T Vasis:
Ka Boom - with respect, it's not Qantas's fault the 78's are delayed.
Remember, they'd be flying by now and Qantas would be phasing out their ageing 76's. Also, considering a number of other airlines around the world, fleet age isn't that bad...there are plenty of legacy airlines operating some seriously old hull's
With regards to network reduction; do you believe it makes business sense to operate on markets where the return either below acceptable or not at all? I would be terribly concerned as a shareholder if Qantas was operating routes that were not delivering a return - Qantas would be better off redeploying on to markets where they can deliver returns...It's a sad fact, but you just cannot deliver returns on every market (and FCO was a good example), just look at V...pulling out of HKT/JNB etc, why, because they cannot delivery an appropriate return. Does that make V a bad business? Because technically that equates to network reductions in the same light you've applied to Qantas...Absolutely not.
Qantas has a cost base and it needs to work within that cost base. One way of reducing that cost based in achieving cost reductions and then by delivering a lower cost base, thin, marginal markets may become viable and enable Qantas to operate and compete...
Qantas is investing in its product - you're very aware of the 744 refits, improvements with lounges network-wide, innovative technologies with new gen check-in as well as a number of other investment programs to improve the product and deliver a competitive business for consumers.
At the end of the day, Qantas is still rated as a high-tier operator and this is supported by their position in the top 10 airlines globally as well as winners with their Y+ product (Skytrax) and considering the numbers of operators out there, Qantas is not too bad at all...
Qantas is still an innovator and delivers a product that sits in the the top bracket of carriers globally - you cannot deny that. Sure, there is some lag in some areas i.e. a number of ageing fleet types, but Qantas has committed to fleet investment and that's quite obvious as per the order books for both short-haul and long-haul.
And if you have a chance to see the MPS scores for Qantas, you'd be surprised to see how well they rate and are received by customers.
1. 787 - There is this concept called "technical risk", which is first cousin of commercial risk and sovereign risk, pity there is no one on the QF Board, then or now, with any technical experience of airlines.
2. The lovely concept of "Acceptable return"! Acceptable to who? I much prefer the concept of "market rate". If QF cannot make a profit on something, then how about cutting down the number of bloated management levels, starting with getting rid of the notion of "The Qantas Group" and the associated horde of "Group General Managers?". Then get the head office out of central Sydney, cutting staff as you go, and put it in a Tin shed as close as possible to the airport.
3. The idea that QF has a "premium business class product" is laughable. I tried that to LAX around Ten years ago and the service and experience was execrable - and expensive. Only a first time business traveler would consider QF.
QF have had excrable management for at least the last Ten years - the entire Dixon reign, and there is no sign of any change.
To put it another way, T Vasis, the first sign of positive change at QF would be abandoning the concept of "Acceptable return" and competing on quality of service and price, like everyone else does. Air travel is now a commodity.
The idea that the "carriage trade", sorry, "premium business class travelers" can be mined to subsidies the rest of your operation, sorry, I mean generate an "acceptable return", is lethally stupid because it exposes your shareholders to risk if that single market segment is all that is holding you in profit. The same idea, as it percolates through layers of management, also devalues and therefore de emphasizes the economy travel experience.
Lets face it, the only thing keeping QF afloat is its ability to lobby the Federal Government and keep out competition.