A J Wish List.

[Cool banana]

Aviationweek.com 5th August

Qantas To Avoid Mergers For 10 years, Says CEO


Qantas, once an enthusiastic supporter of airline consolidation, won't merge with another carrier for at least 10 years, predicts CEO Alan Joyce.

"It's going to take a lot longer than we originally thought," says Joyce. "It's still the way the industry will go, but I'm not sure it's going to be in the next few years. It's going to be 10 years-plus."

Joyce also says airlines -- presumably Qantas' competitors -- may give up flying within Australia and between Australia and the United States.

The Australian domestic market is contested by Qantas, Virgin Blue and Tiger Airways, the latter part owned by Singapore Airlines. Qantas also runs a subsidiary budget carrier, Jetstar. Virgin Blue, using the V Australia brand, and Delta have entered the transpacific market, competing with Qantas and United.

Qantas and British Airways tried but failed to negotiate a merger last year. Joyce says Qantas learned from the experience that such combinations are hard to achieve.

[ditch handle]

Which means that there is a better than even chance that "management" might [for ten years] actually concentrate on running the airline.:ugh::ugh::ugh:

[Pegasus747]

dont you mean "mis" management??

have heard an interesting rumour that the Melbourne Long Haul base is looking very shaky.... Same discontent issues as the perth base before it was closed..

Apparently an exercise has been done on working out whether it would be better to have crew on A380 in melbourne and everything else on 747 done by Sydney....

Watch this space

[Gingerbread]

The SMH headline:Joyce rules out Qantas Merger

Probably means that Australia the Roo will go the same way as Air Canada
http://www.centreforaviation.com/images/resized/stories/misc/Protectionism-200x.jpg (http://www.centreforaviation.com/news/2009/08/07/air-canada-bailout-buys-time---but-canada-inc-sells-out-to-forces-of-protectionism/page1)

The Canadian government is simultaneously bailing out its flag carrier and blocking entry by foreign airlines – on the basis that they are “instruments of government policy”. Air Canada is far from safe, even with the bailout. But there is a special irony here. The government justifies its action as a matter of “national interest”. As the legacy airline industry looks for a future, this begs the question of whether that future should focus more on the economic importance of airlines, rather than their financial well-being.

Only two choices.:rolleyes:

[The Green Goblin]

National legacy airlines should be owned and operated by the people ie the Government. They should not be about making a profit but rather being a strategic national asset.

They are an essential part of transport infrastructure and an important part of commerce. They should be treated as such and not be operated by the many for the few IE GD's golden parachute.

How can you justify multi million dollar corporate salaries while dishing out pay cuts and freezes to the ones who make the company tick over?

Take back the airports into government hands, buy back into Qantas get the 777, boot out the greedy penny pinching mismanagement and appoint passionate aviation folk to put "our" airline back to what it does best. Flying!

Not going to happen :{

[teresa green]

Excellent comment Green Goblin, sadly won't happen of course, but another point to consider is the use of civilian aircraft in protection of the country and its waters/ borders, it becomes increasingly difficult to do this when the airline is owned by Joe Bloggs, though my understanding is that the govt arrangement with QF is that its aircraft and crews can be seconded at any given moment in the case of War, Invasion, or acts of GOD, floods, fires etc, when a large nbr of civilians are at risk, eg: DRW etc. This will always have to be maintained as our Armed Forces are simply not large enough to do the job themselves, which in itself will always be in the govts favour to keep QF flying no matter what, unless the job is handed over to JQ (well it would be cheaper)!

[GlobalMaster]

Graph below:
Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) total frequencies per month: Jul-2001 to Jul-2009
http://www.centreforaviation.com/images/stories/2009/august/10/lax2.png

Suggests AJ wishes GD hadn't signed him up for 20 Dugons. :p

[porch monkey]

WTF is a Dugon? Anyhow, your graph doesn't mean all that much. One of the big differences between 2001 and 2009 will also be the replacement of narrowbodies with wide bodies. Simply, more people, less aircraft. You will also find that some of the narrow bodies now go to more regional airports, rather than expensive and congested primaries. A more honest comparison is total passengers, not movements.

[GlobalMaster]

Honestly Monkey, you need to get off the porch.

As per the chart below, in excess of two million less seats were on offer in Jul-09 compared to Jul-01.

LAX total seats per month: Jul-2001 to Jul-2009
http://www.centreforaviation.com/images/stories/2009/august/10/lax1.png

[Bootstrap1]

For all of QFs faults you can not fault them in a time of crisis. They are there with an aircraft willing to take any ticket from any airline.eg Bali or asian tsunami. And there are others. This is why we need a legacy airline. I can't remember any LCC helping out in a time of need.

[cokecropduster]

I believe Virgin has done it a few times as well...

[blow.n.gasket]

How's that?
What supplying some more floozies for Sir Dickie?:}

[Going Boeing]

cropduster, there's a slight difference - when DJ did it, it was under charter from the Federal Government. There have been many occasions when QF funded the operation themselves.