sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

David Hargreaves wishes Air New Zealand well but thinks their announced capital raising is a little light and they may need to find more money later

Business / opinion
David Hargreaves wishes Air New Zealand well but thinks their announced capital raising is a little light and they may need to find more money later
airnz-caraise3

Okay, if somebody wanted to throw $1.2 billion my way I would be very appreciative - and I reckon I could do plenty with it.

Let's face it, that's a lot of money. But even 'a lot' is potentially 'not enough' in some circumstances. Not if you are trying to run an international airline.

And, well, such is the onerous job that Air New Zealand finds itself faced with, I'm not sure that even the $1.2 billion of new equity it is about to raise will be quite enough.

To put it in some perspective - it's only about the same amount that Air New Zealand has had sheared off its shareholders funds since the 2019 financial year. Thank you, Covid. 

Now yes, there is also $600 million of redeemable shares that will be going to the government (with $400 million of those set to be repaid with a $600 million debt market capital raising by June - subject to market conditions). And there's a new $400 million standby debt facility from the Government - which won't be drawn on at this stage.

But having more good old shareholders funds would have been better. Equity always trumps debt, particularly when interest rates are on the climb. 

My gut feeling is the airline probably needed $1.5 billion worth of new shareholders capital at least - and $2 billion would have been ideal.

But there was always the question of literally how much could be successfully raised from our shallow equity pool.

As I've said a few times, I think one of the things holding back Air New Zealand from a successful equity raising has been, ironically, NOT that shareholders have been looking to get out of investing in it - but in fact the complete opposite.

Air New Zealand's 2019 (June year) financial report shows it then had about 27,500 shareholders. Fast forward to 2021 and that number had close to doubled - to just under 52,000. 

The big 'bulge' has come from shareholders with fewer than 5000 shares - with 18,000 more Air NZ investors in this category now than before Covid.

The real point is, these newbies have not been coming in at exactly bargain basement prices. The Air NZ price started 2020 at over $3 then tanked to under $1 as the Covid sky fell in during March 2020. 

However, during the completely unexpected (well, certainly by me) raging market rally that followed, the Air NZ shares got flavour of the month status and have traded at close to $2 on a number of occasions since - which is ridiculous for a company losing money hand over fist. (Note that Air NZ has revised its forecast for the June 2022 year and now sees a slightly lower loss of under $800 million.)

And I'm sure it probably gave the 52% Air New Zealand major shareholder the Government (AKA the taxpayer) pause for thought. It made pitching the share price of any capital raising really difficult.

I think they've done a pretty good job in setting the price where they have, but it will still be interesting to see what the enthusiasm is of some of the newbies and how prepared they were really to be stumping up with extra cash. (Or if they even knew they would be asked to. They should have known.) 

Based on the pre-offer closing price of just under $1.38 for the Air New Zealand shares, this means that any shareholder that bought shares at that price is now going to be asked for another $1.06 (being the 53c a share price times two under the terms of the two-shares-for-every-one offer). So, that's a bit under $2.44 that it would cost our shareholder, for which they would end up with three shares each worth a little over 81c.

I've got to say, 81c sounds like a fairly high price relative to where Air New Zealand is in its recovery process. Again, gut feeling would suggest 65c to 70c would be more like it.

To be honest, it would have been better for the airline if the share price had been trading at basement levels. Then the Government could have backed probably a bigger capital raising and ended up owning most if not all the airline.

As it is, under this offer the Crown is committing a princely $600 million of taxpayers' money for new shares and yet will see its level of shareholding actually fall slightly from just under 52% to 51%.

I'm probably sounding overly negative, but really I don't mean to be. It's great that Air New Zealand will get this new money (with the public part of the equity raising fully underwritten by Citigroup Global Markets and UBS New Zealand - so, the money will be raised). But it's not like the airline is flying off into clear blue skies leaving the pandemic behind it.

We are now in the midst of an oil shock, made much worse by the invasion of Ukraine. And inflation's galloping, with economists seeing 7.5% inflation very soon. To be honest I wouldn't rule out the chances of us seeing double digit inflation by the end of this year.

Undoubtedly there is going to be some pent up demand for travel, given we've all been shut in for two years. But none of the airlines are going to be able to offer cheap-as-chips seats with the oil price in the heavens, while the cost of living (and don't forget those rising mortgage rates) may well dampen down enthusiasm for travel after an initial flurry.

So, I really wish our airline all the best, but fear it could be a struggle. I would feel happier if Air NZ was raising more money and I think the Government's provision of a $400 million standby loan facility betrays some concern on its part that more money may be needed.

It's very sensible that Air NZ's not making any promises on paying any dividends before 2026, which of course demonstrates that profits it does make before that time will be held in the coffers to bolster shareholders' funds. Very sensible. 

But I still wouldn't rule out unfortunately that Air NZ will have to come back to shareholders for more money before then. 

What the 25,000 people who climbed into Air NZ shares after the start of Covid will make of this will be interesting to see. I expect we will see some consolidation of shareholder numbers.

(Note: At time of writing the Air NZ share price had fallen over 10% to $1.22 in Thursday trading.

Below for interest are some of the 'crunchy' financial details Air NZ has provided in relation to its capital raising:

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

29 Comments

Scarcely any international air passenger, “ transits”  through NZ. Air NZ firstly depends on its 5 mill or so inhabitants to travel back & forth domestically and internationally. After that the market is plainly tourists bolstered a bit by freight. That is the rub. How big an airline can you rebuild out of that sort of patronage and at what rate can there be growth sufficient to realise premiums to the investors being courted here. The obvious answer is that  NZ must reactivate successfully its tourism sector and that ability still has quite a question mark hanging over it surely. As John Key commented two years ago, locking down is the easy part, opening up will be the opposite.

Up
5

... AirNZ are set to make a fortune on one-way tickets to Australia  ! ... 

Up
8

There are probably more transits than you expect, to/from Aussie and the islands. But your main point largely stands.

Up
1

A collaboration with an International Airline, with cross holding of shares and infusion of money from that partner to build routes, facilities, etc would be a good option for AirNZ, instead of always going to the Government or existing shareholders. Air travel will bounce back and profits will be made. This is the time for AirNZ to be ready and map out its long term future. Not just band aids for short terms.

Up
0

Warren Buffett always shied away from investing in airlines as he said there wouldn''t be an airline that hasn't gone bust.Then for some reason he changed his mind and guess what happened.

He lost money.

Up
2

He did sell at the worse time.. even if he had waited a couple of weeks.. geez 

But yes you're right, airlines - no thanks lol :)

Up
2

There's a reason Warren Buffet of all people is skeptical of airline stocks.

Up
1

I came here to make a similar point - in the long run, who has ever made money off an airline? Seems like the only ones who do short  them.

Up
1

The ROIC is s*&t

Up
0

Good to know the Climate Emergency (TM) is over. I wonder what the next hobgoblin the government will keep us safe from?

Up
4

It's still real, we just haven't reached the stage where the population cares enough about it to impinge on our right to a trip to Australia or the Islands every year. 

People still look at you funny if you suggest not talking 500kg of metal with them to pick up some milk. 

Up
2

Cars are essentially extinct-plant-powered lounge sets that people take with them when they leave the house. I have one, but I use my push bike about 5x as often (a $200 bike trailer helps a lot), and my feet about 2x. It feels weird to me that car-addicted people find me weird.

Up
3

You must have a lot of spare time on your hands or live in a city close to amenities. In the regions people have to drive - riding 15km to the supermarket along narrow roads isn't really an option

Up
3

Different situations have different needs. I'm in Christchurch City and have a rule never to use a car just to transport myself and something that fits in my pannier bags, so I drive it a handful of times a year (family trip out of town, picking up compost etc). Most trips in Chch, taking a bike is just as fast or maybe adds 5-10 minutes if you're heading across town. 

If I lived in the sticks I'd be looking at an e-bike as a compromise - makes 15km straight forward depending on roads, turn it into a 20-30 minute ride. I'm sure it depends on the road quality though, I ride around Prebbleton, Lincoln etc around here quite often and there are very good bike options there. 

I just hate the inefficiency of using a car just to move myself around.

Up
2

Purchase near schools,kindergarten and bike rideable commutes - and a workplace with showers.  

How anyone can live with a 40 minute commute involving dropping the little darlings at 3 different locations al before work is my definition or insanity coupled with cruelty.

Id rather live in Ohura than do that. Forget about the ballet and judo lessons, teach them possuming.

Up
2

"How anyone can live with a 40 minute commute involving dropping the little darlings at 3 different locations al before work is my definition or insanity coupled with cruelty."

I agree, but it is often not the individuals fault, they just live where they can afford.

The real blame sits with the councils and Govt, they are the ones that ok all the residential development with zero thought to amenities/infrastructure (Health, Education, Work, Greenspace, and Transport)

Up
2

yep...and at all turned to s###t because the lunatics thought more people is better.

Just look at the crazy misplaced joy expressed by those now driving that new motorway. Has it solved anything? Nope...just exporting more city problems to the regions.

Up
2

I live in a provincial city, with a full time job and three pre-school children. So no I don't have much time, and nor do I live that close to amenities. Notice that I don't use public transport (though there is a pointless bus service that I've used a handful of times in torrential rain). It's still easily doable, I just don't make excuses. It actually takes me less time to bike to work than to drive, thanks to a handy pedestrian bridge that avoids about 5 traffic lights and gives me a considerably more direct route.

Up
0

99% of the flyers don't care enough to voluntarily offset their CO2 - so that impingement stage is a long way off. Unless there is a captains call of course.

Up
3

NZ's emissions are capped under the ETS. Paying an airline to offset emissions creates more room under the cap for another company to emit. I'm not saying that paying the offset fee does nothing - just that instead of the payment funding lower carbon in the atmosphere, it is subsidising the carbon price for all emitters. It should be encouraged as a noble service to the economy.  

Up
2

Incredible how few people understand this.

Up
0

Yes it is an utter bullshit - literally. The Air NZ flyer offset scheme isn't in the ETS. They run their own sideshow with handy projects like telling Vietnamese how to use cow dung methane cook stoves. How many Vietnamese stoves does one have to convert to methane to offset one Trans Tasman flight and a team of CO2 consultants?

Up
0

They need couple of more billions if they keep paying contractors (in name of a IT reform) with closed eyes, even after knowing there is no BAU in near future.

Earning stopped but expenditure tap is full on at Air NZ.

Up
1

Probably one of the unstated goals of Agenda 2030 is to drive most of the airlines bankrupt.  I imagine the remaining arilines will price airline travel at something like 3x todays prices and so far fewer people will fly and global fuel consumption will be reduced.  

Up
0

My perception of AirNZ is that it is a half cocked international airline (excl. Oz) with the major majority, if not all, of its international flights code shared with other airlines so you get AirNZ flying about halfway to Europe and someone else the rest. I've always found it more convenient to use an airline that flys the whole route. Invariably cheaper as well.

Up
1

As always, price and disposable income are gonna determine demand for long haul travel.  Could be a Demand Destruction Moment.

Up
0

The share issue is sure to be oversubscribed, AirNZ being the Icon.

Up
0

I think there is a strategic reason for a remote country like NZ to have its own airline. (Unless we become a state of Australia which I wouldn’t discount in the next 10 years given power plays in the Pacific)

Love them but wouldn’t want to be a direct shareholder though!

 

Up
0

I hope it does not affect the passengers in any way.

 

Jack, https://www.windowcleaningwellingtonpros.kiwi/

Up
0