Air New Zealand - is my confidence misplaced?

[Passagiata]

Hi folks, I'm hoping someone in the know can disabuse me if I'm wrong of my new role as something of an informal 'viral marketer' for Air New Zealand -- largely as my understanding is that they do NOT skimp on engineering and safety. Is my confidence misplaced? the poor PR on Qantas developments in that regard has me contributing a bit of a good rap for Air Aotearoa to various conversations. I gather they are in financial trouble, but being largely govt owned they sort of have to comply with air safety everything to the book ... Air New Zealand seems rather disorganised on the ground, and I queued for HOURS the other day in Sydney for a flight to LA, but I always take the line to myself that if they are prioritising safety that's fine by me ... and other than the Mt Erebus episode, their safety record would equal Qantas's wouldn't it?

[Rainboe]

Let me get this right. Poor you queued FOR HOURS the other day at Sydney for an ANZ flight, and as a result you now have doubts about ANZs safety and maintenance? Sorry, but I don't think I understand a lot of the rest of what you are wittering about. Maybe you need to get around a bit more.

[Romeo India Xray]

That was a bit harsh, when we come here we come to answer PAX questions, allay fears etc. Many things that we find logical may seem completely contradictory to PAX, likewise we may find some questions completely illogical when to PAX they seem to be very logical. Passengers only get to see the public face of an airline - if that looks shoddy then of course they will start to have a few underlying questions about the non-public bits of the company too.

Passagiata

I dont work for ANZ (or even in the same hemesphere), but I can give you my opinion.

ANZ fall under the auspicies of the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand - check out the public part of their site:

Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand (http://www.caa.govt.nz/)

I have recently been involved in implementing a safety procedure within my company. We used a template .... from New Zealand ..... and all this LONG before this safety measure is going to be legally required. The point is that NZ carriers were already well ahead in improving safety.

I dont think you have anything to worry about with ANZ!

[Passagiata]

"Let me get this right. Poor you queued FOR HOURS the other day at Sydney for an ANZ flight, and as a result you now have doubts about ANZs safety and maintenance? Sorry, but I don't think I understand a lot of the rest of what you are wittering about. Maybe you need to get around a bit more."

Read my post properly before you go off half-cocked. I didn't say I have doubts about Air New Zealand based on the queueing - which, as I indicated, I didn't mind if they are prioritising safety. I'm asking what their standards are like re safety. Obviously if any company or organisation is disorganised on one front, it is reasonable to think they are more likely to be so on another. But that wasn't my point. My point is that I am assuming ANZ are not being asked to cut corners, as their main 'shareholder' is a government - and do I stand to be corrected.

[Passagiata]

Thanks for that Romeo India Xray.

[PAXboy]

A regular pax speaking.
Passagiatamy new role as something of an informal 'viral marketer' for Air New Zealand
Whether you are being paid or not, the moment you say that you are helping to market ANZ - then I take it as read that you believe everything they say.

I find it very curious that you have taken on this 'role' and now want to find out something about the airline. If you accepted to present them in a positive way (which is what marketing is) then why are you voicing your doubts here?

ANZ (with whom I have never travelled) have a good reputation but ANY carrier can have a problem at ANY time. The statistics on who has lost a hull are easily found online (Hint: there are specialist websites with open databases for you to look at)

How much you queue on the ground usually has very little to do with the carrier and more to do with their agents and the level of traffic in the terminal and on the tarmac at that time of day.

Have you travelled with airlines for many years? We all know that a delayed inbound a/c can create hours of delay, often with no direct blame to the carrier - in fact it will cost them money.

Lastly, viral marketers do not reveal themselves. They push positive angles on news groups and discussion boards (such as this) but present themselves as a regular pax - that is how their story appears to be valid - because people do not know that the writer is being remunerated for saying nice things.

PAXboy
(Independent traveller. Anything positive I say about a carrier will be from first hand knowledge and because I liked the service provided)

[Passagiata]

Hi Paxboy - um, I'm referring to perhaps a dozen conversations with colleagues and friends after a handful of ANZ flights over the last year or two - no different from anyone else chatting about any consumer experience, and I have no idea what ANZ say about themselves. And indeed my ANZ in-air experience is first-hand and entirely positive. I should have put inverted commas and some sort of smilie around 'role'. I wasn't referring to any sort of actual viral marketing. sheesh! I have no financial connection with the industry in any way whatsoever! I just want to fly on safe planes. And I want family and friends to do the same. So if there is any legitimate factual information, I'd rather have that than my own flawed intuition/subjectivity on the matter. HENCE my question. If ANZ are sited on the same plane (so to speak) as Qantas, I might as well fly Qantas.