Why are Vietnam's property developers building airlines?

In brief: Vietnam's three major private airlines, Vietjet, Bamboo Airways and Sun PhuQuoc Airways, all trace back to property or resort developers, a pattern found at unusual density in Southeast Asia. The economics help explain why. Vietnam's favourable airline cost structure makes vertical ownership of fuel, ground handling and airport infrastructure particularly valuable to a developer building an airline from scratch.

The airline can then become a structural loss leader for the wider group, bringing travellers into resorts, hotels and attractions where the parent captures more of the value. Developers manufacture that demand through OTA, travel agency and GSA partnerships in source markets, often timing new connectivity around government-led destination development, before reinvesting the resulting growth into more rooms, routes and infrastructure.

Bamboo Airways shows where the model can break. Its parent company's financial crisis cut off the capital needed to keep the airline operating, while its reliance on external suppliers left it with less control over key aviation costs. Sun PhuQuoc Airways is now testing a more integrated version of the model, making its expansion since November 2025 a useful case study in whether an airline can create value across a property group's balance sheet while remaining financially sustainable itself.

Access the full analysis as a PDF or continue reading below:

Why are Vietnams property developers building airlines.pdf

Download PDF • 1.71MB

Sun Phu Quoc Airways becomes Vietnam’s newest airline owned by Sun Group with new expansion plans laid out and widebody orders announced earlier this year. The Phu Quoc based airline also has 20 Boeing 787 confirmed orders and new international expansion plans for an island that had 8 million visitors last year. But across, its major private competitors such as Vietjet and Bamboo Airways, there’s a common underlying pattern. Each of them is owned by a conglomerate that has real estate or resort business interests.

Vietjet Air was built inside Sovico Holdings, a group whose other big businesses are banking (HD Bank) and real estate, including a major township development project outside Hanoi called Mailand. Bamboo Airways was funded by the FLC group, a developer known for building golf resorts and villa complexes across the Vietnamese coastline. Now Sun PhuQuoc belongs to Sun Group, whose core business is luxury resorts, and which has said outright that the airline exists to “complete” its resort ecosystem on Phu Quoc Island.

As a result, each of the three airlines have the same repeated move, where a developer builds an airline, then uses the airline to shape demand around assets it already owns.

This pattern is unique to Vietnam. Across Vietnam’s neighbouts, Indonesia’s biggest carrier Lion Air for example came out from a trading business, Philippines’ Cebu Pacific came from a conglomerate with retail and consumer groups, instead of property. Thailand’s private carriers are mostly state-linked or foreign joint ventures, making Vietnam the outlier.

That creates a different economic logic for aviation. The airline can bring travellers into destinations where the parent already owns hotels, resorts and other assets. More visitors can increase occupancy, tourism spending and the value of the wider destination, while partnerships with OTAs, travel agencies and other distribution channels help direct those travellers into the group's ecosystem.

Why does owning an airline have a unique economic case

When comparing the cost structure of Vietnamese airlines with their Asian counterparts, it shows why aviation can look unusually attractive to a developer-backed conglomerate. On a representative 800-1200km domestic route, Vietnam’s airlines show a higher headline margin that comparable carriers in India, Indonesia and China with fuel and ground handling accounting for a relatively small share of the fare.

Figure 1. Vietnam's headline margin advantage is a function of who owns the fuel and ground handling layers, not of generally cheaper inputs. Representative cost structure on an 800 to 1,200 km domestic route.

That margin advantage comes from two layers of the airline cost base- fuel and ground handling. Fuel sits at 32 percent of the fare in Vietnam and ground handling is just 6 percent. Vietnam Airlines, the state-linked national carrier, Vietnam Airlines Group spent decades building control over both fuel and ground handling, through Skypec and VIAGS respectively. A new entrant has to buy those services from the existing market or develop its own equivalents. Vertical ownership therefore changes the economics of entry, especially for a conglomerate with the capital base to build those layers alongside the airline.

Fuel becomes leverage rather than inheritance

On fuel, Vietjet took a middle path rather than full ownership. It never built its own supplier. Instead, it buys from several suppliers at once, including Skypec, Petrolimex, and international trader World Fuel Services. This multi-supplier structure increases its negotiation position relative to a new airline that is tied to a single procurement channel. Its relationship with Petrolimex has also extended into sustainable aviation fuel, reflecting how its procurement network has expanded alongside its scale. The pattern is also reportedly similar across Sun Phu Quoc Airways as well.

Sun Phu Quoc being a new airline also buys from the established fuel suppliers as well. However, Vietjet’s position reflects years of growth inside the existing system, where scale translates into bargaining power across suppliers. Sun PhuQuoc begins without that accumulated position and relies on standard market procurement. Its cost base will therefore track fuel markets more directly unless it develops similar leverage over time.

Additionally, Vietnam Airlines is auctioning up to 49 percent of Skypec as part of its own restructuring, with no buyer named as of mid-2026 and the process running into 2027. If Sun an affiliate of an airline secures a stake, fuel would move from an exposed cost line toward a controlled layer of the aviation stack.

Ground handling and airport management: the layers entrants can build

Ground handling is more straightforward to as an in-house service line. Vietjet established Vietjet Ground Services and expanded it into a broader ground-handling business. The unit now provides passenger, baggage and ramp services across multiple airports and also sells services to other airlines.

Sun Group is building in the same direction. It has established Sun Phu Quoc Ground Services and has outlined plans for a wider aviation ecosystem covering ground handling, maintenance, catering, logistics and training. Vietjet’s capability reflects years of operational scaling and it’s evolution shows how operational scale can be converted into control over cost layers. On the other hand, Sun Group is in the early stages of building equivalent infrastructure.

Additionally, Sun Group also operates at a different level of infrastructure integration through its role at Phu Quoc International Airport. Sun Airport Corporation assumed management and operation of the airport on January 1, 2026, following the transfer of infrastructure assets in November 2025. Sun Group was also selected as the principal investor in the airport’s expansion, which is being accelerated ahead of APEC 2027.

This structure places airline operations, airport management and destination development within the same corporate group. Capacity planning, passenger flows and infrastructure investment can be aligned across those components. A March 2026 partnership with Changi Airports International extends this framework, with CAI supporting airport development, operations and international connectivity.

The calculation behind the airline

If the airline is not necessarily the most profitable asset in the group, why build it at all? The answer is that the airline can function as a structural loss leader: it carries passengers into resorts, hotels and other assets where the parent can capture the more lucrative parts of the trip. The favourable airline economics still matter because they determine how expensive that traffic is to generate, but the return does not have to appear on the airline's own balance sheet. It can appear across the parent group's hotels, attractions, land and future developments.

Figure 2. The airline is one stage in a loop that begins with demand recruited in source markets and ends with capital reinvested into more rooms and routes.

The loop starts with an asset the developer already owns and needs to fill. It then works backwards from that asset: identify the traveller, build the route that can bring them there, recruit that traveller in the source market, and keep as much of the resulting spend inside the same ecosystem as possible. Four parts of the model make that loop work.

First: manufacture demand for land already owned

A resort developer needs passengers going to a specific destination where it has already invested in hotels, villas, golf courses or attractions. That is why the demand pipeline sits at the centre of the model. The airline creates the physical connection, but the parent group also has to create the reason to travel.

Bamboo Airways did this through South Korea. It hired a Seoul-based agency to target Korean golfers and sold combined flight-and-resort packages to FLC's golf properties for around $500, roughly half the cost of booking the flight and golf separately. FLC's hotel arm also partnered with HanaTour to direct Korean tourists into its resorts. The airline was therefore not just selling seats to South Korea; it was helping turn Korean demand into customers for FLC's own properties.

Sun Group is building the same pipeline around Phu Quoc. Its partnership with Trip . com Sun Group's resorts and attractions across South Korea, China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Thailand, Singapore, India and Japan. It has also partnered with Visa on a booking and payment platform targeting these source markets. Sun PhuQuoc Airways has added country-level sales partners such as Minar Travels in India and Discover the World in Singapore to reach travel agencies, corporate accounts and MICE demand.

Vietjet applies the same principle across a broader portfolio. Its work with provincial tourism authorities, including its promotion of Nha Trang with Khanh Hoa's tourism authority, shows how the airline can be used alongside destination marketing to stimulate traffic into places where the wider group has interests.

The common mechanism is therefore building an airline after identifying the demand that the underlying property assets need, then going into those source markets to recruit it.

Second: build the connectivity around the asset

Once the developer knows which traveller it wants, the airline becomes the mechanism for shaping how that traveller reaches the destination.

That creates a different calculation from relying entirely on third-party airlines. An outside carrier will add capacity when the route works for the airline's own network economics. A developer-owned airline can add capacity because the flight also supports the economics of the resort at the other end.

Sun PhuQuoc is the clearest example. Sun Group is simultaneously developing the resort ecosystem on Phu Quoc, operating Sun PhuQuoc Airways and managing Phu Quoc International Airport. Sun Airport Corporation assumed management and operation of the airport in January 2026, while Sun Group is the principal investor in its expansion ahead of APEC 2027.

The government calendar matters here because it compresses the development timeline. APEC creates a fixed date around which the airport, airline and destination can be scaled. But the commercial calculation has to extend beyond the summit. Sun Group's partnerships with travel agencies, OTAs and MICE distributors are aimed at creating repeatable demand after the event rather than relying on one week of traffic.

The airline therefore becomes part of the destination's development timetable. Routes, airport capacity and resort capacity can be expanded together rather than sequentially.

Third: capture more of the trip inside the same ecosystem

Getting the traveller to the destination is only the first step. The developer also wants to capture more of what that traveller spends once they arrive.

That is where the airline becomes more valuable than a simple distribution partnership. The group can coordinate flight schedules with resort demand, bundle flights with accommodation or attractions, and connect the passenger journey with the rest of its tourism offering.

Sun Group's model is already moving in this direction. The airline sits alongside the group's resorts and attractions, while its airport operation controls another stage of the journey. The group's partnerships with Trip.com and Visa extend the ecosystem into booking and payment, while local sales partners provide access to the traveller before the flight is even booked. Bamboo's Korean golf packages showed the same mechanism in a simpler form. The flight was bundled with the golf product because the commercial objective was not to maximise the value of the airline ticket in isolation. It was to move a customer into an FLC-owned tourism asset.

This connects to the structural loss-leader strategy earlier analysed. The airline can accept a lower return on the seat if that seat creates a more valuable customer for the hotel, golf course, attraction or resort.

Fourth: the value created feeds the next investment

Once the group controls more of the journey, the economic benefit extends beyond the airline's own revenue. More passengers mean more hotel occupancy, more spending across attractions and restaurants, and greater utilisation of the destination infrastructure the parent has already funded. If those flows persist, they strengthen the economics of adding more rooms, attractions, airport capacity and routes.

This is also why the airline can be strategically useful before the property portfolio has reached maturity. A large aircraft order, new international routes and an expanding airport can signal that the developer intends to build the destination at scale, helping align government, infrastructure and commercial partners around that ambition.

Sun PhuQuoc's expansion illustrates the scale of the bet. The airline launched in November 2025 and quickly moved into international expansion, while Sun Group was simultaneously expanding the airport and its resort portfolio. The aviation investment is therefore being made alongside the destination investment rather than after it.

The loop thus starts with this- the developer owns the asset, identifies the traveller it needs, creates the connectivity to bring that traveller in, recruits demand in the source market, and captures more of the resulting spending inside its own ecosystem. The value created then supports the case for expanding the destination and its connectivity further.

However, None of the four reasons above work without the underlying demand being there to catch.

Figure 3. Vietnam's resort markets collapsed together and recovered together, and the recovery broke through the pre-pandemic trend rather than returning to it. Visitors and international arrivals from 2019 to 2025

The demand curve explains why these groups are moving now. Vietnam received nearly 21.2 million international visitors in 2025, 17.8% above the 2019 pre-pandemic level, with 84.3% arriving by air. China and South Korea alone accounted for around 9.6 million visitors, while India reached roughly 750,000.

The recovery is also visible in the destinations themselves. Phu Quoc, Da Nang and Khanh Hoa all collapsed during Covid and have since recovered, while the source-market partnerships being built by Sun Group, Bamboo and Vietjet are concentrated in the same Asian markets driving that recovery.

That makes the partnerships more than a marketing exercise. They show where the developers believe the next passengers will come from. The tourism curve has moved beyond simply recovering lost demand, and the airline is being built to capture the growth that sits above it.

The loop is therefore becoming self-reinforcing: more source-market demand supports more flights, more flights support more resort occupancy, and higher occupancy strengthens the case for more rooms, attractions, airport capacity and routes.

Why did similar property groups choose different airline models?

The same developer-airline model produced different airline products because the parent groups were trying to fill different assets with different customers. Vietjet was built as a mass-market low-cost carrier, Bamboo launched as a hybrid, and Sun PhuQuoc is being built as a resort airline with economy and business class.

Vietjet's role fits Sovico's broader portfolio. Sovico is a diversified conglomerate spanning banking, energy and real estate, so Vietjet benefits from moving large numbers of price-sensitive passengers across a broad network. Its model is built around low fares, high utilisation and ancillary revenue, giving the group a volume engine rather than a carrier designed around one resort destination.

Sun Group has a more concentrated commercial need. Its core businesses are resorts, hotels and attractions, so Sun PhuQuoc needs to bring higher-value travellers to specific destinations where the group has already invested heavily. That is reflected in its "resort airline" positioning, with economy and business class designed to make the journey part of the holiday experience. While APEC 2027 helps explain the timing, but the product is designed to outlast the event. Sun PhuQuoc is therefore targeting international leisure, MICE and premium traffic from markets including South Korea, Central Asia and Australia, while its A330s entering service from September 2026 will offer Premium and fully-flat Business Class cabins. The 787-9s are scheduled to follow from 2031, extending the airline's long-haul ambitions.

Bamboo Airways took a different route when it launched in 2019. FLC positioned it as a hybrid carrier, combining low-cost features with traditional full-service elements, including three cabin products, business class and more flexible service options while keeping entry-level fares competitive with low-cost carriers. That model fitted FLC's resort business. The group could use low fares to stimulate traffic while retaining the service and product features needed to package flights with its hotels and golf resorts. Bamboo's flight-and-resort packages made the connection explicit, which was turning the airline into part of the tourism product rather than relying on the ticket itself to capture the entire return.

Overall, the three airlines therefore reflect three different commercial requirements within the same broader model. Vietjet was built for volume, Sun PhuQuoc for higher-value destination traffic, and Bamboo's hybrid model was designed to stimulate resort demand while retaining enough full-service features to support the wider FLC product.

Bamboo Airways collapse as the caution

The developer-airline model has one structural vulnerability. It is that the airline can depend on the parent for capital even when the underlying tourism strategy is sound. Bamboo Airways is the clearest example of this. FLC built Bamboo around its hotels, golf courses and resorts, but did not build the same vertical control over aviation inputs. The airline relied on external suppliers for fuel and ground handling rather than developing subsidiaries like Vietjet Ground Services or Sun PhuQuoc Ground Services. By mid-2026, Bamboo had accumulated billions of dong in unpaid ground-handling and fuel bills, alongside wider debts that had already pushed its equity deeply negative.

The bigger problem came from the parent. When FLC founder Trinh Van Quyet was arrested in 2022 and the group's finances came under pressure, the capital supporting Bamboo was disrupted. A new investor took over in 2023 and FLC regained control in 2026, but the airline never rebuilt its financial base. Lessors subsequently repossessed aircraft over unpaid bills, and by August 2026 Bamboo had stopped selling scheduled domestic tickets. Vietnam's aviation market continued growing at 10.7% throughout this period.

Bamboo’s collapse makes Sun Group's approach important. Sun PhuQuoc is building the opposite structure. Ground handling is being brought inside the group, the airport is under Sun's management, and the group is exploring further control over fuel through the potential Skypec stake sale. The objective is to make more of the costs and infrastructure behind each passenger controllable within the same ecosystem.

But vertical integration does not remove the capital risk. It can lower the cost of serving a passenger and give the parent more control over the economics, while the parent still has to fund aircraft, operations and expansion until those passengers arrive.

That is the risk Sun PhuQuoc now has to manage. Its widebody ambitions are substantial relative to Phu Quoc's current traffic base, so aircraft deliveries, fuel costs and premium demand will have to scale together. Sun Group enters with a stronger balance sheet and much deeper infrastructure integration than FLC had, but the model still depends on keeping those three pieces aligned.

Closing thoughts

Vietnam's developer-airline pattern comes down to where the economics of a trip are captured. Vietjet built a mass-market airline around scale and supplier leverage. Sun Group is building a more vertically integrated airline, airport and resort ecosystem around higher-value passengers. Bamboo showed the vulnerability in the model when the parent company came under financial stress while the airline remained dependent on external suppliers.

Sun Group is now testing the model at its most integrated. It controls the destination, operates the airport, is building its own ground-handling operation, is expanding its international distribution network and has committed to a widebody fleet aimed at bringing higher-value travellers to Phu Quoc. The next question is whether the traffic generated by those investments can grow quickly enough to support the infrastructure being built around them.

Two indicators will show how the model develops. The outcome of the Skypec stake sale will show whether Sun can bring fuel further inside its aviation ecosystem, while the pace of widebody deliveries will show whether premium and MICE demand is developing quickly enough to support the fleet.

The airline can generate value across the group's hotels, resorts, attractions and land. Its own financial performance still sets the cost of generating that traffic, while the wider group captures the value created when those passengers arrive. Sun PhuQuoc is now the clearest test of whether Vietnam's developer-airline model can turn that closed loop into a durable business.

Author’s Note and About Aeraltus

This analysis is based on public information including Vietnamese court records from the Trinh Van Quyet appellate proceedings, Airports Corporation of Vietnam consolidated financial statements, Vietnam National Authority of Tourism arrival statistics, provincial tourism department data from Da Nang, Phu Quoc and Khanh Hoa, carrier and conglomerate corporate disclosures, sell-side airline cost research, and Aeraltus prior analysis. Where Vietnamese-language primary sources were used, they are identified in the source list. Aeraltus does not hold a position in Sun Group, Sovico Holdings, FLC Group, Vietnam Airlines, or any airline named in this analysis.

Aeraltus produces structural aviation analysis and intelligence on emerging markets across Asia and Africa. Custom analysis is available for institutional investors, airline strategy teams, lessors and corporate development groups. Contact info@aeraltus.com.

Sources

For a full list of sources read the PDF below