Another Virgin on the rocks

Courtesy Virgin Australia

Courtesy Virgin Australia

THE name Virgin is ringing in the air. Following on the heels of Alaska Airlines paying US$2.6 billion for Virgin America, wrenching the bid from rival JetBlue Airways, Singapore Airlines (SIA) announced it has increased its stake in Virgin Australia form 22.91 per cent to 23.11 per cent at a cost of A$3.18 million (US$2.39 million). SIA has approval from Australia’s Foreign Investment Review Board to increase its stake to 25.9 per cent.

Air New Zealand, the largest shareholder of Virgin Australia with a stake of 25.89 per cent, said it was considering an exit to focus on other growth areas. If SIA takes up its full allotment, it will be a larger partner than Etihad Airways, which owns about 24 per cent of the Australian carrier. The Virgin Group holds only a stake of about 10 per cent. There is speculation that SIA is poised to go higher, subject to approval from the relevant Australian authorities.

History repeats itself. SIA’s relationship with the Virgin Group goes as far back as 1999 when the Singapore carrier made headline news buying 49 per cent of Virgin Atlantic at a cost of £600m (US$844 million). What then appeared to be a coup turned out not be a lemon, which after years of lacklustre performance, was sold to Delta Airlines at a hefty loss in 2014 for £224m.

Yet the circumstances today might be a little different. SIA feels more pressured to secure its Australian market against national carrier Qantas. Together with the other partners, SIA is a contributor to an A$425 million loan to Virgin Australia to keep it above waters. While Virgin’s trans-Pacific flights to the US would accomplish a dream long in the making for SIA, it is not as imperative as it was then when it had hoped Virgin Atlantic would augment its trans-Atlantic foray into the US east coast. It could be worse if Air New Zealand’s stake in the Australian carrier falls into the hands of competing rivals that may threaten SIA’s wider market beyond Australia.

SIA paid dearly for the increases take in Virgin Australia at 46.72 cents per share which is well above the current price of 35.5 cents. So it is said that Alaska Airlines too paid a high price to take over Virgin America, which will enlarge Alaska’s west coast market and give it access to the east coast. Virgin chief Richard Branson proudly admitted: “They paid a high price for a great brand.” Indeed, Virgin America, voted consistently as the country’s best airlines in the past four years, could add to Alaska which itself is known for providing consistently good service at reasonable fares. Somehow Virgin Australia has tried hard but with not as much success as expected to bite off Qantas’ 80 per cent market share. How much more can SIA contribute, noting the struggle of erstwhile Tigerair Australia?

SIA and Virgin are reputable brand names. While there is a chance that they can build on each other’s strength, there is no guarantee that the chemistry will work twice as well.

Which Asian airlines might be interested to buy into Virgin America?

Photo courtesy Virgin America

Photo courtesy Virgin America

UP for sale, Virgin America has some suitors lining up. It has received takeover bids from JetBlue Airways Corp and Alaska Air Group Inc. In this era of the mega carriers (consider the mergers of United Airlines and Continental Airlines, Delta Air Lines and Northwest Airlines, and American Airlines and USAir), a tie-up with another carrier strengthen Virgin’s competitive ability. And while it is almost certain that the merger would be with another American carrier, with analysts placing bets on JetBlue as the best fit, apparently some unidentified Asian carriers have also expressed interest. Still, be that as a remote possibility, one cannot help but be curious and speculate who the likely candidates might be.

Two big names come to mind immediately because of their successes, networks and financial capability, namely Cathay Pacific Airways and Singapore Airlines. Both airlines are keen on expanding their US market. Cathay flies to Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York and San Francisco while Singapore Airlines (SIA) operates to Houston, Los Angeles, New York and San Francisco. Both airlines have codeshare access to several other destinations. Cathay’s codeshare partners include Alaska Airlines and American Airlines while SIA already codeshares with Virgin and with JetBlue.

So it looks like SIA more than Cathay would be favoured on relationships alone. Since foreign ownership rules governing US airlines require the bid to be submitted jointly with a US partner. It would be convenient for SIA to join hands with JetBlue. Of course, Cathay may partner Alaska Airways, but historically Cathay is not quite interested in equity participation. Although it has a 20.3% stake in Air China and 49% in Air China Cargo, that could be a matter of expedience to secure its market in the growing China mainland market.

SIA on the other hand, limited by a hinterland market, tried in its early years to grow through acquisitions. In 1999, it bought 49% of Virgin Atlantic and subsequently 25% of Air New Zealand. Although both buys subsequently proved to be lemons, resulting in heavy losses, the misstep might be less strategic than circumstantial. Unfortunately that has hurt SIA deeply more psychologically than financially as the airline became more cautious about such moves. In subsequent years it failed in its seemingly reluctant bid for a stake in China Eastern Airlines, and the SIA Group was plagued by the poor decisions of its budget subsidiary Tigerair in joint ventures in Indonesia and the Philippines. In Oct 2012 SIA bought a 10% stake in Virgin Australia, joining tow other foreign partners namely Air New Zealand and Etihad Airways. In much the same way that Cathay needed to secure its market in China partnering with Air China, SIA needed to secure its Australian market against the competition by Qantas. Six months after, SIA increased its stake to 19.9%.

But is SIA even interested in a stake in Virgin when its codeshare partnership with JetBlue already places it in an advantageous position to benefit from a JetBlue takeover of Virgin? Would a bid jointly with an Asian partner jeopardise JetBlue’s chances if the powers that be preferred an all-American merger a la the big three of United, Delta and American?

Besides Cathay and SIA, one should not ignore the voracious appetite of the China carriers in the national trend to acquire foreign assets. And why must it be premised on full-service carriers that are already serving destinations in the US? What about a budget carrier with dreams of new frontiers? Maverick AirAsia chief Tony Fernandes who models himself after Virgin guru Richard Branson and who had been where others were hesitant, even afraid, to go may yet surprise with an expression of interest even if it is no more than just that. He is one of the few airline chiefs who, like Ryanair’s Michael O’Leary and Qantas’ Alan Joyce, understood what an opportune good dose of publicity could do.

All this, of course, is speculative. Asian carriers are likely to be less concerned this time than when the mergers of the American big three took place. Together with Southwest Airlines, the big three control 80% of the American market. Virgin and its alleged interested parties JetBlue and Alaska are all largely domestic carriers. Even if Southwest throws in a bid (but for its size that may not pass the antitrust law as easily), it is still the same scenario. SIA’s connections with JetBlue and Virgin will continue to stand it in good stead, but if it’s Alaska that carries the day, then it is Cathay that stands to benefit from the new, extended connection. Or does it really matter when there are already subset agreements across partnership lines that allow you to fly an airline of one alliance and connect on another in a rival group? That’s how complex today’s aviation has become.

Singapore Airlines wins Conde Nast best airline award: An old formula that still works

Courtesy Singapore Airlines

Courtesy Singapore Airlines

Conde Nast readers have picked Singapore Airliens (SIA) as their 2014 favorite airline, loved for its good food and comforting seating but above all, its service and customer attention. “The flight attendants are the most courteous of any airline,” said one reader. “This airline definitely treats you like a part of its family,” said another.

SIA has yet again demonstrated how an old formula still works, the personal touch and smile that never failed to win hearts. Many airlines distinguish themselves by the excellent service they provide in the front cabin, but the SIA crew are not far less friendly at the back as well even as they understandably only address premium customers by name. Of course, First and Business Class travellers are feted with champagne and treated to flat beds. Offered exclusively on its A380 aircraft are a pair of fully flat recliners that can be transformed into a double bed. The airline even boasts a “book the cook” program whereby premium customers can pre-order meals designed by top chefs.

One should always be circumspect about “best” survey results and look closely what are being measured. There is a huge bias for the grand offerings in the upper class. Nothing wrong with that since that is where the money is, all the more so when the market for Economy is more inclined to be price sensitive. Fortunately, if providing excellent customer service is in an airline’s DNA, its essence is likely to permeate from the nose of a plane to its tail, though the degree of attention, to be expected, differs.

Conde Nast readers voted Emirates Airlines as the next best after SIA for similar reasons. One reader said: “They truly care about their customers and always try to exceed expectations.” And another: “Amazing service… staff are extremely polite.”

Of course, Emirates also impressed with sought after amenities, excellent food and wines, and luxurious pre-boarding lounges for premium passengers, not to mention the shower on its A380 plane.

Third in the Conde Nast is Virgin America. This is an airline truly linked to the Richard Branson lineage. It is what you may call a “hip” airline that impresses with innovative ideas and sophisticated in-flight features such as touch-screen meal orders and seat-to-seat messaging. It is modern, offering a unique experience without losing customer focus. As one customer said, “You feel like you’re going to a club when you step on the plane. It’s modern, attentive, and their social media is amazing.” Another reader summed up, “Virgin America has a high coolness factor.”

Qatar Airways nets a prized catch, expanding westwards

IT may seem somewhat crazy, but it is definitely not surprising in today’s aviation landscape of fast changing and crisscrossed relationships, some of them making most unlikely bedfellows. The ends justify the means.

Courtesy British Airways

Courtesy British Airways

Qatar Airways has acquired a 10% stake in International Airlines Group (IAG), better known as the owner of British Airways (BA) and Iberia. IAG also owns Spanish budget carrier Vueling. The act of acquisition itself by the cash-rich Middle East carrier does not surprise. Qatar lags behind rival Etihad Airways in this respect; Etihad already owns Alitalia (49%), Air Serbia (49%), Air Serbia (49%), Air Seychelles (40%), Etihad Regional (formerly Darwin Airlines) (33.3%), Air Berlin (29.21%), Jet Airways (24%), Virgin Australia (10%) and Aer Lingus (2.987%).

But coming lately, Qatar has bagged a prized acquisition, considering IAG’s bases at two major European hubs, in particular London Heathrow, and the strong transatlantic networks of BA and Iberia. Qatar chief executive Akbar Al Baker said: “IAG represents an excellent opportunity to further develop our westwards strategy.” It should be a strong partnership. Together, their networks cover Europe, North and South America, Africa, the Middle East, India and Southeast Asia.

In 2013 Qatar became a member of OneWorld, becoming the only one of the big three Gulf carriers to join a global airline alliance. More than an apparent Qatari interest in things British, this was a step forward to forge a closer relationship with BA. Qatar said it may increase its stake in IAG for which it paid £1.15 billion (US$1.73 billion). However, EU regulations have placed a cap on non-EU ownership at 49%.

Courtesy Qatar Airways

Courtesy Qatar Airways

Quite unlike Etihad, which has entered the arena as a white knight in many cases, Qatar is buying into one of Europe’s more profitable outfits. Clearly it is a strategic move. While European carriers are becoming wary of Gulf carriers making inroads in the EU market, the competition is at the same time a race among the big three Middle East carriers themselves- Qatar, Etihad and Emirates Airlines. This has become all the more prominent in recent years as they out-compete each other within their region and seek aggressively to push out their geographical boundaries, leveraging on the success of home bases such as Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Doha as hubs for international traffic connecting Asia Pacific, Europe, Africa and the Americas.

The rivalry for supremacy is clear in a jibe made by Mr Al Baker on the race to top the chart for extreme luxury in the air, something that carriers outside the Gulf are less disposed to think about at the same level. He said: “We always raise the bar for our dear friends around the area to try to copy us.” (The big deal about extreme luxury, Jan 19, 2015)

Courtesy PA

Courtesy PA


The timing could not have been better for Qatar as IAG looks likely to succeed in a new takeover bid of Irish carrier Aer Lingus after two failed attempts previously. This would gain IAG more take-off and landing slots at Heathrow. What is interesting is the composition of Aer Lingus partners, which include Ryanair (29.8%) and Etihad. Any opposition to the deal is likely to come from the Irish government which owns 25% of Aer Lingus, but it may be a price well worth paying for the crucial air links between cities in Ireland and Heathrow as the world’s largest hub (until topped by Dubai recently) and beyond. Ryanair has itself attempted unsuccessfully to take over Aer Lingus and objected vehemently to IAG’s proposal in the past for reasons that are not difficult to see. IAG’s chief executive officer Willie Walsh and Ryanair’s chief Michael O’Leary are not exactly the best of friends. But if money talks, the latest offer of €1.3billion (US$1.47 billion) by IAG may well carry the day.

Airline relationships in today’s industry are more complex, if not blatantly promiscuous. While global alliances offer the broad framework for cooperation, it is not uncommon to find rival airlines connected in some way through a third party. The numerous cross-border codeshare arrangements are testimony to the multi-faceted connections. Less than half the world’s airlines belong to any of the three global alliances: Star (27 members), SkyTeam (20 members), and OneWorld (15 members). Although many major carriers are already members, there are notable exclusions such Virgin Atlantic (although CEO Richard Branson who made an about turn in 2012 announcing Virgin might join one of the alliances soon) and the other two of the big three Gulf carriers Emirates and Etihad. While Aer Lingus itself is unaffiliated, and so are part owners Ryanair and Etihad, IAG’s influence cannot be precluded although it has said Aer Lingus would continue to operate independently.

It is best to adopt a detached view of the business. Alliance membership may but not necessarily suggest a like-mindedness that brings friends to the same table. There is no reason why friends and foes alike may not put their money in a common proposition that will help further their respective positions. OneWorld membership may have eased Qatar’s way into the IAG stable, making it easier for Mr Walsh to be “delighted to have Qatar Airways as a long term supportive shareholder.” Not sure if he would be any less delighted if it had been Emirates or Etihad. But for Qatar, as part owner of IAG which is set to take over Aer Lingus, it is stealing a march on rival Etihad.

This article was first published in Aspire Aviation.

Air India joins Star Alliance: How will it benefit?

Logo_Star_AllianceNO more pussy-footing. Air India becomes a member of Star Alliance from July 11, 2014, joining a global network of 26 airlines that include founders Air Canada, Lufthansa, Scandinavian Airlines, Thai Airways International and Untied Airlines. Other airlines that have since joined the alliance include Air China, Air New Zealand, All Nippon Airlines, Asiana Airlines, Singapore Airlines and South African Airways.

Welcoming the Indian flag carrier to the club, Star Alliance COO Jeffrey Goh said Air India would enjoy “Alliance’s benefits” while other member airlines would benefit from “improved access to a region which includes the world’s fifth largest domestic aviation market.”

Courtesy Star Alliance

Courtesy Star Alliance


At the same time, an elated Air India chairman and managing director Rohit Nandan said: “We eagerly look forward to extending the benefits and privileges of Star Alliance to (our) passengers.” The benefits are assumed, often touted from the perspective of the air traveller with “connectivity” and “seamless travel” listed at the top of the list. Air India’s admission to the club can only mean more flights and more destinations added to the alliance’s network, which will boosted by an additional 400 daily flights and 35 new destinations in India.

Yes, indeed, it is only to be expected that membership must come with benefits. What does Air India – as an airline – hope to gain from the induction?

If it works good for the passengers, it should work well for the airlines. That, after all, is the encapsulation of the alliance’s goal to grow the market share collectively in a way that individual members may not be able to do as effectively and as efficiently because of costs and the limitations of market access. Member airlines are increasingly moving towards more code share flights, shared facilities such as airport lounges and even pooled management at some ports. The launch of a dedicated Star Alliance terminal at London’s Heathrow Airport will strengthen the cooperation among member airlines and enhance the connectivity between them. Alliances (including OneWorld and SkyTeam) will have to introduce more of such initiatives to convert doubters like Virgin Atlantic chief Richard Branson; except for the scale, membership otherwise is not much difference as commercial tie-ups between individual airlines that may even benefit from the flexibility of cross-alliance arrangements. However, airlines such as resource-rich Emirates which are single-handedly successful thus far may not be as easily convinced. Suffice that it be suggested that Air India is not quite Emirates.

On the home front, India is currently being served by 13 Star Alliance members flying to 10 destinations, making up a total of 13% market share. It is expected that with Air India, the market share of the alliance will increase to 30%. However, is the alliance benefiting at Air India’s expense? The inducement for Air India must be the international market which will increase to 28% for Star Alliance. Through the alliance, Air India will be able to serve more than 10 destinations additionally in China, Africa and Europe over and above its own 33 international destinations. Since its main focus is the Middle East, through the alliance, Air India may be able to check the competition posed by the big three Middle east carriers of Emirates Airlines, Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways. Interestingly, Air India’s seat share is only 18% compared to Emirates’ 20% between India and the Middle East.

In the same way that Emirates (although not a OneWorld member) has increased Qantas’ access to more destinations in the Middle East besides Europe and Africa, Air India could latch on to Star Alliance partners such as Turkish Airlines for the same extension. In fact, some observers have primed Turkey’s TAV Istanbul Ataturk Airport as a veritable competitor that may one day usurp the hub status of Dubai. In that connection, Turkish Airlines will also grow in importance.

Yet another school opines that India has that same hub potential to connect Asia and Australiasia with Europe and Africa and beyond. Mumbai could be a convenient one-stop between Sydney and London with feeds to the region. Access by Star Alliance members to India’s domestic market and the improved standing of Air India in the global market will, as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi hoped, revive economic growth in India under his leadership.

So much has already been said about India’s potential with a population of 1.2 billion for both domestic and international traffic. That almost suggests an imbalance in the equation in favour of Star Alliance members outside India waiting to tap into that potential. But granted that the benefits are mutual as they are supposed to be, it cannot be denied that there remains still a lot of intra-competition. Yes, membership has its benefits, but Air India cannot be blind to the competition. If it is not about the greater good, it has to be about the lesser evil.

This article was first published in Aspire Aviation.

Gulf carriers compete for world dominance

WHILE Gulf carriers Emirates Airlines, Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways have become daunting competitors to other airlines across the globe, they are themselves competing with each other for world dominance.

All three airlines have been up there in the charts as world’s best in one category or another, garnering awards mainly for premium travel. A recent announcement by Etihad of its decision to no longer participate in Skytrax surveys – allegedly over disagreement on the rating system – has come as a surprise. Yet it may be a sign of there being one too many that points to a meaningless pursuit in a class deemed to be without real competition, and which can only lead to embittered rivalry. In the last Skytrax survey (2013), Etihad was the world’s “best first class”, “best first class seats” and “best first class catering”. But in the “best airline” category, it was placed seventh, far behind Emirates and Qatar which were ranked first and second respectively.

Is there even competition for Etihad’s new Residence suites? (see Extreme luxury: What price prestige? Jun 25, 2014) The race is on: Emirates has said it would introduce a similar product, and it is unlikely that Qatar will want to be left behind.

Interestingly, apart from spending big to acquire the best of equipment and pushing the limits on creature comforts, all three airlines seem to be pursuing different strategies for market dominance.

Courtesy Airbus

Courtesy Airbus


Emirates Airlines

Emirates is replicating the Singapore Airlines (SIA) story of the ‘70s and ‘80s, growing organically with giant strides as it expands its network. Last year it carried 44.5 million passengers to more than 133 cities in six continents. The number far exceeded Etihad’s 12 million passengers to more than 90 destinations and Qatar’s 18 million passengers to over 125 destinations. There are no indications of a likely change in course as Emirates continues to add new destinations in its expansion. Unlike Qatar, which has since joined OneWorld, and unlike Etihad, which has been on a binge to acquire equity in foreign carriers, Emirates remains very much a loner in the game, relying on its own strength and reputation for growth – again, quite reminiscent of the younger SIA.

But unlike SIA, which is a leading member of Star Alliance, Emirates does not believe in alliances. Echoing the sentiments of Virgin Atlantic chief Richard Branson, Emirates senior vice-president of commercial operations worldwide Richard Vaughan said in 2010: “We don’t believe in alliances. We intend to stay as an independent airline.” He believed that alliances reduce the airline’s ability to react swiftly changes in the market place and that they actually reduce competition and lead to higher fares. So true it is that when a passenger books a ticket with an alliance member airline, there is no guarantee that the passenger will be flying with the airline of choice. Under the circumstances, Emirates would have felt its product compromised.

Emirates’ stance has not changed. It has held out impressively during the economic crisis that saw many airlines scrambling to cut back services and subsequently entering into extensive commercial agreements with partner airlines. While Emirates maintains its independence, it has entered into code share agreements – a common industry practice – with a small number of airlines that include All Nippon Airways, Cathay Pacific and Air New Zealand. Its extensive non-equity partnership with Qantas made headline news in 2012, but it was a deal seen as impacting the Australian carrier more than Emirates. The Gulf carrier continues to steer clear of mergers and acquisitions although there was speculation of its interest in acquiring an ailing Indian carrier as India relaxes its rules on foreign ownership. The question remains as to whether Emirates can continue to buck the trend.

Courtesy Etihad Airways

Courtesy Etihad Airways


Etihad Airways

Etihad on the other hand has been acquiring stakes in foreign carriers besides a list of code-share partnerships that include Air France, American Airlines, All Nippon Airways and Cyprus Airways. The cash rich Gulf carrier partially owns Air Berlin (29.21%), Air Seychelles (40%), Aer Lingus (2.987%), Virgin Australia (10%), Jet Airways (24% – to be formalized), Jat Airways which has been renamed Air Serbia (49%), Darwin Airline which has been renamed Etihad Regional (33.3%) and Alitalia (49%). Some of those airlines have been shrouded in financial problems, such as Jet Airways of India and Italy’s flag carrier Alitalia which is already partially owned by Air France-KLM. In the case of Virgin Australia, Etihad also shared ownership with two other foreign carriers – SIA and Air New Zealand.

While code-share partners do little more than allowing airlines to sell seats on each other flights, equity alliances play a more forceful role for partner airlines to feed traffic into each other and provide seamless transfers in an extended network. For the ailing airline, Etihad is the white knight. For Etihad, it proffers the opportunity for growth via a third party. Alitalia, which is reeling in debts of about 800m euros (US$1.1bn), is looking to further injection of capital by Etihad to not only save it from the brinks of bankruptcy but also growth from then on. Italy’s transport minister Maurizio Lupi was elated by the deal. He said: “It’s increasingly clear that this marriage should happen because it’s obvious to all that we are dealing with a strong industrial investment that will offer our airline concrete growth prospects.” Someday Air France-KLM might wish it had enough gumption and money to raise its stake of 25% which has as a consequence dwindled to 7%. But Air France-KLM chief executive Alexandre de Juniac said Alitalia was not a priority at the moment. Still, Mr de Juniac viewed Etihad’s investment “with favor”, adding that the doors to KLM-Air France raising its stake were not closed.

Courtesy Qatar Airways

Courtesy Qatar Airways


Qatar Airways

Qatar is the only airline among the three Gulf carriers that has joined a global alliance, in its case OneWorld, whose members include Qantas, British Airways, American Airlines, Cathay Pacific and Japan Airlines. At its induction in 2013, Qatar chief executive Akbar Al Bakar said: “Alliances are playing an increasingly important role in the airline industry today – and that will continue long into the future. Becoming a member of OneWorld… will strengthen our competitive offering and give our customers what they fully deserve – more choice across a truly global network served together with airline partners.”

That is the ideal scenario, but in reality airline relationships are more complex than that. Without downplaying the benefits of global alliances such as wider network connections, shared facilities (Qantas/British Airways/Cathay Pacific premium lounge at Los Angeles Airport) and a dedicated terminal to enhance coordination (London Heathrow’s terminal 2 for Star Alliance members), member airlines have also entered into bilateral agreements across alliances. It is not uncommon to find rival airline connected in some way through a third party. Perhaps, in this context, lies the reason why Emirates and Etihad have so far not been convinced of the need to join any of the global alliances.

Whatever the strategy adopted by the Gulf carriers as they compete for world dominance, they have become daunting forces in the global market. Lufthansa’s new man at the helm Carsten Spohr has identified the competition posed by Gulf carriers as a major concern in Europe. In Asia, SIA is facing increased pressure from Gulf carriers tapping into its traditional market for traffic between Europe and Asia-Pacific and on the kangaroo route. While they have the means and resources to cut a product above the competition, it is their increased popularity that worry more their rivals, which will be relieved to see the Gulf carriers shifting their energies to outdoing each other instead, for the time being, in pushing the limits for the best Residential suites in the sky.

This article was first published in Aspire Aviation.

Jostling downunder

Photo courtesy Bloomberg

Photo courtesy Bloomberg

Underlying Air New Zealand (ANZ)`s increasing its stake in Virgin Australia to 23 per cent and thus becoming the Australian carrier`s biggest shareholder, the kiwi carrier said it was not seeking a position on the Virgin board nor was it interested in taking control of the airline.

Virgin chief executive John Borghetti was quick to check any speculations that things might change drastically as a consequence, reiterating that ANZ`s move would not in any way affect the business. He said: `I`m still going to work. Nothing changes for us. They don`t have a board seat.”

Courtesy Singapore Airlines

Courtesy Singapore Airlines

Singapore Airlines (SIA) which had only recently agreed to acquire an additional 9.9 per cent stake to add to its current shareholding of 10 per cent – making a total of 19.9 per cent – dispelled any concerns about the ANZ challenge, insisting it remains committed to the Virgin partnership and that SIA has no intention of further increasing its stake.

Billionaire Richard Branson’s Virgin Group holds a 22.4 per cent stake and Dubai’s Etihad Airways owns 10 per cent.

Is it really a round of handshakes auguring a permanent pact of peaceful co-existence among piecemeal partners which have not in recent aviation history boasted much in common except that two of them (SIA and ANZ) belong to the broad Star Alliance group? It may be the same tune that they will sing for now, to break into Qantas’ 65-per-cent hold of the Australian domestic market through the Virgin partnership, and that through this it will support its international operations. However, the collective strategy cannot disguise the individual agenda for each of these airlines, notably ANZ, SIA and Etihad.

Mr Borghetti who said “tomorrow is the same as yesterday” may soon find it cannot be so.

Courtesy wikipedia

Courtesy wikipedia

Interestingly, attention has already been turned to a likely tussle between ANZ and SIA, though both airlines have brushed aside any controlling interest. What is more interesting is how history has once again brought the two competitors together in a similar tussle for control of the ailing Ansett Australia in 1999/2000 and how SIA became badly bruised subsequently in its acquisition of a 25-per-cent stake in ANZ – a lesson that seems to have weighed heavily on the SIA in its subsequent approaches to acquisitions. Even in its stepped-up acquisition of the Virgin stake, it reflects a somewhat overly cautious step that took longer than expected.

Yet more interesting in the present situation is Virgin’s recent takeover of the Australian offshoot of SIA’s budget setup Tiger Airways. That was supposed to boost SIA’s presence across Australia. That should not change, unless Virgin changes course under new directions.

As for Virgin, it should thrive with renewed faith from its partners. Both ANZ and SIA have echoed their faith in the Australian carrier, hence their equity investments in it. But Virgin is facing tough competition from Qantas, having forecast a further slip in annual profit for the third time in five years. It has also been tardy in seeking breakthroughs internationally, much as it has boasted several commercial tie-ups with airlines such as SIA and Delta Air Lines. Something has to change, beyond the handshakes.