Originally Posted by
Tuck Mach
I appreciate the quote, but can you show me what tangible benefit 'leverage' accrues to Qantas from the alliance? If not revenue then what?
Herb Kelleher Founding CEO of Southwest said and I paraphrase
'Revenue alone is not important, neither is cost, the gap between the two is.'..
Yes that is correct, Joyce did., with board approval 'pivot' to Asia.With the JQ Asia 'franchise' in its 13th year and no tangible profit, with JQ having more aircraft than QF does Where is the tangible financial upside? Ever wonder why JQ is not De aggregated into two operating (domestic and international) segments like Qantas is?
Presumably the statutory accounts show exactly the leverage (financial) obtained through the EK alliance. Can someone tell me which revenue line it is in the accounts?
Well for a start, EK pax bookings on QF domestically went through the roof compared with the BA arrangement, something like a whole year worth of BA bookings in one month from EK pax. I don't have the info at hand but could probably find the quotes and the stats. It definitely had an impact and almost straight away. In the 70s, Qantas pulled out of New York and used it's arrangement with AA to fill the gap. No one complained or said it was the beginning of the end. It actually allowed QF to maintain a presence in NY and not incur the cost of flying their own metal there again until it reached a point of critical mass where it became financially viable to return.