PDA

View Full Version : Reaallllllllllllly!


B A Lert
17th Jul 2007, 03:21
from The Australian

Steve Creedy, Aviation writer | July 17, 2007

THE stoush between Jetstar and Tiger Airways grew yesterday as the Qantas offshoot Jetstar warned it might ask the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to investigate the availability of its new rival's cheapest fares.

Tiger continued its drip-feed campaign of route unveilings with an announcement yesterday that it would start a service between Melbourne and Launceston from November 29 with all-inclusive, one-way fares starting at $39.99.

Jetstar immediately responded with a $29 fare on the route for flights between November 29 and December 13 as well as all of February.

Jetstar spokesman Simon Westaway questioned the availability of Tiger's headline low fares. He said attempts last week by Jetstar staff to find Tiger's cheapest fares on its Melbourne-Perth route had found them available on only four occasions over a long period. Attempts to find the fares on Tiger's Melbourne-Gold Coast route had produced a similar result.

Mr Westaway said Jetstar, which always clearly specified the terms and conditions surrounding low fares, was considering raising the matter with the regulator.

"We just believe that the marketing of these low fares from Tiger through their website is not very clear in terms of the availability," Mr Westaway said.

"We're not saying they need to declare how many fares on what day but we just think ... Australian consumers might start to question when is a low fare available and when is a low fare a low fare."

Mr Westaway conceded that one possible reason Tiger's low fares were hard to find was that they had already been taken.

A spokesman for Tiger dismissed the Jetstar claim as having no substance.

"Consumers have been snapping up the tickets and we still maintain we will offer low fares on the flights we have announced," the spokesman said.

Tiger chief executive Tony Davis last week would not reveal how many of the cheap seats were available on each flight but said Tiger had made it clear that it did not believe in gimmicks or quoting fares that were not available to people.


How dare this pillock from Jestar complain about the very same thing for which his organisation is noted! Isn't it ironic that the Jestar flunkies have the same difficulties accessing the Tiger website as Joe Punter has accessing the so-called low fares at Jestar? Wouldn't JQ be better occupied trying to allay the genuine customer service concerns of their patrons rather than bellyache about what a competitor may or may not be up to? :mad::mad::mad:

Buster Hyman
17th Jul 2007, 04:09
"Pot to Kettle! Pot to Kettle!...you're looking a bit black!"

:rolleyes: :ugh::rolleyes: :ugh:

fender
17th Jul 2007, 04:13
Seems like J* is actually running scared.

lowerlobe
17th Jul 2007, 05:08
It looks as though mini Darth is a bit like the school ground bully.He is very happy when all those around him are moving out of his way because if they don't his big brother Darth will thump them.

Now a new kid has arrived at the school and has a big brother too who is prepared to back his sibling.

Mini Darth is now spitting the dummy because the playground is not so big anymore and his corner is shrinking and the new kid wants to play on the team.

Both mini Darth and Darth are complaining to the teachers that this new kid is not playing fair and couldn't possibly be that good to be included.

Yakka
17th Jul 2007, 05:22
Wow lowerlobe,

Thats the longest simile that I have seen in a long time:E

cunninglinguist
17th Jul 2007, 05:46
You lot better hope Jetstar survive.........................................



Who are you going to spend all your spare time bitching about if they don't :hmm:


PS got bored after checking nearly every flight mel-per in December, not 1 fare under $89.95 eachway, most around $150. Cheap, but no different to those other people you luv ;)

2b2
17th Jul 2007, 06:24
12,13,14/12 - all 119.95
4,5,6/12 - all 89.95
1 and 3/12 - 119.95
2/12 - 89.95
pretty good so far!!
JQ seems to be 189+

Quote - "Cheap, but no different to those other people you luv"
different enough :)

B A Lert
17th Jul 2007, 06:37
An interesting view from today's Crikey.com.au

26. Tiger leaves Qantas with only ugly options
Ben Sandilands writes:


Tiger paranoia is gripping Qantas and Jetstar.

In March Tiger said it was coming with five jets before Christmas. By yesterday it had announced routes which look like taking 10 jets, routes it will operate more than a month before Christmas.

And it has forced Jetstar into the deadly zone of negative fares. Fares like the tens of thousands of $1 and $29 offers that donít cover the taxes, levies and airport charges they must include by law. After which Jetstar has to pay the full fixed costs of fuel, wages and leasing to carry those fast enough the accept its "we-pay-you-to-fly" giveaways before the airlineís server collapses under the burden of pouring millions of dollars down the drain.

And on the side line, Virgin Blue, which Jetstar was designed to neutralise, isnít even blinking, filling its jets with real fares for hundreds of dollars more than Jetstar and, crucially, for hundreds of dollars less than typical Qantas prices.

It is a very ugly situation for Qantas and Jetstar, which have even more reasons to fear Tiger:


Reason 1 - Tiger is planning even more route and fare announcements in the coming weeks.

Reason 2 - It is talking to Australian and other pilots about flying wide-bodied jets in the near future, able to carry almost twice as many passengers as its 180 seat A320s.

Reason 3 - Tiger recently ordered an extra 50 jets.

Reason 4 - Singapore Airlines, which shares a combined majority stake in Tiger with Temasek Holdings, Singaporeís cashed up superannuation arm, isnít hunting profits in Australia, but mounting a full scale long term invasion of the domestic market for whatever it costs and however long it takes.

Reason 5 - There is nothing to stop Tiger deciding to take on Qantas and Virgin Blue as a full service but lower cost base carrier whenever it chooses.

Reason 6 - Singapore Airlines has smouldered with resentment over its disastrous flirtation with Ansett and Air New Zealand for six long and bitter years, and it wants revenge.

Reason 7 - There are no rules in Australia that can stop it expanding a loss making operation for as long as it likes, or takes, and the ACCC will do the same for Qantas and Jetstar as it did for Impulse and Virgin Blue back in the heat of the four-way airline battle of 2001, which is precisely nothing.
Of course there is a reason not to fear all of the above, and that is the fact that the Singaporean camp was easily outsmarted by Qantas last time, which had it known how bad things were at Ansett, might well have cheerfully let it proceed with its original plan to take it over via a 49% investment in its then owner Air New Zealand.

But this time around, there is no sign of the same confidence with which Qantas saw off the Singaporeans in 2001. The Tiger has arrived, and is as free to run amok in Australia as Jetstar Asia is from its Singaporean spring board.

Shlonghaul
17th Jul 2007, 07:20
Anyone noticed that the price of bananas has gone up again?? :hmm:

wrongwayaround
17th Jul 2007, 09:06
broccoli has too. bout $14.99/kg

Mr. Hat
17th Jul 2007, 09:17
an interesting fight looms...

lowerlobe
18th Jul 2007, 07:21
Owen Stanley....... "Try finding a bloody zuchinni in Melbourne"

Won't anything else do?:

E

Bula
19th Jul 2007, 00:34
Why? Having the main carrier support survices has been going on for a while with Tiger.

max autobrakes
19th Jul 2007, 00:52
I seem to recall one of our beloved leaders state that when Qantas was a Government run airline it was a Good airline but a Poor business.
Now it appears to be a Good business but a Poor airline.
I wonder what JetStar will be/is ??????:bored:

Shlonghaul
19th Jul 2007, 02:12
I wonder what JetStar will be/is ??????

Geoffstar is the dark side of the force :* :E :hmm:

lowerlobe
19th Jul 2007, 04:55
max autobrakes...

By his own admission Dixon has said that he wants to look after the shareholder rather the customer...

Can someone remind him that this is a service industry and that if you don't retain or increase customers the shareholder won't be getting much of a return as a result.

stubby jumbo
19th Jul 2007, 10:44
'spot on 'Lobe.

Dixon and his Teletubbies show absolute contempt for the Customer.

There will be a day soon when we we find ourselves in the BOD's ( Bad old days - eg post SAR's)

The Chicken Little theory will be trotted out once again.

Dixon will say:
"We're all doomed"
"Its all about the Customer.........errrrr I think !"
"We need to cut costs"
"The sustainable future target for 2008/2009 will be $500m !!"
" Its all the fault of those........ pesky Unions" !

Same Old , Same Old:rolleyes: