Oh the 4Corners doco, yawn. That's just a freebie for brand engagement, organised by Danii and her blackbook again. Maybe she should go back and get those bunny teeth fixed and a degree first... Let's not forget the cringy full page ad's she signed off in March at $3m.... money down the toilet.

Fraud is right throughout the Business,
Former GM then redundant comes back consulting as 'Reknor' and behold DoGoodLabs are onboard. No tender to market for product, the audacity he even took to email former colleagues for comparable pricing. Old Chin-Moody's husband does(did) a bespoke contract for courier services between the 3 sites in Sydney... highly doubt that was put out to tender.

Don't forget Steffie and Martina (the real dynamic duo) who had a muff affair, and organised a stretch yellow hummer for a team outing the same day the business announced a historic loss in 2016 of $657m.

The administrators are not in control despite appearances to the contrary.

https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resou...for-creditors/

The creditors vote for what they want to happen, the administrators simply propose what they think is the the best course of action (but for which party?).

Like Nostradamus, only makes sense after the fact...

Think of the administrator as the slimy real estate agent who spruiks and markets and then presents the best offers to the home owner (creditor). The real estate agent has no power as the home owner decides if the offers are good enough. Similarly there is nothing stopping another buyer bypassing the real estate agent and going straight to the home owner.

In time the administrator will announce in great fan fare who they perceive has the best offer. However, it’s not even close to a done deal. That’s why final binding offers will be due maybe end of June (I’m not sure) but the actual sale, if there is one, will likely not happen to August. That’s why the extra funding is required.

The horses have only just bolted out of the gates in this race.

No not exactly. It is decided by a majority of creditors and the majority of the debt holders. If there is no agreement it's the administrator's call.

Yes, very true...just when you think you can be clever, you’re proven wrong...such is life.

Your point is very relevant as is this clause:
The exercise of the casting vote is most appropriate in circumstances where either creditors with a majority in value have such an overwhelming interest that it is inappropriate to allow a majority in number who do not have the same monetary interest to carry the day, or vice versa;

The Administrator is required to come to a decision based on the interests of ALL creditors - and that includes employees, secured and non secured creditors, leasing Companies, etc.

If Company A in your situation was going to pay $100m more than Company B, but only operate 40 domestic aircraft, versus Company B who were going to pay slightly less but operate more aircraft, and hold on to the WB and VARA - there is a compelling argument that Company B might be in the greater interest of ALL creditors when compared to Company A.

My understanding is that the Administrator will have a recommendation of the preferred bidder - a majority of creditors in both terms of number AND value must approve the sale. Ultimately though, the Administrator has the final say if a consensus can’t be reached by creditors and have the authority to sell the business - although I would imagine if that occurred, the decision would be up for challenge in the courts.

So in summary, it is not necessarily the highest bidder that will be successful.

Quote:

---

- although I would imagine if that occurred, the decision would be up for challenge in the courts.

---

If there are no funds available (as is the situation with VAH after June), a court challenge would be meaningless.

[QUOTE=Colonel_Klink;10795699]

If Company A in your situation was going to pay $100m more than Company B, but only operate 40 domestic aircraft, versus Company B who were going to pay slightly less but operate more aircraft, and hold on to the WB and VARA - there is a compelling argument that Company B might be in the greater interest of ALL creditors when compared to Company A.

Only if the Administrators have a fundamental lack of understanding as to what led VA into this mess in the first place.

If it was “telling” that Brookfield pulled their bid, is it equally “telling” they’re back? Or does that not suit the rhetoric?
:rolleyes:

[QUOTE=KRUSTY 34;10796105]For what it’s worth Krusty, I don’t think that’s actually a credible scenario. I was just trying to make the point that the highest bidder isn’t necessarily going to be the preferred option by the administrator.

From all the media - it’s hard to think the WBs survive. If they do - it will only be one of the current types.

And as for VARA - there is essentially no mention of them. All I keep hearing is one NB type. If you take that literally, then no more ATR or West Coast 320/F100. I just wonder if the advisors of the international bidders seriously understand the WA charter market. It makes money, has significant on carriage and is a pretty good for those WA corporate accounts....I sincerely hope that it survives.

Thanks Colonel, I did take some of your remarks literally.

Hopefully the value of the West Coast Operations won’t be lost on the bidders, but I’m afraid if past airline administrations are anything to go by, I’ll doubt it.

[QUOTE=Colonel_Klink;10796528]Is VARA under administration? legit question. I thought they were two separate AOC and business. ATR use to be on the VARA/Skywest books but now on Virgin

[QUOTE=Ragnor;10797033]They are.....the only part of VA that is not under administration is Velocity. Why you ask? I have no idea!

Just wondering, after reading SMH this morning s$%t is getting real for VA. With Brookfield back on the scene yesterday this could cause legal action by the other 4 delaying the process. Government rejecting Deloitte request for funds to keep operating escalating fears among the 4 remaining bidders and unions liquidation could happen before a deal is reached.

This from a post re the expected British Airways redundancies:

Employees are nothing more than a cost centre for any of the bidders. No one should be under any illusion that there is benevolence in their minds.

I wonder how many of these "serious bidders" have just used this as an opportunity to get access to the "data room" to see where the money is made and lost before walking away and using that data to start up from scratch without the high debt load and industrial issues? Yes it takes time to get an AOC, startup etc... but now is the best time to do it as the market is pretty much non existant for the next 6-12 months anyways.

That, would be smart of them. why buy an airline in the current environment QF and JQ will come back slowly. In the mean time they could start their own operation whilst confidence grows, and hey, there will be 100s of pilots keen and they will work for much less than what JQ pay just to get back in the game.

Well lucky for the rest of us your genius is wasted flying the line at QF, those fools at Deloitte and Clayton Utz wouldn’t stand a chance against your cunning prowess.