Air France-KLM to take majority stake in Scandinavian airline SAS
The purchase, subject to obtaining the necessary regulatory clearances, is expected to close in the second half of 2026, Air France-KLM said.
The value of the investment would be determined at closing, based on SAS's latest financial performance, including EBITDA and net debt, added the company.
The Scandinavian airline welcomed the announcement, calling it a "defining moment" that marked Air-France KLM's commitment to strengthen SAS.
"It brings not just stability but will also allow for deeper industrial integration and the full backing of one of the world's leading airline groups," SAS CEO Anko van der Werff said.
"Together, we will be better positioned to deliver greater value to our customers, our colleagues, and the wider region."
SAS said it would continue to invest in its fleet and network.
Air France-KLM CEO Ben Smith told Reuters in March that the company was looking to raise its stake in SAS, as the carrier was meeting the necessary milestones, including integration into the SkyTeam airline alliance, of which Air France-KLM is also a member.
The two carriers have already had a commercial cooperation since summer 2024. Control of SAS would allow Air France-KLM to expand in the Scandinavian market and create additional value for shareholders, said the Air France-KLM statement.
"Following their successful restructuring, SAS has delivered impressive performance, and we are confident that the airline's potential will continue to grow through deeper integration within the Air France-KLM Group," said Smith.
The stake sale comes as executives seek more consolidation in Europe's fragmented airline industry, which they say is needed to compete with U.S. and Middle Eastern rivals.
SAS has 138 aircraft in service and carried more than 25 million passengers last year, generating revenues of 4.1 billion euros.
The group would have a majority of seats on the board of directors, while the Danish state will keep its 26.4% stake in SAS and its seats on the board.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Auto Blog
an hour ago
- Auto Blog
BMW's M Division Is Working On A "Dream Car For Collectors"
By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. Something Should Succeed The Skytop Cast your mind back a decade to 2015, when the F82 M4 GTS was but a Pebble Beach concept. At that point, cars that cost seven figures were scarce, and Bimmers that cost six and didn't have a 7 on the back were non-existent. But nowadays, after selling every example of the – ahem – $750,000 BMW 3.0 CSL, getting several requests about the Concept Touring Coupe, and then finding resounding success with the Skytop and Speedtop, the Bavarians are poised to build on that momentum with something new, reports BMW Blog. What exactly remains to be seen, but it's described as a 'dream car' that will be 'for collectors.' It seems BMW is making hay while the sun shines. Production Crews Know It's Coming, Just Not When Source: BMW Sylvia Neubauer, Vice President of Customer, Brand, and Sales at M, reportedly told BMW Blog that BMW's small-series team had approved a limited-run M: 'We are discussing things, but we need to find the right time to do it. Be assured, we share the same dream and passion. We have been talking with Adrian van Hooydonk [Head of BMW Group Design] and the team who does the small series planning, and there is a slot reserved for BMW M.' As is typically the case with these sorts of projects, you need to build suspense. You don't hear the name of Oppenheimer, nor that it'll be shot on IMAX, before you hear that Christopher Nolan and Cillian Murphy are working on a new project. Getting the media talking about what the producers have in mind builds excitement, and in this case, it gets potential buyers calling to ask for a build slot. What To Expect, And What Not To Hope For BMW has ruled out the idea of reviving the M1 supercar. If it's to be a true supercar like the Audi R8 was (and may again be), it would need a unique chassis, or something close to it, and BMW is still a massive company built on efficiency, where economies of scale need to make sense. If this project is to be a stepping stone to building a department that could make an M1 happen, it needs to be financially viable, and there's still only so much money you can ask for an M. Thus, we can be sure that it will be based on something BMW already makes, which effectively rules out a supercar, but only for the time being, as Neubauer hints: Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. 'We always think of where there might be potential markets for the future. Many times, we are doing this together with our [BMW] AG colleagues because we need some base car to then turn it into a high-performance model. There are some ideas we are discussing with our AG colleagues at the moment.' Our best guess? BMW is still deciding what to do for its 8 Series replacement. Some rumors have suggested that the 4 Series and the 8 Series will meet in the middle to become the reborn 6 Series, which is exactly what Mercedes did with the E-Class and C-Class coupes when it came up with the CLE. Once the bean counters decide where to go, and the M division knows what it has to work with, then – and only then – will we start to hear rumblings of what is really going on. Until then, anything is possible in this market – especially when there are third parties that can do the hard work of producing a bespoke chassis. Then again, working with a third party (Lamborghini) is what burned BMW the first time it tried to enter the supercar space. Whatever the special model may be, it can't be poorly timed, and it can't be overpriced. BMW hasn't missed in a while, so fingers crossed. About the Author Sebastian Cenizo View Profile
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Minister demands overhaul of UK's leading AI institute
The technology secretary has demanded an overhaul of the UK's leading artificial intelligence institute in a wide-ranging letter that calls for a switch in focus to defence and national security, as well as leadership changes. Peter Kyle said it was clear further action was needed to ensure the government-backed Alan Turing Institute met its full potential. In a letter to ATI's chair, seen by the Guardian, Kyle said the institute should be changed to prioritise defence, national security and 'sovereign capabilities' – a reference to nation states being able to control their own AI technology. The call for new priorities implies a downgrading of ATI's focus on health and the environment, which are two of three core subjects for the institute, alongside defence and security, under its 'Turing 2.0' strategy. 'Moving forward, defence and national security projects should form a core of ATI's activities, and relationships with the UK's security, defence, and intelligence communities should be strengthened accordingly,' Kyle wrote. Making clear that the Turing 2.0 strategy did not meet government requirements, Kyle indicated that he expected leadership changes at ATI. 'To realise this vision, it is imperative that the ATI's leadership reflects the institute's reformed focus,' he wrote in a letter first reported by Politico. 'While we acknowledge the success of the current leadership in delivering reform at the institute during a difficult period, careful consideration should be given to the importance of an executive team who possesses a relevant background and sector knowledge to lead this transition.' ATI is chaired by Doug Gurr, the former head of Amazon's UK operations and interim chair of the UK's competition watchdog. The institute is going through a restructuring under its chief executive, Jean Innes, which one in five staff have said puts ATI's credibility in 'serious jeopardy'. At the end of last year, ATI employed 440 staff, but it has since launched a redundancy process. Although the institute is nominally independent, it recently secured £100m from the government in a five-year funding deal. The letter said ATI's 'longer-term funding arrangement' could be reviewed next year. The government would maintain its current level of research and development from national security and defence for the next three years, Kyle wrote, and would increase the number of defence and national security staff embedded in the institute. Dame Wendy Hall, a professor of computer science at the University of Southampton and the co-chair of a 2017 government AI review, said ATI would cease to be a national institute under the government's proposed changes. 'If the institute focuses on defence and security it ceases to be a national institute on AI,' Hall said. 'It's not broad enough. If the government wants an AI institute that does defence and security then it should just call it that.' In February, the government indicated a focus on national security with its AI strategy by renaming its AI Safety Institute, established under the premiership of Rishi Sunak, the AI Security Institute. Sign up to TechScape A weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives after newsletter promotion Kyle's letter also referred to the government's 50-point AI action plan as a 'testament' to the UK's AI ambitions, The plan's targets include a 20-fold increase in the amount of AI computing power under public control by 2030, and embedding AI in the public sector. A spokesperson for ATI said the institute was focused on 'high-impact missions' that support the UK including in defence and national security. 'We share the government's vision of AI transforming the UK for the better, welcome the recognition of our critical role, and will continue to work closely with the government to support its priorities and deliver science and innovation for the public good,' said the spokesperson. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology said the changes would be a 'natural next step' for ATI following the safety institute renaming. 'These proposed changes would not only ensure the Alan Turing Institute delivers real value for money – it would see it taking on a key role in safeguarding our national security,' said the spokesperson.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
‘My husband is much richer than me but I still wanted a prenup'
In the run-up to Elaine Foster's wedding in 2019, she had the typical to-do list of a bride-to-be: sort out the flowers, pick a caterer — and bring up the subject of a prenuptial agreement with her fiancé. Foster, 56, was determined to sign the legal contract known as a prenup before walking down the aisle. In fact, she said she wouldn't get married without one. 'It was nothing to do with protecting my wealth. My husband is substantially better off than me. I wanted to go into the marriage with us knowing that we were doing it for love, not financial gain,' said Foster, a lawyer at the Milton Keynes firm MacIntyre Law. 'I also wanted to ensure our families didn't worry that they would lose out financially later in life if we separated. I didn't want his children, or mine, from previous relationships to fear that they would lose what their parents had worked for.' Foster and her husband were ahead of their time. Prenuptial agreements are common in the United States, but were fairly rare in the UK, except among the ultra-wealthy. Now, though, lawyers say they are becoming more popular. The number of divorces has fallen dramatically over the past 20 years, but the number of prenups has risen. Edwards Family Law, which specialises in divorce, said that there had been a 50 per cent surge in the number of prenups it dealt with last year, compared with 2023. They are particularly relevant in second marriages where you are more likely to have built up wealth before you met. Without a prenup specifying otherwise, assets are often divided equally according to the 'sharing principle' unless there is good reason to do otherwise. However, a Supreme Court ruling on Tuesday (July 2) has suggested that this principle should not be applied to all assets accrued before the marriage. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of Clive Standish, 72, who had transferred almost £78 million of assets to his ex-wife, Anna, 57, while they were married for tax planning purposes. • Retired banker wins fight to keep majority of £80m 'gift' to wife The assets had been accrued before his marriage and, during a lengthy divorce battle, he argued that they should not be considered as matrimonial assets, even though they had been held in her name while they were together — and the courts, eventually, agreed. Vandana Chitroda from the law firm Broadfield said: 'It is likely that following this judgment, couples entering into pre and postnuptial agreements will be advised to ensure that non-matrimonial property is concisely defined.' Charlotte Lanning from Edwards Family Law said that the growing use of prenups was probably a result of people getting married later. 'The average age at marriage is higher, so you may have already bought a house or set up a business. When everyone was getting married in their early twenties, they had not had a chance to build up any wealth yet. 'The prevalence of second marriages plays a part too. If you've had a messy divorce and lost half your assets, you want to preserve what you have left.' Prenups are not legally binding in the UK, but an important Supreme Court decision in 2010 gave them more clout. A judge ruled that courts should take such agreements into account, provided that they were entered into freely by both parties; that there was 'full and frank' disclosure of their assets; that each party had independent legal advice and the agreement was not unfair. They typically outline how you would divide your assets in the event of a divorce and are often used to protect inherited money, business ownership or inheritance for children. At the time of divorce, a court will consider the prenup in the context that it was made and the effect it would have on the couple if it were enforced. 'If the agreement only provided you with £100,000 but you had been living in a £2 million house, the court is unlikely to think that was fair,' Lanning said. 'You might have agreed not to take any spousal maintenance, but if you had since been in an accident and were unable to work, then the court would probably rule that you are entitled to some financial support.' In the end, Foster's prenup was relatively straightforward. They agreed that what each had accrued before the marriage would remain their own, and that there would be no ongoing legal ties such as maintenance payments if they were to divorce. Anything they accrued after the marriage would be shared equally if they separated. Foster said that this did not include any inheritances, which would be kept separate from their joint finances. • Read more money advice and tips on investing from our experts Foster said: 'We are very straight down the line and didn't want to muddy the waters. Having been divorced before, we knew that it's always a possibility. It's good to talk about these things from a place of love, rather than bitterness or unfairness. 'The way I see it is, If I go and buy a new car, I'm going to insure that car. That's not because I want to crash it or I'm planning to crash it, but because I want to be protected. It's a similar thing for me here.'
