EasyJet moved closer to a change in ownership after its board signalled support for a £6.90-a-share proposal from US investment firm Castlelake, reported in the headline terms as worth £5.2 billion. The board said it would be inclined to recommend a firm offer at that price to shareholders. Other transaction reporting valued the proposal at about £5.5 billion and described it as a 73% premium to easyJet’s undisturbed share price, while the earlier £5.2 billion figure reflects a separate reported valuation. The improved terms marked a shift after easyJet had rejected Castlelake’s earlier approaches as inadequate, once describing one as an attempt to buy the airline “on the cheap.”
Castlelake’s pursuit began to emerge publicly on 29 May 2026. Its third approach, announced on 20 June at 625 pence a share, was valued at about £4.7 billion; a subsequent proposal was reported at 650 pence a share, or around £4.9 billion. The 690-pence proposal was a large increase. Information from the transaction account, Castlelake held a 2.14% stake in easyJet and proposed an ownership structure involving EU nationals Peter Bellew, a former easyJet and Ryanair executive, and Mark Breen, an aerospace consultant. Under the plan, they would control an EU-based company holding the relevant majority stake. The arrangement was intended to address EU nationality and control requirements for airlines seeking to retain traffic rights within the bloc.
When the board first signalled support, Castlelake had until 17:00 BST on 3 August to say whether it intended to proceed or withdraw. Any firm offer would still require shareholder approval and satisfaction of regulatory conditions. The subsequent bidding contest produced a higher proposal from Apollo: on 8 July it offered 715 pence a share, valuing easyJet at about £5.7 billion and representing an 81% premium to the undisturbed share price. EasyJet’s board switched its support to Apollo’s offer, and Castlelake withdrew on 6 August. The Castlelake proposal did not result in an acquisition. Corporate transactions lawyer Tom Mercer of Ashurst said the Castlelake process “seems ultimately to have enabled EasyJet to secure a recommended offer from a competing bidder, Apollo.” He also described the emergence of a rival bid as “interloper risk.”
Headquartered in Luton, easyJet is one of Europe’s largest low-cost carriers. The article’s reported figures put its workforce at more than 19,000, its network at around 1,200 routes across 35 countries and its fleet at more than 350 aircraft. It also holds take-off and landing slots at major airports, including Gatwick and Paris Charles de Gaulle. Former aviation executive John Strickland has pointed to the airline’s brand and strategic airport positions, supported by its fleet, as factors that make it attractive to investors. Each successive bid raised the price available to shareholders, culminating in Apollo’s 715-pence offer after Castlelake’s 625-pence approach and later 690-pence proposal. Apollo also secured strong irrevocable commitments from easyJet’s founder.
Before Apollo’s competing proposal emerged, easyJet shares had closed at £5.58 on the Friday cited in the takeover coverage, after falling by more than 30% over the preceding year. The article linked that pressure partly to the effect of the US-Israel conflict with Iran on travel-sector sentiment. Castlelake, which manages assets reported at $36 billion (£27.3 billion), had said it respected easyJet and intended to support its growth and ability to recover. The bidding contest shifted the immediate focus from Castlelake’s proposed ownership structure to Apollo’s higher offer, while leaving the airline’s longer-term ownership dependent on the outcome of the takeover process.
EU airline ownership rules require carriers operating within the bloc to meet nationality and control requirements, a particularly impressive issue for UK-based airlines after Brexit. For easyJet, meeting those requirements is basic to retaining eligibility to exercise traffic rights within the EU. Castlelake’s proposed arrangement involving Bellew and Breen was presented as a way to address the issue, not as a completed regulatory determination. The contest highlighted how ownership conditions can shape a European airline takeover, alongside the value of its fleet and airport slots, with its route network also in play.
