Actually, PAL does owned them and then sold economic rights to SMBC for leaseback. In aviation parlance that is called "finance lease" in much simpler terms. Operating lease is the other term where the lessor directly orders from the manufacturer to be operated by the airline.
That is almost correct but you understood it wrong. Don't worry we did not understand the first time either. All because of the word "lease" everything else becomes confusing.
In reality, its anything but in aircraft financing, which normally involve 3 actors, the airline, the airline lender, and the lessor lender. But perhaps you may not be aware of that. SMBC happens to be the airline lender and the bank the lessor lender. The bank always take collateral security not assets i.e. aircraft.
Since PAL need a lender to pay Airbus, it needs a bank to finance its aircraft. Banks in the Philippines however is too small to finance it themselves so they look overseas to do just that. Most International lenders however doesn't have business office in the Philippines. That's where financial intermediaries SMBC comes along where the bank makes Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) that will own the aircraft so that it can recover the collateral security promptly without going to court in case of loan default. The relationship between the SPV and the airline is that of lessor and lessee. How it came about? Sale and Leaseback. Which is a legal trick to disguise a loan. In truth however, the lessor is merely the trustee of the bank.
In short, PAL still owns the plane that it mortgage with the bank. Just like bank financing your new car.
FYI, confirmed aircraft orders from manufacturers are called owners. Not the other way around. So if airlines acquire aircraft directly from Airbus they are called the buyer, whatever financing options they would like to make to the OEM, cash or otherwise. Financiers doesn't become the owner simply because of the financing agreement. Its either banker or owner, never both. When they opt to be the banker what they merely owned is the collateral security to take the aircraft in case of loan default. And that is Finance Lease in a nutshell. Glad to be of help.
Passenger loads of YYZ-MNL-YYZ non stop flights are high only the 370 seater B777-300ER can handle the load otherwise PAL order the bigger A350-1000 version
I am working at Toronto Pearson International Airport and PAL always have a long line of Manila bound passengers..just last January 8 the long line of passengers is almost more or less 100meters til Pal ground Pal personnel make a cuuved line to make it short.
I always thought the B77W is pay load restricted due to its 370 passenger capacity, Is the cargo capacity at YYZ large if not could explain why can explain why the B77W fly to YYZ without blocking seats?
Its always a "wow" or "omg" that can you can hear from other non PAL passengers whenever they saw the long line of PAL PR119 Manila bound passengers at the Lester Pearson International Airport, in short PAL payload Passengers at Toronto are always high that sometimes you can hear a pre departure ground staff asking any passengers willimg to have its hand carry luggage be check in due to fully booked and that aircraft overhead bin might not have enough space to put all hand carry luggage..so to the question if Pal new A350-900XWB is intended for Toronto the answer for me is NO because of the Load Factor. Toronto- Manila flight will always have the big B777-300ER
I also assumed the A350 would be on MNL-YYZ-MNL routing. Perhaps we may still see it during a slower traffic season or when strong head winds are expected. I'm also surprised that PR has not maximized the capacity of the B777. For example, Air Canada operates the same with 2 configurations, 400 seats and 450 seats. It could be that the aircraft would have difficulty in operating YYZ-MNL nonstop with 450 passengers and 900 23kg bags plus cargo.
Its about time...expanding to a 5th weekly flight will definitely somehow reduced the long line of Pal passengers bound for YYZ-MNL standing in the line for check-in takes 30-45mins.
its now 45mins to 1hour to be exact the long line waiting at Pal check in area at Toronto Lester B. Pearson International Airport Terminal 3 and need to be expand not just to 5X but to 7X weekly like in Vancouver with this kind of passenger loads at YYZ.
I'm wondering if the 98-99% load factor excludes business class seats? The addition of a 5th weekly flight will definitely help. I've personally experienced the insane check in line as well. Even if you've already checked in online everyone still has to line up for the bag drop. I hope there is some way to improve the operations.
I read from Manila Bulletin that JJB is in talks with Airbus and wants the A350-1000 to have 370 seats, just like their 777-300ER. This is impossible since the A35K doesn't have the same capacity as the 77W, fuselage is smaller than 777 and can only fit 9-abreast layout in economy. Unless PAL will configure 10-abreast in economy (which will be very tight) or opt for more economy seating than premium seating.
Oh I see. Thanks for the link. Then A35K could potentially supplement their 77Ws or even replace the older ones. But the seat pitch would be an issue as they'll need to maintain consistency of 33" just like their A359, and not 30-32" as shown in the blog. And based on number of trolley inserts, galley space would also be an issue. At 370 pax and without galley at door 3, it could only be capable of 2 meals plus 1 snack service instead of 3 meals on their A359 from MNL to JFK, yet still enough for LAX and SFO. And the configuration will also most likely have premium economy to maintain consistency with their A359. Nevertheless, this new A35K upgrade is now a more attractive option for PAL and instead of waiting for the 777X.
I just checked instagram account of @lift_aero . Yup, PAL's A359 is capable of 3 meals service as there appears to be an additional galley at door 3. There are total 4 galleys. So with what Airbus offers the new configuration of A35K with more than 370 seats and with no galley at door 3, it's not capable of 3 meals.
I don't think the A35K is a 1:1 replacement for the B77W. Instead However should be viewed as an in-between aircraft type, with the A359 being the smallest and the B77W being the biggest. The A35K will likely have capacity of 330-345 seats while the B77W if refurbished with PE will likely have a capacity of 350-360 seats. In the end will have to whait and see if PAL will be serious converting its option for 6 A359 and A35K.
I just watched Cathay Pacific A350-1000 under Sam Chui vlogs. It has 334 seats - 46 business, 32 Premium Eco, 256 Economy. So if PAL gets the same plane, with lesser premium seats, it can have between 360-370 seats that may look like this - 30/34 business, 24/28 premium eco, 300/310 economy.
Does PAL own the A350s or are they leased?
ReplyDeleteThey own the A350s, 6 of them. Do you even read the news?
DeleteLeased po from SMBC Aviation
DeleteIngat po sa mga wrong info😉
Actually, PAL does owned them and then sold economic rights to SMBC for leaseback. In aviation parlance that is called "finance lease" in much simpler terms. Operating lease is the other term where the lessor directly orders from the manufacturer to be operated by the airline.
DeleteIt is simply explained here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Airbus_A350_XWB_orders_and_deliveries#Orders_and_deliveries_by_customer
Note on orders made by lessors (ie CIT,ilfc) and airlines. There was none from SMBC.
Erm, it's not necessary for SMBC to order...
DeletePAL ordered A350's under it's own company name, and then, signed a 'sale and leaseback' agreement with SMBC...
Meaning SMBC is financing the payments, and PAL will have to lease the aircraft.
There's another type of lease whereby the lessor or the bank will be the direct customer of the manufacturer.
'Lease' means PAL doesn't own the A350. They did the order, but they cannot finance it by themselves.
Hope this clarifies.🙂
https://www.smbc.aero/news/smbc-aviation-capital-concludes-two-aircraft-deal-new-customer-philippine-airlines
That is almost correct but you understood it wrong. Don't worry we did not understand the first time either. All because of the word "lease" everything else becomes confusing.
DeleteIn reality, its anything but in aircraft financing, which normally involve 3 actors, the airline, the airline lender, and the lessor lender. But perhaps you may not be aware of that. SMBC happens to be the airline lender and the bank the lessor lender. The bank always take collateral security not assets i.e. aircraft.
Since PAL need a lender to pay Airbus, it needs a bank to finance its aircraft. Banks in the Philippines however is too small to finance it themselves so they look overseas to do just that. Most International lenders however doesn't have business office in the Philippines. That's where financial intermediaries SMBC comes along where the bank makes Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) that will own the aircraft so that it can recover the collateral security promptly without going to court in case of loan default. The relationship between the SPV and the airline is that of lessor and lessee. How it came about? Sale and Leaseback. Which is a legal trick to disguise a loan. In truth however, the lessor is merely the trustee of the bank.
In short, PAL still owns the plane that it mortgage with the bank. Just like bank financing your new car.
FYI, confirmed aircraft orders from manufacturers are called owners. Not the other way around. So if airlines acquire aircraft directly from Airbus they are called the buyer, whatever financing options they would like to make to the OEM, cash or otherwise. Financiers doesn't become the owner simply because of the financing agreement. Its either banker or owner, never both. When they opt to be the banker what they merely owned is the collateral security to take the aircraft in case of loan default. And that is Finance Lease in a nutshell. Glad to be of help.
I hope PAL will used its A350 on its Toronto-Manila-Toronto non stop flights
ReplyDeletePassenger loads of YYZ-MNL-YYZ non stop flights are high only the 370 seater B777-300ER can handle the load otherwise PAL order the bigger A350-1000 version
DeleteI thought they blocked seats so the B77W can operate MNL-YYZ non-stop.
DeleteI am working at Toronto Pearson International Airport and PAL always have a long line of Manila bound passengers..just last January 8 the long line of passengers is almost more or less 100meters til Pal ground Pal personnel make a cuuved line to make it short.
DeleteAverage MNL-YYZ-MNL 85% to 90% loadfactor. They did not block the seat. Minsan nga umaabot 95% to 98% load ng YYZMNL
DeleteSo does it mean the new A350-900XWB is not intended for Toronto/Manila flights?
DeleteI always thought the B77W is pay load restricted due to its 370 passenger capacity, Is the cargo capacity at YYZ large if not could explain why can explain why the B77W fly to YYZ without blocking seats?
DeleteMaybe because of their recent approval to use Russian airspace to fly direct to YYZ vs. routing through Alaska-upper Canadian airspace.
DeleteIts always a "wow" or "omg" that can you can hear from other non PAL passengers whenever they saw the long line of PAL PR119 Manila bound passengers at the Lester Pearson International Airport, in short PAL payload Passengers at Toronto are always high that sometimes you can hear a pre departure ground staff asking any passengers willimg to have its hand carry luggage be check in due to fully booked and that aircraft overhead bin might not have enough space to put all hand carry luggage..so to the question if Pal new A350-900XWB is intended for Toronto the answer for me is NO because of the Load Factor. Toronto- Manila flight will always have the big B777-300ER
DeleteI also assumed the A350 would be on MNL-YYZ-MNL routing. Perhaps we may still see it during a slower traffic season or when strong head winds are expected. I'm also surprised that PR has not maximized the capacity of the B777. For example, Air Canada operates the same with 2 configurations, 400 seats and 450 seats. It could be that the aircraft would have difficulty in operating YYZ-MNL nonstop with 450 passengers and 900 23kg bags plus cargo.
DeleteFor now yes. At 4x a week that is expected. With 5x week flight that is a different story.
DeletePhilippine Airlines from December 2018 is expanding Manila – Toronto service, with the addition of 5th weekly flight.
DeleteIts about time...expanding to a 5th weekly flight will definitely somehow reduced the long line of Pal passengers bound for YYZ-MNL standing in the line for check-in takes 30-45mins.
Deleteits now 45mins to 1hour to be exact the long line waiting at Pal check in area at Toronto Lester B. Pearson International Airport Terminal 3 and need to be expand not just to 5X but to 7X weekly like in Vancouver with this kind of passenger loads at YYZ.
DeleteI'm wondering if the 98-99% load factor excludes business class seats? The addition of a 5th weekly flight will definitely help. I've personally experienced the insane check in line as well. Even if you've already checked in online everyone still has to line up for the bag drop. I hope there is some way to improve the operations.
DeleteI read from Manila Bulletin that JJB is in talks with Airbus and wants the A350-1000 to have 370 seats, just like their 777-300ER. This is impossible since the A35K doesn't have the same capacity as the 77W, fuselage is smaller than 777 and can only fit 9-abreast layout in economy. Unless PAL will configure 10-abreast in economy (which will be very tight) or opt for more economy seating than premium seating.
ReplyDeleteThe Airbus A350-1000 has a typical seating capacity of 360 and a maximum of 440 seats.
DeleteSo, if PAL wants to have 370 seats in this aircraft, this is easily doable. Enough room to provide premium service and comfort to passengers.
Max seats will affect the range of the plane.
DeleteHere is PAL A35k configuration most likely would look like, and it is more than what JJB wanted:
Deletehttp://bloga350.blogspot.com/2015/02/airbus-announces-18-additional-seats.html
Just FYI, the link doesnt work.
DeleteAlso, wouldn't more seats go against the more premium direction PAL is taking?
It does go against assuming its accurate. We think however that its meant for the B779.
DeleteOh I see. Thanks for the link. Then A35K could potentially supplement their 77Ws or even replace the older ones. But the seat pitch would be an issue as they'll need to maintain consistency of 33" just like their A359, and not 30-32" as shown in the blog. And based on number of trolley inserts, galley space would also be an issue. At 370 pax and without galley at door 3, it could only be capable of 2 meals plus 1 snack service instead of 3 meals on their A359 from MNL to JFK, yet still enough for LAX and SFO. And the configuration will also most likely have premium economy to maintain consistency with their A359. Nevertheless, this new A35K upgrade is now a more attractive option for PAL and instead of waiting for the 777X.
ReplyDeleteI just checked instagram account of @lift_aero . Yup, PAL's A359 is capable of 3 meals service as there appears to be an additional galley at door 3. There are total 4 galleys. So with what Airbus offers the new configuration of A35K with more than 370 seats and with no galley at door 3, it's not capable of 3 meals.
DeleteI don't think the A35K is a 1:1 replacement for the B77W. Instead However should be viewed as an in-between aircraft type, with the A359 being the smallest and the B77W being the biggest. The A35K will likely have capacity of 330-345 seats while the B77W if refurbished with PE will likely have a capacity of 350-360 seats. In the end will have to whait and see if PAL will be serious converting its option for 6 A359 and A35K.
ReplyDeleteI just watched Cathay Pacific A350-1000 under Sam Chui vlogs. It has 334 seats - 46 business, 32 Premium Eco, 256 Economy. So if PAL gets the same plane, with lesser premium seats, it can have between 360-370 seats that may look like this - 30/34 business, 24/28 premium eco, 300/310 economy.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete