Originally Posted by
downdata
Which have been realised because he wasted billions buying back shares just to vesting those rights / options
The Economist has called them “an addiction to corporate cocaine.” Reuters has called them “self-cannibalization.” The Financial Times has called them “an overwhelming conflict of interest.” In an article that won the HBR McKinsey Award for the best article of the year, Harvard Business Review has called them “stock price manipulation.” These influential journals make a powerful case that wholesale stock buybacks are a bad idea—bad economically, bad financially, bad socially, bad legally and bad morally.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevede.../#19f2ff323346
Qantas fleet metrics are horrible. Outgoing prehistoric Chair MR Leigh Clifford claimed it was the QSA 1992 preventing the re-equipment of the Qantas fleet
So you need a new fleet Leigh? . Mr Roger Montgomery (Montgomery Funds Management) chimed in July 2018 and noted very correctly that:
Qantas has introduced just nine new aircraft or 3.7 per cent of groupseat capacity over the last three years and so a minimum of $1.4bn a year will be required to maintain a constant fleet age, with an additional $300m spend on the nonaircraft asset base making $1.7bn. That matches depreciation, but depreciation is based on historical costs so it is still probably undercooking how much is needed to keep the fleet fresh, new and competitive
How much Qantas spent on share buy backs is an interesting point. As we pointed out in the thread
So you need a new fleet Leigh? Qantas share buy backs totals are around $1.75 billion, before including this year's self enrichment program. This equals the amount Mr Montgomery assesses Qantas still need to spend, just to keep the fleet age where it is.
There have been very few beneficiaries from the self interest driven neglect perpetrated on Qantas by Mr Clifford and his Baron robbers including Mr Joyce, other than a few insiders.
Peer reviewed Qantas performance is sub optimal, unless of course one includes CEO remuneration, what has been achieved there is indeed 'trans formative'
All a question of 'perspective' isn't it Mr Joyce?