Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Discuss topics related to Air Transat.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Torontomaplelaughs
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2018 7:17 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by Torontomaplelaughs »

DanWEC wrote: Mon Mar 14, 2022 12:33 pm
Sharklasers wrote: Sun Mar 13, 2022 8:58 am
DanWEC wrote: Sun Mar 13, 2022 8:19 am Oh good, this again. Very classy to post trashing a companies' pilots in their own sub-forum. Especially ones that are facing possible unemployment.
Man, I cringe when I think of the thousands of people that come across this entirely public site curious about all aspects of aviation, and what they must think once they start reading.
If a single Transat pilot permanently loses their job I will eat my hat.

I would never trash Transat pilots as a whole either. I’d be happy to fly with you Dan, I think your doing gods work with the whole visa push.
All good. Thanks. I wish it was progressing better, but every month I get more suspicious of a handshake agreement to prevent movement. As for losing jobs... I hope not, but I'm not optimistic. I made an ill-timed move to TS myself just pre-pandemic. I swapped airlines for a lifestyle improvement. Absolutely amazing company and culture, but because of it I haven't worked in 2 years besides starting a construction business. Feels pretty bleak, and not a great spot to be in for a guy who already started a bit late as a second career. Might even be time to jump ship to one of the startups.

redbusdriver- You sound like you've been around too much lead paint.
Dan...redbusdriver isn't well liked at AC either. He just prefers to float around in management feces and prop up their agenda. Its pretty pathetic.

Sorry your subject to such rhetoric.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by rudder »

boeingboy wrote: Mon Mar 14, 2022 4:22 pm
SWG did a deal to keep the lights on.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
That's a good one. Please don't try and throw us in the same category as TS.
Hunter/TUI did the deal they had to do.

Projected cash flows for the next 24 months may not have met obligations and substituted debt for the the expensive government debt likely was not available. Like it or not, the balance sheet was turned upside down by COVID.

Hunter got to keep the hotels. That was the value.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by rudder »

I am amazed that some posters are expressing the sentiment akin to TRZ being the ‘Air Canada’ of La Belle Province. In other words - too big to fail.

TRZ is not too big to fail. Neither was AC. TRZ has yet to go through the CCAA car wash. AC already did.

TRZ will likely not disappear, but it could look different. Smaller corporation. Less assets. New owners (the unsecured creditors). Existing shareholders wiped out.

Arrogance and the aura of invincibility (entitlement?) almost caused the liquidation of AC. Reality will always shatter that illusion.

TRZ needs to clean up the balance sheet with cash flows unlikely to meet obligations. Not certain that an equity infusion is coming unless current shareholders are willing to be diluted to a fraction of their current standing.

A pre-packaged CCAA filing with an equity sponsor and revised business plan in place may be best outcome. The new CEO is already admitting serious near term cash flow deficiencies. With an expansion plan that includes even more head-to-head competition with existing players, medium term cash flow may also become problematic, particularly as debt obligations come due (or become more expensive per the terms of the LEEFF). Substitute debt facilities on reasonable terms from private lenders may be problematic if liquidity is an issue.

TRZ is a good company. But even good companies sometimes need to restructure. Protecting shareholders is not a governmental responsibility.
---------- ADS -----------
 
TFTMB heavy
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 656
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:58 am

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by TFTMB heavy »

rudder wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 7:34 am I am amazed that some posters are expressing the sentiment akin to TRZ being the ‘Air Canada’ of La Belle Province. In other words - too big to fail.

TRZ is not too big to fail. Neither was AC. TRZ has yet to go through the CCAA car wash. AC already did.

TRZ will likely not disappear, but it could look different. Smaller corporation. Less assets. New owners (the unsecured creditors). Existing shareholders wiped out.

Arrogance and the aura of invincibility (entitlement?) almost caused the liquidation of AC. Reality will always shatter that illusion.

TRZ needs to clean up the balance sheet with cash flows unlikely to meet obligations. Not certain that an equity infusion is coming unless current shareholders are willing to be diluted to a fraction of their current standing.

A pre-packaged CCAA filing with an equity sponsor and revised business plan in place may be best outcome. The new CEO is already admitting serious near term cash flow deficiencies. With an expansion plan that includes even more head-to-head competition with existing players, medium term cash flow may also become problematic, particularly as debt obligations come due (or become more expensive per the terms of the LEEFF). Substitute debt facilities on reasonable terms from private lenders may be problematic if liquidity is an issue.

TRZ is a good company. But even good companies sometimes need to restructure. Protecting shareholders is not a governmental responsibility.
We are certainly heading in the direction of a different operation under Annick. Everyday that passes without new cashflow brings us closer to that CCAA car wash as you say. They have managed to push back the interest rate increase by 20 months but even that is a drop in the near empty bucket. Will we avoid it and would it be that bad? Nobody knows as of yet but I am very hopeful that either way we will pull through either way.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Sharklasers
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 478
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by Sharklasers »

rudder wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 7:34 am I am amazed that some posters are expressing the sentiment akin to TRZ being the ‘Air Canada’ of La Belle Province. In other words - too big to fail.

TRZ is not too big to fail. Neither was AC. TRZ has yet to go through the CCAA car wash. AC already did.

TRZ will likely not disappear, but it could look different. Smaller corporation. Less assets. New owners (the unsecured creditors). Existing shareholders wiped out.

Arrogance and the aura of invincibility (entitlement?) almost caused the liquidation of AC. Reality will always shatter that illusion.

TRZ needs to clean up the balance sheet with cash flows unlikely to meet obligations. Not certain that an equity infusion is coming unless current shareholders are willing to be diluted to a fraction of their current standing.

A pre-packaged CCAA filing with an equity sponsor and revised business plan in place may be best outcome. The new CEO is already admitting serious near term cash flow deficiencies. With an expansion plan that includes even more head-to-head competition with existing players, medium term cash flow may also become problematic, particularly as debt obligations come due (or become more expensive per the terms of the LEEFF). Substitute debt facilities on reasonable terms from private lenders may be problematic if liquidity is an issue.

TRZ is a good company. But even good companies sometimes need to restructure. Protecting shareholders is not a governmental responsibility.
Transat isn’t too big to fail, it’s too Quebec to fail. The premier of Quebec and the Prime Minister of Canada have both already publicly committed to backstopping Transat. That’s a fact. The market fully disagrees with your takes here, Transat is up 2% at market opening and is trading the same price it was in April 2019 and at nearly double its value in 2012. AC on the other hand is Trading at less than half of its May 2019 stock price. I think if the institutional investors believed there was a realistic possibility of a CCAA car wash they would be looking for the exit and the price would subsequently crash but they appear to be holding strong.
---------- ADS -----------
 
rudder
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by rudder »

Sharklasers wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 8:40 am
Transat isn’t too big to fail, it’s too Quebec to fail. The premier of Quebec and the Prime Minister of Canada have both already publicly committed to backstopping Transat. That’s a fact. The market fully disagrees with your takes here, Transat is up 2% at market opening and is trading the same price it was in April 2019 and at nearly double its value in 2012.
That sums up exactly why the TRZ shares are trading at $4.60 today (market capitalization of C$175MM). Denial. Alternate reality. Hope. Recall this is a corporation with 2019 revenues of C$2.9B. AC shares were also worth more than zero the day it filed on April Fool’s Day 2003.

TRZ has already been forced to abandon a planned reorganization with AC. And to date, no other suitor has stepped forward with an acceptable plan to replace AC. Probably because nobody else can bring to the table what AC can bring.

So whether it is a Plan of Reorganization (outside of CCAA) or a Plan of Arrangement (inside of CCAA protection) - TRZ needs a plan.

I hope they find one. I hope it works out. I hope that everyone keeps their job. And I hope nobody suffers a reduction in WAWCON. But the landscape coming out of COVID looks quite a bit different than it did going in. And the TRZ balance sheet has since been tilted in the wrong direction.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Sharklasers
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 478
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by Sharklasers »

rudder wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:28 am
Sharklasers wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 8:40 am
Transat isn’t too big to fail, it’s too Quebec to fail. The premier of Quebec and the Prime Minister of Canada have both already publicly committed to backstopping Transat. That’s a fact. The market fully disagrees with your takes here, Transat is up 2% at market opening and is trading the same price it was in April 2019 and at nearly double its value in 2012.
That sums up exactly why the TRZ shares are trading at $4.60 today (market capitalization of C$175MM). Denial. Alternate reality. Hope. Recall this is a corporation with 2019 revenues of C$2.9B. AC shares were also worth more than zero the day it filed on April Fool’s Day 2003.

TRZ has already been forced to abandon a planned reorganization with AC. And to date, no other suitor has stepped forward with an acceptable plan to replace AC. Probably because nobody else can bring to the table what AC can bring.

So whether it is a Plan of Reorganization (outside of CCAA) or a Plan of Arrangement (inside of CCAA protection) - TRZ needs a plan.

I hope they find one. I hope it works out. I hope that everyone keeps their job. And I hope nobody suffers a reduction in WAWCON. But the landscape coming out of COVID looks quite a bit different than it did going in. And the TRZ balance sheet has since been tilted in the wrong direction.
Again, the institutional investors who hold large chunks of Transat don’t make decisions based on denial, alternate realities and hope. Everything your saying is correct but you aren’t accounting for one crucial piece of the equation, the game changer.

The MP for Papineau.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DanWEC
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2312
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:05 pm
Location: 404

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by DanWEC »

I'm honestly not sure if that's an asset or a liability. Trudeau has already shown to be unfriendly to any industry that produces carbon, and the bailout precedent set by BBD would subject any government propping of a QC based company to a very high level of public and political scrutiny. Both are existing liabilities.

Some major event has to happen though, no matter what.
---------- ADS -----------
 
elite
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:46 am

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by elite »

rudder wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:28 am That sums up exactly why the TRZ shares are trading at $4.60 today (market capitalization of C$175MM). Denial. Alternate reality. Hope. Recall this is a corporation with 2019 revenues of C$2.9B. AC shares were also worth more than zero the day it filed on April Fool’s Day 2003.

TRZ has already been forced to abandon a planned reorganization with AC. And to date, no other suitor has stepped forward with an acceptable plan to replace AC. Probably because nobody else can bring to the table what AC can bring.

So whether it is a Plan of Reorganization (outside of CCAA) or a Plan of Arrangement (inside of CCAA protection) - TRZ needs a plan.

I hope they find one. I hope it works out. I hope that everyone keeps their job. And I hope nobody suffers a reduction in WAWCON. But the landscape coming out of COVID looks quite a bit different than it did going in. And the TRZ balance sheet has since been tilted in the wrong direction.
Your assessments seem fairly accurate. Here are some additional thoughts for those that can entertain it.

By all accounts, Transat is the last remaining of the original charter airlines, Royal, Skyservice, Canada 3000, all of which have gone bankrupt. Transat too narrowly avoided bankruptcy in 2001 due to sudden collapse of Canada 3000 and the Quebec factor as said. It wasn’t that it was run or managed better than the others, in fact Canada 3000 and Skyservice were much better run.

Due to this long life and the factors you mentioned above, Transat has priced itself out of the market in which it operates and its survival will depend on its acceptance of that fact and working to correct its revenue stream creatively or modify their expectations or a combination. Merging with a legacy carrier to potentially access its higher revenue structure would have been one way. CCAA will likely provide another avenue, but so too will the willingness of its labour force, particularly skilled labour, to accept and acknowledge it in concrete ways.

One such concrete way was the approach of American Airlines’ labour unions to U.S Airways prior to their merger when they made clear their expectations and aspirations which in fact were aligned with U.S Airways’ and facilitated the merger. Some of the ways Transat pilots for instance can do that, is to have an open discussion amongst themselves about what they are willing to accept and then approach potential buyers’ union ahead of a deal to make that known. If the glaring alternative is bankruptcy, would they be willing to merge BOTL with position freeze, or 1 to x for YOS? There are many creative ways to get actively involved in their own destiny by being realistic. Whatever the case, Transat’s challenges are deeper to be solved, or even delayed, by a politician, a very arrogant and unpopular one at that!
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by pelmet »

elite wrote: Mon Apr 18, 2022 2:19 pm
rudder wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:28 am That sums up exactly why the TRZ shares are trading at $4.60 today (market capitalization of C$175MM). Denial. Alternate reality. Hope. Recall this is a corporation with 2019 revenues of C$2.9B. AC shares were also worth more than zero the day it filed on April Fool’s Day 2003.

TRZ has already been forced to abandon a planned reorganization with AC. And to date, no other suitor has stepped forward with an acceptable plan to replace AC. Probably because nobody else can bring to the table what AC can bring.

So whether it is a Plan of Reorganization (outside of CCAA) or a Plan of Arrangement (inside of CCAA protection) - TRZ needs a plan.

I hope they find one. I hope it works out. I hope that everyone keeps their job. And I hope nobody suffers a reduction in WAWCON. But the landscape coming out of COVID looks quite a bit different than it did going in. And the TRZ balance sheet has since been tilted in the wrong direction.
Your assessments seem fairly accurate. Here are some additional thoughts for those that can entertain it.

By all accounts, Transat is the last remaining of the original charter airlines, Royal, Skyservice, Canada 3000, all of which have gone bankrupt. Transat too narrowly avoided bankruptcy in 2001 due to sudden collapse of Canada 3000 and the Quebec factor as said. It wasn’t that it was run or managed better than the others, in fact Canada 3000 and Skyservice were much better run.

Due to this long life and the factors you mentioned above, Transat has priced itself out of the market in which it operates and its survival will depend on its acceptance of that fact and working to correct its revenue stream creatively or modify their expectations or a combination. Merging with a legacy carrier to potentially access its higher revenue structure would have been one way. CCAA will likely provide another avenue, but so too will the willingness of its labour force, particularly skilled labour, to accept and acknowledge it in concrete ways.

One such concrete way was the approach of American Airlines’ labour unions to U.S Airways prior to their merger when they made clear their expectations and aspirations which in fact were aligned with U.S Airways’ and facilitated the merger. Some of the ways Transat pilots for instance can do that, is to have an open discussion amongst themselves about what they are willing to accept and then approach potential buyers’ union ahead of a deal to make that known. If the glaring alternative is bankruptcy, would they be willing to merge BOTL with position freeze, or 1 to x for YOS? There are many creative ways to get actively involved in their own destiny by being realistic. Whatever the case, Transat’s challenges are deeper to be solved, or even delayed, by a politician, a very arrogant and unpopular one at that!
Thanks for the analysis.

It would be interesting to know more detail about pricing itself out of the market.

I think that the employees are probably feel(perhaps with good reason) that bankruptcy is not a likely alternative with the potential of governments willing to swoop in and help somehow. The alternative could be stagnation or an amount od slow downsizing through slow retirements. That is a situation where senior people are quite happy to maintain what they believe they have fought for(and perhaps want more). While there could be junior guys willing to have changes that would result in more opportunity, getting close to a majority can be difficult and the negotiating positions can be held by entrenched individuals.

It seems like AT might have some good benefits with their deal with WJ. One would think they will be around for a while even if they are more of a stable legacy operation than a rapidly expanding operation. Then again, who knows if some war in the middle east breaks out and fuel prices skyrocket.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Latitude
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2020 8:50 am

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by Latitude »

elite wrote: Mon Apr 18, 2022 2:19 pm
rudder wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:28 am That sums up exactly why the TRZ shares are trading at $4.60 today (market capitalization of C$175MM). Denial. Alternate reality. Hope. Recall this is a corporation with 2019 revenues of C$2.9B. AC shares were also worth more than zero the day it filed on April Fool’s Day 2003.

TRZ has already been forced to abandon a planned reorganization with AC. And to date, no other suitor has stepped forward with an acceptable plan to replace AC. Probably because nobody else can bring to the table what AC can bring.

So whether it is a Plan of Reorganization (outside of CCAA) or a Plan of Arrangement (inside of CCAA protection) - TRZ needs a plan.

I hope they find one. I hope it works out. I hope that everyone keeps their job. And I hope nobody suffers a reduction in WAWCON. But the landscape coming out of COVID looks quite a bit different than it did going in. And the TRZ balance sheet has since been tilted in the wrong direction.
Your assessments seem fairly accurate. Here are some additional thoughts for those that can entertain it.

By all accounts, Transat is the last remaining of the original charter airlines, Royal, Skyservice, Canada 3000, all of which have gone bankrupt. Transat too narrowly avoided bankruptcy in 2001 due to sudden collapse of Canada 3000 and the Quebec factor as said. It wasn’t that it was run or managed better than the others, in fact Canada 3000 and Skyservice were much better run.

Due to this long life and the factors you mentioned above, Transat has priced itself out of the market in which it operates and its survival will depend on its acceptance of that fact and working to correct its revenue stream creatively or modify their expectations or a combination. Merging with a legacy carrier to potentially access its higher revenue structure would have been one way. CCAA will likely provide another avenue, but so too will the willingness of its labour force, particularly skilled labour, to accept and acknowledge it in concrete ways.

One such concrete way was the approach of American Airlines’ labour unions to U.S Airways prior to their merger when they made clear their expectations and aspirations which in fact were aligned with U.S Airways’ and facilitated the merger. Some of the ways Transat pilots for instance can do that, is to have an open discussion amongst themselves about what they are willing to accept and then approach potential buyers’ union ahead of a deal to make that known. If the glaring alternative is bankruptcy, would they be willing to merge BOTL with position freeze, or 1 to x for YOS? There are many creative ways to get actively involved in their own destiny by being realistic. Whatever the case, Transat’s challenges are deeper to be solved, or even delayed, by a politician, a very arrogant and unpopular one at that!
Thank god they were. :roll: They lasted for 10-15 years?
---------- ADS -----------
 
flyinhigh
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2973
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 7:42 pm
Location: my couch

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by flyinhigh »

elite wrote: Mon Apr 18, 2022 2:19 pm
rudder wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:28 am That sums up exactly why the TRZ shares are trading at $4.60 today (market capitalization of C$175MM). Denial. Alternate reality. Hope. Recall this is a corporation with 2019 revenues of C$2.9B. AC shares were also worth more than zero the day it filed on April Fool’s Day 2003.

TRZ has already been forced to abandon a planned reorganization with AC. And to date, no other suitor has stepped forward with an acceptable plan to replace AC. Probably because nobody else can bring to the table what AC can bring.

So whether it is a Plan of Reorganization (outside of CCAA) or a Plan of Arrangement (inside of CCAA protection) - TRZ needs a plan.

I hope they find one. I hope it works out. I hope that everyone keeps their job. And I hope nobody suffers a reduction in WAWCON. But the landscape coming out of COVID looks quite a bit different than it did going in. And the TRZ balance sheet has since been tilted in the wrong direction.
Your assessments seem fairly accurate. Here are some additional thoughts for those that can entertain it.

By all accounts, Transat is the last remaining of the original charter airlines, Royal, Skyservice, Canada 3000, all of which have gone bankrupt. Transat too narrowly avoided bankruptcy in 2001 due to sudden collapse of Canada 3000 and the Quebec factor as said. It wasn’t that it was run or managed better than the others, in fact Canada 3000 and Skyservice were much better run.

Due to this long life and the factors you mentioned above, Transat has priced itself out of the market in which it operates and its survival will depend on its acceptance of that fact and working to correct its revenue stream creatively or modify their expectations or a combination. Merging with a legacy carrier to potentially access its higher revenue structure would have been one way. CCAA will likely provide another avenue, but so too will the willingness of its labour force, particularly skilled labour, to accept and acknowledge it in concrete ways.

One such concrete way was the approach of American Airlines’ labour unions to U.S Airways prior to their merger when they made clear their expectations and aspirations which in fact were aligned with U.S Airways’ and facilitated the merger. Some of the ways Transat pilots for instance can do that, is to have an open discussion amongst themselves about what they are willing to accept and then approach potential buyers’ union ahead of a deal to make that known. If the glaring alternative is bankruptcy, would they be willing to merge BOTL with position freeze, or 1 to x for YOS? There are many creative ways to get actively involved in their own destiny by being realistic. Whatever the case, Transat’s challenges are deeper to be solved, or even delayed, by a politician, a very arrogant and unpopular one at that!
I will say that Canada 3000 was better, right up until they were made to take on Michel LeBlanc. That sewered them from the get go, 9/11 was the dager took it out. Skyservice, well just like AC with Sky Regional when the Thomas Cook contract was awarded out of the company they no longer existed. Basing all your apples on one client is generally not a good business practice.

TS's model of tour operator first has now caught up with it, which the new guard is actively changing however is it to little to late. No company can afford to have wide bodies parked routinely between trips at different airports. You have to fly them 12+ hours a day for them to make money and to often the old guard had them parked at how many benjamins a day. Hopefully Annick can change the model quick as she seems to be doing, but as a current TS pilot I have my doubts.
---------- ADS -----------
 
fish4life
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2405
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by fish4life »

flyinhigh wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 5:30 am
elite wrote: Mon Apr 18, 2022 2:19 pm
rudder wrote: Tue Mar 15, 2022 10:28 am That sums up exactly why the TRZ shares are trading at $4.60 today (market capitalization of C$175MM). Denial. Alternate reality. Hope. Recall this is a corporation with 2019 revenues of C$2.9B. AC shares were also worth more than zero the day it filed on April Fool’s Day 2003.

TRZ has already been forced to abandon a planned reorganization with AC. And to date, no other suitor has stepped forward with an acceptable plan to replace AC. Probably because nobody else can bring to the table what AC can bring.

So whether it is a Plan of Reorganization (outside of CCAA) or a Plan of Arrangement (inside of CCAA protection) - TRZ needs a plan.

I hope they find one. I hope it works out. I hope that everyone keeps their job. And I hope nobody suffers a reduction in WAWCON. But the landscape coming out of COVID looks quite a bit different than it did going in. And the TRZ balance sheet has since been tilted in the wrong direction.
Your assessments seem fairly accurate. Here are some additional thoughts for those that can entertain it.

By all accounts, Transat is the last remaining of the original charter airlines, Royal, Skyservice, Canada 3000, all of which have gone bankrupt. Transat too narrowly avoided bankruptcy in 2001 due to sudden collapse of Canada 3000 and the Quebec factor as said. It wasn’t that it was run or managed better than the others, in fact Canada 3000 and Skyservice were much better run.

Due to this long life and the factors you mentioned above, Transat has priced itself out of the market in which it operates and its survival will depend on its acceptance of that fact and working to correct its revenue stream creatively or modify their expectations or a combination. Merging with a legacy carrier to potentially access its higher revenue structure would have been one way. CCAA will likely provide another avenue, but so too will the willingness of its labour force, particularly skilled labour, to accept and acknowledge it in concrete ways.

One such concrete way was the approach of American Airlines’ labour unions to U.S Airways prior to their merger when they made clear their expectations and aspirations which in fact were aligned with U.S Airways’ and facilitated the merger. Some of the ways Transat pilots for instance can do that, is to have an open discussion amongst themselves about what they are willing to accept and then approach potential buyers’ union ahead of a deal to make that known. If the glaring alternative is bankruptcy, would they be willing to merge BOTL with position freeze, or 1 to x for YOS? There are many creative ways to get actively involved in their own destiny by being realistic. Whatever the case, Transat’s challenges are deeper to be solved, or even delayed, by a politician, a very arrogant and unpopular one at that!
I will say that Canada 3000 was better, right up until they were made to take on Michel LeBlanc. That sewered them from the get go, 9/11 was the dager took it out. Skyservice, well just like AC with Sky Regional when the Thomas Cook contract was awarded out of the company they no longer existed. Basing all your apples on one client is generally not a good business practice.

TS's model of tour operator first has now caught up with it, which the new guard is actively changing however is it to little to late. No company can afford to have wide bodies parked routinely between trips at different airports. You have to fly them 12+ hours a day for them to make money and to often the old guard had them parked at how many benjamins a day. Hopefully Annick can change the model quick as she seems to be doing, but as a current TS pilot I have my doubts.
If I remember correctly the 330’s that transat has leased are almost all on a sweetheart power by the hour deal so when they are sitting idle it actually doesn’t cost them anything
---------- ADS -----------
 
Luigi Vampa
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2022 10:13 am

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by Luigi Vampa »

fish4life wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:10 am If I remember correctly the 330’s that transat has leased are almost all on a sweetheart power by the hour deal so when they are sitting idle it actually doesn’t cost them anything
That was just for the A310s
---------- ADS -----------
 
Sharklasers
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 478
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by Sharklasers »

If Flair is successful in getting the foreign ownership regs effectively neutered Transat could be a terrific vehicle for a foreign PE or airline looking to get a ready made high efficiency fleet with full Canadian market penetration and established work force for next to nothing. They could pivot to a LCC model like Norwegian or just leverage the Canadian labour cost savings to carry US pax over the Atlantic like Delta does with their AeroMexico sub going south.
I don’t think Transats final chapter is written yet.
---------- ADS -----------
 
columbia
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2020 7:25 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by columbia »

Sharklasers wrote: Wed Apr 20, 2022 8:39 am
I don’t think Transats final chapter is written yet.
Indeed. Transat is more resilient than we think. Better days to come.
---------- ADS -----------
 
whipline
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 616
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 9:40 am

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by whipline »

Transat is a great company/airline. Hope onex makes an offer them. They’d instantly have a domestic/international airline with the largest vacation company in Canada. Hooked in with TUI.

I’m not arrogant enough to tell the TS pilots they should be bottom of any list. I hated saying elite on the radio. We were far from it.
---------- ADS -----------
 
FL320
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 459
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 11:44 am

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by FL320 »

Some good news (for the short term at least).
Pay increase; back to normal schedule, recall of all pilots, etc.
---------- ADS -----------
 
hithere
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 520
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 8:05 am

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by hithere »

Pay increase? Do you mean you have an increase in your monthly flying and therefore more money or that you somehow got an hourly pay rate increase?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Kingair200
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2014 8:36 pm

Re: Transat AT seeking additional government funding after reporting $114.3M Q1 loss

Post by Kingair200 »

FL320 wrote: Sun Apr 24, 2022 7:01 am Some good news (for the short term at least).
Pay increase; back to normal schedule, recall of all pilots, etc.
possbily of hiring too?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Air Transat”