Maximise your Avios, air miles and hotel points

Norwegian secures a Government bail-out, whilst easyJet puts a UK-wide deal at risk

Links on Head for Points may support the site by paying a commission.  See here for all partner links.

The first European airline bail-out (if you don’t include the nationalisation of Alitalia, which was already doomed!) has been finalised.  A 2nd bail-out, for Finnair, is expected to be agreed imminently albeit the Finnish Government is already a 56% shareholder in the airline.

Norwegian has agreed a deal with the Government of Norway to provide a credit guarantee of NOK 3 billion (£225m).

This means, effectively, that Norwegian can arrange a bank loan which will be underwritten by the Government.

An additional NOK 3 billion will be offered to SAS, small domestic airline Wideroe and other carriers.

It is not a slam-dunk for Norwegian, however.  According to Reuters reports, the initial tranche of NOK 300 million depends on commercial lenders providing NOK 30 million as the Government will only fund 90% of the guarantee.

To access an additional NOK 1.2 billion, Norwegian has to persuade its banks to postpone loan repayments, including interest, for the next three months.  The final NOK 1.5 billion requires the airline to raise additional money for shareholders to improve its debt to equity ratio.

Even if these criteria are met, NOK 3 billion (£225m) is a modest sum of money in airline terms.  It is unclear what the Norwegian cash burn currently is, however, given that 90% of staff have been placed on unpaid leave and virtually all non-Scandinavian routes temporarily closed.

As an additional trade off, all airlines receiving money will be forced to operate selected domestic routes in Norway – selected by the Government – irrespective of whether they are commercially viable.

The bottom line is that there is no guarantee that Norwegian can tick all the boxes required to receive the money, or that it will be enough.

Norwegian

Is easyJet putting a UK airline bail-out at risk?

Plans for a Government-led UK airline – and indeed airport – bail-out are progressing, but it isn’t easy.

British Airways took a firm stand early in the process by stating that it had no interest in a bail-out, whilst adding that if there was one it would obviously jump in.  You could see this as altruism on the part of the airline, but you could also see it as an attempt to drive Virgin Atlantic into bankruptcy.

British Airways and its parent IAG were very publicly against any Government help for Flybe.  By coincidence, as soon as Flybe failed, British Airways regained 12 Summer slot pairs at Heathrow which it was forced to divest as a condition of buying BMI.  I imagine these slots are worth, conservatively, £100m between them.

The complex structure of IAG also makes a bail-out difficult.  British Airways is, of course, a Spanish-owned company.  Should the UK Government be supporting Spanish businesses?  On the other hand, you can be sure that the Spanish Government has bigger problems at the moment, especially post-Brexit, than propping up a UK carrier.

I would have expected an easier ride from easyJet.  Whilst, on paper, the company is financially stronger than IAG it is likely to be grounding more of its fleet.  It also has little to gain from seeing Virgin Atlantic fail, except potentially a handful of extra London Gatwick slots.

easyJet seems to have played its hand badly, however.  This week it paid out dividends of £174 million, of which £60 million goes to Sir Stelios Haji-Ioannou and his family, at the same time as seeking Government funds.

To add insult to injury, it has insisted that cabin crew sign up to a new agreement which includes fundamentally detrimental changes to terms and conditions.  Whilst the request for three months unpaid leave is being mirrored elsewhere, easyJet wants to impose other changes which will run until November 2021 – over 18 months away – including removing free cabin crew meals, scrapping 2021 pay rises and unfavourable changes to working patterns.

easyJet is now in the bizarre position of having over 17,000 of its own staff petition the Government to REFUSE a bail out of the airline.

It is worth contrasting this with the situation at Virgin Atlantic.  Looking at what I have seen posted by staff on social media, there is a genuine desire amongst crew and management to pull together to ensure that the airline survives.

Despite all this, I would expect a multi-billion pound set of loan guarantees to be announced over the next few days.  There may also be an element of direct compensation as the Foreign Office has now advised all UK residents not to travel if possible.

Comments (142)

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

  • Philip Gittins says:

    Branson could easily use cash he doesn’t know what to do with and will never spend to prop up his airline.

  • Nick_C says:

    Not sure why the Norwegian government is bailing out an airline that appears to be Norwegian in name only. Most of its routes dont serve Norway. Are many of the staff Norwegian?

    • Matty says:

      I think I’ve seen a fair few Norwegian aircraft displaying the Irish flag. Wonder if the Irish government are bailing those out?

      • Roger* says:

        Presumably because the planes are leased from an Irish company.

        • Nick says:

          No, aircraft aren’t typically registered in the country of their lessor (otherwise most would be registered in China!)
          Ireland offers a ‘flag of convenience’ for aircraft registration, nothing more or less than that. Almost all Alitalia and Aeroflot aircraft are also Irish-registered. Alitalia even sent a load of their 777s to LHR as part of the registration process (long story).

          • Lady London says:

            Same as ships in the sea. An aircraft is technically a ship

    • ChrisBCN says:

      You are aware it’s the biggest airline in Norway?

    • Alex J says:

      Norwegian do cover a lot of crucial domestic routes in Norway that would otherwise leave SAS with a near-monopoly. Norway relies on domestic flights more so than most countries in Europe due to the challenging topography. If Norwegian went bust, domestic airfares would almost certainly skyrocket once things return to normal, and the government would get a significant portion of the blame for letting that happen.

  • Olly says:

    As there is not Bits…… Seeing as the main benefits of Annex Platinum are travel related has anybody cancelled their card for the pro rata refund or maybe swapped it for the “free for 12 months” Gold card to keep their points in?

    • Olly says:

      …. and I apologise if it’s been covered already in the thousands of comments recently and I’ve missed it!

    • Ken says:

      Yes cancelled Plat and SPG this week.
      Fee refunds in account within 2 days.

      • Bill says:

        Keeping it for travel insurance on trips already booked towards end of summer and beyond

    • Kevin C says:

      I am keeping mine for now because I like the benefits (I had good trip to the National Theatre two weeks ago) and I need things to look forward to.

      Vista offers must all be wiped out but maybe they’ll offer some nice things by post.

      All these things are tricky. I bought Southbank membership to buy Grace Jones tickets and now there’s no Southbank to be a member of but hopefully I’m helping to safeguard someone’s job.

    • Harry T says:

      Got a few trips booked in May that will likely be cancelled – keeping Amex Plat for now in case my other travel insurance doesn’t pay out. I think my renewal is in May so will probably downgrade just before then.

  • Ken says:

    The only way any bailout should be structured is by taking a large equity stake. At least we the taxpayer have a chance of gaining on the upside.

    If Virgin shareholders lost all equity, someone would no doubt buy the assets & people.

    • Bill says:

      Ft reporting government will buy shares as well

    • Simon says:

      Agree. The Pension Protection Fund model would work well – they can take up to a third of the equity as a condition of approving a CVA which abandons an indebted pension scheme.

    • ChrisC says:

      There are only 2 shareholders in VS – 51% Virgin Group and 49% Delta Airlines

      Shares not traded

    • Benilyn says:

      Really? I would’ve thought most prudent would be to give super senior ranking debt at a market interest rate (which currently would be quite high) with warrants/convertible on the equity. Low downside with all the upside. 🤷🏽‍♂️

      • Lady London says:

        I suppose leaving it as equity in exchange for the funding does mean the UK taxpayer takes a bigger risk as no interim cash flowing back I do like your idea Benilyn. But seen too many companies gone because they had too high debt payments to make that killed cashflow.

        In fact the private equity players seem to specialise in killing companies this way over and over again. It’s a masked form of planned asset stripping IMV and why so many people lost pensions.

        I like the Scandinavian govt’s idea of using support to extract concessions although of course what they want will be a drag on profits but can at least be claimed to.have a social value

  • Gomigo says:

    Does S75 rule applies if you have recently purchased air miles and will not be able to use them if the airlines goes bust?

    • Peter K says:

      Doubt it. The purchase was via an intermediary to gain miles, which were provided. Their liability ends when they produce said miles.

      • Gomigo says:

        Thank you Peter, I thought so but just for a mild argument sake can we relate that to a flight purchase made for a purpose of flying but the airlines don’t exist, can CC say you bought the tickets for the intent of flying and the ticket (purchased) has arrived so we consider the purchase is fulfilled so no S75 ? They aren’t right and still consider that for S75 claim.

        • Nick says:

          No because miles can be used for multiple things, not just flights. If you buy a ticket you are buying a flight, a ticket just something you need to get on said flight. If buying miles, you’re buying miles, that’s not something you *need* in order to do something else. If points.com went bust between paying and getting the miles, then (and only then) you’d have a claim.

        • TGLoyalty says:

          You may have a s.75 claim if you have booked long haul flights with the miles and paid the taxes (£100+)

          • Shoestring says:

            that would be quibble-free but I think fees under 3100 but flight value >£100 (ie £17.50 + points but the flight costs (say) £150 to cash buyer) is also going to be covered by S75

          • Shoestring says:

            *under £100

          • Lady London says:

            Harder to prove though @Shoestring if the cash element is not at least £100. s.75 likely to cause outsize costs to cardco’s. It may be that judgements will go towards insisting on that minimum cash. Worse, there may be a trend in legislation to limit or even reverse the help s75 and EU26x give consumers, to support businesses.

            I think you would be fine with just £17.50 cash but I’d be inclined to keep it simple by paying the £100+ cash fees a longhaul flight would take.

            I know case law has valued avios at the price BA was selling them at, but further case law could reverse this in some cases. I think BA still puts somewhere in their small print an avoid is worth .0001p

            Defo spend your miles into refundable flights though in case the valuation of unspent miles as a loss in that form goes against you

  • AJA says:

    Easyjet could have postponed the dividend payout, or paid a smaller amount with the balance payable when normal service is resumed. The reputation of the airline has just taken a nosedive. Stupid is as stupid does.

    • Dubious says:

      I wonder if EasyJet have some contractual commitment to pay x% of dividends to SHI every year – is he still on the board?

    • The Original David says:

      Could they though? Which section of the Companies Act lets them do that? (Genuine question – I thought there wasn’t an easy way for them to do what you’re suggesting legally, but maybe you know one?)

      • Ed says:

        Without expressing a view on whether easyJet should have paid a dividend or not, it was legally obliged to do so. Its AGM was held on 6 Feb and the dividend was declared by its shareholders at that meeting. As a matter of companies law, once a company’s shareholders have declared a dividend it becomes a debt owing to (and enforceable by) a shareholder, so there’s nothing easyJet could’ve unilaterally done to stop the dividend being paid. It could’ve asked shareholders to waive their entitlement to the (declared) dividend, but that’s not within the company’s gift.

        For what it’s worth, as I understand it easyJet’s dividend policy is to pay out 50% of post tax profits. But dividend policies are not legally binding.

        • The Original David says:

          That’s what I thought, but AJA here says Easyjet “could” have done something different. Maybe they’ve found some legal precedent?

          • Ed says:

            Not that I am aware of (at least from a UK perspective). Most companies that have cancelled dividends have been able to do so because, although announced, they hadn’t been declared by shareholders yet, so no (legal) obligation arises to pay it. As I said, all they could’ve done was tried to convince shareholders to waive their entitlements, but I know of no shareholder of a PLC who is not going to take money sitting on the table!

            IHG, for example, recommended their $150 million final dividend on 18 February but as it wasn’t put to shareholder vote yet, the directors were able to subsequently withdraw that recommendation and not pay the dividend.

          • Lady London says:

            Stelios would have had to waive not to receive his dividend, it’s paid strictly otherwise

          • AJA says:

            Once approved by members, a final dividend becomes a debt due on the date specified for payment in the resolution although a company can seek shareholder authority to cancel an approved final dividend. Easyjet plainly decided it didn’t want to even attempt to do this as there was probably not enough time to see shareholder approval given the payment was due yesterday.

            It is unfortunate timing for Easyjet but the dividend was only approved on 6 Feb so not exactly when we didn’t know about coronavirus.It also doesn’t look good when they are grounding planes and trying to makechanges to staff contracts and at the same time asking for government help. But hindsight is a wonderful thing, A lot of companies are considering or actually cancelling dividends and removing the resolutions from their upcoming AGM’s.

    • Lady London says:

      I am sure they debated this – as most FTSE companies -which easyJet floats in and out of – would. They clearly felt they were strong enough to pay it and thought the market message of not paying it would ultimately do more harm. Been in another plc that had to think about this in times of external crisis and pretty sure the thought process was the same.

      • Lady London says:

        *Seen other posts now and looks like easyJet as obliged to pay the dividend as it had been approved by shareholders.

        Another poster has reported easyJet share value up today relatively more than IAG. I like to think that my positive comments about how well they appeared to be managing cashflow recently and handling these difficult times so far, here on the UK’s biggest frequent flyer website with a huge City readership, was the cause of this :-).

        So I have bashed them today for balance, about the sneaky extra charges they have been calling ‘fare difference’ for months.

        Take a look at their latest ts and cs for hold baggage folks. There is a revised clause in there that could mean someone needing to check a £25 bag at an airport now has to pay, say, £40 at the airport because otherwise they have to add the £25 bag charge to every flight on their booking. So cost coukd go up to £300 online as soon as someone needs to check a bag otherwise they are forced to pay a higher fee at the airport.v Hence my comment yesterday about expecting their income from extra fees to be healthy!

        Being more serious, paying the dividend even though it might have been due to an accident of timing, has definitely been positive for their share price.

        • ADS says:

          maybe the rise in the share price is in anticipation of Easyjet staff costs dropping to Ryanair levels ?

          the FT has been scathing about the dividend payment being made whilst the company is at risk of going bust

          I suspect the Easyjet management are more scared of Stelios than they are of UK government / financial regulators

  • Jack says:

    BA resent competition (to the extent they will even break the law -notably the dirty tricks campaign and they consistently exploit consumers where they have a monopoly – and as it is, their service is mediocre. Without Virgin, service would drop even further and prices only increase. It would be a disaster to lose VS. I don’t particularly see the point in EasyJet – a low cost airline that seems to be consistently expensive. Amongst the low cost carriers, Ryanair is my preference as I know where I stand and their hand luggage/priority boarding policies are actually very effective and work well in practice. In any case shame on those airlines, ie. BA using this crisis to try and destroy the competition.

    • Ken says:

      Many other remedies to improving competition rather than bailouts.

      • Jack says:

        Like what? The alternatives would cost more and may not work. If people should be given a bail out because of this crisis, why not companies? You’ll presumably not be claiming anything if you lose your job?

        • Ken says:

          Alternatives have been available since the break up of Standard Oil.

          BA dominance really is just a UK issue and solely down to the quasi monopoly on slots they have at Heathrow. The remedy is straight forward, take some slots away.

          Bailing out companies is biased towards bailing out the wealthy and as a shareholder I can see the attraction.
          It is however, fundamentally wrong.

  • Noggins says:

    O/T but should I be surprised that the miles from Miles Booster that I bought for a flight to Barbados have posted today – despite the fact that Virgin Holidays cancelled our holiday? (the flight did depart as scheduled) I was assuming I would get a cash refund and no miles. Perhaps retention of cash wherever possible is the new world? (we have yet to receive the £15k refund of the holiday!)

    • Mary says:

      Why wouldn’t they arrive?

      • Rob says:

        Miles Booster orders are usually rescinded if you cancel the flight, assuming you are buying in respect of a future flight.

        • Noggins says:

          Exactly what I expected to happen, Rob – and, frankly, what I might have preferred given the increased risk that ‘miles’ will not be worth as much in ‘new world’. Oddly I paid for part of the holiday with miles but it appears that I am going to be paid back in £’s – not in re-posted miles.

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

The UK's biggest frequent flyer website uses cookies, which you can block via your browser settings. Continuing implies your consent to this policy. Our privacy policy is here.