u/LaksaTang

Tbh this whole SIA-Air India situation feels like one of those cases where people act surprised now, but a lot of us saw it coming quite early.

Even when the deal was first announced, the pushback wasn’t about racism or “anti-India sentiment”. It was just basic finance and pattern recognition.

Air India has been loss-making for years, with operational issues, legacy inefficiencies, and a huge turnaround problem after privatisation. That’s not opinion, that’s their track record. Now they’ve reportedly racked up over US$2.4 billion in losses and are asking shareholders like SIA and Tata for more funding.

So when people questioned the investment, it wasn’t “you all biased”. It was more like we’ve seen this kind of situation before. National carriers with deep structural issues don’t just turn around because you inject money. Usually they burn cash for quite a while first.

The concerns were always quite straightforward:
Every dollar SIA puts into Air India is a dollar not going elsewhere
SIA already has a mixed track record with overseas investments like Ansett and Virgin
Now you’re looking at an even more complex turnaround case

Of course, the positive take is that India is a huge growth market and having a foothold there could pay off long term. That’s fair. But that alone doesn’t make it a good investment. It just means it’s high risk and takes time.

Feels like a lot of regular people were just applying common sense:
Good market doesn’t mean good investment
Big population doesn’t mean profitable airline

Finance isn’t about narratives. It’s about recognising patterns, and Air India fits a pretty familiar one.

Now it’s just a question of whether SIA can actually make it work this time, or if it ends up being another case of throwing good money after bad.

Man gets jail for sending pork slices to 7 mosques