Merged: Tiger Tales
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA release here: Civil Aviation Safety Authority - CASA to seek to extend Tiger suspension
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is Tony Davis not the guy quitting? He ran the entire place with his cronies, sacking all the Singaporean and Australian managers and replacing them with his friends from the UK.
He has made S$30 mil from the IPO.
He has destroyed value for most of the shareholders who subscribed to the IPO (though SIA would have made money cos they injected something like S$20 mil to start Tiger, and its 33% stake is probably worth $150 mil at least even today)
Chew Choon Seng, the former CEO of SIA, should be held fully accountable for what happened. True, he does not have majority control of the airline, but he was the cornerstone shareholder at 49% of the original startup. He allowed Tony Davis to run the entire show, and despite many protests and negative press both in Singapore and Australia, it seems he and the entire Tiger Board did not bother to intervene.
SIA did a good job of distancing itself from Tiger and not many people in Singapore and Australia knew that Tiger was associated with SQ. Today, nearly everyone in both countries knows this is the case.
So SQ is now embarrassed, they have to deal with this mess, the Tiger shareholders are screwed, the Australian staff are screwed, and Tony Davis? Well whatever happens, he's $30 mil richer.
Nice.
He has made S$30 mil from the IPO.
He has destroyed value for most of the shareholders who subscribed to the IPO (though SIA would have made money cos they injected something like S$20 mil to start Tiger, and its 33% stake is probably worth $150 mil at least even today)
Chew Choon Seng, the former CEO of SIA, should be held fully accountable for what happened. True, he does not have majority control of the airline, but he was the cornerstone shareholder at 49% of the original startup. He allowed Tony Davis to run the entire show, and despite many protests and negative press both in Singapore and Australia, it seems he and the entire Tiger Board did not bother to intervene.
SIA did a good job of distancing itself from Tiger and not many people in Singapore and Australia knew that Tiger was associated with SQ. Today, nearly everyone in both countries knows this is the case.
So SQ is now embarrassed, they have to deal with this mess, the Tiger shareholders are screwed, the Australian staff are screwed, and Tony Davis? Well whatever happens, he's $30 mil richer.
Nice.
You cant run a safe airline when you charge $49 MEL-SYD, it should be illegal !
It's the same way every airline sells their seats, Tiger could just afford to go lower as they definitely had the lowest cost base..
Quote:
You cant run a safe airline when you charge $49 MEL-SYD, it should be illegal !
True, but you do realise that only maybe the first 40 seats are sold at that price, the next 30 at $59, the 20 after that at $69, etc etc
It's the same way every airline sells their seats, Tiger could just afford to go lower as they definitely had the lowest cost base..
You cant run a safe airline when you charge $49 MEL-SYD, it should be illegal !
True, but you do realise that only maybe the first 40 seats are sold at that price, the next 30 at $59, the 20 after that at $69, etc etc
It's the same way every airline sells their seats, Tiger could just afford to go lower as they definitely had the lowest cost base..
In hindsight they should have focused on SYD which has a greater population based and started ops with SYD-MEL, SYD-OOL, SYD-BNE, SYD-CNS, SYD-HBT
They should have also been more transparent with charges and been easier to get along with. Pax dont like airlines that are not consumer friendly
$49 was too cheap. Totally unsustainable
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the suspension extended the best thing Tiger could do is to rectify the issues and regain confidence by the appointment of a new CEO and remove from play some of the less credible senior managers.
Again however my thoughts are with the good people and few mates that are the real victims.
Time also for the third party labour hire entities to either show some proof points regarding their integrity or forever condemn the concept of outsourcing airline staff.
AT
Again however my thoughts are with the good people and few mates that are the real victims.
Time also for the third party labour hire entities to either show some proof points regarding their integrity or forever condemn the concept of outsourcing airline staff.
AT
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SIA did a good job of distancing itself from Tiger and not many people in Singapore and Australia knew that Tiger was associated with SQ. Today, nearly everyone in both countries knows this is the case.
So SQ is now embarrassed, they have to deal with this mess, the Tiger shareholders are screwed, the Australian staff are screwed, and Tony Davis? Well whatever happens, he's $30 mil richer.
So SQ is now embarrassed, they have to deal with this mess, the Tiger shareholders are screwed, the Australian staff are screwed, and Tony Davis? Well whatever happens, he's $30 mil richer.
Since the advent of the Australian and Singaporean LCC's over the past few years the industry has become a grumpy race to the bottom with costs.
As someone said on here, there is a limit before something goes bang.
Tiger boss quits as flying ban to be extended
TIGER AIRWAYS was in disarray last night following the extension of its flying ban and the shock resignation of its Australian chief executive.
Last edited by TIMA9X; 6th Jul 2011 at 16:13. Reason: edited to include SMH story
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TIMA9X
I don't understand why SQ needs to jump onto this LCC bandwagon. Firstly, at least until recently, they were one of the lowest cost operators in the industry. They had lower CASK than Ryanair in 2005, and only Air Asia had lower costs than them. Their pay for middle level managers sucks by Singaporean standards, but they pay their cabin crew very well. (Eg SIN-NRT-LAX gets the most junior crew about S$2000 in extra allowances and pay). The meal allowance for dinner in Australia is like S$150. The crew pay is comparable to QF mainline, maybe slightly more after tax with SIN tax rates, but still it's by no means third world.
They operated a modern fleet, gave all the frills with a cost base barely higher than Ryanair. Now isn't that enviable?
Today they operate a symphony of aircraft from 777-200 non ER, 777-200ER, A330s, A340-500s, A380s, 744s, some refurbished 777-200 non ERs, some refurbished 777-300 non ER, 777-300ERs........Some two-class, some three-class, and the A340-500s are all JCL.....
When 7 years ago they just basically had 747s and 777s. Very streamlined and efficient
Why do they need to be in this LCC fetish phase? Why is there the need to copy everyone else, when for decades SIA set the standard for the industry? The current group of SIA senior management are as self-serving and short-term as the senior managements of QF and most airlines out there.
SIA sits on S$7 bil of cash, and they hardly have any aircraft on order. $7 bil that was painfully built up over 30 years by the previous competent management prior to Chew Choon Seng taking the helm in 2003. They seem to be happy splashing dividends to shareholders at between 7-10%, and this year they declared a special dividend taking the dividend yield to 14%. An airline giving a 14% dividend yield!
Maybe this is just the price of development. When SIA and Singapore started out with just a swampy land and a crappy Paya Lebar Airport and a bunch of 707s in 1972, there was a bunch of dedicated individuals who gave their entire lives to making SIA the best airline in the world, despite all the obstacles it faced. After all, that bunch of people in 1970s Singapore had nothing to lose.
At one stage QF in the 1970s lobbied the Australian government to ban SIA from flying into Australia, because they were selling 6th freedom tickets, which is a concept that SIA pioneered, very funnily. The airline industry back then was so insanely regulated that IATA even dictated the thickness of your sandwiches, and warned SIA about "violating" the rules by having the audacity to serve free alcohol and shock horror, offer a choice of meals in economy.
To say that SIA is operating in an environment today which is tougher than the 1970s, is a big lie. In 1998, in the depths of the Asian economic crisis, SIA made an after-tax profit of S$1 bil. In 2011, SIA can barely make a profit over S$1 bil, and this is in the middle of Asia's boom. In 1998, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, HK, Philippines, South Korea and even Hong Kong were on the brink of economic collapse and still SIA managed to make S$1 bil and was taking delivery of 1 747 and 1 777 every month, almost.
I hate to see my national carrier, and arguably what was once the world's most fabulous airline, deteriorate to such an extent, and become "another one of them". Alas, when people have everything to lose, they tend to not take risks, sit on their billions and not think beyond tomorrow.
This is the price paid for development.
I don't understand why SQ needs to jump onto this LCC bandwagon. Firstly, at least until recently, they were one of the lowest cost operators in the industry. They had lower CASK than Ryanair in 2005, and only Air Asia had lower costs than them. Their pay for middle level managers sucks by Singaporean standards, but they pay their cabin crew very well. (Eg SIN-NRT-LAX gets the most junior crew about S$2000 in extra allowances and pay). The meal allowance for dinner in Australia is like S$150. The crew pay is comparable to QF mainline, maybe slightly more after tax with SIN tax rates, but still it's by no means third world.
They operated a modern fleet, gave all the frills with a cost base barely higher than Ryanair. Now isn't that enviable?
Today they operate a symphony of aircraft from 777-200 non ER, 777-200ER, A330s, A340-500s, A380s, 744s, some refurbished 777-200 non ERs, some refurbished 777-300 non ER, 777-300ERs........Some two-class, some three-class, and the A340-500s are all JCL.....
When 7 years ago they just basically had 747s and 777s. Very streamlined and efficient
Why do they need to be in this LCC fetish phase? Why is there the need to copy everyone else, when for decades SIA set the standard for the industry? The current group of SIA senior management are as self-serving and short-term as the senior managements of QF and most airlines out there.
SIA sits on S$7 bil of cash, and they hardly have any aircraft on order. $7 bil that was painfully built up over 30 years by the previous competent management prior to Chew Choon Seng taking the helm in 2003. They seem to be happy splashing dividends to shareholders at between 7-10%, and this year they declared a special dividend taking the dividend yield to 14%. An airline giving a 14% dividend yield!
Maybe this is just the price of development. When SIA and Singapore started out with just a swampy land and a crappy Paya Lebar Airport and a bunch of 707s in 1972, there was a bunch of dedicated individuals who gave their entire lives to making SIA the best airline in the world, despite all the obstacles it faced. After all, that bunch of people in 1970s Singapore had nothing to lose.
At one stage QF in the 1970s lobbied the Australian government to ban SIA from flying into Australia, because they were selling 6th freedom tickets, which is a concept that SIA pioneered, very funnily. The airline industry back then was so insanely regulated that IATA even dictated the thickness of your sandwiches, and warned SIA about "violating" the rules by having the audacity to serve free alcohol and shock horror, offer a choice of meals in economy.
To say that SIA is operating in an environment today which is tougher than the 1970s, is a big lie. In 1998, in the depths of the Asian economic crisis, SIA made an after-tax profit of S$1 bil. In 2011, SIA can barely make a profit over S$1 bil, and this is in the middle of Asia's boom. In 1998, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, HK, Philippines, South Korea and even Hong Kong were on the brink of economic collapse and still SIA managed to make S$1 bil and was taking delivery of 1 747 and 1 777 every month, almost.
I hate to see my national carrier, and arguably what was once the world's most fabulous airline, deteriorate to such an extent, and become "another one of them". Alas, when people have everything to lose, they tend to not take risks, sit on their billions and not think beyond tomorrow.
This is the price paid for development.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DrPepz
Great post again, mate, says it all.
I can't help thinking, if I took away the thought of the letters SIA when reading your post, we could be talking about the current situation at the Qantas Group, confusing/fusing the LLC model with the premium one.
Sooner or later it has gota end in tears.
Great post again, mate, says it all.
deteriorate to such an extent, and become "another one of them". Alas, when people have everything to lose, they tend to not take risks, sit on their billions and not think beyond tomorrow.
Sooner or later it has gota end in tears.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Sooner or later it has gota end in tears."
I think it just has ended in tears again having seen the latest news about Tiger.
I am not in the airline industry but in business, Australia is unique in having long distances and a small population, yet we seem to think we can have low cost in everything and it doesn't stack up, either because of business input costs or low population.
Anyway, I feel that is the end of Tiger now which is a shame for all the people involved. (I was no fan of Tiger and refused to fly with them).
.
I think it just has ended in tears again having seen the latest news about Tiger.
I am not in the airline industry but in business, Australia is unique in having long distances and a small population, yet we seem to think we can have low cost in everything and it doesn't stack up, either because of business input costs or low population.
Anyway, I feel that is the end of Tiger now which is a shame for all the people involved. (I was no fan of Tiger and refused to fly with them).
.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has Tony Davis been Demoted?
Tiger Company Statement:
So Tony becomes Tiger Australia's CEO, and Chin Yau Seng, who was Divisional VP Cabin Crew Ops at SIA till last Saturday, becomes Acting Group CEO.
In another SHOCKING event, Tiger relieved its current chairman and appointed the very first Chairman of SIA, JY Pillay, as non-executive Chairman of the board.
So after years of not having a hand in running Tiger, SIA is now putting its hands all over it. Is it too little too late though?
Singapore, 6 July 2011. Tiger Airways Holdings Limited makes the following announcement regarding
Tiger Airways Australia Pty Limited (“Tiger Airways Australia”).
Tiger Airways Australia understands that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority of Australia (“CASA”) intends to file an application in the Federal Court on 7 July 2011 seeking an extension to the period for suspension of flights until 31 July 2011.
Tiger Airways Australia has been working constructively with CASA for the past five days to establish a plan for the resumption of our services and will not oppose the period of extension.
Tiger Airways Australia remains committed to resuming services as quickly as possible.As a consequence, Tiger Airways Australia will refund fares to those passengers holding reservations between now and 31 July 2011. Tiger Airways Australia offers its sincerest apologies for any inconvenience caused.
Tiger Airways Holdings Limited also announces the following management changes:
• The current Chief Executive Officer of Tiger Airways Australia, Mr. Crawford Rix, will leave the airline on 31 July 2011. The Company will be appointing Mr. Tony Davis to the role of Chief Executive Officer, Tiger Airways Australia. Mr. Davis will continue to serve as a Director of Tiger Airways Holdings Limited.
• Mr. Chin Yau Seng, Executive Director of Tiger Airways Holdings Limited will be appointed as Acting Chief Executive Officer.
Tiger Airways Australia Pty Limited (“Tiger Airways Australia”).
Tiger Airways Australia understands that the Civil Aviation Safety Authority of Australia (“CASA”) intends to file an application in the Federal Court on 7 July 2011 seeking an extension to the period for suspension of flights until 31 July 2011.
Tiger Airways Australia has been working constructively with CASA for the past five days to establish a plan for the resumption of our services and will not oppose the period of extension.
Tiger Airways Australia remains committed to resuming services as quickly as possible.As a consequence, Tiger Airways Australia will refund fares to those passengers holding reservations between now and 31 July 2011. Tiger Airways Australia offers its sincerest apologies for any inconvenience caused.
Tiger Airways Holdings Limited also announces the following management changes:
• The current Chief Executive Officer of Tiger Airways Australia, Mr. Crawford Rix, will leave the airline on 31 July 2011. The Company will be appointing Mr. Tony Davis to the role of Chief Executive Officer, Tiger Airways Australia. Mr. Davis will continue to serve as a Director of Tiger Airways Holdings Limited.
• Mr. Chin Yau Seng, Executive Director of Tiger Airways Holdings Limited will be appointed as Acting Chief Executive Officer.
In another SHOCKING event, Tiger relieved its current chairman and appointed the very first Chairman of SIA, JY Pillay, as non-executive Chairman of the board.
Singapore, 6 July 2011. Tiger Airways Holdings Limited (the “Company”) has today appointed Mr. J Y Pillay as an independent Director. With immediate effect Mr. Pillay takes over as nonexecutive Chairman from Mr. Gerard Ee who remains on the Board as an Independent Director.
Mr. Pillay is a Member of the Securities Industry Council. He is the Chairman of the Council of Presidential Advisers of the Republic of Singapore and Member of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights. He is also the Rector of Residential College 3 in the University Town of the National University of Singapore.
Mr. Pillay was in the administrative service of the Government of Singapore from 1961 to 1995 rising to permanent secretary in 1972. He served in the ministries of finance, defence and national development, and was the Managing Director of the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the
Government of Singapore Investment Corporation.
From 1996 – 1999 he was the High Commissioner in Britain and Nov 1999 – Dec 2010 he was the Chairman of Singapore Exchange Limited.
He also previously served as the Chairman of the Development Bank of Singapore (1979 – 1984); Singapore Airlines (1972 – 1996); Temasek Holdings (1974 – 1986); and the Council on Corporate Disclosure and Governance (2002 – 2007).
Mr. Pillay graduated with B.Sc (Hons), Imperial College of Science & Technology, University of London in 1956.
Mr. Pillay is a Member of the Securities Industry Council. He is the Chairman of the Council of Presidential Advisers of the Republic of Singapore and Member of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights. He is also the Rector of Residential College 3 in the University Town of the National University of Singapore.
Mr. Pillay was in the administrative service of the Government of Singapore from 1961 to 1995 rising to permanent secretary in 1972. He served in the ministries of finance, defence and national development, and was the Managing Director of the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the
Government of Singapore Investment Corporation.
From 1996 – 1999 he was the High Commissioner in Britain and Nov 1999 – Dec 2010 he was the Chairman of Singapore Exchange Limited.
He also previously served as the Chairman of the Development Bank of Singapore (1979 – 1984); Singapore Airlines (1972 – 1996); Temasek Holdings (1974 – 1986); and the Council on Corporate Disclosure and Governance (2002 – 2007).
Mr. Pillay graduated with B.Sc (Hons), Imperial College of Science & Technology, University of London in 1956.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The following statement in the press suggests to me that they intend to stick around and fight.
If an agenda to resolve their issues with casa and try and continue was not on the table they would simply pack up and shut up shop leaving potentially thousands of passengers with no option but to get in the queue of creditors with little hope of refunds.
If that happened it would call into the question of allowing airlines, particularly LCC's to charge for fares well in advance without making provision for some form of safety net for consumers.
In the Uk all payments are 'held' by a clearing company until after the flights actually take place however this is not without it's problems.
The next week or so will be very interesting.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
It will refund fares to passengers holding reservations between now and July*31.
If that happened it would call into the question of allowing airlines, particularly LCC's to charge for fares well in advance without making provision for some form of safety net for consumers.
In the Uk all payments are 'held' by a clearing company until after the flights actually take place however this is not without it's problems.
The next week or so will be very interesting.
More to Follow
The Kelpie
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the refunds on tickets for flights from now to 31 July have been driven by the ACCC threat of massive fines - up to $1M per instance, i.e. per ticket sold - if they continued to take money with no reasonable expectation of being able to fly the pax.
The refunds have not been driven by some long term strategic plan. Tiger are likely living from day to day in a reactive mode right now while they attempt to weather out this storm.
The refunds have not been driven by some long term strategic plan. Tiger are likely living from day to day in a reactive mode right now while they attempt to weather out this storm.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 767
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tiger asked to repay S$3m received from South Australian government
It seems that the vultures are beginning to circle before there is nothing left on the carcass to pick on!
More to Follow
The Kelpie
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Tiger was owned by Qantas do you think we would hear Alan saying something like this -
It's just a minor hiccup and we still consider Tiger to be the jewell in our crown. We are fortunate to have such an efficient LCC propping up our loss making International business.
It's just a minor hiccup and we still consider Tiger to be the jewell in our crown. We are fortunate to have such an efficient LCC propping up our loss making International business.