AirAsia close to buying at least 100 Airbus jets in shift to A220, sources say
PARIS, June 11 (Reuters) - AirAsia (CAPI.KL), opens new tab is in advanced discussions to place an order for at least 100 Airbus (AIR.PA), opens new tab jets at next week's Paris Airshow, a deal likely to mark the introduction to its fleet of the planemaker's smallest jet, the A220, industry sources said.
AirAsia and Airbus declined to comment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Man United make Cunha their first major summer transfer
Manchester United have completed the £62.5m transfer of Matheus Cunha from Wolves, marking their first major signing of the summer under Ruben Amorim 's management. Cunha, a boyhood Manchester United fan, has signed a five-year deal with an option to extend until 2031, expressing his delight at joining his favourite English team. The 26-year-old Brazilian forward scored 15 Premier League goals last season, and Manchester United anticipates he will significantly enhance their forward line. Manchester United also made an initial £45m bid for Bryan Mbuemo, which Brentford rejected, and they missed out on Liam Delap, who joined Chelsea. Director of football Jason Wilcox highlighted Cunha's proven Premier League success and dynamic qualities as key reasons for prioritising his signing.
Sky News
16 minutes ago
- Sky News
Money Problem: 'My dog died and insurance company charged me nearly £700'
Our reader Alex* got in touch with Money with this problem... My dog Benji died last month at the age of 11. But when I went to cancel his insurance, they told me I was still liable for paying the remaining five months of his policy (at £138 a month). They took £691.75 out of my final claim. They told me this was standard because if you make a claim in the same year the pet dies, you are then liable for the remaining year's premiums. Is this right? I've had the policy with them since 2020. Our cost of living specialist Megan Harwood-Baynes tackled this one... I'm so sorry to hear about your dog. You told me he died unexpectedly - he was going for tests and died before the results came back. It took you a couple of days to summon up the strength to call HealthyPets and cancel his insurance, but when you did, you were shocked to be told you were liable to pay the remaining £691.75 on your premium. As someone who has also been stung by pet insurance (with a different insurer), I was sad but not surprised to find out this clause exists. Your insurance policy says this: "Any claim resulting from the death/permanent loss (referred as Total Loss) of the insured animal will result in the immediate cancellation of the contract and no refund of the annual premium will be allowed." So, unfortunately, it does seem to be the case that you had to pay the premium. And look, we are all guilty of not reading the small print, and even when we do, it's so dense it can be really difficult to take it all in. When you have an older animal (usually over the ages of eight to ten), your policy changes significantly, as certain things stop being covered. For example, you can claim if your kitten dies, but not your 12-year-old cat. If you stay with the same insurer, this can be particularly tricky to navigate because they rarely flag any policy changes from year to year. Personally, I'm not sure why not - it wouldn't be difficult to include a PDF highlighting what things have changed once your pet reaches a certain age. My main advice to anyone with a pet over a certain age would be to read and reread the small print - and call the insurer before you need to claim to make sure you fully know what you are signing up for. But is this policy fair? That being said, you said what upset you the most was the way you were dealt with by HealthyPets - for an insurer that presumably deals with this situation every day, you said there was no acknowledgement of the shock or grief you were going through. Overall, you felt the approach was rather blunt and cold, especially given you'd been with them for four years (and presumably paid them thousands of pounds) and not claimed for Benji in that time. You felt it could have chosen to be more courteous to you or show some discretion with this clause. I reached out to HealthyPets to ask if it felt it was fair for you to pay premiums on a deceased animal. To me, it seems a particularly cruel clause, designed to hit just when you're grieving your pet. The official reply was this: "We would like to express our deepest condolences to Alex for the loss of Benji as we fully recognise the pain and stress the loss of a pet can cause. Thank you for bringing her complaint to our attention. We have reached out to her directly to discuss her concerns." So, it was not the most helpful reply, but the next day, HealthyPets phoned you to say a formal complaint had been raised on your behalf. You said what mattered most is that in that phone call, the company apologised to you and expressed condolences for Benji's death. A few days later, you had a final response to your complaint. HealthyPets apologised for the fact that its service had not met expectations. It said it tried to make policy wording as clear as possible (I'll let you decide if you agree that is the case…) and explained exactly why, in accordance with their terms, the premium was due to be paid. But it concluded by saying that while it couldn't change the terms of your policy, it arranged for a goodwill payment of £450 in recognition of the distress and disappointment caused by the situation. You told me you were pleased with the outcome - you genuinely weren't expecting any money, but the acknowledgement and apology were what you had hoped for. How to complain about an insurer If you also feel unhappy with how you've been dealt with by an insurer, the first thing you need to do is raise a formal complaint directly with them. They should issue you a final response within a couple of months. If you don't agree with their final decision, you can then go to the Financial Ombudsman - they will make a final decision, which is then binding. If you are still not happy, you can then take your insurer to court, but this should be an absolute last resort. You can find out more about making a complaint on the Citizens' Advice website.
The Guardian
38 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Woody Johnson makes £190m bid for Textor's Crystal Palace shares as Uefa delays decision
The New York Jets owner, Woody Johnson, has offered £190m to buy John Textor's stake in Crystal Palace. The move comes with Uefa expected to delay until the end of the month a decision on whether the club will be allowed to compete in next season's Europa League. The offer from Johnson, the former US ambassador to the UK, has the backing of Palace's co-chair Steve Parish and is believed to be under consideration by Textor despite falling significantly short of his valuation of about £240m for his 44.9% stake. That figure is based on his failed attempt to buy out Parish and his fellow co-owners Josh Harris and David Blitzer in April, when a £550m bid was rebuffed. Textor is understood to be prepared to accept up to £50m less than his valuation after Harris and Blitzer turned down an opportunity to buy his stake at the discounted price. A consortium that includes the NBA star Jimmy Butler and Sportsbank, which has held talks with Textor about investing in Palace, is also in the frame. All four Palace co-owners were part of the club delegation that attended a meeting at Uefa's headquarters in Nyon this month and argued that Textor, the majority shareholder in the French club Lyon, who have also qualified for next season's Europa League, does not have a decisive influence at Selhurst Park despite being the largest shareholder. As reported by the Guardian, Uefa rejected attempts by Textor and Blitzer to place their shares in a blind trust because they missed 1 March deadline. Blitzer's Danish club, Brøndby, have qualified for the Conference League. A decision on Palace had been expected imminently but sources at Uefa have indicated its club financial control body (CFCB) would like more time to consider the case, with the end of June regarded as more realistic. That could give Textor an opportunity to complete a sale – a move that would also be viewed favourably by Uefa – although he is believed to be reluctant to rush through a deal having spent about £180m since purchasing his original 40% stake in August 2021. Palace are understood to remain confident they will be cleared to participate in the Europa League having been in regular contact with the CFCB since their meeting in Nyon. But if they do get the green light, Nottingham Forest could appeal to the court of arbitration for sport after they wrote to Uefa this week raising concerns about a potential breach of multi-club ownership rules by Palace. Forest, whose owner, Evangelos Marinakis, is close to Textor, would stand to be promoted from the Conference League if Palace are banned by Uefa. Brighton would then be in line to take Forest's Conference League place after finishing eighth in the Premier League. Sign up to Football Daily Kick off your evenings with the Guardian's take on the world of football after newsletter promotion It is understood Brighton have no intention of making a complaint to Uefa and would be unlikely to join Forest in any legal action to prevent Palace, their arch-rivals, from competing in Europe.
