# QAN - Qantas takeover by MBL



## reece55 (13 December 2006)

Just wondering everyone's opinion on Qantas - the bid is on the table by MBL et al @ $5.50 and yet the stock closed today at 5.09. I made myself  a tidy sum playing barrier call warrants today, the thing opened at 4.94!!!! 

Even though there is a fair amount of negative press on having an Australian icon company go private, the consortium appears to have fulfilled the 40% in aggregate and 15% any one foreign holder restriction, so you would have to think that provided they back off on the conditions of the offer, the independent directors would give it the nod - and good ole Dixon is sure to give it the tick, he stands to make a furken fortune.

Anyone have any opinions here????


----------



## 3 veiws of a secret (14 December 2006)

reece55 said:
			
		

> Just wondering everyone's opinion on Qantas - the bid is on the table by MBL et al @ $5.50 and yet the stock closed today at 5.09. I made myself  a tidy sum playing barrier call warrants today, the thing opened at 4.94!!!!
> 
> Even though there is a fair amount of negative press on having an Australian icon company go private, the consortium appears to have fulfilled the 40% in aggregate and 15% any one foreign holder restriction, so you would have to think that provided they back off on the conditions of the offer, the independent directors would give it the nod - and good ole Dixon is sure to give it the tick, he stands to make a furken fortune.
> 
> Anyone have any opinions here????




Radio 'states' this morning the MBL consortium have lifted their offer to $5.60.... as a result if true QAN ,accepts the revised offer ............


----------



## theasxgorilla (14 December 2006)

Ongoing QAN is up amongst the most profitable airlines in the world (2002 it was the most profitable airline in the world), so it stands to reason that an astute investor like MBL would want to buy it.

The offer of $5.50 and $5.60 are respectively just 10 cents and 20 cents short of the all-time-high of $5.40 set in August 1999.  That ATH was set before QAN had launched JetStar which has allowed them to sidestep long standing unionisation of their work force and hence reduce their cost base.  

So as one of the most profitable airlines in the world, with an effective (government protected) monopoly on key routes, now with a successful no-frills carrier arm, trading at $2.91 as recently at July this year, the timing seems right for MBL et al to pounce.

Technically, the company is probably still undervalued at $5.50 or $5.60.  On a chart QAN has been forming the mother of all consolidation wedges.  Last month's bar was the breakout from that wedge.

If the takeover goes ahead then the share will be de-listed before it sees the high-side of $6, which I believe it could have easily achieved otherwise.


----------



## bigdog (14 December 2006)

QAN 9:47 AM  Trading Halt 

http://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/showAnnouncementPDF.do?idsID=00678131


----------



## niknah (14 December 2006)

3 veiws of a secret said:
			
		

> Radio 'states' this morning the MBL consortium have lifted their offer to $5.60.... as a result if true QAN ,accepts the revised offer ............




They just announced this now, $5.60 it is.


----------



## Fab (14 December 2006)

Now how many jobs will be lost out of this takeover. I am guessing a lot as that is what Macquarie bank usually do


----------



## theasxgorilla (14 December 2006)

Interesting you should mention that...

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20926326-5005961,00.html


----------



## ducati916 (22 December 2006)

For holders of MBL

http://ducati998.wordpress.com/

jog on
d998


----------



## Dr Doom (23 December 2006)

Is there really any question of whether the deal is good for existing QAN shareholders - it's obviously yes. The offer price is more than could be expected in the near term, the industry could be argued to be in a relatively prosperous period (as opposed to 9/11), and would always be a marginal _real_ wealth creator (if at all).
It's all about the money to be made now by everyone concerned, and the longer term ramifications are something to be dealt with by the people who provide the equity.
Also, there has to be concern over the welfare of both the employees and passengers. It's highly likely that QAN will be forced to adopt US centric maintenance and safety regimes that put passenger safety at risk, either by outsourcing to a low wage country or cutting corners. Worst case is that QAN's enviable safety record will come to an end due to the above.

On the subject of MBL, known as the millionaires factory, it could very well be known soon as the house of cards.


----------



## ducati916 (24 December 2006)

*DrD*

I've completed the numbers on QAN. I would agree that this was an excellent deal for QAN holders & speculators............for MBL [or more accurately those that end up holding the debt securities] this is a bad deal.

The numbers on QAN are pretty grim reading. I'll post them up once I've actually written the summary of the analysis.

jog on
d998


----------



## ducati916 (27 December 2006)

*DrD*

Great deal for existing holders of QAN. 
Horrible deal for MBL
Analysis @

http://ducati998.wordpress.com/

jog on
d998


----------



## Dr Doom (27 December 2006)

Duc, It's all water under the bridge now I spose. With QAN, the practice of borrowing money and then paying a portion of those borrowings back as dividends makes no sense but I guess it keeps the shareholders happy. As for the Big Mac, you would assume they would have their ar*e covered with hedging etc in the event of a downturn. Or do they?. Could they be in trouble in a recession? Might be a discussion on the MBL forum.


----------



## theasxgorilla (29 December 2006)

ducati916 said:
			
		

> *DrD*
> 
> Great deal for existing holders of QAN.
> Horrible deal for MBL
> ...




Duc, thanks for the analysis.  I read your blog and it's very good.

So the question beckons...why the takeover?


----------



## sirk (6 January 2007)

*QANTAS*

I am confused about how the private consortium take over works.

The information I have so far is that the current shareholders have been given an offer slightly above market price for their shares. What I can gather from the letter is that 90% of the shares have to be brought for it to be taken off the market.

I think I read a while ago that what happens is the private consortium's take the company off the market, change it so it is more profitable and then sell it later by reissuing shares on the market. Is this correct?

Also, what happens if people don't accept the current offer? If it's under 90% that sell I guess they'd still own their shares. What happens if over 90% sell up - but you don't? Are you forced to sell or something?

 

Could someone clear it up for me? Also, are all take overs run the same way because I'd suggest there would be a few to come, such as Myer.


----------



## ducati916 (6 January 2007)

theasxgorilla said:
			
		

> Duc, thanks for the analysis.  I read your blog and it's very good.
> 
> So the question beckons...why the takeover?




Macquarie has a number of fingers in a number of pies; they advise [for a fee] they take equity stakes, they provide financing, they lease assets, all driving revenues.

Why QAN?
The money for LBO's is currently available, make hay while the sun shines.
Who exactly is left holding what is not currently clear, I would guess that MBL would want to unload these bonds as quickly as possible.

QAN is a horrible business to LBO. The cash-flows are anaemic, and possibly terminal. Would the government step up to the plate if needed? Who knows, but MBL will be at my guess long gone.

jog on
d998


----------



## BSD (6 January 2007)

ducati916 said:
			
		

> Macquarie has a number of fingers in a number of pies; they advise [for a fee] they take equity stakes, they provide financing, they lease assets, all driving revenues.
> 
> Why QAN?
> The money for LBO's is currently available, make hay while the sun shines.
> ...




MBL do not lease assets to QAN - AFG do. 

MBL is an equity partner - not a bond holder

MBL is going to generate more fees in the first year than their total equity contribution

Still a bad deal for MBL? 

I don't think so...


----------



## ducati916 (6 January 2007)

BSD said:
			
		

> MBL do not lease assets to QAN - AFG do.
> 
> MBL is an equity partner - not a bond holder
> 
> ...




Never actually said MBL leased anything to QAN. It was referring to MBL leasing assets as part of their overall strategy.

LBO's as already delineated are designed first & foremost to generate fees.
MBL will have sold the debt, ignoring any moral concerns, again already stated.

As regards a bad deal for MBL, no, a bad deal for the creditors, whoever they eventually turn out to be, again, already mentioned.

Have you anything new to add?
Or are you just reiterating the analysis already provided?

jog on
d998


----------



## theasxgorilla (7 January 2007)

*Re: QANTAS*



			
				sirk said:
			
		

> Could someone clear it up for me? Also, are all take overs run the same way because I'd suggest there would be a few to come, such as Myer.




Good foresight but I think you're shooting behind the duck on this one 

Quote from the below article:

"Texas Pacific Group narrowly edged out rival heavyweights Blackstone and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts to become the world's most prolific buyout group for 2006, helped by its $A1.4 billion purchase of the Myer department store chain and the pending $US8.7 billion acquisition of Qantas with Macquarie Bank."

http://www.news.com.au/sundayheraldsun/story/0,,20998375-664,00.html


----------



## ducati916 (7 January 2007)

The risk to MBL on this particular deal is loss of credibility should the deal blow up at some later stage. Investors rely upon MBL in selecting deals that will provide them with a return.......junk bond return, whatever.

If MBL selects poorly, their reputation as a deal maker is tarnished, and future deals become that little more difficult. Should a number go south, and that pretty much becomes all she wrote.

Looking at previous deals from MBL, QAN really stands out as one that falls outside their "area of expertise".

Possibly part of the reason [conjecture] is that with so much money in the LBO game currently, competition to find suitable LBO companies becomes far more difficult.

jog on
d998


----------



## on AIM trader (7 January 2007)

theasxgorilla said:
			
		

> Duc, thanks for the analysis.  I read your blog and it's very good.
> 
> So the question beckons...why the takeover?




OK first post here ever.. but I have seen the machinations inside the machine and Its my own opinion that they have been rejected on some BIG FCUK off deals lately and they need to secure something of note.. i mean namely the LSE takeover last year which would have been the ultimate feather in the cap for the 'colonials'. Also they are cashed up several good deals and divestments which have prolly been in the works for some time and allowed them to forcast thier liquidity to allow them to participate in the QAN takeover. 

I think its a bit like when you are a anxious with a bunch of cash burning a hole in ur pocket. And let's keep things in perspective here, as there has been an absolute flurry of M & A activity in the preceeding few years and companies are more open than ever to TKOvers and mergers etc... so if the cash is on the table.. and it CLEARY is, then game on!

Just an opinion.


----------



## nioka (7 January 2007)

I,m beginning to see a "whiff" of Alan Bond in the operations of MBL and it's offer for Qantas. Some one is going to get badly burnt on this one and I can see Qantas going the same way as Ansett in the not too distant future. Another Aussie icon will go down the drain. To me the figures don't add up. But then as I often say "I'm often wrong" (and sometimes I'm glad I am.)
What am I missing on this one?


----------



## fleathedog (8 January 2007)

> I,m beginning to see a "whiff" of Alan Bond in the operations of MBL and it's offer for Qantas. Some one is going to get badly burnt on this one and I can see Qantas going the same way as Ansett in the not too distant future




Can't say I was around in Alan Bonds time (possibly we worth reading up on..).

But I started in shares reading about Warren Buffet who lost a few $100m on an airline play in the early 90's.

Funding an airline purchase through debt (no one buys with their own money these days fo they?) is particularly dangerous IMO coz airline cash flow can disappear in a heartbeat through any of: 
- a spike in oil which makes up a third of their costs (maybe QAN hedges though?), 
- a terrorist attack
- recession/downtrun in consumer spending. 

The fed gov't has so far protected QAN from competition from Singapore Airlines, who actually feed something like 15-20% of the domestic market from international inbound flights. The gov't bluster about competition is a load of crap. And there was quite some publicity when they again refused SIN to fly the lucrative Syd-LA route. They could lose this protection as a private co according to some media reports.

It's a very very risky move IMO...


----------



## theasxgorilla (8 January 2007)

An intersesting article from  Saturday's Australian;

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21017655-5001641,00.html

To quote:
"Dixon is one of the most astute managers in the country. That performance has rarely translated into Qantas's share price because, as Dixon is often at pains to tell us, Qantas still barely makes its cost of capital.  But Qantas is one of the three most profitable airlines circling the globe. And certainly the least protected. Which is why private equity wants Qantas. Dixon has a great management team and private equity has the right answer to his problem: simply lower the cost of capital."

Duc, from your analysis, does this make sense?  Can going the private equity route lower the cost of capital and make QAN a better run company?


----------



## ducati916 (8 January 2007)

*Grilla*



> _Duc, from your analysis, does this make sense? Can going the private equity route lower the cost of capital and make QAN a better run company?_




In theory yes it can make QAN a *profitable* LBO.

In theory this is the underlying purpose of an LBO, to find public companies that are undervalued by the market based on sentiment, or underappreciated assets, and purchase those assets utilizing debt, that still represents a cheap source of capital.

The purchased assets require a stable cash-flow to service the debt, and surplus assets are usually sold to reduce the interest payments on the debt. Costs are ruthlessly cut [jobs etc] and eventually the business is resold via an IPO back to the public.

KKR, the premier LBO business showed returns circa 50% compounded over many years following this basic strategy. [not including fees which added substantially to the partners returns, but not the investors]

MBL, will take the fees, investors within the Fund will reap the returns, assuming all goes well.

QAN currently returns 4.3% on capital, thus a cost of capital that exceeds 4.3% is doomed to lose money unless that earnings rate can be dramatically improved. Junk bonds are circa 10%+ 

For all the previously cited reasons, this is a real throw of the dice, as fuel hedging in essence provides the Net Profit, get that wrong, and QAN will be bankrupt inside of 3yrs

jog on
d998


----------



## jet328 (9 February 2007)

Is anyone else surprised by QAN's share price. I sure wouldn't be hanging around for an upside of 20c.
This announcement might give them some more competition. 

*Quote*
Airfare war looms as Tiger roars

Scott Rochfort
February 9, 2007 - 11:22AM
AdvertisementAdvertisement

Singapore Airlines backed Tiger Airways has announced its plans on becoming Australia's third domestic airline by late 2007, sparking expectations it will trigger the mother of all low-cost domestic airfare wars.

In a sign Tiger is intent on smashing the cosy duopoly enjoyed between Virgin Blue and Qantas-Jetstar, its chief executive Tony Davis, said in a statement: "Fares are too high in Australia. We see the opportunity to deliver consistently low fares on all our routes.''

It is expected to take Tiger at least six months to receive an Air Operators Certificate to allow it to fly domestic flights.

Mr Davis told smh.com.au Tiger would offer "single digit'' one-way fares for its domestic launch.

*The airline already offers $8 one-way fares from Darwin to Singapore *and is currently advertising S$21.50 ($18) one way fares from Perth to Singapore for the launch of this service next month.

Out of its homebase in Singapore, there is a joke around aviation circles that the airline at times can offer a ticket for the same price as a six pack of Tiger beer. The company has offered S$1 fares in the past.

Tiger is yet to detail which cities it hopes to service. The airline is running a poll for Australians on its website, asking them where they would like to fly.

"We're looking at the whole country. Our objective is volume. It's not yield,'' said Mr Davis.

When asked to respond to Qantas deputy chief executive Peter Gregg's comments that Jetstar would continue to have the lowest costs for any Australian story, Mr Davis said: "Good Luck, good luck.''

"We are committed to having the lowest base in Australia and we are committed to having the lowest fares in Australia,'' he said.

"Our business model is about sustainable low fares. It's in our DNA, it's what we do.''

Tiger's business model is loosely based on the Europe's largest low-cost airline RyanAir, whose founders helped set up the airline. "Our business model is that we give consumers the lowest possible airfares.''

"Australians love our model and are supporting it already in their thousands. We are now keen to extend that model to the overpriced domestic market,'' said Mr Davis referring to the success of Tiger's services into Darwin.

The airline was established in 2004 by Singapore Airlines, the founders of Irelands's Ryanair and a private equity form Indigo Partners to tap into the fast growing South East Asian low cost airline market.

The airline hopes to fly five A320s domestically this year, and employ 1000 staff  "both direct and indirect'' in Australia.

Tiger is also expected to test the nerves of unions, given signs it could seek individual workplace agreement. When asked if Tiger would seek to establish union endorsed enterprise bargaining agreement, Mr Davis said: "It's up to the employees.''

"Our staff are incentivised and we have remuneration packages that reward the high efficiency levels we get from our business.''

Tiger is already advertising for Australian-based pilots, cabin crew and engineers on its web site.

Unlike failed previous airline's such as OzJet and Compass, Tiger Airways has the backing of Singapore Airlines. Tiger insists it runs independently from Singapore Air - its 49 per cent shareholder.

The move echoes Qantas's attempts to crack the South East Asian airline market by establishing a Jetstar Asia franchise in Singapore in late 2004.

The 44.5 per cent Qantas-owned airline has racked up an estimated $100 million in losses with its other Singapore subsidiary Valuair, and has never appeared to be a serious threat to Singapore Air or Tiger Airways.

Qantas chief financial officer and Jetstar Asia chairman Peter Gregg rejected suggestions Qantas was about it quit its Singapore investment yesterday.

Mr Gregg also hit out at a report in the Herald which mentioned the large number of flight cancellations on the airline, and its ongoing losses.

"It is ridiculous to equate a number of operational cancellations - which are in the process of being resolved - and a claim about pilot shortages, with concerns over the airline's future, as some media reports today have done,'' he said. He said Jetstar Asia made its first profit in December.

He said January however was a quiet month.

theage.com.au
http://www.tigerairways.com/oz/ozwelcome.php


----------



## Dr Doom (8 March 2007)

RATINGS agency Standard & Poor's says the credit quality of Qantas is likely to be significantly weakened if an $11 billion takeover by a private equity consortium succeeds.

S&P today repeated that its BBB-plus longer and A-2 short term ratings on the airline remain on *CreditWatch with negative implications*.

The ratings on Qantas will remain on CreditWatch while the airline is subject to the leveraged buyout (LBO) from the Airline Partners Australia (APA) consortium.

"If APA is successful with its $11.1 billion cash bid for Qantas, the airline's credit quality will be weakened significantly because the transaction will be substantially financed by debt and lead to a marked increase in the airline's financial leverage," S&P analyst Jeanette Ward said.


----------



## scsl (13 March 2007)

QAN has dipped 25 cents (5%) in three days of trading, to be at the lowest sp in three months. Could this be a good short-term opportunity to go long QAN? At $5.07, it represents a 10% return, if the 15 cent special dividend is factored in. 

Latest news on the takeover:



> *Qantas Bidder Says More Protection Unnecessary*
> CANBERRA (Dow Jones)--Airline Partners Australia, the private equity consortium mounting a A$11.11 billion (US$8.74 billion) takeover bid for Qantas Airways Ltd. (QAN.AU), Tuesday said no further legislation is needed to protect the national flag carrier's domestic routes and local jobs.
> APA director David Coe told a Senate committee hearing the undertakings given to the Australian government last week and the provisions of the Qantas Sale Act and the Air Navigation Act are adequate protection.
> The Senate economics committee is holding a half-day hearing into legislation to ensure Qantas subsidiary Jetstar remains an Australian-owned Australian-based operation.
> ...



IMO, the takeover of Qantas will eventually be wrapped up, whether it be at the current offer of $5.60 (inc dividend) or a higher one (unlikely). That's why I think that once positivity about the progress of the takeover creeps back in, hedge funds will again drive the sp upwards. But still, anything could happen. Think Flight Centre...


----------



## Warren Buffet II (13 March 2007)

scsl said:
			
		

> QAN has dipped 25 cents (5%) in three days of trading, to be at the lowest sp in three months. Could this be a good short-term opportunity to go long QAN? At $5.07, it represents a 10% return, if the 15 cent special dividend is factored in.
> 
> Latest news on the takeover:
> 
> ...





Well, there is an increasing sense that the takeover is not going well and that is shown in the latest Supplementary Bidder's Statement where they started offering fees to brokers to help with the sell. Interesting to see here that any broker that tries to sell you the idea of selling your QAN shares will be doing that more for the fee that for the real value.

WBII


----------



## Warren Buffet II (30 April 2007)

Acceptances from QAN shareholders keep decreasing and this is showing the arrogance which the APA team has been showing for the last few weeks, claiming most of the time that if the offer is withdrawed the share price will drop.

So if the share price drops what is the problem?, are investors in QAN for the short run?. My opinion is that idea of the price dropping is just stupid and I am starting to believe that the price will actually go pass the $5.45 offer after a after-takeover price volatility.

I am also starting to believe and based on peers performance in this year that APA should pay much more for QAN.

WBII


----------



## niknah (3 May 2007)

Tommorrow's the last day for acceptances.

Even with the buyout offer the share price hasn't done much better than virgin blue this past year...


----------



## Warren Buffet II (4 May 2007)

niknah said:


> Tommorrow's the last day for acceptances.
> 
> Even with the buyout offer the share price hasn't done much better than virgin blue this past year...




Well, I do not think so. VBA hsa done much better because it doesn't have the takeover push that QAN has. So that graph is actually pretty good because it shows that what APA is paying is what QAN should be valued at and it does not include any premium.

WBII


----------



## chansw (6 May 2007)

*Takeovers body blocks Qantas deal*
May 06, 2007 03:14pm

http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,21680830-31037,00.html

THE Takeovers Panel has effectively blocked the private equity consortium Airline Partners Australia's takeover bid for Qantas, putting an end to the $11.1 billion deal.

The takeovers umpire has refused to look at the matter after the APA consortium asked it to allow a late acceptance for the offer, which would have let the bid proceed to the next stage. 

APA has indicated that it intends to seek an urgent review of the decision, the panel said. 

The fate of the takeover bid for Australia's largest airline has hung in the balance since Friday, when a large US hedge fund offered its shares to the group after an important deadline. 

The bid effectively failed on Friday night when shareholder acceptances did not reach the 50 per cent acceptance level required to extend the offer by the 7pm AEST deadline. 

APA applied to the Takeovers Panel to allow the belated acceptance from the US hedge fund, which the consortium believed gave it claim to 50.6 per cent of Qantas shares. 

"The panel has decided not to commence proceedings in relation to APA's application," the panel said in a statement today. 

The decision effectively scuttles APA's takeover offer for the airline.


----------



## chansw (6 May 2007)

*Qantas takeover deal grounded*
May 06, 2007 04:14pm

http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,21680832-462,00.html


Takeovers Panel won't allow deadline extension 
Late-accepting fund 'should have known better' 
Consortium asks for review to keep $11bn bid alive
THE Takeovers Panel has effectively blocked the private equity consortium Airline Partners Australia's takeover bid for Qantas, putting an end to the $11.1 billion deal.

The takeovers umpire has refused to look at the matter after the APA consortium asked it to allow a late acceptance for the offer, which would have let the bid proceed to the next stage. 

Read the Takeovers Panel's decision in full.

APA has confirmed that it intends to seek an urgent review of the decision.  A spokesman for Qantas has said the airline still plans to make a statement before the market opens tomorrow. 

The fate of the takeover bid for Australia's largest airline has hung in the balance since Friday, when a large US hedge fund offered some of its shares to the group after an important deadline. 

APA applied to the Takeovers Panel to allow the belated acceptance from the hedge fund, which the consortium believed gave it claim to 50.6 per cent of Qantas shares. 

"The panel has decided not to commence proceedings in relation to APA's application," the panel said. 

It said the late acceptance came from a single sophisticated shareholder "who should have been well aware of the closing time and the date of the offer and the implications of not meeting that deadline".

It is believed the decision effectively scuttles APA's takeover offer for the airline, pending APA's call for a review. 

"APA notes that a majority of Qantas shareholders (around 60 per cent by number) representing more than 50 per cent of Qantas shares have indicated their support for the offer," APA has said. 

"The APA proposal offers an attractive 60 per cent premium above the three year average price of Qantas shares prior to speculation about the offer."

The Takeovers Panel said it was currently appointing a sitting panel to consider the review application. 

Analysts had said it would have been unprecedented for the panel to allow the late acceptance. 

ACTU spokesman Richard Watts described the process of APA being allowed to ask for an extended deadline as a farce and akin to "allowing another player on the field after the game to kick an uncontested goal".

"The shareholders have made their choice and the bid has failed," Mr Watts said.

Federal Treasurer Peter Costello had said earlier that he hoped the Takeovers Panel would make its decision quickly.


----------



## Absolutely (6 May 2007)

OK guys - there could be a buying opportunity tomorrow. Could be some panic selling and an opportunity to bottom pick.

Who's up for chancing it ?


----------



## shinobi346 (6 May 2007)

This is marvelous news. I _might_ buy some more on tuesday just to hold more to prevent it falling into APAs hands if they intend to make another offer.


----------



## krisbarry (7 May 2007)

Yep the share price will go into a nose dive with this weekends antics; oxygen masks in the ready and make sure those tray tables are secured in the upright position


----------



## ta2693 (7 May 2007)

I do not have experience like this circumstance. 
Will APA increase its offer in the near future, or make the same offer again? How much bidding pricing APA have to or might increase in case like this?


----------



## Kimosabi (7 May 2007)

The other share price to watch today today is AFG which was part of the Airline Partners Australia...


----------



## 3 veiws of a secret (7 May 2007)

Kimosabi said:


> The other share price to watch today today is AFG which was part of the Airline Partners Australia...




*YES* but the real looser in my veiw would be MBL ....AFG still collects the minor chips on the table ( I think)


----------



## Kimosabi (7 May 2007)

Good article on the Qantas Debacle



> Giant bluff goes badly wrong
> 
> AMERICAN billionaire Samuel Heyman woke up early Friday morning in the US to several frantic and incredulous phone calls. The most furious were from two giant US hedge funds.
> 
> ...




http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,21684413-462,00.html


----------



## ta2693 (7 May 2007)

I do not know why big investo like MBL, AFG can not start everything from beginning and try again?
If they can, why they are loser in the end?  er?


----------



## Julia (7 May 2007)

shinobi346 said:


> This is marvelous news. I _might_ buy some more on tuesday just to hold more to prevent it falling into APAs hands if they intend to make another offer.




A fascinating suggestion.   How many shares are you considering buying in this $11 billion company to prevent it falling into APA's hands?


----------



## Kimosabi (7 May 2007)

Julia said:


> A fascinating suggestion. How many shares are you considering buying in this $11 billion company to prevent it falling into APA's hands?




We've got got an appointment with MBL tomorrow, to see if they will fund us for a 50% stake. We're 100% in (with their money)...


----------



## Gundini (8 May 2007)

Qantas is about to trade again in a couple of minutes.

Good luck to all holders, not sure what will happen...


----------



## Gundini (8 May 2007)

Unbelievable!

Opened up $5.14/ $5.15

I would have to think it is a short prospect at these levels, why hasn't it tanked?


----------



## ozambersand (8 May 2007)

As at 11.30am, 89,156,060 shares had traded hands.

(That equates to $463 million at $5.20) 

Given a market cap of $10,679 million and a current share price of $5.20. Doesn't that mean that about 4.3% of the shares available have already traded today?

Pity the private equity people couldn't get that sort of sale action! 

Wonder how long that price will remain so that the overseas hedge funds can bail out.

Will be interested to see what institutions have bought in.


----------



## Bazmate (8 May 2007)

I'm guessing there's still some hope of a renewed bid, and a renewed bid would have to be a couple of $$ higher to get off the ground. Not to mention the profit upgrades and current optimism in the airline industry in general.

My shares are still stuck in the 'reserved units' column so I guess I can't trade them yet anyway.

I've held them for only about 9 months, (one of my better buys) so I'm up for a big tax bill if I sell out now.... wonder if I can hold out for another 3 months???

Baz


----------



## Absolutely (8 May 2007)

I reckon it is being manipulated to hell. I'm sure a bigger fall will come once the big funds are satisfied.


----------



## Julia (8 May 2007)

Kimosabi said:


> We've got got an appointment with MBL tomorrow, to see if they will fund us for a 50% stake. We're 100% in (with their money)...




Well, I'm sure I don't even need to wish you luck, Kimosabi.  They will jump at the chance to grab you!


----------



## Julia (8 May 2007)

Gundini said:


> Unbelievable!
> 
> Opened up $5.14/ $5.15
> 
> I would have to think it is a short prospect at these levels, why hasn't it tanked?




Yes, this is hard to understand.  Especially since AFG and MBL have been much more sold off, both yesterday and again today.


----------



## jammin (18 May 2007)

Gundini said:


> Unbelievable!
> 
> Opened up $5.14/ $5.15
> 
> I would have to think it is a short prospect at these levels, why hasn't it tanked?



With the combined ann of; APA will not renew the bid and are looking else-where; and Ms Jacksons resignation/retirement; you would think the level of uncertainty surrounding this stock is such that it is a standout shorting opportunity (in the short term, 1-2 weeks) with the indicated open around $5.25 this morning.


----------

