Tiger Airways changes logo & name.

[Greg Hyde]

One mystery solved


XUH AIRBUS INDUSTRIE A320-232 6136 12/9/2014 TIGER AIRWAYS
AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED
Bldg 166,
1-5 Grants Rd
MELBOURNE AIRPORT
VIC 3045 TIGER AIRWAYS AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED
Bldg 166,
1-5 Grants Rd
MELBOURNE AIRPORT
VIC 3045 Aircraft delivery cancelled

[Mick F]

Where'd you find that Greg?

[Zac M]

I wonder why they are taking delivery of new birds when Tigerair Singapore has reasonably new A320 9V-TRO parked up at ASP??? I know they are different companies but surely they could transfer aircraft???

[Ash W]

You answered your own question. They are different companies, end of story.

The only thing they share is the name, reputation and both have TigerAir Holdings as a share holder, minority in the case of Tiger Australia and wholly in the case of Tigerair (Singapore).

[Rowan McKeever]

Originally Posted by Ash W

They are different companies, end of story.

Wellllllll... not really... nothing in your post precludes them from transferring aircraft. They've done it in the past, just as Singapore and Philippines have also transferred aircraft. Zac raises a very valid point - why store a 9V- aircraft at ASP and then take delivery of a brand new VH-? Seems like someone maybe ordered too many A320s...???

[Steve S... 2]

Which is what they have done in this case.

They have cancelled the delivery of the new VH-XUH as per the first post.

[Ash W]

The key words in your post are "in the past". Shall I add "in the past" was when they had full common ownership?

As for Tigerair and Tigerair Philipines, the aircraft you have described as being 'transfered' are in fact leased from Tigerair (Singapore). So not quite transferred.

As for ordering too many aircraft, again they are totally separate companies. So maybe Tigerair (Singapore) ordered too many, or more to the point traffic levels have changed from forecasts, but that doesn't mean they can or should transfer aircraft to another company just because they have the same name.

That would be like Virgin America sending some A320's to Virgin Australia because they had too many. (Would be good though). As mentioned all Tigerair Singapore and Tigerair Australia share is the name and a minority shareholder.

[Rowan McKeever]

My mistake, missed the last line of Greg's message.

In any case, I don't see what ownership has to do with 'transferring'. Legally, a lease is, in fact, a transfer of a legal interest in an asset. As is a sale. So Qantas could transfer an aircraft to Virgin Australia if those parties chose to do so.

[Ash W]

So why would two companies that have no relationship with each other, other than name want to transfer or lease assets to each other? As you said it would be like Qantas transfering or leasing aircraft to Virgin Australia. It makes no sense does it?

Though if fully owned, and the fleet was treated as one, then yes it may have made sense to transfer amongs subsiduaries. But they aren't anymore and the fleets are seperate.

[Greg Hyde]

All,

CASA normally does a weekly update for the Aus. Civil Register.

You can pick up, adds, deletes, changes and change of marks.

http://www.casa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dl...D::pc=PC_93247