB and Citzen XX…… you guys must be sniffing petrol. I was not having a go at QF but rather just making a comment about the misguided belief that SIA is some white night out to re invent the wheel here in Oz ….. but as you did bring it up, a recent Sydney Melbourne return fare using QF at the times I wanted was roughly double that available on the competition (I won’t mention their name as you seem sensitive):p

Boeing Belly
8th Oct 2002, 02:45
No mate, no petrol here. You can have a go at QF if you want, I've got no problem with them or Virgin. From personal experience and from the experiences of friends and family, invariably, you can find the same deal on both carriers. I accept that on some flights Virgin are cheaper, as is QF on others. With the extras you get at QF ( Terminals at SY so you don't get wet, lounges, in-flight entertainment, food of varying quantity and standards, more flexible time-table, more flexible conditions with respect to tickets etc) you would think that QF would be significantly more expensive at all times. This is simply not the case. For value for money, I think that QF is the better deal. It's a bloody long way from SY to PH when you're sitting in wet clothes, eating an expensive muffin and can't even watch a movie!!

Prong Wallop
8th Oct 2002, 03:09
Whiskery is the only one making sense here, although I can't work out why the beer is in the shed.
The zipperheads do not have the coddies to move into Australia as proven by their inability to act when the chance was really there after Ansett's demise. They froze when the prize was there for the taking. Dr. Cueball is now indulging himself in a bit of vengeful retaliation after recognising his missed opportunity. Notice how the talk of a third domestic has reduced Qantas' ability to borrow funds on market? Qantas' capital expansion plans are being throttled by increasing costs of finance that will make marginal capital expenditures unattractive. If Dr. Cueball can make Qantas' cost of capital relatively more expensive than SQ's costs he wins in the competition race.

8th Oct 2002, 03:49
Well I can think of a few reasons why SIA wouldn't have moved into Australia immediately after the Ansett collapse but they don't have much to do with a lack of 'coddies'.

1. There is no way SIA would have stepped in and saved Ansett as the financial baggage would have crippled their efforts to resurrect the airline.

2. SIA got their fingers burned both by the near demise of ANZ and the non peformance of Virgin Atlantic.

3. The end of Ansett coincided with the events of Sept. 11 and at that time no one, world-wide, was thinking of expanding existing airlines or setting up new ones, quite the reverse in fact as there were closures and retrenchments all over the place.

8th Oct 2002, 05:37
Blue Eagle, I would be interested to know "a few reasons" why SIA would move into the Oz domestic scene now. There are two players, one has 80% of the market and an established business supporter base and the other has marketed a product and service that has already put one competitor out of business and has a similar supporter base to QF.

It would be ideal for the consumer to have a third airline flying around in competition with Virgin and Qantas, however, I suggest it would take a pretty gutzzee move to start up a new airline in this present climate. Now I'll go out and buy another case of Crownies and put them in the shed but the bet remains the same:-

SQ don't have the cods to start up a third airline, in their own right, down here in Oz.

Keep the faith:]

Prong Wallop
8th Oct 2002, 08:04
Actually Blue Eagle I didn't mention anything about taking over Ansetts' assets or in this case liabilities. The fact remains that the demise of Ansett offered the prize of significant market share, particularly the high yield segment of the market, to someone like SQ who has the infrastrcture in place to act quickly and decisively. They dropped the ball. Got the collywobbles. The debacle at Air NZ cost them a packet but what is conveniently forgotten is that SQ were represented on the board throughout the entire process and could have acted to protect their investment or bail out and pick up the pieces for zip later on. Once again they took their eye off the ball. Outside the protected corporate Singapore environment with its financial subsidies that result in lower financing costs, SQ management has a lousy track record.
Maybe I should change my mind. Perhaps they are stupid enough to try and take 50% off Qantas. I doubt they would get any of the virgin share. Remember 50% of Qantas' share is still only 35% of the total domestic market, historically proven not to be enough to support a full service carrier.
I still reckon Dr. Mudguard is just irritating the Qantas (defacto Aussie Airlines) capital expansion to deflect competition from SQ.

8th Oct 2002, 10:05
Whiskery You may be right, I'm not taking any bets, (I prefer VB anyway!), my contributions to this thread are just an attempt to quote the facts rather than some of the more outlandish opinion that gets expressed from time to time.

Prong Wallop As I said, no one in their right mind would have considered any kind of expansion at the time Ansett went down, the entire industry, balls and all was moving in the opposite direction. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

As for the board member in ANZ from SQ, nothing he could do anyway, he would have been outvoted, sure SQ knew what was happening but was powerless to stop it. No way SQ could have 'protected their investment', the whole airline was on the verge of going bankrupt anyway.

10th Oct 2002, 01:27
Skinny Dog,

No sensitivity here. I've travelled ten domestic sectors in the last 13 months, and on 9 occasions QF was the same or cheaper.

On one, QF was $180 and VB $420!! Big difference there, and not the norm, but the point I make is that VB has promoted themselves as a low cost carrier, but that doen't translate to low fares, necessarily. They're playing on that point, and good luck to them for doing so. Buyer beware.

The public may think so and book VB without checking, but if the fare is the same with QF, or even a little more, then I'd take QF any day.

11th Oct 2002, 00:51
Dear Blue Eagle You have succeeded in exposing my true past
identity.But, I believe you are in fact none other than Gladiator !! the colder weather has changed your opinions. What in heavans
name has my possible previous handle got to do with the facts
on SQ. Okay I got the population wrong. The biggest business
in Singapore is SQ, the government owns it through the process
of a mandatory universal provident fund. My point was that SQ
does not compete in a level field sense. It is a commercial sham,
it has used cleverly negotiated historical rights to operate.
If you believe that crew rest in economy is not approaching slave
labour conditions- you ain't done long haul.

11th Oct 2002, 11:29
Gladiator = BlueEagle? Don't think so!!!

Titan = Phlaps 1? Nah!

luna landing
12th Oct 2002, 02:43
The son of a very good friend has it on good authority that Singapore will be operating in Oz domestically first half of next year.

Why don't the ex Ansett staff get behind Singapore and talk to them about a staff/share deal. Singapore are well known for 'looking after' employees.

Put some of the money that the Administrator owes in to buy shares.;)

Buster Hyman
12th Oct 2002, 04:27
I can't imagine anyone worse than the staff to run an airline (with the possible exception of the previous ANZ management team!) Just look at United.

luna landing
12th Oct 2002, 04:32
Buster - show me where I said the staff should run the airline - not my thoughts at all.

12th Oct 2002, 11:45
Blue Eagle -

With respect to my previous quote of "SQ being a knight in shining armour" this was a quote from many an ex Ansett driver who were confident right until Sept 14 that "Singapore would never let AN-Air NZ collapse" and "there is too much to lose if we collapse".
What prophetic words.
These same guys were also so cock-sure of SQ buying the remnants early in the piece and then were very smug about Ansett MKII starting up and kicking "severe Virgin butt".
I dont think you have to be a neuro surgeon to comment on this one.

Speaking to these same ex AN A320 pilots some weeks back they were so confident that SQ would be starting an airline in Oz using A320s that one had even delayed an interview with an overseas operator and others were delaying applying overseas until they heard something.

Reackon I must be from another planet because that was the way I was treated after telling these guys they have blast-furnace sludge for brains and telling these guys they have to accept reality rather than rumours and maybe's.
Wishful thinking is nice but not at the expense of survival and prosperity.
12 months on these guys are still unemployed and living on a wing and a prayer so to speak and refusing to accept "lesser" positions to what they were used to.

I guess some people just cant be told and that's testimony to the fact that ego is a hindrance.

Blue Eagle you ask about QF being lured into the Star Alliance.
Can you imagine the legal wrangling involved with frequent flyer points by itself let alone the other myriad of legal and commercial nightmares?

12th Oct 2002, 12:48

You fellows are not listening!!!!

"It would be ideal for the consumer to have a third airline flying around in competition with Virgin and Qantas, however, I suggest it would take a pretty gutzzee move to start up a new airline in this present climate. Now I'll go out and buy another case of Crownies and put them in the shed but the bet remains the same:- "

Alliance you boofhead!

I prefer the Scottish brown stuff anyway. You can keep your crownies in the shed.


Buster Hyman
12th Oct 2002, 15:22
Luna - Show me where I said that you said it?:p

12th Oct 2002, 22:59
TIMMEE - Yup I am inclined to agree with your sentiments re the ex Ansett pilots, I think we were, in part, at cross purposes earlier.

I was always told by the 'old men' of the profession that you should always take the first firm offer in aviation, you cannot afford to hang back and wait on the off chance of a better opportunity.

My point regarding the Star Alliance and QF was very much a case of saying, "Do you really think this could happen, because I don't think so". I agree, the mess involved would be unmanageable.

13th Oct 2002, 00:21
Thanks a heap Blue Eagle.

With regard to the "unravelling" from one Loyalty Program to another (ie: Star Alliance to New World/Skyteam etc) it would be very interesting to see if it could actually be done, what would it cost (apart from the standard exit fees) and what exactly the true consequences would be.

At the moment all eyes are on United Airlines and their pending and probable entry into Chapter 11 Bankruptcy protection.
One thing for sure will be that if they do enter Chapter 11 then if they emerge it will be in the guise of a very much reduced, leaner company a fraction of its current size and shape.

Also would the US govt sacrifice a major company like United (and all its staff, numerous pending orders etc etc) and not go injecting billions as required into that company and subsequently bolster the other companies such as American,Delta and Northwest?
Job losses would be inevitable but which will it be?

I know US Airways just scored a US$300m grant from the US government.
How deep are their pockets?
I guess only time will tell.

Also United in Chapter 11 will adversely impact the Star Alliance to a certain extent.

Cheers and safe flying.

13th Oct 2002, 04:07
I'm not too sure of the point you are trying to make, littlefokkerfella, but if it helps you, I shall place a case of your "Scottish brown stuff" in the shed and assume we have a bet.

If not, I guess you are like Singapore Airlines - all PUFF & WIND?

14th Oct 2002, 12:40

"I suggest it would take a pretty gutzzee move to start up a new airline in this present climate. " Your quote!!

The point I am trying to make is that Alliance have started up a new airline. They are playing their cards very close to the chest. I know very little and am at liberty to say less.

However a case of Scotch Whisky against a case of Crown Larger is very good odds.

Alliance may pull a big ferking rabbit out of their small hat!!!

And the bet is recorded in the public domain.

All I am saying is watch Alliance.


15th Oct 2002, 22:53
Something that hasn't been considered -

SQ starts playing up the '3rd airline in OZ' line to intentionally drop the QF share price.

QF still buys into ANZ

SQ buys BA's share of QF, at a much, much reduced price(just check out how far the Qantas share price has dropped) thus getting its foot firmly into the Australian market, VERY CHEAPLY. I'd like to see the difference in profit they would get from having 20% of QFs market share compared to them starting up another airline -I think buying into QF would be far more profitable

Far-fetched? I think it was interesting that GD made the comment recently about the need for a strong 'AustralASIAn Airline' to compete on the world market.

The Singaporeans might have some culture issues that don't translate well into a majority of workplaces, but one thing they are very clever about is money.

Don't bet against it, no matter how far fetched it appears.

15th Oct 2002, 23:13
Asian airline move unlikely
By Steve Creedy
October 16, 2002
FORMER Ansett boss Rod Eddington does not expect Singapore Airlines to start a domestic airline in Australia.

Mr Eddington, now British Airways chief executive, said Singapore Airlines had already captured 95 per cent of its targeted leisure market and 99 per cent of business traffic by servicing the major Australian centres.

"The number of people it needs to fly between Australian cities is minimal and they can be covered with an interline deal with Qantas, which it has now," Mr Eddington told the latest edition of Orient Aviation magazine.

"I can't see why a full-service foreign airline would want to start up a domestic airline in Australia from scratch," he said.

Singapore Airlines chief executive Cheong Choong Kong said earlier this month the airline believed a third domestic carrier was viable.

But, he said, the Asian carrier was keeping its options open and those options extended beyond Australia.

He said war in Iraq would force Singapore to put any overseas investment plans on hold.

The fallout for airlines of the Bali bombing remains unclear, but analysts said it increased uncertainty and made an Australian move by the Singaporeans less likely.

Mr Eddington reiterated British Airways' determination to retain its 18 per cent stake in Qantas, which was recently diluted by the Qantas rights issue.

He told Orient Aviation: "I am committed to the Qantas relationship and I am keen to retain that shareholding. We have no intention of selling it to anyone."

Some analysts had suggested Singapore could replace BA as a cornerstone investor in Qantas.

15th Oct 2002, 23:53
Eddington has failed to mention that the SQ business plan was targetting far more than just the "servicing the major Australian centres" from Singapore.

What is now clearer as a result of Eddington's comments is that the One World alliance with QF as a member, is very much intact. It also means that Air NZ will most probably also join (despite the Star Alliance exit penalties).

From what I have heard, SQ's modelling revolves around a full service domestic carrier, with code share and on carriage agreements with REX, Skywest and possibly Alliance.

The SQ model supposedly covers services between MEL - SYD - BNE - PER with ADL to follow.

Who knows the reality of where SQ's business plan is right now, but the almost certainty of Air NZ leaving Star following QF's announcement of a stake in the company at the end of the month, may provide a trigger point for a decision by SQ.

The problem of slots at Sydney is a furphy - If SACL can get a third operator to the terminals, some of the former AN slots will undoubtedly materialise. QF will not be able to hang on to the lot.

16th Oct 2002, 00:35
littlefokkerfella - just to confirm this wager without all the if's, but's and duckshoving.

If Singapore Airlines starts up an Airline down here in Oz within the next 6 months,I shall present you with 12 bottles of Scotch Whiskey.

If not, you shall buy me 24 bottles of Crown Lager. Is that clear enough and are we in agreement?


Oh, and you're right, the odds are good. That's the only way we bookmakers can get punters in on a long shot!

Thumbs up
16th Oct 2002, 03:01
I see you've given youself pretty good odds.

Are you saying that after 6 months all bets are off because then you concede there is a probabilty of them starting?.;)

16th Oct 2002, 03:32
I attended a lunch at the press club yesterday where the speaker was Paul Cubbin from Rex.

Though there was no earth shattering announcement, his speech clearly inimated that Rex are in negotiation to being a feeder for a 3rd domestic carrier and that we are talking a 6 month timeframe.

Take it for what it's worth.

16th Oct 2002, 04:06
That's not what I'm saying at all Thumbs up, I just don't like "open ended" bets, they normally send the booky broke. Now if you want part of the action, take the bet with me now and at the end of 6 months, if I win, you buy me 24 Crownies and I'll stake the same bet with you again for the next six months and six months after that if you wish. You've sure got my "thumbs up!"

apacau - regional airlines will always feed the domestics in one way or another. What I am saying is that SQ will not start a domestic airline down here in Oz - plain & simple fact.

Thumbs up
16th Oct 2002, 04:17

Thanks,but I think I'll pass
You'd be getting very drunk at my expense.:D

Boeing Belly
16th Oct 2002, 07:25
That's rather charitable of Rod to suggest that a competitor would be better off to put passengers on an airline that he just happens to be a Board Member of. An airline that the company he runs just happens to own 18% of. Well done Rod. A fine attempt to talk up the QF share price. You have to remember that just because these guys have the top jobs doesn't necessarily mean they know what they are talking about. Who will ever forget Rods classic statement when AirNZ bought the final 50% of Ansett, "this deal is win,win". Good one Rod. You're doing a great job at BA!!!;)

17th Oct 2002, 09:06
SQ want much more than the domestic market. They will only fly BNE-SYD-MEL-ADL-PER and maybe Hobart, Darwin and OOL. The other cities will be serviced by Alliance, Rex or Skywest.

You may not know, but AN MkI was due to start flights to the U.S. in March 2002. SQ want the AN Int'l slots so they can get into the U.S. This would also alleviate any problem with United going bankrupt.

17th Oct 2002, 11:12
Presume you mean that SQ would like to get into the US from Australia? They already serve the West Coast, New York and Chicago via Europe.

17th Oct 2002, 11:34
Yeah right, there's two ways the Oz Govt are going to allow that to happen and that's assuming the US don't squawk about it

In their dreams.

Pinky the pilot
18th Oct 2002, 02:09
I've just finished reading every post on this thread right from the start and the one thing that really strikes me is that we do indeed live in 'interesting times'

18th Oct 2002, 08:54
Yeah BlueEagle, that's what I'm led to believe.

18th Oct 2002, 10:37

Are you by any chance Hypoxia on another forum ?

5th Nov 2002, 09:46

5th Nov 2002, 11:17
Well here we are over the ton again and still no sign of the elusive SQ.

Feel free to start anothery when we get some news about it.