TransAsia Airways announced (08-Nov-2012) a firm order for six additional A321neos to be equipped with Pratt & Whitney PW1100G engines. The latest order brings the carrier's narrowbody orders to 29, including 12 A320neos with six to be equipped with Sharklets. TransAsia chairman Vincent Lin said, “The A321neo is a perfect fit for our strategy to grow efficiently in both domestic and regional markets and is the ideal solution to our fleet needs.” [more - original PR]
TransAsia places firm order for six additional A321neos
You may also be interested in the following articles...
Taiwan's TransAsia Airways collapses, having failed to address changes in Asian aviation
The repeated strategic failures of TransAsia Airways have resulted in the Taiwanese carrier being punished with market exit. Outside the domestic market TransAsia amassed little presence, and its departure will not greatly affect the market. But its collapse is an example for all: TransAsia is an unfortunate example of having failed to address market changes around Asia, and more specifically – needing to evolve out of a small regional full service airline.
There will undoubtedly be a superficial narrative that TransAsia struggled to recover from two tragic fatal accidents. But as at Malaysia Airlines, TransAsia's underlying problems existed before the crashes. Unlike Malaysia Airlines, TransAsia did not move fast enough to get its house in order.
TransAsia & V Air dual brand strategy collapses: TransAsia to become hybrid and V Air to shut down
Taiwan’s V Air, the LCC unit of TransAsia Airways, will end operations in Sep-2016 having carried only half a million passengers since its Dec-2014 launch. V Air was constantly the underdog to Tigerair Taiwan, although both are loss-making. V Air becomes the second notable Northeast Asian LCC to exit the market after AirAsia Japan (Mk I).
Whereas AirAsia Japan suffered from a shareholder dispute, V Air and TransAsia failed due to an unsuccessful dual brand strategy. The problem was one from the start, not a scenario that unravelled. V Air could have made decisions differently, but ultimately it hinged on TransAsia.
V Air’s collapse is not self-inflicted but rather, a failure of TransAsia. TransAsia’s decision to launch a dual brand strategy was unusual, given the small size of TransAsia and its undefined market position. Instead of the sum of the two airlines being greater than the individual parts, having two sub-scale airlines fragmented both. TransAsia operates 10 jet narrowbodies while V Air operates four. TransAsia will now restructure to pursue a hybrid business model, combining the two.