IFT - Infratil

[Anna Naum]

I thought Lloyd & Co owned the stake in Hamilton outside of IFT, that is IFT has no holding in the Hamilton company.

[Toddy]

Rmbbrave

I live in Central London, St Johns Wood. The fastest way for me to get to work would be to drive our car`and park in the parking building by work. The congestion charge has worked wonders.
However, I do not drive but catch a tube/bus that is jam packed, smelly and full of every nationality except the English. The underground and bus companys make a packet.

Why use public transport, its simple, ££££...... public transport is cheaper than having to pay a congestion charge + parking + 98 pence a litre.

That's the catch, especially now with oil at $74 USD. And Kiwi's love to save a buck. The trend of using more public transport has started even without any Auckland traffic solutions on the table.

[Gryffyn]

Thanks for bringing this one back to the fore.

[Gryffyn]

Many STers hold this?

Worried about the possible coming AIR cartel?

Looks like a good steady performer otherwise.

Disc: none but considering

[Sideshow Bob]

Have a look at the B warrants Gryf. Currently trading at about $1.12, with $3.50 payable 10/7/09.

Heads trading at $4.37, and showing steady growth over last few years & well placed.

Disc: Own some B warrants, but not enough!

[Toddy]

Here is a copy of the email I received from Wellington Airport explaining the proposed code share.


Number 1 - May 1, 2006

Qantas - Air New Zealand Code Share

On 12 April 2006, Qantas and Air NZ announced a plan to "code-share" on the Tasman. This alert explains what the code share is and what the Government should do.

What is a code-share?

Usually a code-share is an arrangement to allow one airline to show its code or flight number on another airline's flight, on a route where they do not compete. For example, Air New Zealand code shares with United Airlines on some trans Tasman flights where they are never likely to compete. The proposed code-share is for routes where Qantas and Air NZ are by far the dominant competitors. That is not normal at all.

What are Air NZ and Qantas proposing?

Air NZ and Qantas want to create a cartel. That is, they want to collude on prices and services for all routes between Australia and New Zealand. They also want to be able to collude on payments to travel agents and a range of other matters. They will set up a joint committee between the two airlines to make decisions on what they will jointly offer customers. They will not compete and the deliberations of the joint committee will not be scrutinised.

Didn't they try this once before?

In 2003 Qantas and Air NZ proposed an "alliance" that would have allowed extensive collusion in many markets. It was rejected by the Commerce Commission as highly detrimental to New Zealand. It was rejected by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) as detrimental to Australia. On appeal, the High Court upheld the Commerce Commission's decision.

So what's different this time?

As far as consumers are concerned, not much. The worst elements of the former proposal remain - collusion on prices and schedules on one of New Zealand's most important markets. Although the agreement does not allow the cartel committee to set prices and schedules for other markets, there is nothing to prevent them from making unilateral decisions not to challenge a 'friendly party' on domestic routes.

Won't the Commerce Commission put a stop to it?

This time, the Commerce Commission may not get a say. There is an anachronistic exemption from the Commerce Act to allow the Minister for Transport to approve code shares. It was never envisaged that this would extend to a highly anti-competitive cartel, but that exemption exists and it is being used in that way.
There is no such exemption in Australia, so (as in most countries) it will go to the competition regulator. But the ACCC is under no obligation to take the interests of Kiwis into account.

Should the Minister of Transport make the decision?

Most developed countries recognise that when influential commercial interests seek to collude, it is better to have an independent and expert commission examine the impacts on consumers. When the Government owns the airline, it is even more difficult for the Minister to be independent and be seen to be independent.

What should the Government do?

If this code-share really is good for New Zealand as the proponents say, why not let that point be tested openly and rigorously?
The Government should do two things:
" Refer the current application to the Commerce Commission for a transparent investigation and advice;
" Enact legislation to get rid of the exemption from the Commerce Act for anti-competitive code shares.

What can I do?

Write to the Minister of Transport, the Minister of Commerce, and your local MP, and tell them you want New Zealand's interests examined by the Commerce Commission. Airlines are making a case to pursue their commercial interests. Be sceptical of claims about the potential benefits of the cartel and assurances that all will be well.

[Gryffyn]

quote:Originally posted by Sideshow Bob

Have a look at the B warrants Gryf. Currently trading at about $1.12, with $3.50 payable 10/7/09.

Heads trading at $4.37, and showing steady growth over last few years & well placed.

Disc: Own some B warrants, but not enough!

SSB me old china - are you saying I have to buy at 1.12 and pay 3.50 for something worth 4.37 now?

sure, growth has been good - and I like the share - had round $2 and sold at $3 a while back (damn!) - and I like their stagecoach angle but the airport (WN) thing worries me.

[Sideshow Bob]

quote:Originally posted by Gryffyn

SSB me old china - are you saying I have to buy at 1.12 and pay 3.50 for something worth 4.37 now?

sure, growth has been good - and I like the share - had round $2 and sold at $3 a while back (damn!) - and I like their stagecoach angle but the airport (WN) thing worries me.

You've got it me old Garden Gate! Shell out $4.62 for something that is trading at $4.37. Bargain!!

It's only got 3 years for the shareprice to go up 5.8%!!!

Seriously though, think there is a bit more info further back on this thread regarding valuation of warrants.

[Gryffyn]

Cheers - and thanks for the calculation - that is kinda tempting.

[Toddy]

Gryffyn

Management signed off a buyback programme around the time of the last agm. This has yet to be fully implemented and should be a driver for the SP in the coming months.

As for the cartel, I would say that the Labour Govt will be running like scared rabbits from this one after yesterdays Telecom interference.

PS not guilty of voting Labour in the last election.