I didnt know about that one, sounds interesting, will look into it
Printable View
Amazing 12 hour program on Prime ... Go Further South
Trip to the Antartica on a ship visiting the islands on the way
Cool ..it’s going through to 7.30pm
surely there is a good buying opportunity here ?
A piece from Ian Wishart suggesting that restrictions on international travel could become the new normal. I hope he's wrong.
https://investigatemagazine.co.nz/28...mMz_bm6gxvvLNo
Lets face it - neither Ian Wishart (nor anybody else I am aware of) was able to predict in November 2019 how travel and tourism will look in April 2020. I am pretty sure that the virus didn't improve his or anybody else's forecasting capabilities, i.e. he just did a piece of linear extrapolation which is so convenient (because easy to do), but nearly always wrong.
Experts currently seem to agree that it is more likely than not that mankind will develop a vaccine and a cure - with roll out more likely in 2021 than in 2020.
After that I don't see why tourism and travel should not normalize again. I could however imagine that this new normal might be lower than the 2019 normal. People are currently just learning that a lot of business and communication can be done without travelling. I guess they will learn later this year that holidaying close to home can be nice as well. Why should people unlearn this experience again?
But no matter which future virus scenario we expect - there clearly will be ongoing need for air travel and transport. Whether Air New Zealand benefits from this demand depends on how nimble they are.
These are great times for flexible and adaptable businesses and bad times for the dinosaurs.
I guess we will see in which category Air New Zealand falls.
Bit of a negative take from the media. The important thing is that the plane was flying to Raro whether it had passengers in it is kind of neither here nor there I would have thought.
This is the time for positivity.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/ind...ovid19-network
From the Sruff article;
"Wallace said Air New Zealand engineers were even toying with the idea of modifying a 777-200 so it could get more cargo onto the passenger deck."
Here is a YouTube which shows examples of this;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY-bdNPUGtI
Boop boop de do
Marilyn
Here is a sermon on the future of Cullen Airlines and its relationship with the government. Stop fiddling in the pews and pay attention.
It is an unfair burden on taxpayers if every couple of decades they must reach into their pockets and bail out Air New Zealand. Can the Government justify this spending again and again to the taxpayer who earns this money by standing in the dust on a potato digger?
I hope the Government after the latest crisis has a deep think about what it will do next time. Unfortunately any Government Ministers who ponder this question will have to rely on the advice of the tea drinkers and biscuit nibblers at the Ministry of Transport.
Never fear Ministers Marilyn will guide you.
After deep thought Ministers may conclude air passenger transport is a vital part of public infrastructure requiring them to, next time, once again wade in throwing around the hard earned tax dollars from citizens like the potato digger person.
Perhaps they can limit the taxpayer’s future liability
Marilyn proposes what she calls the NAC option. Those of you of a similar vintage to a faded movie star will recall NAC, National Airways Corporation, was the government owned domestic air carrier until it was merged into the Air New Zealand combined domestic and international carrier.
The NAC option would restrict the burden on the taxpayer by rescuing only the domestic arm of Cullen Airlines.
But what about the vital role Cullen Airlines international arm plays in the economy I hear you ask? Marilyn says it is not worth the risk. There is no evidence other international carriers would not step into the breach and provide replacement services.
Ocean freight from New Zealand is well served by competing international shipping without the need for a New Zealand owned shipping service. Marilyn predicts air travel would follow this pattern if a future Government implements the NAC plan.
If implemented the Government might have the money to treat the potato diggers work related repertory disease.
Boop boop de do
Marilyn
Just like other industries, there will be winners and losers in the Airline industry as well in the post corona world. Anyone with a strong balance sheet will do very well. A weak balance sheet means going out of business. Companies with huge cash reserves not only well positioned to weather the current market storm, when the dust finally settles they may end up stronger. They also may acquire less well-off rivals. Before travel people have to take care of their health and food. It may take some time to rebound airline industry fully.Quote:
Quoted from the following link.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/opi...rely-survivors
Winners and losers will be decided by their pre-pandemic financial strength, their ability to obtain any necessary additional funding, and the strategic position they adopt.
Qantas, British Airways, American Airlines, Cathay Pacific, and a number of others have dedicated teams looking at post-pandemic opportunities, and they are positioning themselves now to be able to move when appropriate.
The future will belong to the airlines that emerge with a regrowth game plan ready to be executed. That means keeping your specialist skills close, and having training and checking systems operating at maximum to ensure flight crew availability does not impede recovery.
Qantas and Air New Zealand seem to be setting different paths.
Time will tell who got it right.
Marilyn
I don't buy into that hogwash. The Govt makes money on these bailouts. They sold down about 30% of their post Ansett recapitalisation stake at a reasonable profit and the 53% they hold now has a negative cost basis after deducting all those dividends they've been paid over the past 17 years.
If they convert the $900m loan to equity in the next 6-12 months which I think likely I'd wager that by 2030 you'll be able to look back and see another sell down in the Govt stake at a profit and no doubt healthy dividends from about 2023 onwards. As a taxpayer I'm more than comfortable with the Govt stepping into the breach to support AIR every 20 years or so.
AIR really is a rich golden conduit of profit for the Govt. Every year they help bring in a share of the $41 billion of tourist dollars that returns 15% thereof in GST, (over $6 billion a year in GST). There's also the well known multiplier effect in our economy from all those tourism dollars spent here.
The wages bill of $1.3 billion a year itself draws close to $400m a year in PAYE for the Govt plus the direct tax the company pays and its share of the dividends. All this is before they go through the rinse and repeat exercise every so often of buying assets at truly distressed prices and then flogging them off to hapless investors and aviation enthusiasts who should know better, for top dollar.
If there was any reason to separate out two aspects of the airline then a variation of Marilyn's proposal might be considered appropriate. AIR could be rebranded as "TEAL" and as in the old days of TEAL stick to its core knitting of N.Z. Australia and the close pacific islands. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEAL Those with a sense of occasion might see fit to announce this on the 80th anniversary of TEAL on 30 April this month. The more "adventurous" aspects of AIR flying to far flung places could then be carved off into another sister company perhaps called "STEAL", wherein every decade or two that's exactly what they do to shareholders pockets to keep themselves afloat.
There's still a lot of former NAC people who deplore the merger with TEAL and would like nothing better than to see a demerger, even at this late stage. Be that as it may, the best reason for the govt supporting (rescuing?) AIR IMO would be to prevent foreign airlines from scooping all the cream from the eventual resumption of international tourism, as Beagle suggests.
:cool: