Withdrawal Said Not Temporary

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30535, 2 September 1964, Page 6

Withdrawal Said Not Temporary

There was no suggestion that Mr R. M. Ansett was withdrawing from S.P.A.N.Z; Airline only for a time, to improve the airline’s position, Captain Daniell said when he was being questioned by Mr Cooke about the gift of 49 per cent of S.P.A.N.Z. to the staff of S.P.A.N.Z.

Captain Daniell said he had no thought in mind that Mr Ansett would cotne back Into the firm later. *1 think’ it very unlikely that I’ll be encouraging him to.” A letter from Mr Ansett to S.P.A.N.Z. in which he offered his gift of shares was produced to the authority.

Mr Cooke commented on Mr Anseti’s suggestion that the two co-founders of S.P.A.N.Z., Captain Daniell and Mr Anderson, should have a better entitlement to the shares than others. Did this mean that the co-founders would have a controlling interest in the company? Captain Daniell said this was not so. There would be an equitable distribution of the Ansett shares, he said. If there was not, then there would be loyal members of the staff who would not remain loyal. Distribution of the shares had yet to be determined, he said. •

Gift Duty Mr Cooke asked him about Mr Ansett’s requirements that gift duty on the shares be paid by recipients. Would not some of the staff refuse the shares because they did not want to pay the gift duty? Captain Daniell said he could not say yet what, would happen. He did not agree that the whole deal might yet fall through. “I’d be happy to pay gift duty on all the shares if they were given to me.” Captain Daniell said Mr Ansett was giving S.P.A.N.Z. some continued technical assistance and had offered to provide £lO,OOO to help the staff get the company on its feet

Mr Cooke: He’ll be taking a fatherly interest for some time?

Captain Daniell said he thought Mr Ansett was making an extraordinary ges-

ture to a staff he had come to know only a short time. Asked whether Mr Ansett had not made it clear early that he was only interested in New Zealand in competing full-scale with N.A.C., Captain Daniell said he did not know about that. ■

Mr Cooke said each application by S.P.A.N.Z. to the licensing authority had led towards ful competitiveness. Captain Daneill said each application had been for the purpose of improving S.P.A.N.Z.’s position—thia was a .gradual process. Mr Cooke said the authority and the appeal authority had both rightly agreed that New Zealand was too small for two major airlines. Captain Daniell said there were three airlines here now. He did not visualise that S.P.A.N.Z. would quickly become a full-scale competitor with N.A.C. It was clear that N.A.C. required a monopoly of the main air routes in New Zealand. Questioned by Mr Cooke, he said he thought that two airlines could economically share the main routes here now, providing they had no other responsibilities. Rail Passangers To Mr Cathro, Mr Daniell agreed that the £5 12s 6d economy fare between Wellington and Auckland (excluding ground fares between airport and town) was competitive with the £4 8s 6d rail fare and would attract some passengers from the rail service. He said he did not see that the application would jeopardise the railways plan for an improved express service between Wellington and Auckland. But it was inevitable that all railways would continue to lose passengers to airlines. Progress could not be stopped.