Parked Planes at AKL

[mattyj]

I was working on the apron at Auckland Intl today and couldn't help notice no fewer than 6 aircraft from the Koru Club parked on layover all day. 2 777's had also been parked most of the night. Aircraft included 2 A320s, 2 763's and a 744.

I don't have an aviation managment diploma but is this the best use of the Govt bailout money?

Incidently, is that A320 down at heavy maintenance being painted all white because its sold?

[zulu_kilo]

I think some sched. maint has been altering the sched somewhat. The daily flt over to BNE is normaly the 400, but I think today the 772 is doing the run. Often on a Sat afternoon you will see a 320 or two and an ATR on the INTL tarmac for the night.

I too would like to find out about the 320 down at the maint hanger!

[iceblock]

I think Air NZ have one A320 surplus due to efficiencies created from the Air NZ / Freedom aggreement and another surplus due to the QF codeshare aggreement. Possibly this one getting painted all white is the first to go??

[Under Review]

Zk OJK and OJL (A320's) have been leased out to Brazilian and European operators for up to 30 months.

[Buster Hyman]

...And they said Ansett was a basket case & inefficient!:rolleyes:


(Don't bother....I'm just winding up!);)

[Pass-A-Frozo]

And they said Ansett was a basket case & inefficient

Only from the date that Air New Zealand took over :p

[nike]

......Sat afternoon you will see a 320 or two and an ATR on the INTL tarmac for the night.

An ATR?

Is this due to lack of space over at the domestic apron overnight?

P.S. How many 777 does AirNZ have now? And what is there delivery schedule?

Ta.

[Cloud Cutter]

I'm pretty sure it's 4, with number 5 being in the final stages of construction.

[Hanz Blix]

Nike, yes they are short of gates over there so the ATR is sent to overnight over near delta.

[Swamp Donkey]

Pass-a-frozo,

Ansett was dead in the water along time before ANZ got anywhere near it........!

[EPIRB]

Strange how Ansett made a profit before Air New Zealand tookover.

[piontyendforward]

blaa blaa blaa

stick to the thread or start a new one

[Enema Bandit's Dad]

Yes. You New Zealander's all seem to have big watches

Woomera Edit: Keep it clean, or you'll be following in your son's footsteps.

Woomera (Eastern States)

[27/09]

Strange how Ansett made a profit before Air New Zealand tookover. Yep, EPIRB have to agree, the profit was made in a strange way, smoke and mirrors I believe.

Yes. You New Zealander's all seem to have big watches and little dick's. Well EBD at least we don't go around comparing appendage sizes like you obviously do.

Now back to the topic of the post.

[Scumfish]

Yes, the profit may have been all "smoke and mirrors", however, it was a profit just the same. It doesn't excuse the fact that once Air New Zealand took over Ansett, there suddenly became major losses of hundreds of millions of dollars within a year and nearly dragging Air New Zealand down. I wonder how the NZ economy was affected by such poor management decisions? It's a pity Sunfish isn't communicating at the moment as I'm sure that he'd have a better handle on the situation than I have and could elaborate more. We'll have to take a raincheck there.
And everyone thinks that Qantas management are bad???

[Cloud Cutter]

Anyone who thinks Qantas or Air New Zealand are managed poorly are deluded. They are among the few conventional (non-LCC) carriers in the world to turn a profit. I sometimes think that pilots and other airline employees are unable to look at the big picture.

[6080ft]

the atr ends up onthe 'tennis court' between the qantas terminal and international apron. Last week there was a 744 that sat on the international apron for about 2 days.

[haughtney1]

Anyone who thinks Qantas or Air New Zealand are managed poorly are deluded. They are among the few conventional (non-LCC) carriers in the world to turn a profit. I sometimes think that pilots and other airline employees are unable to look at the big picture

Point well made cloud, however the even bigger picture tells a slightly different story.
The profitability is based on anti-competitive practices, an effective duopoly in Australasia (yes EK and others operate into NZ and Oz..they don't however benefit form a regional feeder network that is a monopoly..) and the organizations are still struggling with antiquated working conditions. (The Air NZ bailout..QF heavy maintenance etc etc)
Put simply the market place is distorted with national interest and profiteering, the good old customer is the one paying through the nose for a product that is at best 20-30% overpriced.

[Cloud Cutter]

I don't know about Australia, but the NZ market is deregulated to the extent that Air NZ can't afford to to exercise the power of monopoly. There comes a point where a new entrant becomes viable, that point has not yet been reached. In fact, quite the converse, with Origin all but dead in the water.

I know it is hard for a private company like Origin to compete against what is in a round about way, a government subsidised airline - but there are other big Airlines in a position to compete should they deam it viable.

At the end of the day, a public company has a duty to do the best it can for it's shareholders. You can only work with what you've got. My initial point, was that pilots have to be carefull not to work too hard against their respective employers. We have to find a balance between fair pay and conditions, and economic viability. A strong company (aviation or otherwise) is one in which employees work with management, for the overall good of the company. If I sound idealistic, guilty as charged.

[haughtney1]

Nahh Cloud mate, your not idealistic..in point of fact I agree with you in regards to a balance.
The New Zealand market however no matter how deregulated it is, will continue to be effectively monopolized for the simple fact that true competition is not allowed to exist..(Origin cant compete as you say because they didn't benefit from a $880 million bailout package a few years back)
As for other airlines finding it viable? nope it ain't gonna happen if a government continues with a policy of subsidy for the same reason..those airlines are accountable to their shareholders.
Cloud, lets call a spade a spade, Air NZ has no incentive to be truly efficient as long as it can rely on the government of the day to prop up what is effectively a lame-duck business model. (harsh words..mayby..but they operate in an effective monopoly..and STILL find it tough to turn a profit:eek: )

[Speeds high]

Just in defence of the 880 million, don't forget that Orgin were also given a bail out hand out, not 880 million i agree but similar scale bail out for there size, and since the two respective bail outs, one company has made changes turned things around and produced a profit and is now growing the business (yes yes i know the changes aren't all perfect and they still do things that leave you :ugh: ); and the other is downsizing, and roumoured to be in a little trouble.

I know its a little pears and apples, but what im sayin is that Origin weren't left entirly in the cold.

[haughtney1]

Just in defence of the 880 million, don't forget that Origin were also given a bail out hand out, not 880 million i agree but similar scale bail out
Apples and Pears though, and let me be clear here..Im no fan/supporter/ex-employee of Origin..because truth be known Mr Inglis very nearly screwed my aviation career before it started. The facts are this, Origin cant compete, as they dont operate on a level playing field..hence the bailout. This as a direct result of AirNZ's effective monopoly in the domestic market.

[Cloud Cutter]

I guess its like Boeing trying to compete with Airbus:}

Look at the NZ goverment as an oportunistic investor. They purchased a large stake in a troubled company, providing the capital needed to turn it around, thus increasing the value of their initial investment. They wouldn't have done it if their was nothing in it for them. When I mentioned Air NZ being subsidised, I was meaning in terms of regulation and goverment funded tourism marketing (like any national carrier). As far as I'm aware, there is no true subsidy given to Air NZ, nor has there been in the recent past. I could be wrong?

[pakeha-boy]

Cloud mate...it,s sometimes real hard to get the big picture,when the #1 bloke in ANZ cant turn the airline around,loses a ****eload of $$$$$ and then leaves with a ****eload of $$$$$ and a golden parachute....... yeah mate,the "BIG PICTURE" gets a little clouded once in a while/.....PB

[Cloud Cutter]

P-boy

We'll have to agree to differ on that one. I for one think Norris did a great job, and made a good start at turning Air NZ around. Let's not forget the decent pay-cut he gave himself when he started.

I believe CEOs of large companies deserve the large salaries they make. If I was that qualified, willing to work that hard, and put up with that much (often uneducated) criticism, I would expect the same. If you're not earning your keep as a CEO, you are soon shown the door.

I hope I don't sound disrespectful because I do respect your opinion, but that's mine. Safe flying;)

[27/09]

when the #1 bloke in ANZ cant turn the airline around,loses a ****eload of $$$$$ and then leaves with a ****eload of $$$$$ and a golden parachute

PB Presume you are referring to RN's predesessor.

[Cloud Cutter]

Oh, in that case I refer to my:
If you're not earning your keep as a CEO, you are soon shown the door.
Statement.

Although he was committed, absolutely! :}

[Buster Hyman]

Anyone who thinks Qantas or Air New Zealand are managed poorly are deluded. They are among the few conventional (non-LCC) carriers in the world to turn a profit.
:=
what is in a round about way, a government subsidised airline

......:ugh:

[pakeha-boy]

27/09....yeah mate,you are correct......didnt see the reason to play the "name" game as that whole sagarso was a shocking example of......"one bloke can fix this problem".....NOT......

Cloud mate...like you ,even though I dont work for ANZ,I still want our National Airlrine to do well(has nothing to do with the fact that I have shares in the company:E )but we,have been guilty on numerous occassssssssions of piss-poor CEO selections.....seems a little strange,that when the CEO "COCKS" it up..... he gets a huge compensaton package,.....I cock it up,and get fired.....they bring in headhunters to fix the problem and in actuality they should have been hired in the first place!!!!....respect your point view...PB