Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Silk Air to be merged into Singapore Airlines

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by 259850 View Post
    This is incorrect for the following reasons::

    1. In the most recent Financial Year, MI's operating margin was 4.2%, SQ Parent's 6.0%.

    2. SQ revenues are 11.5x larger than MI's. Even if MI's profit margins are better (they were in some years in the past), the needle will hardly be moved.

    3. The company reports profits on a consolidated basis since MI is a 100% owned subsidiary and that is what the market focuses on (the numbers in point 1 and 2 above are taken from footnotes deep inside the financial statement). So financial results will be same with or without merger.

    There may be some cost benefits from maintaining a single brand (just one brand to promote, etc), but probably will be balanced by higher cost of providing the SQ service (better seats, food, etc) on the MI network.

    All in all, this is highly unlikely to be a financially motivated move. More of providing operating flexibility (e.g. with one AOC, they have the flexibility of upsizing/downsizing aircraft to destinations based on demand).
    My personal thought, it may be too many "complain" as MI flight is marketed as SQ but not *A flight.

    I believe this cause revenue lost to SQ to certain extend. For example if someone want to fly to Kunming from Europe, if they really want *A benefit, they will probably opt for TG instead of SQ.

    I think this is also the reason why SQ took back one of the flight to SUB and RGN from MI. Otherwise they will "lose" *A traffic.

    With smaller plane in the fleet, this allow them to allocate some less busy traffic to the subsidiary like what CX did without losing *A traffic.
    visit my blog

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by lingua101 View Post
      probably not. i think it is more like Cathay Dragon concept.
      How would that work if they are operating under SQ's logo, but still wear MI's uniform?

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by lingua101 View Post
        is it 737 or 727? I remember I took SQ B727 in 80s
        This link may help:

        http://www.airfleets.net/flottecie/S...7-0-regasc.htm

        I never knew SQ's 737-100s were registered with 9V-BF* series. Most of the time it has always been 9V-S** series and still is.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by flyinghigher View Post
          How would that work if they are operating under SQ's logo, but still wear MI's uniform?
          Right? If MI is going to be merged to SQ, I'm sure they will retain the same uniforms that they wear on SQ.

          The one thing I read for sure was that SQ will only take ownership of the MI fleet when they have fitted the aircraft with their own products. I still believe it suggests that even the newest MI planes could be fitted too, though who knows?

          Comment


          • #20
            Very interesting move! Let's see how it plays out. For one thing, I am glad that these narrowbodies would finally get Krisworld. Also, it would be great to at last earn *A miles on these flights after years of MI deliberately being kept out of the alliance.

            Originally posted by lingua101 View Post
            is it 737 or 727? I remember I took SQ B727 in 80s
            SQ had both 737s and 727s. Two other narrowbodies it had were 707s (one of the aircraft types inherited from MSA, if I'm not mistaken) and 757s. With the planned repainting of MI aircraft, this would also mean we would see narrowbodies in SQ colors for the first time since the late 80s/early 90s.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by lingua101 View Post
              is it 737 or 727? I remember I took SQ B727 in 80s
              It’s 737-100. If i remembered correctly, it’s a combi. Inherit from MSA.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by 259850 View Post
                This is incorrect for the following reasons::

                1. In the most recent Financial Year, MI's operating margin was 4.2%, SQ Parent's 6.0%.

                2. SQ revenues are 11.5x larger than MI's. Even if MI's profit margins are better (they were in some years in the past), the needle will hardly be moved.

                3. The company reports profits on a consolidated basis since MI is a 100% owned subsidiary and that is what the market focuses on (the numbers in point 1 and 2 above are taken from footnotes deep inside the financial statement). So financial results will be same with or without merger.

                There may be some cost benefits from maintaining a single brand (just one brand to promote, etc), but probably will be balanced by higher cost of providing the SQ service (better seats, food, etc) on the MI network.

                All in all, this is highly unlikely to be a financially motivated move. More of providing operating flexibility (e.g. with one AOC, they have the flexibility of upsizing/downsizing aircraft to destinations based on demand).
                above the line doesn't require a company to report its numbers at company and group level. SQ's numbers are cyclical than MI. Yes SQ numbers are better in this year but what about 2017, 2016? Having both to report at
                company level would normalize some cyclicality on their books. By the way, MI has a better ROE?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by SQ_326 View Post
                  above the line doesn't require a company to report its numbers at company and group level. SQ's numbers are cyclical than MI. Yes SQ numbers are better in this year but what about 2017, 2016? Having both to report at
                  company level would normalize some cyclicality on their books. By the way, MI has a better ROE?
                  See my point 2. SQ is 11-12 times bigger than MI. What happens in MI is not going to move the needle. The other subsidiaries like Cargo and Scoot are also bigger than MI.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by 259850 View Post
                    See my point 2. SQ is 11-12 times bigger than MI. What happens in MI is not going to move the needle.
                    if SQ is 11~12 times larger than MI then whatever they do with MI wouldn't move any needle at all from all perspective. At the end of the day, whatever they do, are driven by financial objectives. Many companies are struggling to raise their ROE by 1 to 2% and practically no mature business can swing the needle in just 1 move. It's all those little things (rationalizing cargo operations, Silk Air, Scoot etc) that wouldn't move the needle much by its own could add up to the scale.
                    Last edited by SQ_326; 18 May 2018, 03:04 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      What took them so long ? I think this would give them the flexibility to change the aircraft type based on demand which would make them very nimble. And SIA's brand name on regional sectors would surely have a noticeable effect on loads as some foreigners are not even aware that MI is a subsidiary of SIA.
                      On a sidenote, SIA cargo was operating B734s with its current livery in the mid 90s.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by boing View Post
                        On a sidenote, SIA cargo was operating B734s with its current livery in the mid 90s.
                        Don’t recall SIA Cargo have ever operated any B734, but I do remember they had a single B733 in the “current” livery in the 90s and maybe early 2000s. From memory that aircraft was registered 9V-SQZ...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Are the new SQ Y seats (on the 787-10 and new A380's) able to be fitted in the 737's?
                          Singapore Airlines fan in Sweden.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I think its a smart move for SQ branding to have both narrow and widebodies from a capacity control POV. Interchange narrow and wide depending on seasonal capacity needs.

                            Perhaps we'll see SQ widebodies back in places like PEN in the future during peak season.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by SQavgeek View Post
                              Are the new SQ Y seats (on the 787-10 and new A380's) able to be fitted in the 737's?
                              Definitely, SQ's new economy seat is the Recaro CL3710 model which is also used on Flydubai's 737MAX. I hope they'll use this seat on the 737's.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by lingua101 View Post
                                probably not. i think it is more like Cathay Dragon concept.
                                Interesting...........

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X