Did CX promised not to layoff any more of their employees in exchange for taking taxpayer money? Did the government stipulate such a requirement?
Did CX promised not to layoff any more of their employees in exchange for taking taxpayer money? Did the government stipulate such a requirement?
Last edited by Coolboy; 09-06-2020 at 03:18 PM.
Primarily less controversial because Temasek was already the majority stakeholder, who has no interest - even without its role as a Sovereign Fund - to let its existing investment fail. Not a case of corporate welfare ensuring the wellbeing of existing commercial shareholders.
One last post from me ..
https://twitter.com/JournoDannyAero/...68802068967424
and
https://twitter.com/JournoDannyAero/...71124404764673
Well the market certainly liked it – Cathay's shares rose 2.7% after the suspension was lifted. The deal they got was probably one of the most favourable outcomes that could reasonably be expected with relatively little dilution of existing shareholders and most of the new money being raised by way of a renounceable rights issue which all shareholders can participate in (instead of a very damaging placement) and a low interest loan. In this respect at least, and contrary to my expectations, management have done well.
State team was not impressed. Seems like that is what the market is these days....Original Post Deleted
Considering that all holders do still need to fork out money to buy the rights and there are still dilution impact, price of stock coming off is quite expected.. Singapore airline stocks fell 15% over the few days after their rights announcement..
Applied for the subsidy...
https://twitter.com/JournoDannyAero/...62868663877632
Today's profit warning:
andThe Directors of Cathay Pacific Airways Limited estimate that for the
six months ended 30 June 2020, the Group will record a net loss attributable to
shareholders of approximately HK$9.9 billion, which compares to a net profit to
shareholders of HK$1.3 billion for the same period in 2019. This includes impairment
charges amounting to approximately HK$2.4 billion, which mainly relate to 16 aircraft
that are unlikely to re-enter meaningful economic service again before the 2021
summer season
More: https://www1.hkexnews.hk/listedco/li...01.pdf?noembedMr Lam said of the airlines’ June traffic performance: “Demand continued to be very
weak in June with our airlines carrying less than 1% of the passengers we carried in
the same month in 2019. We operated about 4% of our normal passenger flight
capacity in June. This was slightly more than we operated in May, having resumed
services to some destinations such as New York, San Francisco, Amsterdam and
Melbourne in late June. Load factor remained low at 27.3%, and on average we
carried approximately 900 passengers a day only.