If the Air NZ purchase of 14.9% of Virgin Blue is a blocking move to prevent, say, Etihad from acquiring a significant interest in the carrier, it may well be thwarted by “unintended consequences”.
One of them could be the division of Virgin Blue into a purely domestic Australian company, in which 100% foreign ownership is allowed, and the devising of an international arm in which the owners of Virgin Blue also own 51%, thus retaining its status in terms of air traffic treaties as an Australian flag carrier controlled by entities recognised as Australian.
However, while such a structure is a fascinating conjecture (and that was used by Ansett to set up Ansett International, in the unprofitable glory days of that brand before a different Air New Zealand purchased and destroyed what was already a very badly run airline) the immediate story is that the NZ carrier is now sitting on a “can’t lose” minority stake.
Air NZ stands to make money from a well-run and expanding Virgin Blue just by being a 14.9% minority owner, or by selling it for a better price to a more ambitious investor, keeping in mind that sovereign funds such as those of the UAE states or Singapore are not airlines in their own right, and can probably finesse their way to significant holdings other than up-front ownership of up to 49% of an Australian flag carrier.
They can, for example, own the fleet, or the engines, or key debt instruments, yet not necessarily, too many shares, or even any shares at all.
And in any event, the numbers will change if Richard Branson sells down his equity to, say 10% of Virgin Blue from his 26% equity (as of yesterday). Branson is publicly prepared to sell down his 51% controlling stake in Virgin Atlantic in order to broker a merger with another carrier that would defend it from the consequences of a triple trans-Atlantic merger between American Airlines, British Airways and Iberia.
It is not known if he is contemplating a similar sell-down of Virgin Blue. Or even a higher stake. Never second-guess Branson.
At the moment, former Qantas executive general manager John Borghetti is, as Virgin Blue CEO, taking delivery of completely n-ked white new jets in advance of a rebranding of Virgin Blue, Pacific Blue and V Australia.
The all-white jets are the physical metaphor for the public uncertainty over the group’s new but unannounced name, as well as the uncertainty about Branson’s intentions, and that of other potential large scale investors in what is still called Virgin Blue.
The “white” whatever-it-is-to-be-called future Virgin Blue entity is also planning to launch product to eclipse the Qantas full-service offering, and introduce wide-body A330s to the transcontinental routes, and start up a fleet of 18 turbo-props to take on the Qantaslink network as well. It is a huge year for Virgin. Whatever, even without the for-whatever-purpose purchase of 14.9% by Air New Zealand.
While this is going on, Qantas is expanding its Jetstar brand into a trans-border low-cost franchise throughout Asia, and has began a longer-term migration of its assets to a Singapore base that will host a substantial fleet of Australian-registered, Jetstar-branded, wide-body jets in the near future.
Those changes represent the biggest medium-term challenges to the future of Virgin Blue and Air New Zealand that have yet emerged, and will require something more than rebranded jets and cabin changes if they intend to survive or prosper beyond the end of this decade.
I am, and have always been, confused by some of this:
[…the division of Virgin Blue into a purely domestic Australian company, in which 100% foreign ownership is allowed….]
Are you speculating that foreign ownership rules might be relaxed by the Australian government?
And on the same issue, what is the status of Tiger which flies Australian domestic routes but surely is 100% owned by the Singapore government (or their proxies)–I have never understood this and never seen it explained anywhere. How can Tiger do it when Air NZ cannot? And why not, if they once were allowed to buy Ansett?
Ditto, how can Jetstar operate out of Singapore?
Unless there is a special & unique bilateral arrangement between Singapore and Australia on this kind of ownership issue? (But then even if there were, why would other Asian IATA member countries allow Jetstar to operate out of Singapore?)
The rules in this country allow 100% foreign ownership of a domestic carrier whether by a single airline, a consortium or whatever. Thus Virgin Blue began as a 100% owned venture of Richard Branson’s private company Virgin Holdings and Tiger was structured as an Australian franchise completely owned by a Singapore based consortium effectively controlled by Singapore Airlines, which remains the case, even after the partial float. The international routes flown buy the Tiger brand are operated by the head franchise, in Singapore to avoid any traffic rights complications for its Tiger Australia subsidiary.
A similar trans border franchising of a low cost brand through different but Qantas controlled entities is used by Qantas through Jetstar Asia, with other franchises other than Jestar Pacific (a minority investment based in Vietnam) under study.
However the Australian rules on foreign airlines investing in Australian carriers that fly international routes are framed to keep 51% or more of the equity Australian owned in order to conform to current international air treaty requirements.
To really cover the intricacies and case history of foreign investment in Australian carriers I recommend a good aged red, a plate of superb cheeses and a few hours drilling down through a web search of whichever source you find the least obtuse.
I should add that there are many studies of the treaty difficulties that have slowed the growth of both Tiger and Jetstar Asia out of Singapore. It is grindingly slow process of negotiating access on a not just a country by country basis but a city basis. Even slower than the process undertaken by Ryanair in Europe.
But persistence, and the demand by consumers and businesses for airline reforms have seen trans border franchising take root. The abolition of borders within the EU allowed low cost networks to create a web of connections that bypasses the legacy hubs, and also made it much easier for the Air France KLM merger and the Lufthansa investments in Austrian, Swiss, bmi, and SAS occur, including some Lufthansa might regret.
“completely n-ked white new jets”
Ben, you missed an opportunity to call them “brand new”. 😉
I just caught up with your replies. Thanks. Good to learn (it must have happened prior to my return to Oz–at least that is my feeble reason for being so ignorant.) It explains some of the seemingly nonsensical complicated branding/structure of the various Virgin Blue entities (V Australia; Virgin Pacific). But am I correct in thinking that Australia must be one of the few countries to have opened up its domestic aviation like this? (At the same time I do not understand how but presume Branson has arranged majority American ownership of the US domestic Virgin line?)
As to your suggestion
[To really cover the intricacies and case history of foreign investment in Australian carriers I recommend a good aged red, a plate of superb cheeses and a few hours drilling down through a web search…]
Obviously you jest, as those are mutually exclusive activities, not to mention bound to result in very greasy keyboards/screens! In any case I am a lazy s.o.b. and will continue to try to get an expert such as yourself to answer such intricate questions…