Taking on Emirates in their own background

[Ka.Boom]

Emirates seems to be the only airline that is confident about the future and is not risk averse.
Qantas just sits back and cops it while complaining about the uneven playing field.
Get some hulls to start flying to Dubai and take these guys on.
The kangaroo route is losing money.Travellers are sick of Deathrow and having to backtrack to reach their European destinations.
Dubai is a fantastic launchpad to Europe...no Deathrow and no backtracking
Qantas used to be an innovator..now its just a shrinking whiner

[Wizofoz]

Ka,

Not to be pedantic (OK, yes I am!!) but the phrase you're looking for is "Taking on Emirates in their own backYARD"

The porblem with what you are saying is, well, exactley what you are saying. Dubai is a great Hub, not a destination in itself. Something like 80% of EKs traffic through DXB is transit pax going on the different destinations.

There would be no point QF flying there unless it was tied up with other carriers going on to popular destinations in Europe, Africa and the Sub-Continent,.

Even then, you can't match the seamlessness and consistency of product of flying with one carrier through a hub which it basically owns. This has always been the strength of the likes of Singair and Thai, and EK has taken it to a new level.

Australia simply is where it is, and Qantas has the restraints that implys. It also has the advantage that it can reach some of it's biggest markets (notably North America) non-stop, and is thus able to shut fifth-freedom competition out on those routes.

If THAT ever changes, QF would be in REAL trouble!

[metrosmoker]

Wizofoz,

Your entire argument is not only correct, but exactly the reason Singapore, Emirates and any other carrier should not be given rights to fly across the Pacific.

Australia is simply where it is. We need some advantage over the rest of the world. Everything down here is all to hard for the rest of the world, UNLESS there is a dollar in for someone.

Back on topic. No matter where Qantas hub through, people going to Europe want to go to Europe. A stop in Dubai, Singapore, Bangkok is still a stop. Ka does have a point.

[The Green Goblin]

If you can't beat 'em join 'em!

Qantas and Emirates merger :}

[skybed]

was a plan to go to abu dhabi a while ago but it looks like being shelved. there is no clear strategy at the moment for QF. They pin their hopes on 7 million FF, J* expansion and Qf using A380 to Lax & Lhr. sad story indeed!:{

[dragon man]

A good post. QFs problems in my opinion are twofold. 1) The product has slipped, however the A380 is an excellent improvement however it only makes up a small part of the network at the moment. 2) Thanks to Dickson we never purchased the 777 and this has created a major problem in that Qf cant hub into Singapore from Brisbane and Perth with these aircraft and then send them on thinner routes to Europe with paxs that have come from Syd/Mel on the A380. I believe the failure to purchase the 777 will go down in history as one of the worst mistakes management have made in the airlines history. It will haunt Qf for many many years to come. I think they are now so far behind the power curve re competing with Emirates that they will never get in front of them. Witness the Tasman where they have basically capitulated and are competing with 737s against Emirates wide bodies. I know whose aircraft id be on if i was paying for the ticket.

[Jed Clampett]

What about operating the A380 as QF1 and QF2 through Abu Dhabi to LHR and return. QF already codeshare with Etihad and they have a fairly substantial network into Europe. This would at least put a QF presence in the Middle East with connections through to the UK and Europe. They could then leave Bangkok/Thailand to JQ.

[packrat]

A380 into Dubai
Base 3 or 4 A330 in Dubai
Zurich Copenhagen and Paris all within reach
But wait...I forgot JetStar will be doing that.
Therein lies the problem...no growth for mainline while Jetstar is around

[Metro man]

Basically, exactly as Wizofoz says. Emirates offers CONNECTIONS, QF would need to fly into Dubai from SYD/MEL/PER/BNE and then tie up connecting flights with other airlines or operate those flights themselves.

They would have the problems of coordinating timetables, code shares, baggage transfers and revenue sharing just to start with.

Emirates can offer Birmingham UK to Perth with one stop via Dubai. QF would only attract passengers going to Australia where as EK can offer them Africa, Far East, Asia and South America, possibly North America if the price made up for the extra travel time. A seamless, easy way to travel with all the ease of staying on one carrier.

With modern aircraft it is possible to fly from Dubai to any point in the world non stop. With its central location it covers a huge chunk of the travel market.

QF don't have the aircraft or product to compete. B744s are too big for frequency on the thinner routes, and who wants to fly long range on a B767 ? EK enjoy considerable cost savings with Dubai based non unionized labour, and don't have to follow Australian workplace laws.ie they don't have to pay inflated wages to non performing personnel who can't be sacked.

Had QF bought B777s and operated a hub through Singapore it could have had a much more extensive European network and competed on the major city routes to Australia. EK now have a huge lead which will be difficult to catch even with the B787.

[desmotronic]

Nothing wrong with being a pedant Wiz but
The porblem with what you are saying is, well, exactley what you are saying. :}

[Showa Cho]

Bugger Dubai, just go to twice a day with Etihad out of the ports the currently serve to Abu Dhabi. One Etihad flight, one QANATS flight. They codeshare already, and Etihad connections are pretty good to Europe. Could it be a possibility?

[terminal2]

B744s are too big for frequency on the thinner routes, and who wants to fly long range on a B767 ?
......Seemed to be okay for B707's back in the day.

EK enjoy considerable cost savings with Dubai based non unionized labour, and don't have to follow Australian workplace laws.ie they don't have to pay inflated wages to non performing personnel who can't be sacked.
......You're welcome to come work here in Australia for free.

[swh]

Qantas and Emirates merger

Three words, Qantas Sales Act, no can do.

However if you were to spin off a lot of your airline growth into an airline that sits somewhere between a full service carrier and a LCC, it would be as good as, if not better than what airlines like EK offer as a regional product.

That airline would not be subject to the Qantas Sales Act, and could be taken over.

Not being biased (I am an Aussie), but EK has a much better product than QF

EK has a range of products in service, not every aircraft is kitted out like the new A380s. Their older "regional" 2 class aircraft are not as good at the Jetstar product on the A330. However the seats on the aircraft are only just a part of the overall experience as you mentioned.

[Metro man]

......Seemed to be okay for B707's back in the day.

Ah yes, the good old days, when you would have gone London - Bahrain - Singapore - Perth - Sydney. A projector screen at the front and those rubber tube earphones. A trip down under or back to the old country would have been the highlight of your life. Now it's a wide body with 100 channels on demand IFE and a stopover in Dubai for some shopping. Affordable every few years if you're careful.

You're welcome to come work here in Australia for free

Unionised inefficiency and cost is fine when you have no competition or your competition has the same handicap. When the kangaroo route was a QF/BA duopoly the customer had little choice. Now Emirates, Etihad, Qatar, Cathay, Singapore, Malaysian, Korean, EVA, China, Thai, Brunei just to name a few are competing on the same route. They play by different rules with most of them having award winning service and/or government oil money backing them.

In the latest Skytrax awards QF come in at number seven THE WORLD AIRLINE AWARDS™ - the Passenger's Choice (http://www.worldairlineawards.com/) all of the other airlines in the top ten, except Air New Zealand, compete directly on the Australia - Europe run.

Whilst QF did well in the premium economy category, BA didn't win a single award, are bleeding money and beset by strikes. QF could be in the same position in a few years time.

[terminal2]

Why get so worked up about it?
It's beyond your control.
........let it go.

[parabellum]

Why get so worked up about it?
It's beyond your control.
........let it go.


Because it would be a great shame to see QANTAS end up like Swissair and SABENA perhaps?

[Tempo]

but EK has a much better product than QF. In my opinion, EK offers a better level of service on board than QF

Have travelled Business and with EK and the same with QF and in my opinion....QF's product is far superior to that of EK.

[PPRuNeUser0198]

You all seem to be forgetting the underlying issue with operating via the Middle East; it would only be viable if Qantas secured rights to fly onwards to Europe. Qantas needs daily services from the Middle East and beyond for the market to work. Flying only to the Middle East does not offer value for Qantas. The traffic would primarily be VFR.

The majority of traffic that actually goes to the Middle East is European traffic. It's not a destination, but simply a transit. People are not specifically going to the Middle East for holidays, they're simply transiting onwards to Europe.

Qantas cannot get traffic rights onwards to London on other preferred European cities.

That is the bottom line. The same applies to China. Qantas has been lobbying to allow travel to China and on to Europe, however has been denied access onwards.

Qantas needs access (and frequent) to London to enable onward European travel for customers, otherwise why would a customer fly Qantas via the Middle East to Europe when they can fly a Middle Eastern airline with a minimum potential two stops to get to a European city?

On Qantas you'd have to fly i.e. MEL/DXB (if an aircraft can make it)LHR/ATH for example or potential MEL/SIN/DXB/LHR/ATH to keep it all QF metal.

That is why Qantas code-shares with Etihad. But for Qantas to operate just to the Middle East - not viable. Also consider that the Middle East market is heavily saturated with capacity. The yields would be relatively poor.

[parabellum]

QANTAS had traffic rights via Bahrain to Europe for years, what happened to those?

[Ken Borough]

But for Qantas to operate just to the Middle East - not viable. Also consider that the Middle East market is heavily saturated with capacity

And if Emirates and Etihad were restricted to Aus/ME uplift/discharge, then they may elect not to operate at all to Australia. They are operating to/from Australia to capture end-to-end Aus/UK-Europe traffic, make no mistake. With the excess capacity they offer, the yields are also probably quite low but they have the wherewthal to absorb it - for now. These carriers are no more than leeches, parasites - call them what you will.

[PPRuNeUser0198]

QANTAS had traffic rights via Bahrain to Europe for years, what happened to those?

Not daily. Qantas needs daily and direct. There is no point adding an extra stop on the way via SIN or HKG because the equipment cannot operate non-stop from MEL to the Middle East - including considering the issue of weight restrictions that may limit passengers or cargo, in particular cargo.

the yields are also probably quite low but they have the wherewthal to absorb it - for now.

Let's not forget that Etihad are yet to turn a profit. Unprofitable for 5 or 6 years now...Any other airline business share-holder run would be out-of-business. So the question must be asked; if they can continue to operate, buy more aircraft and spend on product, yet run a loss, then one must ask where the money is coming from and what the agenda's are...These Middle Eastern destinations will eventually run out of oil. What will form the countries GDP? Tourism. That's all they'll have so what better way then to dump as many souls into their states as possible to spend, spend, spend...It's more about Government policy/agenda's then actually running a profitable business...

I'd go as far as to question EK's books too. How you can spend so much capital on new aircraft as they have is beyond belief...How are they financing this? they'd certainly not be capturing premium yield considering they price well below Qantas and many other carriers...

There is more to it then what's portrayed.

[surfside6]

Why not Sydney Bahrain and then onto Europe.?
Bahrain was essentially a tech stop for the 747 200s to uplift fuel
The skill set at QF is essentially domestic.They will always have difficulty growing an international airline.

[Metro man]

Middle Eastern Airlines are not there just to be commercially viable and turn a profit. As long as we need to keep buying oil from the Arabs they'll have the money to run at a loss.

Dubai is planning for when their oil runs out, they want to be a world business center - Singapore in the Middle East. An airline serving the world will help them achieve this and eventually contribute to Dubai Incorporated

Abu Dhabi has plenty of oil and the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world. It can't be upstaged by Dubai so starts an airline Etihad, to rival Emirates. If it turns a profit, great. If not even, British Airways scale losses are only a few days interest earned by their US $800 billion government portfolio.

A few years ago most people wouldn't have been able to find QATAR on a map. Now every body's heard of QATAR Airways and their numerous awards.The sheik can hold his head up at the Arab summit meetings and with their massive LNG reserves he can afford to stay in the "arms race".

Just be grateful Saudi Arabian haven't jumped on the band wagon. Older equipment (but big orders in), no alcohol and an aversion to western tourists visiting the Kingdom hold them back. But with their oil reserves there's no time limit on how long they can stay in the game.

Airlines such as Egypt Air, Royal Jordanian, Oman Air etc either lack the financial muscle, capability or the will to join in. As long as they can serve neighbouring countries, migrant labour sources, the major shopping and financial centers in Europe and a long range destination or two in North America or the Far East they'll be happy.

[ferris]

I'm not sure a lot of the posters here grasp what is going on. Lots of people are under the impression that ME airlines are created (and run at a loss) for various reasons such as diversification of economy/promotion of the place/because they can...
The fact is they don't have to grow them organically, like a normal business. They have the resources to fast-track them to huge. But to think they are not going to make money is just wrong (EK already makes more than a BILLION (!) dollars annually). They are growing the cake, whilst QF stagnates - QFs own annual report says as much. QF keeps operating the same amount of seats, but the total amount of seats sold is growing at a great rate. Not just flown- but sold. The loads on every carrier out of oz are terrific- ask the pilots on this forum who fly them. I fly to and from the ME regularly, and there is never more than the odd empty seat. Im usually one of half a dozen who get off in the ME- so, yes, the traffic is almost all onwards to Europe (or elsewhere). But exactly what has QF done to protect it's market? Anything at all?
Dismissing the ME carriers as a flash in the pan that will die away "when the oil runs out" is going to lead to a lot of disappointment. At least they hire lots of us aussies.

[Metro man]

Huge size doesn't necessarily equal huge profits, just look at British Airways. Obviously the owners would rather be in the black ink than the red and their business plans are likely to aim for that at some stage.

However they have the resources behind them to ride out many negative years which would send other airlines to the wall and if it doesn't work out no one gets his house reposessed.

Huge resources enabling top people to be hired straight away, brand new aircraft and a clean sheet of paper to start on. Add a base with cheap labour, favourable laws and government backing. Tough competition.

[8888]

and even if the argument that they will 'run out of oil' one day holds true the damage done in the mean time to the likes of QF and other 'genuine, profit based airlines' could be terminal. If they outlast the competition they'll start to prove themselves viable by default.

[Visual Procedures]

T-vasis..

EK and the Dubai government regularly promte the 'open skies' policy of Dubai. Many airlines use Dubai as a stopover on the way to Europe. Singapore and Cathay to name just 2 off the top of my head..

[Koala Sheila]

Singapore and Cathay to name just 2 off the top of my head..
Where in Europe do these 2 airlines fly to?

If Qantas was serious, they would operate to Dubai and then use the JSA and Codeshare agreements they have with other airlines to offer passengers destinations in Europe. But I guess I am dreaming as expansion and innovation no longer form part of the mainline dictionary.:cool: Moreover, what is the point of having an "Airport of the future" when the passengers still end up on the same old jets.:mad:

[sandpit]

I think they only fly freighters through, not pax.

[Captain Dart]

Correct. CX pax flights to Europe are non-stop from Hong Kong. Dubai, Bahrain, Jeddah, Riyadh still a big pax destination from HKG in their own right though.

[ferris]

I remember many moons ago sitting in my accountants office as he was trying to pass some wisdom to me: "Look, you are making lots of money atm, but you have to decide- are you going to run this business as a cash cow, and just take the money out, or are you going to run it for the long term? If it's a cash cow, it wont be here in 5 years, so you need to plan for that. If you want to keep it, you need to make substantial re-investment every year". I didn't believe him. He was right (I took the cash cow option). Every time I think about QF, I think back to that speech in his office (of course QF international will still be here in 5 years. Won't it?).

[halas]

ME carriers are playing on the globalisation and liberalisation of the industry and routes, knowing full well that most punters are not travelling to Dubai, Abu Dhabi etc. So as stated here they are moving in on other market pairings that have been dominated by established carriers for years.

However l think Oneworld is probably the biggest restriction QF have on any expansion.

It appears to me that EK don't need an alliance, and indeed know it's detrimental to any expansion. I think Jet* know this too :oh:

halas

[404 Titan]

Personally when I am going to fly long haul I look for the shortest flight. If you live on the east coast of Aus, it is quickest to go via SIN or HKG. If you live in PER it is quickest to go via DXB. I tend to think all QF is doing is putting the capacity where most of the population centres lie on the shortest route.

SYD → HKG → LHR = 9208nm
SYD → SIN → LHR = 9291nm
SYD → DXB → LHR = 9488nm

MEL → HKG → LHR = 9227nm
MEL → SIN → LHR = 9108nm
MEL → DXB → LHR = 9279nm

BNE → HKG → LHR = 8967nm
BNE → SIN → LHR = 9210nm
BNE → DXB → LHR = 9451nm

PER → HKG → LHR = 8483nm
PER → SIN → LHR = 8000nm
PER → DXB → LHR = 7864nm

[ferris]

Yeah but a/c don't fly a strict 'great circle'. More to flight planning than that.
Also, as a pax, "shortest flight" will mean shortest stop between legs, or shortest total time. Thats what I look for. You also assume (in a very QF way) that everyone wants to go to LHR. Take a look at, say, a journey to ANZAC day at Gallipoli. SY/MEL/BRI/PER to Istanbul. One stop to Istanbul via the ME....

[404 Titan]

ferris
Yeah but a/c don't fly a strict 'great circle'. More to flight planning than that.
I am very well aware of that. Flight planning is usually filed to produce a minimum fuel burn and time combination. North/South flights generally follow very close to a great circle route, airways allowing for this. West to East will generally flight plan to follow a prevailing jet stream. East to West will generally file to avoid the prevailing jet stream. Airline schedules for airlines routing to LHR will confirm my view that DXB is only really beneficial from PER. I have only used LHR as a reference point. Other European destinations follow the same logic.

For the record I’m not QF. I’m CX.

[ferris]

Airline schedules for airlines routing to LHR will confirm my view that DXB is only really beneficial from PER. Then explain why every single one (QF, SIA, Thai etc.) all flew over DXB last night? Anyway, getting away from the real issues.

[Metro man]

This is where frequency and connections come into play. If your particular airline serves where you want to go two or three times a day the your connection is likely to be shorter. Two hours is about right if you already have next sectors boarding pass in hand, your not pushed if you arrive half an hour late and you have time for a comfortable stroll around, perhaps a shower or some shopping and back on board.

Also the desirability of a stop over on route needs considering. Singapore, Dubai and Hong Kong have plenty to see and do during a 24/36/48 hour journey break. Singapore's Changi is a lovely airport to spend time in and I make a point of arriving early just to look around. There is a transit hotel air side and an eight hour break would be quite comfortable en route from Australia to Europe, a few hours sleep in a real bed, nice hot shower and change of clothes, dinner, film, gym are available.

However Qatar or Abu Dhabi leave a bit to be desired at the moment and more than about three hours would be quite tedious.

[Ken Borough]

404,

GC distances are one measure but probably the most accurate measure is scheduled block times added to transit times. There are sometimes fudges to suit slots (or to get better punctuality,or fiddle a crew duty day isssue) but my understanding is that most carriers use seasonal blocktimes based on experience to something like the 65th percentile.

[404 Titan]

ferris
Then explain why every single one (QF, SIA, Thai etc.) all flew over DXB last night?
Looking at last nights weather charts would indicate that flight planning via Afghanistan or Iran would have been unfavourable with a jet stream of about 100 knots at FL380 from a NW’ly direction. It would make sense for these flights to have flight planned further west to avoid this and then encounter it later on and for a briefer period of time with the wind at roughly 90° to flight plan track.

Ken Borough
GC distances are one measure but probably the most accurate measure is scheduled block times added to transit times.
I actually said something to that effect when I said:
Airline schedules for airlines routing to LHR will confirm my view that DXB is only really beneficial from PER.

[High 6]

As far as SQ flights into DXB and AUH, they do a lot of freighters but have also over the years operated passenger SIN - DXB - CAI and SIN - AUH - JED returns on B777 and A330. Don't know if that is still happening. CX used to operate a HKG - BOM - DXB return on the B777 a few years ago as well.

With the UAE open sky policy it seems that any airline can operate through DXB/AUH to wherever they want, am not sure of fifth freedom rights though.

[mikk_13]

I don't understand why qantas does not get in bed with cathay. I good code share and pricing would mean both carriers could fly all the capitals to Hk with Q, then onwards with cathey to europe. Q could increase their capacity on the hk route while cathey could do the same to europe, and the savings would roll in. But i guess there is no foresight or inspiration in Q, its all about the A380 which soon everyone else will fly also.

I've flown a few airlines and Q wasn't great. I flew the clapped out 747-3 for one of the legs and that will be the last time i fly Q. It was embarrassing.

Qantas offers nothing better or worse than any other carrier, so why pay more for qantas. I find it hard to believe that some people seem to believe flying Q is better value for money.

The simple fact is Q pulled a big 1 billion profit, spent nothing on the service or product for a period of time, and now they are behind all the other carriers.

Qantas is not going anywhere. They are unheard of in europe and more expensive than most. The range of destination in Asia is minimal and limited. They don't even fly direct to Beijing even with the huge chinese population in most cities.

The only way i see any future with Q is they really need to revamp their product so it is worth the money they are asking people to pay. Maybe if they increase seat pitch or aspect of comfort in economy and started to charge at a price people are willing to pay, and actually served more destination with more code share connections that are affordable, they will start to grow.

[ferris]

404 It would make sense for these flights to have flight planned further west to avoid this Ok, so that sort of defeats your argument that only PER flights should operate via DXB (because of distance). Especially when QF31 etc. is overflying DXB. Can't really say that isn't the 'beneficial' way to go, then overfly it, can you?
Agreed mikk, QF has been operating the 'cash cow' method for years, and now it's time to reap what was sown. Lots of QF pilots wonder where the 777s are (see these forums).
Even some sort of strategy to maintain market share might have been forthcoming, but alas, Dixon's true legacy will take a year or two to unfold.

[404 Titan]

mikk_13
I don't understand why qantas does not get in bed with cathay.
It takes two to get in bed and CX aren’t interest in getting into bed anymore than they currently are with QF. They certainly aren’t interested in relinquishing their Australian slots in a code share arrangement with QF.

ferris

As I have said in a previous post, in a westerly direction we will generally avoid the prevailing jet streams. In an easterly direction we will generally seek them out. In the end it tends to almost balance itself out.

These are the shortest schedule block times with the relevant stop over times for CX, QF, BA & EK, SYD → LHR off the relevant airlines web sites. As can be seen CX has the shortest time to LHR even with a 2:10 stopover in HKG.
CX = 22:15 (20:05 hours flying with a 2:10 stop over and aircraft change)
QF/BA = 22:35 via SIN (21:25 hours flying with a 1:10 stop over)
EK = 23:15 (22 hours flying with a 1:15 stop over and aircraft change)

[Captain Dart]

QANTAS in bed with Cathay?? CX's product ain't what it used to be, but...erm...I don't think so.

[Tankengine]

I have flown First class in 744s with both Airlines in the last 12 months, the product was pretty equal. [the Cathay first class lounge in HKG is excellent!]
I hear that the QF A380 First is MUCH better.:ok:

Mikk-13, The 747 Classics are LONG gone, the 380 and 330s [plus the upgraded 744s] are a huge improvement.

[PPRuNeUser0198]

Qantas spreads its wings again but CEO Alan Joyce cautious

QANTAS mainline international operations are growing again after hitting historic lows during the global financial crisis, but chief executive Alan Joyce has warned he cannot guarantee the airline will maintain its overall market share to and from Australia.

The Qantas share on international markets to and from Australia has dropped to about 20 per cent under the onslaught of overseas carriers such as Emirates and the low-cost carriers.

While it has been aggressively growing Jetstar International operations, Mr Joyce conceded last week that Qantas had been scaled back to "a minimum network" during the GFC.

But he said it was now growing again and he believed there were opportunities moving forward.

"We've grown Japan in the last year, we're growing London again, we're growing LA again and we are growing China again," he said. "So there are growth opportunities within (the network). But if someone in the Middle East wants to grow at 10 to 20 per cent, we're not going to match that because that's unprofitable growth into an area that we haven't got interest in."

Unlike the 65 per cent "line in the sand" market share the Qantas Group has set for domestic operations, Mr Joyce said there was no overall market share target for Qantas full-service overseas operations.

Mr Joyce said this was because each of the international markets was different and Qantas concentrated on core business markets.

"So in the UK market, for example, we've actually held up very well in market share over the last 10 years," he said.

Turning to Jetstar International, Mr Joyce said there was still "a lot of white space" where the low-cost carrier could operate as part of its rapid growth in and out of Australia.

Mr Joyce said Jetstar could easily be the second-biggest carrier within 10 years and it allowed the group to enter markets "that haven't been as critical for us".

On the domestic front, Mr Joyce said Qantas would "mix and match" the brands to maintain its 65 per cent market share dependent on their performance and which of the airline's competitors was adding capacity. He said the airline was looking at how much capacity it would put into the market after its previous announcements for both Qantas and Jetstar and would continue to do so on a season-by-season basis.

"But we have huge flexibility because we have Jetstar leases we can extend," he said.

"We have Qantas aircraft that we don't have to retire, that we can keep in the fleet a little bit longer, we have utilisation we've lowered so we can increase utilisation as well. So we have complete flexibility."Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/qantas-spreads-its-wings-once-again-but-ceo-alan-joyce/story-e6frg8zx-1225879193152)

[abc1]

Take on Emirates? Na, the then management were too busy trying to take Qantas to the cleaners instead.

As for the current beholder, a neo-manager, albeit ex lost cost, what can you expect other than ryanair style expansion.