Originally Posted by
AerialPerspective
I know exactly where you're coming from as I spent many wonderful years with the company and my father before me - he also played cricket for Qantas with Hudson Fysh and met him many times. I'm not sure it's accurate to say it's lost its soul though. Once again, I completely understand what you're saying but in my view, any soulessness was during the reign of one James Strong who hated the Qantas name and everything about it. He single handed tried to convince the Board to change the name allegedly. He threw a lot of good people out the door, mostly the near-do-wells survived while he brought in a bunch of cronies including one who had to resign for feeding his own consultancy company with Qantas work, another who was more concerned about the bird poo on his office window and chewing gum on the escalators than actually caring about the company and sent a belt-tightening memo world-wide at the same time as he was taking delivery of his company purchased BMW luxury car. This period was soul destroying for anyone who loved Qantas. However, I've been thinking about this quite a bit lately after discussing with a number of former colleagues the 100th anniversary. I think people of the era we talk about were either new to Qantas half way through it's life or like me and many others, were children of people who were directly connected to the founders. I'm sure there are companies a lot older than Qantas who are still respected that if you brought people back from the days of their founding or the generation after would say similar things. Companies change over time, many core things stay the same, Qantas is still respected around the world even if we don't see it so clearly in Australia. Mind you the constant carping of tall poppy cutting Australians bagging it at every chance (many of whom have never flown with it) doesn't help. But I think overall, there is still something about Qantas that is enduring and which has outlived all the bad management in the past. It survived Strong, it survived Sir Lennox and it survived CO Turner, all of whom I am told were not liked at all and viewed in much the same light as the current CEO. There are changes happening yes, but some of these are essential and aren't necessarily management's fault but rather the result of stupid government policy on both sides in selling Qantas, then allowing every tin pot airline in the world, even ones banned in Europe to fly here and squeezing the company to the point of unfair competition. I'm not a protectionist but many of these airlines are STILL owned substantially by their governments and money is no object or fuel is virtually zero and they therefore do not create a level playing field. Qantas is one of the few among those that has to make a profit or else. With that sort of ridiculously tilted playing field, Qantas has to make changes and sadly that means changing some of the things it's done for many years. We may not like it but it's preferable to having no Qantas at all until such time as the country wakes up and starts putting some priority on Australian businesses over foreign ones. I have worked for many companies since but I carry a huge amount of Qantas around with me in everything I do and that is a testament to its endurance as a brand that it will always, always be my first choice above all others - I don't care if their boarding passes are covered in gold leaf, I will still take Qantas over the others.
Exactly what you said. Except my family and I tragically now (and we all resent it) travel on other airlines as well. Flying home spending $20-30k+ when you are parked beside the (now bastardised beyond recognition) Flying Kangaroo is a quixotic moment. I'd rather give it to the airline, but a) it doesnt often stack up and b) Elaine does not deserve anyone's money.