Qantas Profit

[Stationair8]

Noticed ABC News Finance reporter talking about the nice little first half profit for Qantas, obviously down to shrewd management skills of Mr Dixon and MS Jackson and the board.

Good thing those stupid mums and dads shareholder didn't sell out to the private equity mob.

How's Allco Finance traveling, Marg?

[Brian Abraham]

Pity they didn't spend a few bucks on maintenance (drip shields, missing fasteners in seat rails etc). Why are the tech crew given the task of salvaging the stuff ups of management.

[satos]

I'd like to hear "Qantas announces a record pay rise and better conditions for its engineering staff".
I'd like to see that.

[flyitboy]

You know what QF really means? Quiet Fukcers !!!

They do it with the gen flying publics full support, why? 'cause the same people who own QF shares have no idea & never will of why their share prices rise!

Like slimy snakes in the grass, they live only to feed off it's employees!.

F

[ramyon]

So all the profits should be distributed to workers? :ugh:
How about losses?

[flyitboy]

Well pass-a-frozo I see yr 'loved' on a few other threads in here..NOT !

That pretty much sums it up about you

Now where that 'ignore' feature of this site?:E


F

[Enema Bandit's Dad]

And no doubt that without aircraft mark 2's contibutions and suggestions to the board, the profits would have been $500 million dollars less :rolleyes:.

[HotDog]

Flyitboy, I don't know what your contribution has been to Qantas but mine has been to shell out my dollars for QF shares. In return, I expect dividends which depend on profitable company results and I find the latest to be pleasing. I'll just hang in there a bit to see if the shares go up and then get rid of them before you and your ilk kill the golden goose.:sad:

[rudderless1]

Hotdog, whilst I sympathise with shareholders needing a return, that should not come from where it can't. Shareholders have a responsibility to pull management into line when needed. (ie ridiculous bonus's for poor management) Sadly its all about speculation not investment and we are ending up running a 1st class airline on a 3rd world budget for no other reason than greed and stupidity.

Good shareholders and management do not need or expect to leech the calcium from the bones nor the burn the muscle. They are clever enough to develop energy without siphoning the companies capital (in this case maintenance, skill, moral and training) to distribute as false short term gains.

What will you shares be worth when the Red tail is sticking out of the ground. Its coming to close to frequently now. Not much I suggest, oh thats right your a share holder you will just walk away, whinge you lost some money and still not understand why. I hope you will be on board with your mates. Sadly the staff will cope the brunt of this current stupidity.:sad:

[flyitboy]

'rudderless1', well said, couldn't have put it better myself.
I to have shares but not with QF. So I know what a share holder expects/likes but at what cost? Greed is all that some see these rather than moderation for the good of all !
QF like all the other Co's listed on the stock exchange have done so for one reason, to enable an expansion of their buisness. BUT not at the cost of the very thing that makes up that cash cow business some share holders would like to think it is, & that's at the expense of the workers, the very reason you have share profits in the first place!

With so many unhappy workers within QF they will start to show some ill effects by way of poorer return profits, meaning less gain for the greedy !

You reap what you sow!




F

[HotDog]

Rudderless, so what you are suggesting is that the shareholders should take an active role in managing the company? Brilliant idea, that way we'll get better returns on our investment and perhaps share executive bonuses. Qantas is no longer government owned and controlled, I was employed by Qantas when it was. No greedy ignorant shareholders then. In route stations, my colleagues and I were chauffeur driven to the hangar and back home to the company provided free accommodation and our salary was tax free. Maybe you should fight to have Qantas nationalized?

[The Professor]

"No greedy ignorant shareholders then."

No sustainable profits either.

[lowerlobe]

There is no question as to whether or not the company should be making a profit.

It is well known that Darth has cut costs but how that has affected the bottom line and any other aspects of the company's operation is debatable.

The question should be how much better would the profit be if Darth worked with his employees rather than against them.

[puma pants]

Pass a Frozo and Hot dog. Management eh??? Definitely not pilots. What are you doing on the "Professional PILOTS Rumour network"; except stirring S*#t!!!

[flyitboy]

'lowerlobe' yr point although plausable would never work as you, I & a lot of others know, working with rather than against the employers is fancyful! Darth wouldn't consider the employees in these modern times, it's all about 'performance' in the eyes of the shareholders, he looks good, they (the share holders) look good, everyones happy, accept those that got 'em all there in the first place, the backbone of any Co; the workers!

Remember the likes of GD wouldn't last 5 secs if they didn't perform, so something has to give to fatten the well healed, enter the human element !:bored:


F

[flyitboy]

simple but well said 'puma':)


F

[lowerlobe]

Remember the likes of GD wouldn't last 5 secs if they didn't perform

flyitboy....

The point in question is what is the definition of the word 'perform' ?

It does not take much skill to cut and slash however it takes a lot more talent to motivate your employees and develop new products that distinguish your business from others.....

[flyitboy]

i thought it pretty obvious 'lowerlobe' what performance is where CEO's are most concerned about, their own! They don't do better or at least as good as the last then their out ! I happen to agree with yr last statement lowerlobe, just that the QF employees aren't getting what you mentioned. GD's concerns don't go anywhere near that area as we have seen here amongst these pages.


F

[Keg]

If we're going to bang on about 'performance' then I'd like to line Dixon up beside Gordon Bethune. Dixon would then be shown up as the one trick wonder that he is. No ability to motivate staff or create new ways of doing business- at least he didn't until offered a percentage of the company :rolleyes: , just the same old tired mantra of slash and burn.

[QFcaptain]

I don't understand why the majority of you are against dixon.He's the best thing that couldve happend to QF.If it wasn't for dixon, Pilots would've had an at least 20-30% pay decrease a long time ago.Which is something that's on the horizon at QF in the not too far future.Especially having Mr. channel 9 "mr.Pecker" putting it on his personal to do list.QF days are just about gone, won't be long now.

[ferris]

I have to question the wisdom of making this profit, at this time. I understand that there are times when the $$ are moved into different columns- some years its spent buying aircraft etc, some years its profit. Just looking at the capacity growth of competitors really makes me question whether this short-term outlook (booking a big profit now) isn't going to have long-term consequences. How much profit could there be if QF matched that capacity growth?

[ramyon]

some years its spent buying aircraft etc, some years its profit. Just looking at the capacity growth of competitors really makes me question whether this short-term outlook (booking a big profit now) isn't going to have long-term consequences. How much profit could there be if QF matched that capacity growth?

Hasn't Qantas already made huge orders for A380, 787, 737 and A320 aircraft (Jetstar)? Profit is not used to purchase aircraft persee profit is the net income after all operating and financing costs are made.

Capital expenditure does not go (directly) through the income statement. Only the interest expenses related to the loans and the depreciation expenses related to fixed assets hit the P&L which in turn effect profit.

Although if profits are not distributed to shareholders then they are usually put into equity reserves which usually along with a combination of debt is used for major aquisitions.....

[Sunfish]

My first boss as a young Mechanical Engineer pounded this into me:

"The job of management is to maximise the value of the firm in the long term".

And he severely punished some of my well meaning and apparently profitable "short term thinking" (in this case it was postponing a maintenace program a few months to get its expense into the next financial year).

I think most employees in most companies understand this subconsciously, which is why I think you bang your heads against the wall when you see it all the time.

As for shareholders, OK you want a Biiiiiig dividend this year, but of course you want to see them again the following year don't you? And you want a bit of capital appreciation as a result of farsighted thinking as well?

What is NOT wanted by shareholders is short term thinking by managers who are focussing on maximising their annual bonuses at the expense of long term decisions, especially when their salaries are so large that they can leave anytime and never have to work again.

And by all accounts Qantas management is governed by short term thinkers right?

Obviously shareholders want dividends.

Obviously money has to be invested in capital equipment.

Obviously a company has to attract and retain suitably skilled staff.

F**k up the balance between any of those elements in the long term and you screw everyone, investors and employees alike.

Please think about that for a while.

[ferris]

Ok, Ramyon, instead of make I should have said distribute the profit. At the end of the day, it's just creative accounting. ie. we've got x dollars, what do we call them?
The point was that while there may be orders for aircraft, where is the growth of the airline. Only asking because as a frequent traveller, I know how few QF options there are, compared to any other airline you'd care to name (EK, TG, CX etc). I recall reading over the last few years on these boards the laments by various people about how QF seemed to be shrinking, reducing, cutting, and other carriers have taken up the capacity. I realise it's no good being a big, unprofitable airline, but with a bit of forsight how much profit could there be in the good times (now) if your airline was able to cater to the demand (which is obviously there).
It might look clever posting this profit; but is it really? If the management had've been focussed on growing the airline for the last few years instead of paring it down for sale, what might the numbers have been?

[ramyon]

The point was that while there may be orders for aircraft, where is the growth of the airline. Only asking because as a frequent traveller, I know how few QF options there are, compared to any other airline you'd care to name (EK, TG, CX etc). I recall reading over the last few years on these boards the laments by various people about how QF seemed to be shrinking, reducing, cutting, and other carriers have taken up the capacity. I realise it's no good being a big, unprofitable airline, but with a bit of forsight how much profit could there be in the good times (now) if your airline was able to cater to the demand (which is obviously there).


Oh ok, point taken. I guess the question(s) should be have Qantas profits (due largely to favourable market conditions) been reasonable or have they been super normal? have they reduced costs too far chewing away more than just the fat? Has the airline been left in a weaker position than it should be to fight off the vast army of new competition?

[lowerlobe]

posted by PAF.....Well given the profit result it seems GD has done a pretty good job of it. I guess you've just advocated an easy way to increase profits. You really should lecture at the AICD

Imagine how much better the profit would be if Darth thought of employees as an asset instead of a neccessary liability.

PAF it sounds as though you advocate the easy,non thinking and minimalistic approach to management.In the long run however the results are nowhere near what they could have been and should be.

As far as myself lecturing, I think my fee would be too high and the other sticking point is that I have morals.....but let me know when next your spouting advice and if I need a laugh I'll see if I can get there....:E

[Brian Abraham]

employees as an asset instead of a neccessary liability.

And here's me thinking that he considered them an un-necessary liability, what with the slash and burn.

[lowerlobe]

Even Darth understands that employees are necessary but he would prefer them to be cost neutral at worst and if at all possible a positive source of revenue...

In other words he would like us to pay for our jobs...

[WynSock]

The extremely unpopular Fuel levy on staff travel...

Charge staff more - presto, you reduce your 'costs'.