QF-JStar Japan performance comparison

[Capt Kremin]

Once you know where the figures are, the spin evaporates. To any Jetstar crew reading this, it is not about you. It is about the lies and the wrecking of mainline careers by the people above you.

It is difficult to compare apples with apples when you rely on Company press releases. Even the figures that QF release to the ASX, which supposedly pass the "reasonable person" test, are found to be padded where it suits. Enormously padded.

One area where it is possible to compare apples with apples is in the official BITRE statistics. Japan is the obvious candidate for comparison as both airlines operate there.

The statistics from the last two years call into question many things. But I'll let you decide for yourself.

In the 2008 calendar year:

QF, including Australian airlines, operated 2740 flights to and from Japan, carrying 527095 Pax at an average monthly Load Factor of 76.3%

JQ operated 1532 flights to and from Japan carrying 360547 Pax at an average monthly Load factor of 69.1%

In the 2009 Calendar year:

QF mainline operated 964 flights to and from Japan carrying 207995 Pax at an average Load factor of 78.6%.

JQ operated 1949 flights to and from Japan, carrying 433827 passengers at an average monthly load factor of 73.7%

Questions for the Board:

a. Has Jetstar grown, or shrunk this market?

b.Why do you persist with Jetstar in this market when the load factors point to a preference for mainline?

You claim a 30% cost margin in favour of Jetstar. When are you going to release to the ASX the true figures regarding the subsidisation of Jetstar, as required by the ASX "reasonable person" test?

[OverheadPanel]

From discussions with airport managers, passengers and Japanese tour group operators - most Japanese pax do not like Jstar - its just that QANTAS management is forcing pax onto Jstar by reducing the alternative options (its really quite ironic that Jstar say its all about choice when in reality it is the opposite).

Premium pax are pissed off. Japanese pax are pissed off. QF staff are pissed off.....who is the winner? Jetstars figures? Well as we have seen (Capt Kremin) even they are rubbery at best.

Its amazing how an iconic brand as QF can go from one of trusted safety - a rock solid brand - to now - a distrusted brand where of all things (if nothing else at QF) the MAIN thing - SAFETY is questioned, and without a doubt has been compromised by greedy people.

[speeeedy]

Capt kremin,

How dare you let the facts get in the way of a beautiful charade!

The cost difference you refer to (30%) has been spun for years, and it is the biggest lie of all.

45 to 55% of the expenditure of an airline is directly related to fuel and aircraft, which clearly are the same whether you are an LCC or legacy.

Another 10 - 15% is marketing, computers, property etc. again, this is presumably the same on a like for like basis

Another 10% or so covers all sorts of other things, some of which an LCC may not have, but that is a choice that even a legacy could make if they thought that they were better off without these extras. For example, Qantas could save 3% tomorrow by not giving away free food, if they choose to keep the free food (presumably because they think overall it increases profit) it is hardly fair to use these items to crow about how Jetstar is cheaper. It is a choice management could make at anytime. For example why not have the last 4 rows on QF with no catering, no magazine, no headsets? Sub-Economy.

So really it just leaves the remaining 20 to 25% of cost to play with - Staff related costs.

Even if Jetstar staff work for FREE then the cost difference between it and mainline is not 30%.

More rubbery figures!

By my calculations, on a like for like basis the cost difference is around 8% (a long way from 30%).

Lies, lies and more lies, but why should we be surprised! QF are apparently using Enron as the role model for accounting and reporting standards.

Ben Sandilands should spend some real time and blow this whole thing wide open.

[Koala Sheila]

Not to mention the fact that the fares are supposed to be cheaper in the effort to attract pax.

At its peak, Qf/ AO used to run 54 flights a week to Japan from Cairns. Now = 0.:mad:

[Angle of Attack]

And there is a large proportion of that market now going to SIA, they have been running a sale in Japan for the last year or so that beats Jet* flights to Australia, and even though the flight is longer obviously sweetening the deal with a stay in Singapore included, plus they get fed and a decent IFE as well.

[Bazzamundi]

SQ and CX have benefited greatly from the QF policy re Japan.

Also, it has to be remembered that QF have ensured JQ operates the newest and cheapest equipment, much to the detriment of the average fleet age in QF.

I wonder how the figures would look if QF had kept the A330's and given JQ the 767's.

[RAD_ALT_ALIVE]

Bazz,

According to the AO supporters, the whole AO operation was the best one that god ever gave wings to. Surely then, the aircraft type must have had a huge part to play in that 'success'. And taking that line further, the trusty B767 would have been equally successful in the JQ fleet... If, however, as you imply, it would not have been successful at JQ, then why was AO the success that it clearly was (to everyone except those who see the figures and make the decisions)?

And let's not forget that 4/7 of the JQ A330 fleet are not 'spring chickens' anymore. If it were a priority that JQ operate only the most efficient aircraft, then EBA to EBD would be back at mainline, having been replaced by the newest A332s.

Captain K

Nice try, but rubbery figures at best. Firstly, here's a link to the IASC website. Determinations and Decisions (http://www.iasc.gov.au/determinations_decisions/#Japan)
I'd suggest anyone interested look at determination [2008] IASC 212 for some interesting stats regarding the serious drop in pax numbers by end of March 2008 (while QF still had 29 Japan return trips/week and JQ had 15). This in and of itself might indicate why QF had decided to leave the market by then and why the pax figures for 2009 are so much lower.

Then there's a nasty error in your figures which I will (in a great moment of benevolence) put down to cut-and-paste of dodgy data - it wouldn't be by design, surely? 360547 pax carried by JQ during 1532 flights equates to 235.4 pax per flight. Each aircraft is configured for 303 pax, therefore the average load factor is 77.7%, not 69.1%. The subsequent year's load factor is within about 5% of '08's (77.7%-73.7% = 4%. 4% is a 5.15% of 77.7%), a figure well within expectations taking into account annual variation and 'the downturn'.

QF's figures are pretty accurate if you use an average aircraft configuration of 250 seats (considering the mix of B767s, A332s and A333s).


Overhead Panel et al,

If the decision-makers were to listen to (in)accurate anecdotal feedback, the Cityflyer service would have been long dead and buried! When was the last time you listened to the grumblings from the J class suits as another flight is delayed by anything more than about 15 seconds? I too have asked many pax/staff/managers about their impressions of the JQ Japanese product; they mostly say that it's quite acceptable and that the experience is not unpleasant. So who do we believe? I'd guess that if people were unhappy, then JQ wouldn't continue to see 3/4 load factors year-on-year. The argument that there's no one else for them to fly on is weak - a mate of mine flew to NRT late last year. The cheapest ticket was SIA, and he loved it! Sure it took longer, but it shows there's still choice for punters.

I heard/you heard/they heard is irrelevant. Seats on bums is the only language in this game. When the global financial turnaround is a certainty, you QFers might find that assets move around again so that returns to the group are always maximised.

[speeeedy]

Seats on bums is the only language in this game

I'll assume (In a great moment of benevolence) you meant bums on seats.

Qantas on these routes gets and has got more bums on seats and at a higher revenue - FACT

The board does have questions to answer here - no doubt about it.

BTW Kremins figures discuss average monthly load factors, whilst the pax and flight numbers are over the whole year. This easily explains the difference - so probably no benevolence needed on your part.

[blueloo]

If the decision-makers were to listen to (in)accurate anecdotal feedback

If they listened maybe QANTAS (and Onestar) wouldnt be copping the continual negative media.

Where there is smoke there is fire comes to mind.

Whilst I don't disagree that bums on seats is vastly important - both for revenue/yield - if its bums on seats that never return cause they have had an ordinary experience or forced to fly with them - then the long term future maybe bleak - and for most employees (as opposed to short term management pay/remuneration) it is the long term that counts.

As another thread alludes to and I think whether intentionally or not in your post RAD_ALT - the arrogance of QF and the immediate dismissal of any negative publicity is something QF needs to address. To merely say it is anecdotal and therefore not factual is somewhat damning. This is a systemic problem.

How has QF got to this point where everyone else's surveys are wrong? Why is is only the surveys QF (do they sponsor them perhaps?) does well in do they accept as gospell ?

My musings aside - I have another bit of anecdotal evidence to be dismissed. QFs negative publicity comes largely as a result of how its media department is run. The arrogance (there is that word again) displayed by the PR/media department is mind boggling. The natural reaction from the press when they deal with them is quite simply "we will only publish negative stories".

[Bazzamundi]

Rad Alt, the first 330's are among the cheapest as they were compensation for the 380 delays. The newer ones are being paid for at more like market rates. The routes Jetstar fly could all have been done by the 767, however, it would increase their costs compared to the 330. The one goal of management is to ensure JQ keeps its low cost base, even if it results in an increased cost to mainline.

In the AO days, there were fewer 330's. The 767's cost a lot more to maintain given the fact the majority are closer to 20 years of age. Have you been in many lately - they are getting unreliable, showing their age, and are not popular with the business class punters.

As to whether AO was a raging success or not, it was obviously not financially worth it, as it was replaced again with QF mainline. I was not up there so I have no in depth knowledge of the Cairns market.

Also, why do we have a JQ CEO who gets judged by the performance of JQ, and a QF CEO who gets rewarded based on the performance of the group, not just QF. Therefore there is nobody with an interest in Mainline, just executives driven by the success of JQ.

An interesting snippet was that all other LCC's created by legacy entities have failed prior to JQ. This case is probably going to be the first whereby the legacy carrier ends up dead and buried because of their own LCC. The competition are loving the way QF and JQ are more focused on competing with each other rather than those they should.

[Capt Kremin]

The Load Factors are indeed the average of the monthly inbound/outbound Load factors.

Anyone can access the BITRE figures and check them.

For two months of each of those years, JQ had a higher LF than QF. QF has maintained an average LF advantage of JQ, on figures for the entire two years of 6.1%.

In the Jan 2010 figures it was almost a 13% difference. It would be interesting to see the difference in yield, but I suspect that is Commercial-in-Confidence.

[Cactusjack]

The whole JQ/QF Japan discussion comes down to $$$. It is cheaper to use JQ on the route based on the airlines overall cost structure.Passenger service and customer satisfaction is not a considation,never has been and never will be.
Break even costs are when fuel is around $100.00 per barrel (approximately,as prices tend to fluctuate like Alan's OTP performance bonus).As soon as the fuel cost exceeds this figure,JQ will (and have previously) dropped routes and/or the amount of sectors flown.It is a fairly simple formula for the group,any thing under $100.00 per barrel = cucumber sandwiches,Beluga caviar and a bottle of Chateau Lafite 1787
for Team BCG !!
So raise your glasses....

[GlobalMaster]

According to Crikey

Jetstar pays its way

Jetstar spokesperson Simon Westaway writes: Re. "Pilots: time for Qantas to come clean on propping up Jetstar (http://redirect.cmailer.com.au/LinkRedirector.aspx?clid=cde2f80f-6577-4b67-957a-3f4453d3f2e7&rid=e4e786fd-27f2-4418-a165-6634e62a03bb)" . It would be fair to say the pilot union should probably stick to the flight paths and not with thumbing their way through the financial accounts without a better interpretation of what they see within them.


The assertions made by AIPA around aspects of Jetstar's operations or financial allocations are incorrect.

Jetstar plain and simply pays its way.


Good try Bazza :8

[struggling]

Strange indeed. Is in total conflict with he following public statement:

· The president of the Australian and International Pilots Association, Barry Jackson, this morning said: "It is time for management to explain why if it's so successful Jetstar needs to be propped up by Qantas paying for its gates at major airports here and abroad, paying for significant training costs and paying for its participation in an expensive spare parts pooling arrangement with other A330 operators...."When the public are fed lines about how much more profitable Jetstar is than main line, can we please see this figures stripped of the hundreds of millions of dollars of asset transfers."

Someone is vilifying someone here. :uhoh:

[regitaekilthgiwt]

What about the other rumour that on some of the CNS-NRT flights (and maybe others) the cargo section of the Jetstar A330s is mainly empty but as the Airport Manager said - 'thats ok because Qantas rents the cargo space of the aircraft from Jetstar, therefore we make money'.

Bizarre but I have heard this from more than one source. There are plenty of different ways for Jetstar to hide getting money from QF. Simon Westaway has addressed the A330 engineering expenses but what about the thousands of other ways Jetstar uses Qantas money to prop up there business where a true new low cost carrier to the market wouldn't have. It gate space at terminals, training facilities, gifted aircraft and routes, just to name a few of the top of my head. I cannot believe now that Qf and Jetstar are now directly competing against each other on the MEL-SYD route. Its hilarious. Oh well :ugh:

[hotnhigh]

Perhaps one could ask Mr Westaway how much Jetstar paid qantas for the use of the 330 sim in Jetstar Internationals start up phase through to the end of year one? All whilst 'the expensive' qantas mainline pilots were being flown around to different parts of the world to complete their simulator cyclic requirements on third party simulators.:ugh:
Just the facts would be great!

[Bazzamundi]

QF has one 330 service per day to NRT, while JQ has how many? Yet from what I hear, QF engineers are based in the QF crew hotel, on QF allowances, while the majority of the work they do up there is looking after the JQ aircraft (up to 3 per night reportedly) while there is only 1 QF aircraft.

Any QF engineers able to elaborate on this???

[Mstr Caution]

http://travelbulletin.com.au/pdfs/inside%20story/insideOct09.pdf

Seeing Bruce Buchanan is part of the Qantas Executive Team, I assume J* reimburse QF for the cost of their CEO. Being seperate companies & all.

[Clipped]

Exactly as you have implied Bazz, it is ALL at QF expense.

To take this one further, there is also the provision of maintenance at some Australian ports of JQ planes by QF engineers. Servicing and ground equipment loaned, at a cost we're told, yet no one I know can show the invoicing to JQ.

[Toruk Macto]

I believe this was all predicted to happen 20 years ago, only way you had any chance of slowing the dismantling of QF mainline was a united front. The senior blokes at the time said no and now they are retired and happy after getting what they wanted. So what to do now!

[DutchRoll]

Well I can vouch for the fact that Qantas mainline aircraft can be required to pay exhorbitant money if they need to use a Jetstar gate, having experienced it personally. In fact it was so costly that we were told to hold in the apron area until a QF designated gate became available, pax on board, engines running, even though a JQ one right next door was vacant. And QF "group" owns the terminal!

So Simon, please stop lying to us. Didn't your mum ever tell you it's naughty, or is that principal beaten out of you these days in Australian Business School?

[triadic]

And who last week made what seems a very dumb decision to divert a CNS-BNE JQ flight to HMI with an engineer to fix a u/s Airbus....?

Talk about all the bad press from the pax that had to wade thru that diversion etc... when a charter out of CNS would have done the job most likely quicker and cheaper without all the bad PR...

Makes one wonder!!:mad::mad:

[Sunstar320]

I had a look at the BITRE site and worked out the loads for a few months, included both inbound/outbound in the figures. Buchanan keeps saying how good they are doing in Japan, when is Jetstar ever doing bad in a market! Time to dump Osaka mabye, its hardly doing any good. Swap it for a Singapore run.

Nov 2009
OOL-NRT- 81%
OOL-KIX- 53%
CNS-NRT- 63%

Dec 2010
OOL-NRT- 69%
OOL-KIX- 55%
CNS-NRT- 70%

Jan 2010
OOL-NRT- 78%
OOL-KIX- 55%
CNS-NRT-76%

[OchreOgre]

I wonder how much JQ has used on advertising in Japan.Pretty sure it has been more than QF in the last two years, and well sure more than AO in the whole four years of operation. JQ paying big yen, using the C grade celebrity "Becky", again...Half English in the first place. Pour que? JQ's big exposure advertising campaign on trains, in papers, and other media outlets, has obviously not paid off. Why else would they be advertising "Specials" from Japan, cheaper than airline staff benefit travel. What would the profit margin be on these tickets? Bums on seat at any cost? ....And there are rubbery figures....

[ditch handle]

Jetstar must [be seen to] succeed at any cost :mad:

[Wingspar]

Got it in one Ditch!

It doesn't matter how much you jump up and down. The fact is they will not let it be a failure.
To ensure that is the case, JQ are given guaranteed sources of revenue from mainline. That being in one form or another.
The only point is whether some wil ever accept it or not?

[Gingerbread]

Perhaps upcoming changes to Australia’s aviation policy will encourage Qantas to sell a % of Jetstar to a foreign airline?
Should this happen, any (undisclosed) cross revenue/cost sharing between Qantas and Jetstar would come to an end forthwith.
:)

[genex]

Enjoy the fun of your slanging and sledging kiddies

Whatever you think of life in the Qantas Group with Jetstar I trust you never find out what the Group would be like without it. "Ankle deep in blood" would be a good start if you're having trouble with word pictures.

Qantas is a GROUP.......a collection of units which add together to perform better than the sum of the parts......get over it.

[Wingspar]

Sorry, but just to correct myself
To ensure that is the case, JQ are given guaranteed sources of revenue from mainline.
Better description is;

To ensure that is the case, JQ are given guaranteed sources of value from mainline.

[Artificial Horizon]

Genex,

I couldn't agree more, Qantas 'Group' comprises many different entities of which Jetstar is just one. All the bitch*ng that goes on about Jetstar seems to forget the convenient fact that it was only started as a 'blocker' to Virgin Blue totally taking a massive share in the domestic market working with costs that would mean Qantas as it existed would not be able to compete with. Jetstar was formed on a reduced cost basis in direct competition with Virgin Blue and was given certain advantages by its parent company. Why would you go to the trouble of spending all that money on a new operation without giving it every chance of success. Funny thing happened then.... the public actually had a taste for this 'low cost' carrier and drove demand for more services, was it to the detriment of the Qantas 'Group', NO, it is still highly profitable and it has successfully stopped other competitors from dominating the market. Has it been detrimental to the career aspirations of some Qantas mainline employees, YES. This is not a new thing though, companies the world over chop and change all the time to remain competitive, there are always casualties in this sort of business environment. Try and think though, would your jobs and careers have been any further ahead in a 'non-Jetstar' world once Virgin, Tiger etc... had moved in an destroyed Qantas mainline domestically?? I am afraid Jetstar is here to stay, they will continue to receive help from Qantas Group resources because they are part of the Group.:ugh:

[Capt Kremin]

I haven't published anything about Jetstar domestic. The issue here is Jetstar Intl.

So far we have found that almost half of its quoted passengers are actually domestic passengers in Australia and NZ. Then we find that the routes and aircraft that were gifted to it from mainline are operating at a substantial reduction in load factor in comparison to mainline, and very probably yield as well.

Jetstar International has shrunk the Group's Japanese market. It has probably done that elsewhere as well, but it is difficult to make a direct comparison on most routes.

Maybe you should pay attention to the actual thread?

[genex]

Jetstar has, by itself, as a direct result of QF policy, actually shrunk the Japanese market!! Wow...that is a big call. Sure the Board will be calling you anyday for your rare forensic insights into the lemming like behaviour of management who for some reason seem to seek loss rather than profit. Are you really sure Japan wasn't being subsidized by mainline losses before and now is closer to the long run trend which from all accounts I read is downwards anyway.

Subsidies are such interesting things. For example the severe constraints on Sydney due the size of the airport and the curfew is a heavy subsidy by travellers toward those carriers with privileged positions at KSA. One in particular. Imagine the free market value of the acres of staff car parks at the Qantas base? Wow....If Sydney West airport had even one 12,000 ft Cat 3 strip up and running now, 24/7 with open skies access, yields would have fallen and markets expanded. So the monopolist carrier would have have to slim down heaps. In that world the $150 k Second Officers would be long gone. What is the "free market" value of a Qantas S/O job if they had to pay the full costs and not be subsidized by the rest of the Group (including one wonders.... JQ's blue singlet Y class travellers?) I'd guess that buying your own 744 rating and starting at $65k would be the going rate if you advertised 200 jobs tomorrow and saw what the market would bear.

The mere fact that Qantas mainline operates such an inefficient fleet with way above world level salaries for pilots is a function of hidden subsidies of all sorts. It would be fascinating to sort it all out. Years back, (and if anyone wants it I think there's a copy in Genex's library) the old BTE produced a report saying that Qantas' costs and protection were such a net drain on Australian industry and tourism that we would all be better off to scrap QF, announce open skies and let the free market rule. Jetstar is a start at reversing that travesty and if pampered/subisized AIPA/Qantas pilots could think a little positively and read history books instead of sledging, the world might be a better place.

[Artificial Horizon]

Oh I see, so Qantas management are replacing huge chunks of their overseas markets with Jetstar knowing that they will be making less money!! Then they are fiddling the figures to hide that fact whilst all the time planning to give even more of the profitable routes to an airline that will also bring in less money:eek:

[Capt Kremin]

I see you aren't really interested in discussing the figures, only illustrating your bias.

Some more figures. The only competition the QF group has on this route is Jalways. Analysis of their figures does indeed point to a reduction of overall traffic on the Japan Australia route, but the load factors are very interesting.

In the 2008 calendar year Jalways carried 375360 Pax at an average monthly load factor of 68.6%

Australian Airlines was shutdown at the end of 2008 and replaced by Jetstar. The Jalways LF's immediately leapt.

In the 2009 calendar year Jalways carried less passengers, 279869, but at a LF of 76.5%. A jump of almost 8%. While there could be many reasons for that, the obvious one is that the Japanese do not like flying on Jetstar.

Genex in your world a car park for a business of 35,000 people may be seen as a subsidy, others may view it as a necessary expense of running business in a city like Sydney.

No SO in QF gets 150K as their base pay. If SO's are making 150K then they are doing that on LH overtime payments on top of their base pay. With other airlines crewing complements those OT payments would be getting added at Captain and FO rates. The SO is actually saving QF money.

I don't know what that has to do with looking at the comparison of QF-JQ on a route where they operate similiar equipment and one has recently assumes the routes of the other. Maybe you can explain...:=

[mohikan]

Genex.

The history of commercial aviation is littered with management decisions which were quite obviously contrary to logical business interest. Frank Lorenzo at Eastern comes to mind.

Qantas senior management has been charactarised for some time by ego, hubris and a focus on short term remuneration targets. Have a look at the APA debacle for the prime example if you don't believe me.

Because of this mindset, Jetstar cannot be seen to be less then a resounding success. Even if it drags down the parent airline with it in the process of being 'successful'.

Personally, I don't care about transfer pricing and cross subsidisation - hell. 'economies of scale' is high school economics 101.

What I, and every other mainline employee wants as well, is for senior management to stop lying about whats going on. If JQ needs to be supported by mainline revenue to block VB / Tiger / Air Asia ect, then I defer to the superior business judgement and acumen of those paid the big bucks.

Until the lies stop, engagement is impossible. Pure and Simple.

[Bazzamundi]

Genex, QF are the only airline in the world who carry 2 second officers as part of the crew complement. Cathay and Air NZ carry one s/o and 2 f/o's. BA, United, Emirates and others all carry a heavy 4 crew complement of 2 Captains and 2 F/O's.

By the admission of management at various briefings in years gone by, the total crewing cost of operating a heavy long haul (4 pilot crew) is significantly cheaper for Qantas than most major carriers due to our ability to carry second officers.

Then here you stand and bleat about how overpaid QF crews are. No wonder the industry is heading to where it is. It is your attitude which is the cancer in this industry.

[ampclamp]

I think Kremin has raised (again) some very pertinent points regarding the way jetstar int figures are published.
Diversion onto pay for crew and carparks etc just drifts away from an important issue.
I am a qf employee and shareholder and if J* is not quite what they want us to believe I want to know.

Thanks to capt kremin for some independent analysis.

[balance]

Gotta agree with amp here.

It has been very evident for a long time now that Jetstar is a parasite on it's parent, despite the constant management spin to the contrary. Intimations that Jetstar is profitable whilst mainline is losing money is laughable at best, shonky and deceitful at worst.

That Kremin has taken the time to come up with these figures is a credit to him. It is way more than anyone else has done. That crikey.com has utilised his figures and filed complaint to the ASX is great - they demand accountability for the shareholders and employees. That this should have been required in the first place is abhorent - you should hang your head in shame QF management.

AH:

Oh I see, so Qantas management are replacing huge chunks of their overseas markets with Jetstar knowing that they will be making less money!! Then they are fiddling the figures to hide that fact whilst all the time planning to give even more of the profitable routes to an airline that will also bring in less money

Yes. Yes I believe they are. Sad isn't it?

Another AH gem:

I am afraid Jetstar is here to stay, they will continue to receive help from Qantas Group resources because they are part of the Group.

Quite true, unfortunately. All that is being asked though by Kremin, and quite reasonably so IMHO, is some honesty from management. Not spin. Not rubbery figures. Not lies. Just the truth. But also unfortunately, QF management couldnt lie straight in bed.

To address the AH and genex anti QF sentiment: sorry lads but you are defending the indefensible, and supporting this attitude will come back and bite us all in the @rse one day. It probably already has....

[ampclamp]

Hi balance,
I'm not anti jetstar per se' far from it.The reality is qf needs its cheap offshoot.Thats rpt these days.

all of us just trying to earn the best living we can. Captain or cleaner we all answer to the boss.
The qf v jq peeing competition annoys the heck out of me.

It is purely the way the qf management has chosen to operate , divide , conquer, gifting of routes, denegrating the mainline as too expensive etc etc.They preach we are one group but not once have I seen them preach teamwork.Its always segregation lest we infect the orange family with bad qf attitudes.
Well lo and behold they run the show, insist on having more mangement levels than ever.The qf board and exec committee are resposible for the efficient running of the company, full stop.

If Kremin's posts manage to rattle some ones chains thats great isnt it?
Dont care if its BHP qantas RIO or some tiddler miner, the principal is the same.

Again I commend kremin for his attempt at clarity.There are plenty of sheep in the financial press.Very few actually do any analysis at all.

many I am sure just echo the PR blurb issued by the various companies.
I well remember the fawning over of the types of Skase, Bond, Groves, Babcock and brown OneTel FAI.
Qantas is way above those as a business and draw no inference there, we make real money with a real business, but I am sure you get the principal I am driving.

[Capt Kremin]

Can I put forward my basic position as that I agree that Jetstar Domestic appears to have done the job in countering the threat from the LCC's on the Australian scene.

The only issue I have ever had with Jetstar Dom is the method of it's creation and it's effect on the career progression of junior mainline pilots who were systematically excluded from taking any meaningful part in the expansion of that part of the Group.

Jetstar International however is a problem. Senior management, and I mean Board level, put forward the opinion a couple of years ago that there were real questions hanging over Jetstar International. Nothing we have seen in these figures changes those questions.

We have seen Jetstar senior management constantly talking up Jetstar International with over the top claims about its growth and popularity. The massive growth claims are fallacious. The popularity claims are fallacious.

When they attempt to foster these claims by including purely domestic passengers to pad the figures I believe their motives become clear. When the load factor comparison with mainline shows a systemic deficit the motives yet again becomes clear.

I believe the Board is being derelict in its duty to represent the shareholders. The plan to increase the number of A330's to 12 and have a 787 fleet size of 25 or so, cannot be sustained on these figures. There is a better option available. The poor old Qantas brand, given half a chance, would seem to represent better shareholder value based on these figures.

If anyone cares to argue that fact lets see your evidence?

[Wingspar]

The reason for the inflated success JQ figures is that management need to show some form of performance measurement, KPI's if you like.
There is only so much they could do with QF.
So lets substitute QF business over to JQ and prove how smart we are!
It's their justification for their highly inflated salaries

[ghw78]

Quoting Bazzamundi

" Genex, QF are the only airline in the world who carry 2 second officers as part of the crew complement. Cathay and Air NZ carry one s/o and 2 f/o's. BA, United, Emirates and others all carry a heavy 4 crew complement of 2 Captains and 2 F/O's."

Air NZ have a 4 pilot crew as standard on a few routes, PEK, YVR and on occasions when there is a short turn around on slightly shorter routes normally crewed as a three Pilot Crew..

The Standard crewing for 4 pilots is 1 x Capt, 1 x F/O and 2 x S/O. Only when there is a shortage of S/Os, then they may be replaced by either a Capt and/or F/O.So if a four pilot crew included only 1 x S/O the the extra Capt/F/O is acting as a temporary replacement for the missing S/O

[QFinsider]

This thread is one of the best I have ever read on pprune. I thank Capt. K for his efforts. In dissecting the company accounts there is little guidance available making comparison extremely difficult. It has be near on impossible to understand 'contribution margin'
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was instituted as a result of the collapse of Enron. Students of the corporation would be well advised to see just how misleading Enron's accounting ,record keeping and statements to the market actually were.

The reality is that the Japanese market has allowed an "apples to apples" comparison. This has been very difficult to date. In revealing the reality of JQ international's success or otherwise Capt. K has raised very important issues with respect to statements made by management, the standards adopted by the company and more broadly the issue of transparency in accounting standards and corporate governance. No matter in which "entity" one sits it poses some very big questions...

[Angle of Attack]

Regardless of the figures the Japanese market has tanked, completely, so its all smoke and mirrors anyway, the only thing increasing loads are Aussies going to the increasingly popular ski market in Northern japan.

[dragon man]

The only problem with QF and skiing is that Sapporo is not listed as a destination on the QF web page. So you have to book QF to Narita then either JAL or ANA separately. Last year the JAL flights connected out of Narita to Sapporo but to come home you had to go to Haneda. Not user friendly so most people i know book with Cathay through Hongkong. Just another opportunity lost.

[4PW's]

Not sure why, but the Osaka - Cairns flight was canceled last night. The Narita - Cairns flight departed pretty much on-time for Cairns via Osaka to pick up whatever pax in Osaka. Bit of thread drift, perhaps. Not sure, but given Osaka just started up, this doesn't sound good for a new route.

[skybed]

2 class configured aircraft will shortly start flying on the SYD-NRT-SYD sectors.:ok:

[blow.n.gasket]

Is that so Qantas can reinvigorate the route prior to handing it back to jetstar again?:}

[Capt Kremin]

February BITRE figures for the Japan Route.

Jetstar Average load factor = 85.85%

QF Average load factor = 94%

Memo to the Board...... have you looked at these figures?:ugh:

[Sunstar320]

Over the last few months loads were crap so they re-gigged the flight plans so frequencies were cut so loads will probably appear higher.

Buchanan will be out soon blabbing about record loads for Japan etc...fact is they have been sending the A332 NRT-KIX-OOL and it dosn't even appear to be daily. Appears to be a big bus on the ground every day at OOL now, expect this week which is some holiday week in Japan or something...

[Angle of Attack]

Jetstar Average load factor = 85.85%

QF Average load factor = 94%


And when you talk about the yield you can be assured the split is exponentially higher!:ok:

[Koala Sheila]

Given Qantas has a world class board full of aviation experience I am sure they can properly explain why Jetstar makes a greater return on equity given they have lower yield and pax numbers :ugh::E

Hey Capt Kremin, are the numbers out on Jetstars passenger numbers for this month yet? I am looking forward to reading how they count the amount of passengers they have again, I am guessing another 30% growth rate:p :8

[Capt Kremin]

Check the ".....WTF?" thread. It is all there.

[Zapatas Blood]

"the total crewing cost of operating a heavy long haul (4 pilot crew) is significantly cheaper for Qantas than most major carriers due to our ability to carry second officers."

The only attitude problem around here is that guys like bazz actually believe this bollocks.

Some UA 744 FO's post ch11 get less than some QF SO's.

[Capt Coco]

Yep it appears they are cancelling 4 to 5 flight a week out of OOL (keeping the weekend flights as normal) for the whole of MAY and combining the NRT and KIX flights into a OOL-NRT-KIX-OOL flight instead (I guess the load factors will still look good then!!!)
When I asked the checkin lady the other day at OOL about the flights in May and why a couple of my next few flights have been canceled or as JETSTAR put it 'rescheduled due to operational requirements!!!!!' (And what do I do now!!) she said and quote "Well we're not going to send a empty A330 to Japan if we can't make money are we!?!?!?!"
Oh for the good old days of scheduled airlines!!

[cart_elevator]

It will be interesting if Qantas/ Jet* can get some more routes into Japan with JAL cutting 40% of international operations and retiring all 747's shortly... maybe some routes could open up for the QF group?

[alangirvan]

With all those US carriers scrambling to get into Haneda, it must be time an Australian carrier or two got in there, as well.

[ratpoison]

be time an Australian carrier or two got in there
Well that would be Qantas or V Aus then since the inept moron running Jetcrap has publicly stated "Jetstar has never stated it is an Australian airline".
That must be the reason why Australian cabin crew are rapidly being replaced by asians earning 12K a year. :ugh:

[genex]

Ratpoison

Have you got any products at all in your home labelled "Made in China-Korea-Singapore-India etc etc" ??? Its a world economy. You go jogging in Nikes made by some $3 a day laborer but would deny passengers the right to use Asian employees when they travel. Hypocrite!! Did you ever fly with Cathay or Singapore? Do you fly a wholly Australian made aircraft? Hypocrite!!!

And as for your use of the English language....haven't seen so much spleen since I first saw that autopsy programme on SBS. At least that was educational. Yours was but a sad insight into a troubled and warped mind.

[ratpoison]

Oh genex, you really need to do something about your anger. No doubt, yet another Australian who is too inept to eat at home and has to settle for "takeaway".

"Why you so angry man geeeeeex, ladyboy love you sooo muuuuch. You so handsome man geneeeex. Me not want your money. Love you long time geneeeex."

F***ing idiot :ugh: