The Orange Cancer Spreads

[Ka.Boom]

Jetstar eyes Japanese domestic market

Qantas's budget offshoot, Jetstar, is reportedly planning to enter the challenging domestic market in Japan by forming a joint venture with local investors.


Jetstar and its Singapore-based joint venture, Jetstar Asia, already fly international routes from Australia and Singapore to Japan. But the Yomiuri newspaper has reported that Jetstar plans to raise funds from Japanese investors to form a joint venture to fly domestic routes. Under foreign investment rules, Japan requires domestic airlines to have less than a third of foreign capital.
Although Japan presents enormous opportunities, any plan to enter the country's domestic market would be fraught with difficulties because it is regarded as a relatively closed market. The country's two major carriers, Japan Airlines and All Nippon, are also considering forming low-cost subsidiaries.
Advertisement: Story continues below
"I would have a crack at south-east Asian markets before I'd have a crack at Japan – it's really tough," an industry insider said. "China would be the hardest, followed by Japan."
The Yomiuri newspaper reported that Jetstar and China's Spring Airlines has approached Japan's transport ministry to inform them of their plans and seek approval.
A Jetstar spokesman could not comment immediately on the report.
Jetstar has been emphasising its intention to form other joint ventures in Asia in order to expand its footprint in the world's fastest growing aviation market.
Any joint venture in Japan is likely to be modelled on Jetstar Asia, the Singapore-based airline in which Qantas has a 49 per cent stake and Singaporean businessman Dennis Choo the rest.
Qantas also part-owns a stake in Vietnam's second-largest airline, Jetstar Pacific.
Qantas's chief executive, Alan Joyce, has highlighted his desire to form alliances with other Asian airlines, especially as its premium international operations face increased competition.
Macquarie Equities believes Qantas will cement a closer relationship with JAL before turning its attention to courting another Asian partner. Qantas has a code-share agreement with JAL between Australia and Japan.

[Cactusjack]

This is hilarious. JQ in Japan. This is the land where +30 seconds late is a delay, a catastrophe, a life changing event. It will be funny watching our Japanese friends have to adjust to a new culture called DELAYED !
Perhaps Boston Bruce will start up Jetstar Bullet Trains as well ?

Well there you have it, from the land that brought us the Geisha, Godzilla and bukkake comes JQ Japan !

[Hugh Jarse]

Will they have those little men in hats with white gloves shoving all the PAX into the plane like they do on the trains?:}

[airtags]

As much as we joke the reality is these JQ 'franchise-like' arrangements are serious threats to Australian T&C's and job security.

Don't forget EVERY QF route approval has been rubber stamped to allow the capacity to be used by QF, JQ or another 'majority' owned subsidiary.

The offshore backdooring by JQ into Australia (ex NZ & SIN) opens the door to deploying the JQ defacto franchsies using the Australian bilateral freedoms.

This form of Agent Orange is far more deadlier - and the real cost will be in the Australian aviation economy and ultimately in pax lives.

AT

[Mr. Hat]

airtags, you are making way too much sense.

Is it just me or is a certain minister facilitating the Cancer growth? Don't look too closely you might start seeing things you don't like.

[rho]

Oh there will be some feisty young Grade 2 intructors straight off a state of the art GLASS C172 - who have done the hard yards since their high school formal last week who would pay to go to Japan - "look everywun, toldyas - I'm an airline pilot now and stuff"

They think they are being chosen for their skills and experience - ahem - gullability and naievity.

"but it's shiny and sh#t, like my ipod"

[OneDotLow]

"Just call me First Officer Shizzle"
:ok:

[ejectx3]

Onestar -> CRO Airways (http://your-path-to-wealth.com/)

[TBM-Legend]

Great news that an Australian company can spread its wings and earn some foreign profits for its Australian shareholders who pay taxes here....:ok:

[Keg]

Like the profits that J* Asia has provided Qantas? Oops. That's right, we're about $300 million in the hole on that one thus far. I'm sure that J* Asia will turn a profit one day. I suspect it will be by flying the routes that Qantas used to fly in it's own right (and make a profit on) before they were handed to J* Australia who were then passed them on to J* Asia. :rolleyes: :ugh:

What about J* Pacific? Are they contributing foreign profits to Qantas yet? How much is Qantas in the hole for them?

Who does the acceptance on J*'s aeroplanes in Toulouse? Where does that cost get attributed to?

[gobbledock]

What about J* Pacific? Are they contributing foreign profits to Qantas yet? How much is Qantas in the hole for them?
Who does the acceptance on J*'s aeroplanes in Toulouse? Where does that cost get attributed to?
All good questions Keg. If you direct those questions toward BCG along with a small fee they will be able to provide an answer.

'It's All About Choice'

[QAN_Shareholder]

I'm sure that J* Asia will turn a profit one day.


I think it was last year rather than "one day", both second half of last year and first half of this year were profitable. Tiger is fairly profitable overall and it certainly isn't coming from Australia so Singapore must be doing pretty well. And if Tiger can make very good profits in Singapore it doesn't seem that difficult to believe that J* Asia is profitable.

As for aircraft acceptance in Toulouse, how many people does it involve and how much of the work relates to J*? (This isn't a rhetorical question, I am interested in the numbers).

[Trent 972]

QAN_Shareholder (re J*Asia profit figures)
....and first half of this year were profitable
Considering it's only March, you must be quoting 'Insider, Rubbery Figures', if not please tell us all what the overall results for the "first half of this year" were/are/is/will be. I would have thought, only AJ would have access to those figures, at this stage.

[Mstr Caution]

Ben Sandilands speaking on radio station 2UE sunday 13th March.

I recall the discussion as follows: (whilst driving with a few kids in the car)

1. Qantas is a serious concern regarding it's current strategies.
2. The public no longer feel a "special" association with Qantas
3. Jetstar is not the answer to Qantas reduced market share.
4. The bulk of Qantas customers do not want to fly J*. They will fly with another carrier rather than the QF subsidiary.
5. Virgin will continue to benefit from the loss of Qantas customers.
6. The overseas push has affected how the public now view the airline.
7. Qantas will no longer call Australia home. (Singapore & NZ)
8. Pilots possible PIA & ground staff to shortly follow.

[Sunstar320]

I think it was last year rather than "one day", both second half of last year and first half of this year were profitable. Tiger is fairly profitable overall and it certainly isn't coming from Australia so Singapore must be doing pretty well. And if Tiger can make very good profits in Singapore it doesn't seem that difficult to believe that J* Asia is profitable.


Jetstar Asia has a bleak future in its current form, not to mention that Tiger will be twice the size of them by the years end which is where the problems begin. They are playing in a market with two carriers (AirAsia/Tiger) that have the two lowest cost bases for any LCC in the industry. AirAsia has a CASK of $3.58, Tiger $3.65 and Jetstar Asia sits at $6.8. J* spent something like 100m a year on marketing to "rejuvenate" their brand up there, whilst Tiger spends 1.5m a year on marketing and is Singapore's most visited website in the airline carrier category, paying these celebrity star jumpers just dosn't cut it. They have no choice to match their competitors airfares, they might make money of them but J* Asia sure doesn't.

Foreign exchange is not in there favour either with a 25% loss from SGD to AUD.

[Keg]

Sadly it appears that Ben Sandiland's assessment is spot on I reckon. The people I speak to who once upon a time flew QF because of our 'history' no longer feel the need to fly with us because we're 'just the same as everyone else'. :(

[Offchocks]

Jetstar Asia made S$6.9 million last financial year.......about Au$5.4 million. I may be wrong but I think that is the airline's first profit. Not overly impressive considering the money spent on it and the losses that have taken place.

[The The]

I believe that Jetstar pilots voted a "no confidence in management" motion at meetings regarding the sacking of a pilot for talking to the media.

Though mostly symbolic, is a "no confidence" vote in the management and the board something the mainline pilots should consider and promote?

To change (and hopefully save) the company, you need to change the management and the board, nothing else will suffice. This is beyond any bandaid fixes or reviews.

I would like to see the media reports on 2500+ pilots voting "no confidence" in the current management of this once great airline.

[QAN_Shareholder]

Trent,

if not please tell us all what the overall results for the "first half of this year" were/are/is/will be

By first half of year I mean first half of financial year not calendar year. The figure was S$17m and is shown in Qantas' results presentation from February.

Sunstar,

Where do you get figure for CASK of 6.8c for Jetstar Asia? Is it ex fuel?

[Sunstar320]

Ex fuel QAN and mathematically worked out from 2010 figures.

[Trent 972]

QAN_Shareholder
The figure was S$17m and is shown in Qantas' results presentation from February.
I would appreciate if you able to point that figure out in the Consolidated Interim Financial Report for the Half-Year ended 31 December 2010 (http://afr.com/rw/2009-2014/AFR/2011/02/16/Photos/589db460-3a15-11e0-8056-d3c198c5d903_qantas.pdf)
Otherwise, to quote yourself from Feb 15th when you said
I wouldn't put much weight on auditing for ensuring the accuracy of transactions between Qantas and Jetstar. I worked as an auditor for a spell and internal transactions are way down the priority list, there is very little risk to the auditor from internal transactions being mis-stated.

[QAN_Shareholder]

Trent,

I would appreciate if you able to point that figure out

Slide 68 in http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20110217/pdf/41wts2vl1rgknv.pdf

J* Asia profit should be more reliable since based in Singapore and has other shareholders. Wholly owned Australian based operations would be different and these could be mis-stated, but I have yet to see the evidence.

Sunstar,

Could you be a bit more precise how you work it out? Is this from filed accounts in Singapore?

[Gas Bags]

A big problem affecting the QF brand is the sale of QF tickets on J* aircraft. It may not seem like much to industry people but to the guy who buys the ticket it is a turning point in their brand loyalty.

This is a real life example...

I was flying from Bangkok to Melbourne on the once weekly J* A330 service about 6-8 months ago. I purchased my own full fare Star Class ticket for the ride which gave me access to the Qantas Club at Suvarnabhumi in Bangkok where I met a very nice elderly couple travelling on the same flight. They were on the last leg of a 4 month multi country holiday they had purchased full fare business class tickets from Qantas for.

To say they were surprised that the QF flight numbered ticket they had purchased from Qantas had them lining up at the J* counter in Thailand would be an understatement. They were seated directly behind me in the cabin and they were extremely dissapointed with the whole situation. The premium fare they had paid was not returned in what they received compared to what they would have received had they been on board a Qantas aircraft, or any of the business class code share airlines they had travelled on around the world over the preceeding 4 months on their Qantas tickets.

The worst part for them was that (in their minds) they were misled by Qantas when purchasing the tickets that they were not told the service would be operated by J*. If it had been pointed out verbally by the ticketing agent they would have changed the date of travel to ensure they were on a Qantas aircraft.

I spoke with them in the departure hall at Melbourne airport and they both said the decades long association they had with Qantas, travelling regularly business class in both the husbands professional role and the familys leisure travel was at an end because of the situation. They were not interested in complaining and possibly receiving a refund or future free upgrade. They simply were going to end the association and spend their money elsewhere.

And that is where Qantas are going wrong with J*. People generally dont want to have to complain to get what they are entitled to. They want it delivered as they expected when they handed the money over.

I remember seeing a sign a many years ago that read something like this -

I am the person in your shop that is waiting patiently for service...
I am the person in your shop who does not complain about the long queue...
I am the person in your shop who does not complain about the abrupt attendant...
I am the person in your shop who does not complain about the faulty product you have sold me...
I am the person who does not return to your shop because of these things...

Most importantly I am the person who you spend millions of dollars on advertising to get to come to your shop when I was there in the first place...

Food for thought QF?

GB

[Trent 972]

Thankyou QAN_Shareholder.
One more request, if you would be so kind.
Are you also able to show me whereabouts the table showing how the statutory profit has been adjusted to arrive at the underlying profit in this presentation?
Or
Whereabouts QANTAS describes their transparent and consistent approach to the reporting of underlying profit, which includes reporting both positive and negative adjustments to the statutory profit figure, or a narrative to explain the adjustments?
Or
Are they using the smoke and mirrors principle?

Edit. Please don't refer me to slide 42, that table is not clear and unambiguous.

[Fruet Mich]

Gas bags you've hit the nail on the head. My rellys purchased a ticket on Qantas from London to chch last year. They were disgusted when the last 3 hours of their long haul flight was spent on a jetstar flight from Mel to chc. Qantas don't even fly that route anymore. They had been loyal Qantas customers for years but now travel emirates. Did not complain, just voted with their feet. I can't believe this management team can't see this? :ugh:

[QAN_Shareholder]

Trent,

p18 of interim financial statements is pretty clear. Generally speaking I don't think Qantas is particularly aggressive with accounting disclosures. I believe some airlines adjusted last year's profit for impact from Icelandic volcano which Qantas didn't. They also didn't adjust for impact of A380 explosion.

There is one area which is a bit suspect though and that is treatment of accounting change from Frequent Flyer. I don't believe they had much choice in making the change but the non-recurring profits which result are included in underlying profit. This isn't any Enron type accounting, it has all been disclosed in multiple presentations, but if you're looking for things to criticise this may be the best example.

[Taildragger67]

QAN Shareholder,

Has any analysis been carried out as to how much could be saved by moving Qantas group clerical / office jobs to lower cost centres, eg. Singapore?

Surely the presence of only senior management within Australia (using a similar control test as that used to determine corporate tax residence) would satisfy s.7(h) of the Qantas Sale Act 1992?

Hence why not save the company some real money, and so generate a real return to you and other shareholders, and shift functions like accounting, accounts, marketing, HR, etc. to Singapore? Surely the necessary skills are there? And the company would avoid pesky things like super guarantee, payroll tax, etc.!

If such an analysis has not been carried out, then perhaps as an interested shareholder, you might like to ask management, why not?

[-438]

I don't think QAN shareholder would like to be shifted offshore.

[C441]

I don't think QAN shareholder would like to be shifted offshore.

It's only the job that would be moving. It's up to him if he wants to retain it. :ouch:

[QAN_Shareholder]

Taildragger, 438,

This thread is drifting a bit, but from a shareholder's perspective the best solution may be cutting international routes rather than offshoring pilots. International long haul routes use a lot of the group's capital, have very volatile earnings and struggle to be competitive. I wonder if it would be better to cancel most of the 787s for both J* and QF international routes and gradually scale back the network to the routes that can clearly justify the investment. I can't see management advocating this since it is a very rare CEO that is willing to shrink a business. The board could push for this outcome but I'm not sure they devote much time to thinking about options that aren't presented by management, it would probably need shareholders to lead them in this direction.

As for offshoring maintenance, I guess there is plenty in common with Australian manufacturing which is bleeding pretty badly with the current exchange rate. If it was my decision I guess I'd treat it the same way as buying a plane ticket, I'll pay a premium for Qantas but if the premium gets too high then I'll go elsewhere.

[hotnhigh]

[I wonder if it would be better to cancel most of the 787s for both J* and QF international routes and gradually scale back the network to the routes that can clearly justify the investment.


A bit like tree pruning. I think qantas management watched this video for inspiration.
YouTube - Shotgun Tree Trimming 101 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlNwaMX-QBU)

[Taildragger67]

QAN Shareholder,

My question is independent of flight operations; that is, even if management & board decided that the best option was to close every route except (say) Sydney-Melb, money could still be saved by shifting office jobs out of Australia.

Offshoring - much like other enterprises (eg. banks) have done.

So why the destructive focus on the pilots? How much $$$ could have been saved over, say, the last 10 years if clerical positions had been moved?

[QAN_Shareholder]

Taildragger,

Taking a dispassionate view, banks lend themselves well to offshoring, developing and maintaining IT systems is a large part of what they do and Indians tend to be better and cheaper at it. I guess you need a quite well defined activity to make it worthwhile though and a lot of admin work doesn't fit too well. The management consultants that push this stuff do practice what they preach though, I recall working with some who were getting their presentation slides produced in India overnight.

[Stalins ugly Brother]

Qan Shareholder,

Have you ever heard the saying "you have to spend money to make money"?

QF is supposed to be premium product but has not had any real capital injected into it to maintain a high quality product for a long while. Even the A380, the new flagship, the internal product compared to other airlines (on the kangaroo route, not so much the US) is still a substandard product. In a nutshell they cheeped out! Other airlines provide door to door service for premium customers, not QF. The examples are endless, these are real world reasons why the longhaul airline is failing, they have become uncompetitive due to management neglect, nothing more, nothing less.

On the note of cutting more routes, I don't see CX and Singair, Ek, Malay,Etc etc cutting longhaul routes, even Air nz are expanding routes! That is a narrow minded view that is made by individuals that have no plans for sustainability, just short turn bonuses. Shareholders want year in, year out sustainable growth, healthy dividends and a stable business with direction, they do not have that with Qantas at the moment. Are you happy with your QF portfolio?????

I question if you are really a shareholder?

If so, and you observed your assets being stripped away from your high yield, high premium product to then be allocated to a low yield, lower product with marginal profits I would have serious concerns of why I was holding that stock. Basic maths, allocate 50 aircraft to one entity, 50 to the other, charge $50 fares on one, $250 on the other but provide $50 of service, which one makes the profit? And before you mention labour costs on the $250 seat, fuel price has already negated the profit on the $50 seat.:=
Its no coincidence that QF shares and profits have proportionally declined inversely to Jetstars expansion.

Make no mistake about it, Jetstars costs are being hidden in mainlines bottom line, unfortunately for AJ the bottom line, due to reducing yields and neglect at mainline, is starting to be exposed and where will the costs be hidden then?

Hence the urgency to rescue QF mainline.

Qf Shareholder, I suggest you put your calculator back in your pocket, put your uni books back on the shelf and step into the real world.
Oh, and by the way, the QF graduate program just opened up for applications, maybe you should apply, management needs more stooges like you, if you are not already there! :yuk:

On another note, Please inform us,
1, Who is Orangestar?
2, Who are the directors?
3, Who are their shareholders?
4, Where are they based?
5, Who would profit if the above entity was sold and on what market can it be sold (e.g ASX, SING etc)??
6, Does this entity have the ability to circumvent the Qantas sales act?

The answers to these questions may enlighten us all as to the real drive behind the growth of Jetstar at the expense of Qantas.

[QAN_Shareholder]

Stalin,

Plenty of stockbrokers, perhaps even a majority, will tell you that you shouldn't invest in Qantas since it can't earn it's cost of capital through the cycle. They are not telling me "you have to spend money to make money" they are telling me I shouldn't spend money to make losses. They have lots of evidence on their side of international airlines that have attempted plenty of different strategies yet failed to make an acceptable return. If they are right it would be the duty of directors to ensure that Qantas never buy another aeroplane. The airline should be run for cash and at the end of every year cash should be returned to shareholders and the company would gradually be wound down.

So I could be in the minority, but I don't believe this. I think parts of Qantas can earn cost of capital and this includes the domestic business and parts of the international business. I know the arguments about synergies between domestic and international but I'm not convinced it is necessary to retain all the international network particularly since the nearest competitor only flies to 2 long haul destinations.

Interesting that when comparing to other airlines you mention Emirates, Cathay and Singapore. To me Qantas looks a lot more like the US and European airlines with regard to cost structures and industrial issues, and none of their airlines are looking too great just now, but maybe they all have the wrong strategy too.

[skybed]

studying QFshareholders comments its rather difficult to understand why he still holds shares in QF. Some of his comments are very valid however comparing costs between airlines is marked with controversy. Having seen comparison between QF and Asian/Middle East carriers , when challenged by persons with credible knowledge there were no answers(don't ask for details0.
One major item seems to be forgotten is that QF managment is the most expensive managment in the airline industry.:(

[Jimothy]

Let's not forget only a few years Qantas (when Jetstar was quite small) was making record profits (billion or so $), and that includes Mainline International. So what has changed? Qantas has contracted and Jetstar has expanded, any coincidence here?

[Angle of Attack]

All I suggest is dont even bother with QAN_Shareholder, he is just another troll, the point is you dont need to justify to that idiot just do your stuff and he will snuff out.

[Oldmate]

$2.12. Any margin call yet?

[Stalins ugly Brother]

QAN,

I think we are talking about two different things.
Presently, the current direction of QF is cancerous and potentially terminal, and is providing a very poor return to shareholders.
Qantas needs to spend money on its product to attract back the premium travels who in turn will bolster profits who will in turn provide a return to its institutional shareholders.


In regard to your stockbroker buddies, stockbrokers are purely speculators (and some are just gamblers), if they were to become the cornerstone of any economy and the basic fundamentals of running a business were lost we would all be in a hell of a lot of trouble.

Based on your views of managing an airline QAN, maybe you should change your name to Bud Fox!

[Millet Fanger]

Since late 2007 Qantas mainline has shrunk, and as the thread originator claims, the Orange Cancer has increased.

During this time Qantas shares have lost 65% of their value and they no longer even pay a dividend.

It's time for the management and board to acknowledge they don't know what they are doing and 'fall on their swords'!!

[73to91]

Stalins ugly Brother said:

QF is supposed to be premium product but has not had any real capital injected into it to maintain a high quality product for a long while. Even the A380, the new flagship, the internal product compared to other airlines (on the kangaroo route, not so much the US) is still a substandard product.


Was going over some notes at work yesterday relating to scorecards, some of you guys might not be aware of Balance Scorecards and I'm sure Sunfish could add more, but thought this was relative to QF.

The balanced scorecard is a strategic planning and management system that is used extensively in business.

The balanced scorecard suggests that we view the organization from four perspectives.

The Learning & Growth Perspective
This perspective includes employee training and corporate cultural attitudes related to both individual and corporate self-improvement. In a knowledge-worker organization, people -- the only repository of knowledge -- are the main resource. In the current climate of rapid technological change, it is becoming necessary for knowledge workers to be in a continuous learning mode.

The Business Process Perspective
This perspective refers to internal business processes. Metrics based on this perspective allow the managers to know how well their business is running, and whether its products and services conform to customer requirements (the mission). These metrics have to be carefully designed by those who know these processes most intimately; with our unique missions these are not something that can be developed by outside consultants.

The Customer Perspective
Recent management philosophy has shown an increasing realization of the importance of customer focus and customer satisfaction in any business. These are leading indicators: if customers are not satisfied, they will eventually find other suppliers that will meet their needs. Poor performance from this perspective is thus a leading indicator of future decline, even though the current financial picture may look good.
In developing metrics for satisfaction, customers should be analysed in terms of kinds of customers and the kinds of processes for which we are providing a product or service to those customer groups.

The Financial Perspective
Do not disregard the traditional need for financial data. Timely and accurate funding data will always be a priority, and managers will do whatever necessary to provide it. In fact, often there is more than enough handling and processing of financial data. With the implementation of a corporate database, it is hoped that more of the processing can be centralized and automated. But the point is that the current emphasis on financials leads to the "unbalanced" situation with regard to other perspectives.

I think there needs to be some old heads, put into some senior management roles - guys who would have followed the above because it was just plain common sense.

[QFinsider]

Millet,

It may actually be the custodians, the staff who put the so called "management" to the sword and cut away the cancer in the next few months.......

[Gas Bags]

Good luck with that QFI,

I think you will find that in reality there will be no blood letting on either side. Some may consider a victory for one or the other however no one will 'fall on their sword'.

A friend who was highly successful in private enterprise once said to me 'directors have managers to carry out the directions the company requires to move with'. You guys are dealing with the managers a tier or two below these managers who are being directed what to do, and they in turn will not budge from their directions due to the tier they reside on.

More importantly in a company like Qantas the lower level managers who are negotiating (for want of a better term) have been awarded their roles in the management structure for their ability to tow the company line and their ability to curtail to their superiors every beck and call. A manager at this level in Qantas would sign their own death warrant if they should ever express their own opinions regarding relevant issues that would be contrary to the company line, be it for the betterment of the company or not.

Unfortunately the mangement in this industry has been in this situation for a long time now so no matter what the rank and file expect would happen with them is more than likely not going to.

This EBA looks like turning into a debacle to match the previous one however the management you are dealing with is only doing what they are told. The problem is they believe it. they do not comprehend they are merely pawns in the grander scheme of things, just like they secretly think you minions are.

GB

[Angle of Attack]

Easy way is to tell them to **** off and do a Contract as I am. Pretty easy actually.

Edited because f e c k got censored lol!

[John Citizen]

Future travel ?

Interview selection procedure ?

http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2011/03/13/1226020/717212-moomba.jpg

[WorthWhat]

Difficult to know what you mean by the following GB
· This EBA looks like turning into a debacle to match the previous one.
Are your talking about LHEBA 8 or the LHEBA 7 Rollover?

Irrespective, the difference between them certainly resulted in the situation now unfolding. Walking away from the undertaking Qantas made in LHEBA 8 to pay all who fly Qantas branded B787’s in accordance with the LHEBA and then agreeing in the EBA 7 Rollover to recognise the role of Jetconnect, is a debacle.

Yep! Jetconnect New Zealand is but proof of a concept that will allow Qantas to crew B787’s with offshore pilots. I just about chocked on my wheaties when I heard Woody say to John Laws that Qantas pilots are very worried about Jetconnect. Isn’t he one of the team that threw the baby out with the bathwater?

[73to91]

Jetstar cuts flights after big fall in demand from Japanese travellers (http://www.smh.com.au/travel/jetstar-cuts-flights-after-big-fall-in-demand-from-japanese-travellers-20110321-1c3rm.html)

Jetstar cuts flights after big fall in demand from Japanese travellers



JETSTAR will cut flights between Australia and Japan - its most important long-haul destination - because of a fall in demand from Japanese travellers.

Jetstar today will halve the number of services between Australia and Tokyo to seven, after redeploying the ''lion's share'' of flights to Osaka due to ''operational issues'' and fewer people wanting to fly to the Japanese capital amid fears about the crisis at the Fukushima nuclear power plant.

The airline will maintain 25 flights a week between Australia and Japan, but it conceded yesterday that there could be ''some lessening of capacity'' in the longer term.

Jetstar will bear the brunt of a longer-term slump in travellers because over the past four years it has taken over the majority of flying on the route from its parent, Qantas.

Qantas now has only 10 flights a week to Japan. About 80 per cent of the passengers on Jetstar flights between the two countries are Japanese.

Travel agents have reported cancellation rates of about 50 per cent for bookings by Japanese tourists for trips to Australia since the earthquake and tsunami on March 11. A downturn in demand from Japanese travellers creates additional headaches for Qantas and Jetstar executives, who already face jet fuel prices hovering near a three-year high.

CBA Equities analyst Matt Crowe said a fall in demand for flights on the route would have a impact on Qantas.

''I don't think it will be as material as the Queensland floods, but it will be material,'' he said.

Qantas has estimated the floods will cut $55 million from pre-tax profit in the second half. Mr Crowe said there was likely to be a big fall in passengers on the route once the immediate rush by people to leave Japan due to the nuclear crisis and earthquake abated.

Qantas shares rose 1¢ to $2.10 yesterday, slightly above a 20-month low reached last week.

Qantas said demand for its flights to Japan had been affected by the natural disaster but until events stabilised, it would be difficult to calculate the impact.

Jetstar and Qantas have gained an estimated $500 million a year in revenue from the Japan-Australia route.

Two years ago, Jetstar had to cut a third of its flights between Australia and Japan for several months due to Japanese travellers' fears of swine flu.

Air New Zealand also warned last week that it would post a second-half loss due to high fuel prices and the Christchurch and Japanese earthquakes.

[stubby jumbo]

'Heard that this was on the JQ website today.... SALE FARES :ugh:

* SYD to SYD .BARGAIN PRICE =$179.00

Amateurs :hmm:

[runesta]

During this time Qantas shares have lost 65% of their value

don't forget the peak was artificially high driven by TPG's bid. Wait for another corporate raider to come along and the share price will go up again :rolleyes: