Virgin name clash delays relaunch

ANDREW GORRIE/The Dominion Post

RENAMING: Virgin Blue has delayed the relaunch of the airline to early next year as it deals with a dispute with its largest shareholder.

Relevant offers

World

Greece strikes bailout deal Gunns keen for NZ investment to fire up mill Telstra profit soars 23 pct on mobiles Groupon user growth slows News Corp pays latest hacking settlements Kiwi billionaire takes stake in Aussie timber firm BHP profit goes backwards as costs rise Yahoo chairman exits, review drags on Rupert Murdoch's mum turns 103 Greek parties delay bailout talks despite EU threats

Virgin Blue has delayed the relaunch of the airline to early next year as it deals with a dispute with its largest shareholder, Sir Richard Branson, over plans by the Australian offshoot to own the Virgin name.

The aviation industry had been expecting Virgin's new chief executive, John Borghetti, to use the airline's 10th anniversary in August to relaunch the airline.

The V marque rather than the entire Virgin name is most likely to emerge as the one that will unite Virgin Blue's four carriers - Virgin Blue, the New Zealand-based Pacific Blue, Polynesia Blue and V Australia - under one brand.

But Virgin Blue and Sir Richard's British-based Virgin Group - which is a 26 per cent shareholder in the Australian airline - have yet to resolve a long-running dispute over ownership of both the V and Virgin names.

Last year, Virgin Enterprises blocked Virgin Blue's bid to trademark V Australia - the name for its trans-Pacific carrier.

An agreement with Singapore Airlines that prevents Virgin Blue from using the Virgin name in this region frustrates executives because they are unable to fully exploit the Virgin brand on the Australian carrier's planes flying overseas, such as V Australia.

Far from being resolved at the end of the year - as claimed by both parties - the matter has escalated.

The British knight's lawyers have taken exception to Virgin Blue's attempts to trademark the name V Pacific and the logo of a large V with the Southern Cross on it.

Virgin Blue declined to comment on the dispute and the delay of the relaunch, which a company source confirmed, though that person played down the stoush over the brand name.

Intellectual property lawyers say the dispute is a sign of a deeper rift between the two companies. A close observer of the case, lawyer Trevor Choy, questioned why they had to get lawyers involved if it was just a simple internal dispute.

"That they have had to go through a very public opposition procedure ... shows there is a lack of trust of some seriousness there. It's as if we are talking about two separate and rival corporate giants fighting it out over a name," he said.

A Virgin Group spokesman, Nick Fox, said an agreement over the usage of the brand names would be reached at an unspecified date and that the delay was due to the large volume of licensee contracts dealt with by a single office in London.

''There were just differences over process, that is all, and we expect it to be sorted out within the next few months,'' Mr Fox said.

''The new management there are looking at it as a priority.''

Mr Fox also said Virgin Blue was ''most likely'' to opt for the V name and that the trademark would reside with Sir Richard, who would then licence it back to Virgin Blue for a fee.

Mr Choy said the argument most likely centred on an attempt by former Virgin Blue boss Brett Godfrey to circumvent the normal licensing agreements Virgin HQ imposed on its partners.

Virgin Group collects up to £40 million ($8 million) annually from companies using the Virgin name.

- © Fairfax NZ News