Virgin Australia concerns
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet again an alternate point of view potentially at odds with your own and the author is accused of being some form of management...
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet again an alternate point of view potentially at odds with your own and the author is accused of being some form of management...
The capital injection you are referring occurred as new shares issued.
That's my point exactly. He used that capital injection to pay down debt, but is claiming that the paying down of the debt has been a result of normal business. If he was able to pay down debt from normal cashflow then, in the absence of a serious downturn, it would stand to reason that he would be able to continue to pay down similar amounts of debt going forward without having to resort to more capital raising. I won't be holding my breath.
That's my point exactly. He used that capital injection to pay down debt, but is claiming that the paying down of the debt has been a result of normal business. If he was able to pay down debt from normal cashflow then, in the absence of a serious downturn, it would stand to reason that he would be able to continue to pay down similar amounts of debt going forward without having to resort to more capital raising. I won't be holding my breath.
I could be wrong but my understanding is that some if not all of the money that came from the shareholders (Etihad last minute) was used to get rid of the very high interest US debt. So there is still money "owed" (possibly the same amount) but less to external institutions. Anyway, as I said, pretty fair chance it's a great deal more complex than that.
I guess people don't understand and thus feel anxious with bills to pay.
Hoping for the best.
I guess people don't understand and thus feel anxious with bills to pay.
Hoping for the best.
I think that's a little grassy-knoll like conspiratorial if you're serious but if not, it is at least amusing that former QF executives who seem to be lauded for the very fact that leave QF are not hugely successful. Could it be rather that QF was right to let them go... with the big guy I'd say yes, he was Strong appointment and was more concerned with his company BMW, birds-it on his window and chewing gum on tiles in the domestic terminal than anything to do with the welfare of the company, like many of Strong's appointments - he was a crony. JB presumably survived the JS era because he was a yes man. None of these people impressed, which is why they were eventually found out for not being very good. The previous QF execs that were dispensed with by JS in many cases ended up being snapped up by other well regarded airlines. I don't think it's QF strategy, I just think it's Boards that don't know much... the company in question in this thread doesn't even supply it's frontline managers with information about how their budgets are tracking, period reports or similar, it all seems to be secret squirrel stuff so is it any wonder that the place doesn't make a profit. I'm told they also spend money on systems that don't get implemented and when they do fully implement a system, liker reservations or airport, it's usually the wrong system. The company seems to be a mess and have very few people who have a clue what they are doing. That's the problem and short of a revolution it would seem impossible to fix at this stage as long as the Village 'cone of silence' and 'bubble' continue to blur out reality.
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sydney
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wherever they got the money, it's certainly not from their operations - oh look unlevered free cash flow had been negative for the last 5 financial years.
in MM AUD
That's not the whole story. JB also managed to turn a c. $5.6 billion company to a $2 billion one in the span of 10 years! That's not accounting for inflation!
in MM AUD
That's not the whole story. JB also managed to turn a c. $5.6 billion company to a $2 billion one in the span of 10 years! That's not accounting for inflation!
Whilst I have no experience in this what so ever, when did JB join virgin?
2007/8 somewhere and they were worth not much at the time
Every CEO is lumbered with previous CEO's past choices. Think 380/lack of 777. In virgins case EMB.
I agree he has not made many good decisions but he didn't turn a 5.6 B$ company into the one it is today.
AJ didn't turn QF around either. 400m$ is the fuel price,,250m$ is less interest on the massive right down.
You can float any figures to prove your point, every company does it all the time. Read through the figures and you'll realise airlines are a crap investment.
I just hope they last us all long enough for a good retirement
2007/8 somewhere and they were worth not much at the time
Every CEO is lumbered with previous CEO's past choices. Think 380/lack of 777. In virgins case EMB.
I agree he has not made many good decisions but he didn't turn a 5.6 B$ company into the one it is today.
AJ didn't turn QF around either. 400m$ is the fuel price,,250m$ is less interest on the massive right down.
You can float any figures to prove your point, every company does it all the time. Read through the figures and you'll realise airlines are a crap investment.
I just hope they last us all long enough for a good retirement
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 751
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every CEO is lumbered with previous CEO's past choices. Think 380/lack of 777. In virgins case EMB.
JB was the one who introduced A330's and it's been a total cluster f@&k since day one, and cost millions and millions of dollars.
He's also responsible for the lowest level of staff engagement in the history of the airline.
It was bad under Godfrey; he's taken it to a completely new low!
I'll call bull**** on this one.
JB was the one who introduced A330's and it's been a total cluster f@&k since day one, and cost millions and millions of dollars.
He's also responsible for the lowest level of staff engagement in the history of the airline.
It was bad under Godfrey; he's taken it to a completely new low!
JB was the one who introduced A330's and it's been a total cluster f@&k since day one, and cost millions and millions of dollars.
He's also responsible for the lowest level of staff engagement in the history of the airline.
It was bad under Godfrey; he's taken it to a completely new low!
Aussie FO, the decision to purchase the ejet was the right one at the time, and in my opinion, still is. Which by default makes the decision to remove them no so clever.
There is a definite place for a 100 seat jet in our market, QF cant get enough 717's and the crews and punters love the Embraer.
The investment has been made in getting engineering and crew up to speed on the airframe, the training facilities are all here and we are throwing it away.
We will now fly 176 seat jets with 76 punters on them on some routes, at a loss, to "rationalise" the fleet.
Yes there is a place for sensible fleet rationalisation, but I suspect this isn't it.
The ATR's were a huge mistake. I would think that keeping the ejet until the e2 came along, then pass the "classic" ejet to vara and replace the f100 would have been a smart move. Do all the training here, leverage off 10 years of operating the Embraer, happy crews who were flying it, happy punters, inflight wifi ife, etc etc etc. the 6 170's could and did do what the ATR's were leased for, and let's face it, give the travelling public the choice of a jet or turboprop, frequent flyer points aside, they would pick the jet nearly every time.
In the widebody world, both the 777 and the 330 are spectacular aeroplanes, but perhaps the better option was to and grab some of the whitetail "terrible teens" 787-8 which are (or were at the time) parked up at everett and use them with a common crew across the 777 group.
The terrible teens were heavy and didn't meet performance guarantees but were cheap and had the necessary capability to do transcontinental and Asia.
There is a definite place for a 100 seat jet in our market, QF cant get enough 717's and the crews and punters love the Embraer.
The investment has been made in getting engineering and crew up to speed on the airframe, the training facilities are all here and we are throwing it away.
We will now fly 176 seat jets with 76 punters on them on some routes, at a loss, to "rationalise" the fleet.
Yes there is a place for sensible fleet rationalisation, but I suspect this isn't it.
The ATR's were a huge mistake. I would think that keeping the ejet until the e2 came along, then pass the "classic" ejet to vara and replace the f100 would have been a smart move. Do all the training here, leverage off 10 years of operating the Embraer, happy crews who were flying it, happy punters, inflight wifi ife, etc etc etc. the 6 170's could and did do what the ATR's were leased for, and let's face it, give the travelling public the choice of a jet or turboprop, frequent flyer points aside, they would pick the jet nearly every time.
In the widebody world, both the 777 and the 330 are spectacular aeroplanes, but perhaps the better option was to and grab some of the whitetail "terrible teens" 787-8 which are (or were at the time) parked up at everett and use them with a common crew across the 777 group.
The terrible teens were heavy and didn't meet performance guarantees but were cheap and had the necessary capability to do transcontinental and Asia.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting points, Charma.
I have often wondered how the VA Embraer CASK's compared to the QLink Q400's. My assumption was that the Q400's were probably cheaper but VA had the advantage of the "Jet appeal". I've never paxed on an Embraer so I don't know how internal comfort actually compares.
As to how the Embraers compare to the B717 operation is another interesting one. Especially given that the B717 operation is fully outsourced (on a deal apparently "too good to refuse"). I have paxed quite often on the B717's and they are very appealing from a passenger point of view (quiet and spacious).
But costs aside, it is quite probable that the big advantage QF has in this regional market is simply the frequent flyer program (hence loyalty), which probably drives up yields for QF that VA can't compete with.
If true, VA may have been better off in the long run as a single type low-cast carrier, code-sharing with foreign airlines and Rex. Jetstar's bread and butter has relied almost entirely upon it's A320 fleet (I don't think JQ's experiments with other types such as A330/B787 and Dash-8's in NZ have made any money yet). I recall when JQ tried A330's trans-continental for a short period - didn't work for them.
I have often wondered how the VA Embraer CASK's compared to the QLink Q400's. My assumption was that the Q400's were probably cheaper but VA had the advantage of the "Jet appeal". I've never paxed on an Embraer so I don't know how internal comfort actually compares.
As to how the Embraers compare to the B717 operation is another interesting one. Especially given that the B717 operation is fully outsourced (on a deal apparently "too good to refuse"). I have paxed quite often on the B717's and they are very appealing from a passenger point of view (quiet and spacious).
But costs aside, it is quite probable that the big advantage QF has in this regional market is simply the frequent flyer program (hence loyalty), which probably drives up yields for QF that VA can't compete with.
If true, VA may have been better off in the long run as a single type low-cast carrier, code-sharing with foreign airlines and Rex. Jetstar's bread and butter has relied almost entirely upon it's A320 fleet (I don't think JQ's experiments with other types such as A330/B787 and Dash-8's in NZ have made any money yet). I recall when JQ tried A330's trans-continental for a short period - didn't work for them.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flypelican and Velocity have just signed a deal. This could perhaps lead to a closer relationship between VA and Flypelican and give VA access to other regional centres in NSW.
FlyPelican - Earn Points with Velocity
FlyPelican - Earn Points with Velocity