Mango airline sale: SAA to receive nominal fee as new owners emerge
Image: File
The sale of grounded state-owned low-cost airline Mango is being finalised and its current owners, SA Airways (SA), are likely to receive a nominal fee of about R1 000.
Business rescue practitioner Sipho Sono this week said there was no reason why SAA should not sign the sale of shares agreement because the sale was approved even though the matter had to go to court to force the decision.
'That decision has already been taken. We don't know why its taken SAA long to comment on the sale of shares agreement but at least now there is some movement,' he explained.
Sono said SAA appointed lawyers advising the national carrier to review and conclude the agreement.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
'So it looks like we are moving in the right direction. The value that goes to SAA is nominal, they are not getting anything. Their shares will be sold at next to nothing, let's say a R1,000,' he added.
Sono expressed confidence that the rest is more the language of the agreement and nothing of substance will change. Mango's new owners are expected to lease aircraft, according to Sono.
'The investor will be buying the intellectual property, the brand, which is Mango, and the loyal customer base, which previously had a good experience with Mango. The planes and so forth would be leased independently so there are no planes to be sold,' he said.
Sono said Mango has to be sold and it has to be privatised as it may no longer be owned by SAA.
'It will be sold to a private investor whose details we have not officially released. We will only do so once all the relevant agreements have been signed,' he further stated.
Sono said the investor has also reviewed the agreement and once it is signed the investor will be announced but timelines for the restart of Mango have not been finalised.
'We are busy with trying to conclude a transaction that will then allow the investor to finalise its own business plan. The timelines and the dates will be announced in the future,' he said.
At the start of the business rescue process, there were 55,000 unflown customers, which is about R180 million in value.
Sono said some of the customers have been refunded by their banks, where if a passenger bought a ticket with their credit card they are allowed to claim back from the bank within 30 days or so.
In addition, there are a number of customers who may have opted for bank refunds and some of them may have been refunded by Mango's pervious travel partners.
Sono said customers are no different from other creditors but they have been prioritised to receive the full value of their unflown tickets.
'Customers are getting good value, assuming we finalise the transaction and Mango restarts soon enough,' he said.
However, if the sale is not concluded, customers will be treated the same way as other creditors and will be paid a dividend, which is a fraction of what they paid for their tickets.
loyiso.sidimba@inl.co.za
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Ground control to FlySafair: we have a problem
Long queues, missed appointments, and almost two dozen cancelled flights marked day one of FlySafair's pilot strike, as more than 200 pilots downed their controls in a labour showdown with the airline. However, by the end of the day, the airline had agreed - under pressure - to participate in the mediation process as requested by the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA). At OR Tambo International Airport, stranded passengers and grounded pilots found themselves on the same side of the runway as fallout collateral damage in the escalating dispute. Turbulence at the top 'They said there weren't any cancellations but I only found out my flight was cancelled this morning,' said Masego, a frustrated traveler who was due to fly to Cape Town. She was one of many travellers queuing at the FlySafair terminals who had been issued vouchers for their missed flights. Masego didn't want to share her full name for fear that FlySafair would decline her request for a refund rather than a flight voucher. The standoff is not just about the two primary tabled issues — pay and rostering — but also a representation of pilots asserting themselves in what they deem an increasingly airline-dominant space post the Covid-19 pandemic. 'This isn't just about the money,' said one FlySafair pilot to Daily Maverick on condition of anonymity. 'We're professionals, not just numbers on a roster.' How much is a pilot worth? Of FlySafair's roughly 300 pilots, about two-thirds are represented by trade union Solidarity and rejected a proposed 5.7% wage increase, instead demanding what Solidarity describes as a 'market-related' adjustment closer to 10.5%. According to data from Payscale and Glassdoor, commercial pilots earn anywhere between R300,000 to well over R1-million — and FlySafair itself has noted that its pilots earn up to R2.3-million per annum. While this appears to be lucrative, a pilot interviewed by Daily Maverick stated that the higher end of salaries was usually reserved for very senior captains, such as a pilot with 20 years' experience, with the median being closer to the R300,000 mark. The second sticking point is the way rosters are structured. According to a pilot, rosters are released on the 24th of each month, typically with five days on, two days off. But last-minute changes mean that even on scheduled off days, pilots struggle to plan their lives. 'It's not like you're knocking off work at 4pm on a Friday,' said one pilot. 'You might get home from that last shift at midnight, and then on Monday your first flight is at 5am.' 'We don't have complete access to the rosters, but the pilots are saying 'I'm tired,'' said Helgard Cronjé , deputy general secretary at Solidarity. 'You can't put a price on missing your kid's rugby match.' FlySafair maintains otherwise. 'Fatigue is not a concern,' said chief marketing officer Kirby Gordon in a previous written response to Daily Maverick. The same reply also stated that 'there are no concerns for flights being disrupted as a result of this industrial action'. This did not turn out to be the case, as at least 26 flights were cancelled on Monday morning, 21 July 2025. Pilots stress that fatigue isn't just a lifestyle issue — it's a safety concern. According to a pilot, many are now flying 90 to 95 hours per month, near the legal maximum. 'That's not sustainable in the long run. People think 90 hours (per month) is nothing because it's less than a nine-to-five job,' said one pilot. 'But they don't realise that flying is mentally and physically demanding. You're in high-stress environments, constantly alert, and that takes a toll.' And it's a toll many no longer want to pay. Pilots estimate 80 colleagues have left the company in the past year, with many heading overseas. FlySafair bowed to pressure after about 90% of pilots affiliated with labour group, Solidarity, declared their willingness to strike. 'FlySafair underestimated how disruptive the lock-out (would) be. It is costing them too much and the passengers are paying the price,' said Cronjé, adding that the airline had indicated it would only be willing to start the negotiation process by Wednesday. 'As a result, thousands more passengers will be affected before FlySafair comes to the table,' she said. Airline dominance Following the Covid-19 pandemic, pilots were furloughed en masse. As aviation resumed, airlines dominated the hiring terms. Pilots say they are now pushing back. Solidarity claims FlySafair refused to provide financial data to justify the wage freeze. 'When we asked for the financials to back this up, they refused,' said Cronjé. 'We believe the company is profitable enough to meet our demands, or at least to come to the table with a better offer.' FlySafair confirmed to Daily Maverick that no such financial disclosures were made, stating that this was not standard practice. 'Salaries are typically determined by market dynamics,' said the company. 'Our pilots are not equity stakeholders — they have not invested capital or assumed financial risk.' Dr Joachim Vermooten, transport economist and former airline executive, told Daily Maverick that low-cost airlines derived profit from high aircraft utilisation and passenger density. He cited European examples as proof that low-cost carriers could be highly profitable. FlySafair, for its part, claims that its current offer, while described as a 5.7% raise, actually constitutes an 11.29% cost-to-company increase. 'This is a generous offer, particularly in a low-inflation environment where many major corporations, including banks, are offering increases closer to 4%,' the airline said. What this means for you If you have booked flights with FlySafair, you should check the updates page before you make plans or even show up at the airport — particularly for flights from Tuesday, 22 July up to and including Monday, 28 July. While FlySafair says contingency crews are in place, delays and cancellations remain likely, and it's likely to be a bumpy journey ahead until the dispute is reconciled. If your flight is affected, you have three choices: Rebook your trip by selecting a different flight on the same route, or pick entirely new flights for a future journey. Cancel your booking and receive a FlySafair voucher for the full value of your original flight. This credit will be loaded to your FlySafair wallet and is valid for 12 months. If you'd prefer a full cash refund instead, you're also welcome to cash out your voucher at any time. The CCMA has been approached to mediate the matter, which might result in a faster resolution.
Daily Maverick
12 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Every single billboard on R21 to OR Tambo Airport is illegal, says Sanral
Billboard owners, emboldened by industry intimidation tactics and government inaction, are costing local and national authorities millions of rands in lost revenue. The outdoor advertising industry has gone rogue. The South African National Roads Agency (Sanral), backed by the City of Ekurhuleni, admitted that not a single billboard on the R21 freeway — stretching from Johannesburg to OR Tambo International Airport — has been lawfully installed. An investigation by Daily Maverick uncovered that billboard owners, emboldened by industry intimidation tactics and government inaction, are costing local and national authorities millions of rands in lost revenue. Worse yet, some are structurally unsound and could collapse, endangering motorists. They can also cause dangerous conditions by obstructing road signs. Outdoor advertisers are required to pay upfront fees — up to R400,000 — for leases at high-visibility spots, as well as 20% of their monthly earnings from the billboards to the local and national entities, a regulation that's largely ignored. There is a deliberate pattern of non-compliance — companies exploit loopholes to install boards on private property, knowing that enforcement is weak and legal battles are costly for authorities. Monitoring efforts have been largely abandoned by road and council officials, allowing illegal installations to multiply. Ekurhuleni councillor Jill Humphreys admitted the city had 'given up' on removing the illegal structures. 'The industry takes advantage of this. There is no money, no manpower. The industry knows we can't fight them and is taking advantage of that.' Sanral confirmed that every billboard on the R21, including those mounted on bridges, is illegal under the Sanral Act. Sanral spokesperson Lwando Mahlasela said it was difficult to track illegal billboards. 'It is influenced by many factors such as billboards not yet reported by routine road maintenance, those in the process of being illegally erected, those in the process of being removed, as well as those under consideration by the municipalities.' He said workers tasked with removing illegal billboards had been threatened. 'There have been threats made against officials by certain individuals and companies within the outdoor industry. These incidents have been reported and are currently under investigation by our legal department for further handling.' He said billboards on private land must be authorised. 'If not removed when requested, the owner can be asked to provide access to the property for removal, but should there be objections, a court interdict may be needed to enter the property.' Warnings The City of Ekurhuleni claims that the advertising industry has largely ignored calls to regularise billboards. This month, the city gave advertisers 21 days to register their billboards, ending on 4 August. The MMC for developmental planning and real estate, Nomadlozi Nkosi, placed 'illegal advertising' stickers on three billboards in Bedfordview, Alberton and Sunward Park, threatening the owners with fines, legal action and possible removal of the billboards at their own cost. The average cost to remove an 18 sq m billboard is between R100,000 and R150,000. If they are erected illegally on private property and the owner refuses access, court applications are needed to enter the property. Ekurhuleni spokesperson Zweli Dlamini said the municipality only had three people to monitor for illegal billboards. Safety risk He said illegal billboards placed motorists at risk by blocking visibility and obscuring road signs 'They may also be structurally unsafe if not approved, increasing the risk of collapse, especially in extreme weather conditions,' he said. The billboards are uninsured and do not carry public liability or professional indemnity insurance. 'There have been incidents where bylaw enforcement officers were threatened or met with resistance when attempting to remove illegal advertising signs,' said Dlamini. 'In some cases, individuals claiming ownership of the signs have intervened aggressively to prevent removal. 'These incidents have been reported through the appropriate internal channels, and where necessary, law enforcement support has been requested to ensure the safety of officials and compliance with the city's bylaws.' The city estimates there are about 78 illegal billboards on the R21. 'The department is exploring means to vigorously deal with the insurgent illegal advertising across the city in terms of bylaw enforcement,' said Dlamini. The exact loss in revenue is unquantifiable, but Dlamini points out that legal applications to erect billboards cost R1,810, with an inspection charge of R250 per square metre, plus 20% of the monthly revenue generated by the billboard. 'None of this money reaches the city when structures are off our records. In addition to the direct revenue loss, illegal signs undermine regulated competition and place a financial burden on the city's enforcement resources,' he said. The city's outdoor advertising bylaw enforcement unit removed 873 illegal billboards from council-owned properties and road reserves during the 2023-2024 financial year. Industry's response Angelo Tandy, the chairperson of Out of Home Media South Africa (Ohmsa), a voluntary industry umbrella body, said: 'While isolated instances of non-compliance may occur in any industry, these do not reflect the values of the majority of our stakeholders. We also work tirelessly with government and the various municipalities to fix the challenges facing the industry in efforts to positively transform the outdoor industry.' Ohmsa does not possess regulatory enforcement powers, but it functions as a self-regulatory body by promoting adherence to municipal bylaws and national regulations. 'We offer guidance, training, and a code of conduct to our members, reinforcing governance and operational accountability,' said Tandy. Tandy dismissed accusations of 'mafia-style' organisations in Ekurhuleni that threaten officials who try to remove illegal billboards. 'We are not in possession of verified information regarding these allegations and cannot comment on speculation. We strongly condemn any form of intimidation or criminality and encourage municipal officials and stakeholders to report unlawful conduct to the appropriate authorities.' Tandy said the regularisation of boards with municipalities was an ongoing process. 'Our efforts include ongoing stakeholder engagement to encourage best practices, providing training and resources to our members, and actively supporting policies that promote fair competition and innovation. 'We advocate for an inclusive and transparent permitting process, prioritise SMME development, and support municipal enforcement efforts to dismantle non-compliant boards while expanding compliant access for new entrants. 'The regularisation of alleged illegal billboards is an ongoing issue in South Africa, especially in larger urban areas. However, Ohmsa encourages its members to work closely with local authorities to remain compliant and to help mitigate the challenges.' Neither Jinja Outdoor Advertising or Alliance Media, companies that own boards on the R21, responded to a request for comment. DM
IOL News
12 hours ago
- IOL News
Eskom to pay R1 billion penalty over Koeberg steam generator dispute
Eskom has been ordered to pay French company Framatome almost R1 billion by the Western Cape High Court in a contractual dispute over the replacement of steam generators at the Koeberg Power Station. Image: Supplied Power utility Eskom must pay French nuclear power company Framatome nearly R1 billion in a contractual dispute over the replacement of steam generators at the Koeberg Nuclear Power Station. Eskom hauled the company formerly known as Areva to the Western Cape High Court to challenge adjudicator Peter Ramsden's decisions on the merits and the quantum delivered in December 2022 and March 2023, respectively. The entity's contention was that both decisions were beyond his jurisdiction and failed to apply the rules of natural justice. Eskom complained that Ramsden failed to take into account its submissions, issue a reasoned decision and decide the issues that he was required to decide. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ In addition, Eskom stated that the adjudicator failed to receive and take into account its response to Framatome's amended claim as well as its submissions when determining the quantum. Eskom was also unhappy that the adjudicator accepted the amounts in the company's amended claim without having enquired into the supporting documents or the details of the claim, failed to issue a reasoned decision and/or follow the procedure he laid down by himself. The dispute dates back to 2014 when the parties concluded an agreement to replace the steam generators at Koeberg. In terms of the contract, Framatome work included the supply and installation of two sets of three replacement steam generators, with one set to be installed in each of the reactor buildings at units one and two at Koeberg during their separate planned outages. The work of replacing the steam generators can only be performed during maintenance and refuelling outages when the power station is offline and the outages are planned in advance and around Eskom's operational requirements. Eskom had scheduled the outage dates and planned to replace the steam generators but then twice postponed for a later date. The power utility then informed Framatome that it would not be continuing with the steam generator replacement work during one of the outages. However, the company notified Eskom of an event which required it to notify the power supplier of such an event and that it required compensation after the postponement. This was acknowledged by the project manager. Eskom then unsuccessfully approached the adjudicator, claiming that both decisions were unenforceable as contractual obligations and need not be complied with as he exceeded his powers. It later filed an application for several declarators, which acting Judge Renata Williams dismissed with costs on Thursday. Framatome succeeded in its counter-application and Eskom was ordered to pay the company €35,288,582 (about R729 million) exclusive of value-added tax (VAT) and subject to the price adjustment for inflation pursuant to secondary option clause of the contract. Payment is also pursuant to certain clauses of the contract, interest thereon calculated at the London Interbank Offered Rate applicable at the time for amounts due in other currencies Additionally, Eskom must pay Framatome more than R256.6m exclusive of VAT and subject to the price adjustment for inflation pursuant to secondary option clause of the contract and pursuant to certain clauses including interest. The power utility was also ordered to pay the costs of Framatome's counter application including the costs of the company's France-based attorneys. 'There is no basis to set aside the decisions of the adjudicator which are valid and binding. In terms of the parties' contract Eskom was obliged to comply therewith,' acting Judge Williams ruled. Eskom spokesperson Daphney Mokwena did not respond to requests for comment on Saturday. Cape Times
