Maximise your Avios, air miles and hotel points

Virgin Atlantic abandons plan for Government bailout, has five weeks to find a buyer (Telegraph)

Links on Head for Points may support the site by paying a commission.  See here for all partner links.

The Sunday Telegraph reports that Sir Richard Branson has abandoned plans for a Government bailout of Virgin Atlantic and is now desperately seeking a trade buyer.

The airline will be put into administration at the end of May if this cannot be achieved.  Accountancy firm EY is reportedly already lined up to act as administrator.

The airline is reported to have hired investment bank Houlihan Lokey, which specialises in distressed debt situations, to approach potential investors.  50 parties are believed to have asked for financial information.

Interestingly, none appear to be trade buyers.  Names quoted included hedge fund Lansdowne Partners, Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund, US private equity group Centerbridge Partners and distressed debt investor Cerberus.

Potential bidders are expected to form consortia to submit bids.  It is important to remember that a 51% shareholding must remain with UK or European Union entities under EU aviation law.  Only Lansdowne Partners, of the names listed above, has a qualifying domicile.

Delta Air Lines, currently a 49% shareholder, has already said that it will not commit further funds to the airline as it deals with its own financial crisis.  Delta is keener to take money out of Virgin Atlantic, with the airline currently owed $200m which was due as a transition payment to reflect the addition of Air France and KLM into the Delta / Virgin transatlantic joint venture.

Delta’s CEO Ed Bastian is quoted as telling MSNBC that it supported administration, believing that there would be bidders for the assets.

Any solution is likely to see Delta’s shareholding wiped out, but this is unlikely to be a major problem as the real value for the airline is in the joint venture agreement.  Virgin Group may be reduced to a minority stake unless there is an issue over hitting the 51% EU quota.

It is possible that the airline will return to the Government with a request for aid before putting the airline into administration.  As we covered, the original bail-out request was rejected because the airline was not believed to have exhausted all other potential options.  This new process may be a way of proving to the Government that no other alternative is possible.

The Sunday Telegraph article is here.


How to earn Virgin Points from UK credit cards

How to earn Virgin Points from UK credit cards (April 2025)

As a reminder, there are various ways of earning Virgin Points from UK credit cards.  Many cards also have generous sign-up bonuses.

You can choose from two official Virgin Atlantic credit cards (apply here, the Reward+ card has a bonus of 18,000 Virgin Points and the free card has a bonus of 3,000 Virgin Points):

Virgin Atlantic Reward+ Mastercard

18,000 bonus points and 1.5 points for every £1 you spend Read our full review

Virgin Atlantic Reward Mastercard

3,000 bonus points, no fee and 1 point for every £1 you spend Read our full review

You can also earn Virgin Points from various American Express cards – and these have sign-up bonuses too.

American Express Preferred Rewards Gold is FREE for a year and comes with 20,000 Membership Rewards points, which convert into 20,000 Virgin Points.

American Express Preferred Rewards Gold

Your best beginner’s card – 30,000 points, FREE for a year & four airport lounge passes Read our full review

The Platinum Card from American Express comes with 50,000 Membership Rewards points, which convert into 50,000 Virgin Points.

The Platinum Card from American Express

80,000 bonus points and great travel benefits – for a large fee Read our full review

Small business owners should consider the two American Express Business cards. Points convert at 1:1 into Virgin Points.

American Express Business Platinum

50,000 points when you sign-up and an annual £200 Amex Travel credit Read our full review

American Express Business Gold

20,000 points sign-up bonus and FREE for a year Read our full review

Click here to read our detailed summary of all UK credit cards which earn Virgin Points

Comments (347)

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

  • Cod stew says:

    All this talk of people saying the government shouldn’t bail out VS is misguided. VS is on the brink due in large part to government mandated travel restrictions which have imploded the economy. Government is therefore partly to blame for this mess. Government should therefore bail out any and every company which is being screwed by said government actions.

    • Brendan Hannan says:

      Although an interesting argument, and it has merit, it is flawed. Of the Government did not act in such a way, we would be in a worse situation than we are. A case of cutting off the had to save the arm.

      I agree fully that the Government – indeed the people – owe it to our economy to bail out businesses and companies in times of need – if only to ensure our own economy.

      But when a man who is withing the top 200 richest in the world, and who refuses to pay tax while hiding it behind doing charitable acts – although well recieved a bit empty still – asks for a bail out, it still rankles with most. And with good reason. We are all told ‘save x amount of your wage, have three months wage saved for emergencies’ and the such all the time. The rich have no excuse I’m afraid.

      • David Turner says:

        I agree with you, he will profit out of this either way he should be able to pay his way, it’s the small airlines I feel sorry for and other small businessess.

    • Nick_C says:

      The UK Government isn’t preventing anyone from flying abroad. Just advising against it. VS mainly flies to the US, which is no longer admitting most Brits.

      The UK government, or rather the taxpayers, is bailing out companies by paying the wages of furloughed staff and other measures.

    • Marcw says:

      Hello? you can count with the fingers of one hand (left or right, doesn’t matter) which countries are allowing British citizens to enter their borders.

    • Lady London says:

      Virgin wasn’t making me money anyway for the last 10 years and that included the boom times. Profits in the very few years any were reported, were miniscule related to their turnover it was clearly a voluntary choice to report them. In those odd years too it was such a close run thing.

      So either Virgin was incompetent, wasn’t able to make money given even boom market conditions – or profits were being manipulated to avoid paying tax.

      Since there is a lot of concern about many companies doing the same thing – feasting off the workforce and safe environment in the UK and its market – since it looks like Virgin was doing the same thing as Amazon, Google and Apple in not paying their fare.share an awful lot of us see no reason why we should support them now.

      • Chrisasaurus says:

        +1

        Fundamentally a business doesnt have to make large profits to be a worthwhile operation- plenty of business exist to provide a living for their staff and theres no rule saying lifestyle business cant be large.

        But nobody believes VS are innocent party here, as LL says there is a suspicious (almost calculated) ability to make minimal profits even when the market is doing well which combined with SRB’s decision to live some which which is purely by coincidence a tax haven, makes us all a little suspicious that those profits are hiding something.

  • Brendan Hannan says:

    I am sorry, but Richard Branson has money. Save your company sir. Sell off your precious Island, sell off assets if you need too.

    There are many small businesses within the UK who are suffering without your assets. Many who have paid tax. The drama is that if Virgin Atlantic don’t get saved, how many thousands are going to depend on support like benefits?

    I believe the Government should offer Branson a deal. He sells all his shares to the government. The people then own the company, and can bail it out. He may buy back his shares down the line including a decent percentage. This to cover inflation, the bail out, and the fact he’s not paid tax. Then the government owns a majority in an airline service, and can be used for future epidemics such as this if people need transport back or for aid relief etc.

    If Sir Branson cannot stomach that, then tough.

    • Rob says:

      The level of business insight here is impressive, Brendan 🙂

      1. What do you think British Airways would say if the UK Government took full control of its major UK long-haul competitor?

      2. The equity in the airline is worthless already. It was only valued at £600m last year when Air France KLM was planning to pay £200m for a third. It doesn’t matter who owns it. Branson will give you 49% for £1 if you ring him up, as long as you promise to loan the company £500m.

      • mvcvz says:

        Definitely not much going on up top. But he’s still way smarter than Shoestring.

      • James says:

        But will he also agree to relinquish royalties/licence fees?

  • Steships says:

    If Branson can’t be bothered to stump up the cash, then why should the UK taxpayer. Especially as he doesnt pay too much as he enjoys his Tax Haven in the BVI…..

    Let’s not forget he is valued at 4.2 billion, I for one am disappointed that he has chosen to view his personal wealth as his whilst his staff have been thrown to the wolves….

    Poor show Richard, hang your head in shame.

    • TGLoyalty says:

      He’s not worth 4.2bn cash. What’s 4bn of shareholding’s in businesses that are about to go bust actually worth now…?

  • Jason Hindle says:

    I’m not against bailouts but I think the government needs to avoid throwing good money after bad. The fundamentals, prior to the COVID-19 emergency, should probably be taken into account. If Virgin were strong, then it follows they should receive help.

  • SSS says:

    Comments regarding Virgin Atlantic “not required” and there being more smaller businesses’ that need help. True on the latter, but you might be more dependant on VS that you think… 36% of food arrives in the belly of an aeroplane. Whilst there might be space in the competitors cargo hold, expect the price of of food to go up. Add to that, the reduction in competition… so enjoy paying £2000 for an economy ticket to JFK. Personally, I see the survival of VS more important to the UK economy than Betty’s cupcakes down the road.

    As for Branson… do you think he actually has $4.6Bn liquid? Course not. And whilst he might not UK tax on his personal income, his business’ (VS) pay UK tax on their incomes, and so do their employees.

    What gets me the most is that EasyJet (and BA?) have secured £600m of government funding – yet how many of their shareholders are millionaires paying zero UK tax? Stellios was paid a £60m dividend earlier this year yet the irresponsible UK media isn’t targeting him or the rest of the EasyJet shareholders. Branson is a single shareholder so an easy target… if only he ran some charities too.

    • Marcw says:

      You must be joking. VS survival more important to British economy… UK airports moved around 290 million passengers. About 6 millions were transported by VS. In essence, VS is negligible… And remember, numbers don’t lie!

    • J says:

      Good reasoned analysis. Much of the comment here seems to be motivated by people with a dislike of Branson based on what they’ve read in the tabloids or by people who simply don’t like Virgin as an airline very much because they prefer the ME3 or Cathay Pacific – none are good reasons to throw away a British company struggling during an unprecedented crisis. As has been pointed out many times too, BA will also inevitably ask for state aid too (they just want VS to go out of business first).

      • Lady London says:

        I’m against aiding BA too. For different reasons. They have a history of dirty tricks and they haven’t got clean hands on the way they’ve organised themselves and their website deliberately so as to deny customers refunds they are entitled to.

        I literally don’t care if BA goes bust as well as VS. I doubt BA will though. I’ve changed my mind on this over time and listening to people here to reach this conclusion now.

        • J says:

          But as you know there is no chance of a BA or Lufthansa, Air France etc going bust. So VS goes and that just leaves BA with all their history of misbehaviour and poor service more powerful.

          • Sean says:

            Not necessarily as any bailout of BA may well require the break up of IAG – UK Govt would not support a spanish company.

          • Rhys says:

            Unless UK and Spanish governments co-operate as the Dutch and French have done for AF-KLM.

          • Rob says:

            If Virgin goes bust, the AA/BA joint venture is toast. That will be a big enough blow.

          • Lady London says:

            We’ll find other ways to limit abuses by BA.

            Funding an airline that has a consistent long history of near-faikure and hasn’t made any effort to pay a fair rate if corporate tax is not ever going to achieve this.

            Have you ever put an old dog to sleep when he developed a new condition which meant no hope, when he already before that had been struggling and barely making it for years? It’s the humane thing to all parties.

            We’ll deal with British Airways later if the government and its advisers have any sense.

            The issues in Australia are different. Here in Europe we have a bigger market with more supply options.

          • J says:

            What like the German govt has with Lufthansa? They get away with more than BA.

    • insider says:

      Virgin is a tiny part of capacity into the UK – it wouldn’t make much of a dent on cargo (which is overcapacitied in normal times anyway) and just how many competitors are there on New York?

      Easyjet has accessed money because it was investment grade pre-Covid. Virgin didn’t have such a rating, presumably because it couldn’t, so therefore in the eyes of the government, it’s a much riskier bet to lend money to. This money is just a short (1-year) bridge to normal financing I believe, so understandably, the government wants to minismise its exposure.

    • Reeferman says:

      The assertion that 36% of UK food arrives in the belly of an aircraft is very wrong.
      In terms of tonnes, I would estimate that it is less than 1% – with sea freight and then trucking (including short-sea) being the main transportation methods

    • Ken says:

      36% of food arrives by air?

      What utter bollocks.

      My guesstimate would be you are out by a factor of 100.

      • Lady London says:

        perhaps by value. 36% could just be caviar for Lufthansa, fresh airfreighted Spargel for London-resident Germans and very out of season strawberries and a few dried guavas.

    • Ken says:

      Dividends are paid out of taxed corporate profits.
      EasyJet paid £57m in corporation tax in 2017/18 alone.

      This is more than Virgin Atlantic have paid in their entire history.

      No apologist for Stelios but he wasn’t born here, and has never been tax resident here.
      His companies largely don’t appear to use convoluted tax avoidance measures courtesy of the British Virgin Islands.
      I’d be confident of EasyJet making profits in 3 or 4 years time.
      VS – well history shows us they are unlikely to reap long term consistent profits.

      • Rob says:

        Come on Ken, time to ‘fess up. Are you paid by BA to post anti-Virgin stuff on social media? Many big companies do pay people very quietly to disparage their competition online, it is very common (and quite a cushy job by all accounts).

        Virtually all of your HFP contributions have been knocking Virgin. Only one comment, consisting of the word ‘Yes’, could be classed as not complaining.

        You also disguise your IP address for no good reason which means that we cannot identify exactly where you are.

        • ken says:

          No

          • ken says:

            And to expand, the service on Virgin Atlantic was great, and domestic competition in Australia was dire 30 years ago.

            Equally the West Coast Virgin train service was brilliant for almost 20 years (after a couple of years teething problems).

            I just think government support should always be a safety net not a hammock.

            If Branson loaned Virgin say £300m and the government matched it, I probably wouldn’t have too much of a problem – as long as $200m didn’t go straight into Delta’s paws.

            If IAG/BA come begging, I expect the shareholders to get tapped up first.
            Whatever you say about the various bank bailouts, we can’t say that the shareholders didn’t bare any pain.

            A couple of questions for you.

            1) Do you think £500m is enough ?

            2) Do you think RB couldn’t raise £300m against various other stakes or royalty streams ?

            3) Do you think there is a place for Virgin in a sea of ex flag carriers, middle east 3 & low cost airlines. My gut feeling is that they have had their day.

          • Rob says:

            The banks were insolvent and the shares were worth nothing without Government support – the shareholders were bailed out because they should have received nothing. The big slump happened before the bailout.

            Look at Lufthansa now. It is insolvent. The Citi report from last week, which I summarised on Saturday, made it clear. It probably shouldn’t even still be trading under Company Law. However, it still has a market value of €4 billion as opposed to nothing. This is purely because the market expects a bailout and that bailout is, implicitly, supporting the shareholders now to the tune of €4 billion.

        • Doug M says:

          I like to slate Virgin. Part of it is an irrational dislike of some of its customers, a very rational dislike of billionaires, and that really annoying flip over seat which so many give a pass to whilst being merciless to the CW seat. It’s also that so much about Virgin, and the reporting of it, appears smug and very pleased with itself. It think it’s the Manchester United of airlines, when really it’s QPR.
          A lot of that maybe the Branson inspired image/marketing, which of course is now massively biting it in the arse.
          Where does one get a social media rubbisher job, because for companies I don’t like I’ll do it on the cheap, rubbishing telecom companies I’ll do for free.

        • avstar says:

          haha chapeaux rob!

          to quote finance speak, there’s a fair amount of commentators who BTL are talking their book too

        • Alex Cruz says:

          Rob, it seems we both have an equal dislike for our customers, or as I like to call them, ‘self loading freight’. I like how you also rightly think you are God’s gift to the world, and your readership are just ignorant plebs. Fair play on catching my plant though, we all know Branson is paying you so I thought I had to balance the books.

          Also I see you’ve started surveillance on your readership, congrats! I hadn’t thought of that, but you’ve obviously read more about the true virtues of the Chinese state.

        • Binks says:

          Lol …. time to own up 😎

          Has someone been rumbled 🎈

  • Andrew Mew says:

    In January I paid for a flight to South Africa.
    Will I get my money back if Virgin goes into administration Or is bought will my tickets still be valid.

    • Doug M says:

      No one can answer the question because administration could mean several things. If you paid on a credit card as you should have then they’re jointly responsible and have to either refund you, or buy you a comparable ticket on another airline. This protection is usually referred to as S75.

      • Lady London says:

        I’m feeling quite miffed. I’ve done a much better job of bashing Virgin than Ken has and yet he’s the one being accused of being a professional :-(.

  • Brian says:

    Like a lot of business directors once the money stops comming in to their pockets. They take the bonuses and cut and run without a care for their staff and customers.

  • Chris H says:

    I have decided that reading the comments on this page is like watching the news. When I watch the news I have to watch it for hours just to see ONE thing I have not seen before. They go over the same ground again and again, and when they get fed up with that someone comments on the things we have been told over and over again. And all they have to say is “We do not known yet”.
    With Virgin “we do not known yet”.
    As for the continuing hate mail over Branson, he is only doing what 90% plus of all the other companies and millionaires are doing who are able to do it, and only doing it because the tax laws allow it. Instead of bombasting him in these pages, lobby the government to change the laws to prevent it.
    For those of you who run your own businesses, please be honest now, do you take every opportunity to reduce your tax burden? Or are you generous enough to say “No, I will pay as much as I can because I am a nice guy” ???? Yes, the owners should do as much as they can to protect their own businesses. The rich are in a better position than the poor. But Branson is not in the minority here. Just look at the footballers. How many of them are using their own wealth to secure the future of the groundsmen etc that maintain their clubs?? Some have taken pay cuts, some are supporting charities, but if they are not playing, why are they being paid more than the furlough maximum? The staff aren’t.
    I have now added to the drivel from so many people, and probably repeated some stuff too. I apologise to you all for doing this. I love reading these pages, and getting good advice. I just wish it was easier to trawl through everything to find it!

    • James says:

      + 1 many, many times over 🙂

    • Johnny Tabasco says:

      Agree with all that bar the pop at footballers who are a very easy and convenient target.

      But yes there really are at lot of people posting on here who really think they know what they are talking about and jumping to some pretty hefty conclusions without anywhere near the full picture.

      Not as many who keep asking Rob the same questions though!

    • Ken says:

      It’s simply delusional to say that small and medium business have remotely the same access to tax avoidance as Branson .
      Non- residency, manipulation of royalty payments , transfer pricing and debt payments simply don’t exist.

      And some people do pay more than you’d expect. Denise Coates of B365 took £220m as a salary rather than a dividend in 2018

      • J says:

        Not the best example given the devastation and enormous social costs caused by the gambling industry.

      • Chris H says:

        I was not trying to say or even imply that small businesses have the same access to tax avoidance. I was trying to say that if the system allows it, then we should not criminalise them for doing it. Human nature, let alone business sense, says keep it where we can, rather than give it to the government to spend. In small or large ways, most if not all businesses do it. I claim for everything I can too. If it is wrong, then the government is responsible for allowing it.

      • Rob says:

        Yes they do. Contractors were milking it for years, as were small businesses who exploited the dividends vs income tax trade off. In my banking days good old HSBC was happy for us to sign up for every tax avoidance scheme under the sun and was happy to pick up the NI tab if they went wrong.

        I could do it myself – register HFP in a country with no corporation tax, leave the money outside the UK and live off savings, and then either use the cash for property abroad or leave the UK for 5 years later in life and repatriate it all tax free. Any small business can move their IP into an overseas subsidiary and licence it back – the cost is peanuts.

        • Lady London says:

          I had a huge laugh this week when the head of IAPSE (association of the self-employed and small Ltd company directors) was trying to tell the government their members only pay themselves a very small proportion of their salary through PAYE, and the rest as dividends, to maintain “agility” and it had nothing to do with reducing NI and PAYE tax costs.

          Thus is because having paid themselves very little is PAYE, apparently these people think the government should allow them to receive the amount they received as dividends our if their companies, as part of furlough support.

          Even as a sole Director of a Ltd myself I choked on my tea when I heard this guy’s brass neck. You PAYEs your money and you take your choice so far as furlough is concerned – only PAYE and reported self-employment income should be eligible.

    • luckyjim says:

      I think you mean ‘lambasting him’ rather than ‘bombasting him’.

      • mr_jetlag says:

        Lambast the plastic, bombastic Branson – fantastic.

        And 10000 internet points Chris H. I am feeling definite Groundhog day vibes on every Virgin post except instead of waking up every day trying to shag Andie McDowell it’s the same argument on VS bailouts and whether one should move their miles from VS.

    • Chrisasaurus says:

      So answer this: to a man with a (paper) net worth of >4Bn tell me whether his rampant tax avoidance has as much benefit to him as it does to the treasury.

      If I as small business owner run a company car I dont really need because the BIK contribution is lower than the cost of leasing or depreciating a car personally then I wonder up saving myself a tiny percentage of my monthly salary so I have enough extra cash for a weekend away every couple of months (figures are approximate, your weekends may vary)

      When Beardy does it hes taking literally millions out of the public purse and for what? He needs that.extra money you think? You think it has a significant impact on his disposable income, means the difference between going away or not a couple of extra times a year?

      Or is it pure selfish greed, hoarding money he doesnt need and cannot possibly spend?

      Just because the tax system allows it (and nobody doubts that it does and only a few think it shouldn’t be fixed) doesn’t make it morally reprehensible.

    • Anna says:

      Lambasting, not bombasting (I don’t think that’s even a word!) This thread might have reached it’s natural end but my determination to root out bad spelling and grammar never will.

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

The UK's biggest frequent flyer website uses cookies, which you can block via your browser settings. Continuing implies your consent to this policy. Our privacy policy is here.