MIDF Research dismisses Airbus admission, believes the "allegations" against Choirboy & Din may yet be "found to be untrue": "..a golden opportunity for both co-founders to strengthen their trustworthiness back in the company and subsequently, the airline industry,".
Commenting on the Airbus corruption controversy, MIDF Research opined that the negative development could be an overall sentiment dampener to AirAsia Group, especially in an operating environment that is already facing headwinds.
“Until the outcome of the investigations are known, precautions have to be taken in valuing the company as any adverse findings could pose an impact to the airline’s reputation and potential financial penalties.
“Nevertheless, if the allegations are found to be untrue, this will serve as a golden opportunity for both co-founders to strengthen their trustworthiness back in the company and subsequently, the airline industry, ” it said in a note yesterday.
39. The first count alleges that contrary to section 7 of the Bribery Act 2010,
between 1 July 2011 and 1 June 2015, Airbus SE failed to prevent persons
associated with Airbus SE from bribing others concerned with the purchase of
aircraft by AirAsia and AirAsia X airlines from Airbus, namely directors and/or
employees of AirAsia airlines where the said bribery was intended to obtain or
retain business or advantage in the conduct of business for Airbus SE.
40. AirAsia and AirAsia X are two major airlines in Southeast Asia, headquartered
in Malaysia and were significant customers of Airbus at the time of the offences.
Between October 2005 and November 2014, AirAsia and AirAsia X ordered
406 aircraft from Airbus, including 180 aircraft secured during the indictment
period by way of improper payment (made by EADS France SAS, later Airbus
Group SAS), and the offer of a further improper payment. The improper payment consisted of $50 million (and Airbus employees also offered but did
not pay an additional $55 Million) paid to directors and/or employees of AirAsia
and AirAsia X airlines as sponsorship for a sports team. The sports team was
jointly owned by AirAsia Executive 1 and AirAsia Executive 2 but was legally
unrelated to AirAsia and AirAsia X. The additional improper payment was
prevented by the October 2014 freeze on payments to BPs described at para 29