Yes Creampuff I agree that Qantas being uncompetitive is not the breach. It is whether they are seeking to remain competitive. Trying hard and failing is ok to. I suspect they are trying hard to fail. I think this is deliberate either by design or stupidity.
So the court would rightly concentrate on how the company sought to remain competitive. That would go to the decision making process of those people making the decisions and what evidence they had before them to make the decisions on.
Halving flts to London was a good example. Although it was in May 2012 when the flts were cut, the announcement was made in Aug 2011. The decision must have been made by then. Again a case of - why would you cut services? It would be rightly ok if you were struggling to get pax.
I've taken a snap shot of the 12 months of loads on the LHR services in those 12 months. They appear on the right column. These supposed (according to press release) services were losing money with an average load factor of 86.6%....
The corresponding previous 12 months, the loads are now down to 85.4%. These are extremely healthy load factors for any airline. The effect of this reduction of services was to make Qantas carry less pax for each piece of metal sent to London. Of course when the Board made this decision, they didn't know it would make them less profitable but they sure as hell knew they had been carrying 86.6% beforehand.
