QANTAS - WHERE TO NOW?

[The The]

By the end of October, the group's international fleet will include 12 A380s and nine Boeing 747s.

The actual quote was:

By the end of October, our international fleet will include 12 A380s and nine Boeing 747s with award-winning all Marc Newson interiors.

The fleet is being cut, but not that much by October.

[cart_elevator]

Interesting to read about more job losses,surprising considering the cabin crew dept appears to have tripled its number of executive level positions in the past 3 months :}

[piston broke again]

I doubt highly that anything major will occur with emirates. Maybe a token code share on some routes: ADL-DXB (when they start their services) and onward DXB-CDG etc. I'd more fancy Qatar are a better suited partner in crime.

Seems everyday there is a new excuse - geographic location, aus $, Australia's low population...We all know Joyce and Co are incompetent - we just need the financial results to be announced to prove it!

[Stalins ugly Brother]

Apparently talks have failed between the two (ek + qf) and that's why today Joyce is taking the line that " the airline is not in a hurry for alliances". There is now no interest from anyone anymore.
The way Joyce has gone about destroying this airline he won't even be able to give it away soon. :ugh:

Please shareholders get rid of this clown! :*

[CabinCrew747]

I can't see LHR being closed down when AKL international has been kept running with zero flights. LHR has 2 x A380 flights compared to up to 3 x 747 LHR crewed sectors when the base opened. The difference in crew utilised now is marginal at best. Think of how much it saves the company in OT sector payments, transport, hotels and allowances. I think the only way LHR base would be closed down is if LHR as a port itself, was closed down...If the EK deal works out though resulting in a re-route via DXB, I'm skeptical that an extra 2 x LHR-DXB sectors a day would be required from QF on top of EKs 5, BAs 2, VS' 1 and BIs 1...

[Bagus]

AJ is a bad Omen ,any time u see him in press conference all will be bad news for employees and their families,

[QF94]

AJ is a bad Omen ,any time u see him in press conference all will be bad news for employees and their families,

It's always bad news, as it's his way of saying that the international side of things is kaput, and that it is no longer viable to fly internationally. It's really a continuation of Dixon who had nothing but bad news for QANTAS, but were always posting great profits, and the board pocketing great bonuses.

[Bagus]

How are the guys in other bases working after what AJ and his managers sacked their engineers in tullamarine and Avalon,I think there are more to come and moral in line is all time low and all we do is talk about the company next move instead of concentrating about work,Avalon is in worst situation as the do not know when is the next redundancy coming,engineering is the front line of the company and is being destroyed,so AJ stop emphasizing about safety and quality.

[QF94]

How are the guys in other bases working after what AJ and his managers sacked their engineers in tullamarine and Avalon,I think there are more to come and moral in line is all time low and all we do is talk about the company next move instead of concentrating about work,

Bagus, the unfortunate thing with some people within QANTAS is, that if they aren't directly affected, they couldn't really give a toss about other sections. When they do become affected, they do whatever is asked of them to be more efficient and save their own backsides, then it slides back into the complacent mood again until the next round of sackings/redundancies/efficient work practices, or whatever is the buzz word of the week.

[TIMA9X]

It's always bad news, as it's his way of saying that the international side of things is kaput, and that it is no longer viable to fly internationally. It's really a continuation of Dixon who had nothing but bad news for QANTAS, but were always posting great profits, and the board pocketing great bonuses. Yeah, and over the past couple of years the image of a once great airline has been trashed, always negative messages sent out to its potential customers, more than two years of it now,,,, they just never seem to get things right with the "image control.."

AvIAy6YsOUw

[wilcoleaks]

A hostile takeover of Skywest could stop a lot of cash leaving the books when VA get a national regional network with the ATR, a big cash cow will be halfed. This would delay the impact.

*No share buyback

*No new twin engine orders with the AUD above $1.05US

*No merging of brands

And the list goes on........its like the Roo has been shot and no one is stopping the bleeding.

[QF94]

its like the Roo has been shot and no one is stopping the bleeding.

The Roo has been shot, and continues to be shot. In the words of Mr Joyce "Death by a thousand cuts" or in this case a thousand gun shot wounds.

[ohallen]

Unfortunately shot by friendly fire and there is plenty of ammunition left yet. This is not about an airline, but rather a commodity for self fulfillment.

I really like the suggestion floated this week that some banks suggested bonuses should only be paid on retirement to cut out the short term nature of what is going on at the moment.

[SOPS]

Can somone please tell me how many aircraft "International" will have left in service by the end of the year?

[crystalballwannabe]

If MGMT have their way.....0

[QF94]

Unfortunately shot by friendly fire and there is plenty of ammunition left yet. This is not about an airline, but rather a commodity for self fulfillment.

Nothing friendly about this fire. It's no accident, and you have stated that in the second sentence.

I really like the suggestion floated this week that some banks suggested bonuses should only be paid on retirement to cut out the short term nature of what is going on at the moment.

I like even better that bonuses are paid on actual performance (good not bad), or better still, pegged to the share price of the company. If the share price drops by, let's pull a figure out of the air, 70% from it's high, then bonuses are forfeited until the share price gets to within 10% of its high and only then at retirement.

[Bagus]

"Most of the reduction in job numbers at Qantas is due to advancements in technology, which means the work doesn't exist anymore. We don't maintain our cars the same way as we did 20 years ago and the same goes for aircraft."Qantas spokeswoman Olivia Wirth said "

[ohallen]

Maybe Liv should get another broken record, how many times can they drag this crap out?

Where do they explain abandonment of routes, less frames and no strategy going forward except roll the dice options.

The fact is that this lot were gifted a valuable and successful business and they don't have the ability to hack it in the real world and then blame everyone else. It is not the company that is broken it is those that are running it into the ground. If you dont believe that look at similar businesses that are growing and have taken initiatives to survive beyond selling the farm.

[Jethro Gibbs]

So Hangar 6 at Avalon is closing and Qantas staff asked to take redundancies.

[Bagus]

Ya they are standing down employees and qantas guys are being offered VR,

[The Green Goblin]

Qantas passengers refuse to fly LA to Melbourne because there were no XL first-class pyjamas | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/qantas-passengers-refuse-to-fly-from-la-to-melbourne-because-there-were-no-xl-sized-first-class-pyjamas/story-e6frfq80-1226447674305)

Meanwhile they are making fun of the first class passengers. You know, the ones who give the company yield and what JB is chasing relentlessly.

Muppet's.

[QF94]

Qantas passengers refuse to fly LA to Melbourne because there were no XL first-class pyjamas | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/qantas-passengers-refuse-to-fly-from-la-to-melbourne-because-there-were-no-xl-sized-first-class-pyjamas/story-e6frfq80-1226447674305)

Meanwhile they are making fun of the first class passengers. You know, the ones who give the company yield and what JB is chasing relentlessly.

Muppet's

With passengers like that, Virgin can have them. For two people to hold up a flight because of jammies that won't fit, don't deserve to fly in the first place. These two were prepared to hold up 400+ other passengers. Good riddance to them. No point in placating two pax while pi$$ing off 400 others.

[Romulus]

With passengers like that, Virgin can have them. For two people to hold up a flight because of jammies that won't fit, don't deserve to fly in the first place. These two were prepared to hold up 400+ other passengers. Good riddance to them. No point in placating two pax while pi$$ing off 400 others.

Whilst I agree with you to an extent you're missing the real point - why weren't there XL sized pyjamas available for your highest yield customers? Do you like soy coffee? How do you feel if it's not available? Take anything you particularly like and value enough to pay for, now imagine if you don't quite get the full experience. How do you feel?

Whilst the customers appear to have been over the top in their reaction the real point is that somewhere the Qantas system simply didn't work to keep your most valuable customers happy.

[QF94]

Whilst I agree with you to an extent you're missing the real point - why weren't there XL sized pyjamas available for your highest yield customers?

I can't answer that, but in the REAL world, sometimes stock runs out, or no one mentioned they were out of XL PJ's. Have you ever gone into a store and wanted something in particular and it wasn't available? If so, did you have a hissy fit in the store, stomp your feet and make a complete jerk of yourself, or did you ask if there was something of similar quality, style, look, feel, etc? Things get missed. Name me an organisation that is 100% fail-safe and never errs.

Do you like soy coffee? How do you feel if it's not available? Take anything you particularly like and value enough to pay for, now imagine if you don't quite get the full experience. How do you feel?

Not interested in soy coffee. Don't care if it's not available. Maybe it's me, but if what I want isn't available, take the next best thing or go elsewhere. I don't know how a set of PJ's give you the "full experience", but it's pretentious idiots like those two that have an overinflated opinion of their own importance, and think the whole airline has to come to a standstill because of their unimportant and illegitimate demands.

Whilst the customers appear to have been over the top in their reaction the real point is that somewhere the Qantas system simply didn't work to keep your most valuable customers happy.

Sure things happen and go wrong. That's life. Some people need a reality check if they believe otherwise. If one doesn't like a particular airline, there's plenty to choose from. But if your only gripe is a set of cheap cotton PJ's that have a brand name on them and made in China, not available in your size, then you have serious issues, regardless of how much you paid for a ticket. QANTAS has a BIG complaints department. Use that instead of making complete Richard Craniums of yourselves in front of a plane load of people.

If you ordered a Ferrari and got a Hyundai, and told that was all that's available, THEN you have a gripe.

[wilcoleaks]

Was looking at the "strategy" slides from a link on the webpage pg 109 that shows by 2021 International will be an all A380 fleet.

Looks like Jetstar will be handed Asia and International will do America, Africa, and South America and maybe Japan from another slide.

[QF94]

Was looking at the "strategy" slides from a link on the webpage pg 109 that shows by 2021 International will be an all A380 fleet.

Looks like Jetstar will be handed Asia and International will do America, Africa, and South America and maybe Japan from another slide.

Nothing new there. That was released late last year/early this year. That slide could be a reality before 2021.

[Arnold E]

If you ordered a Ferrari and got a Hyundai, and told that was all that's available, THEN you have a gripe.

That is exactly what happened, they ordered a $10000 seat WITH extras and they didn't get it, simple as that really. Lets face it, first class is not worth what you pay for it, so if anything is missing then I think people have a right to a hissy fit.:ooh:

[wilcoleaks]

Etihad don't have any PJ's in Business Class at ALL.

I know this is a First class "thingo", but sleeping in a good suit SUCKS and it 8 grand, not 6 to europe.

[Romulus]

If one doesn't like a particular airline, there's plenty to choose from.

That was my main point. For the sake of holding enough PJs Qantas pissed off some top end yield.

And then they decided to broadcast it to the cabin.

Not a smart move regardless.




But if your only gripe is a set of cheap cotton PJ's that have a brand name on them and made in China, not available in your size, then you have serious issues, regardless of how much you paid for a ticket. QANTAS has a BIG complaints department. Use that instead of making complete Richard Craniums of yourselves in front of a plane load of people.


I don't disagree with your premise. But you've missed mine or at the very least have chosen to answer a different question of your own making.

Something went wrong.

For whatever reason it couldn't be handled on the spot.

For whatever reason the customers went "off".

For reasons of ego the crew then broadcast that across the plane.

Whilst I certainly agree that on the information provided the customers were cockheads, the response of the crew was also poor from a longer term perspective. Get them off, get the flight underway and be done with it.

[TIMA9X]

the real point is that somewhere the Qantas system simply didn't work to keep your most valuable customers happy. This I agree with

and If you ordered a Ferrari and got a Hyundai, and told that was all that's available, THEN you have a gripe.The way things are going currently at the Qantas PR department, the management would want you to believe, most people would settle for the Hyundai.. :)

just no positive vibe anymore.... maybe they (the PR dept) should try something new to get people talking positive about the brand again.. this idea for another airline was a bit of a hit...:ok:

elSz5JyKNCQ

.

[wilcoleaks]

First class is all about catering for Whim's.

Pj's, gluten free, all meal choices, spread out seating etc.

If you lose one customer in this field you prob lose 20 because it will be talked about over frapicino's with poodles and lots of OMG comments with the Toorak tractor parked out the front with purchased non abrasive mud to make them look hardcore.

[Ken Borough]

What a sad tale, from several points of view. While the pax's behaviour cannot be defended, neither can whoever made this alleged announcement

'Just to inform you all, the reason we've had the delay is because two of our first class passengers refused to fly on this plane as there was no extra large pyjamas on board for them'

Isn't it time that staff accepted the fact that the adage 'the customer is always right' applies no matter how wrong we think he or she might be?

[wilcoleaks]

They should have just slept nude....

The "Airline with no clothes" has a familiar ring.... Was that the Brother's Grim?

[QF94]

That is exactly what happened, they ordered a $10000 seat WITH extras and they didn't get it, simple as that really. Lets face it, first class is not worth what you pay for it, so if anything is missing then I think people have a right to a hissy fit.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/icon25.gif

If a person buys a First Class ticket on the basis of getting a pair of PJ's and any little cheap extras, then they miss the point of First Class. Big seats that recline and become a flat bed, personalised service and being addressed by their name, eating off Bone China and having real meals, big IFE screen and lots of little electrical buttons to play with and personal space, etc, etc.

A lot of people are quick to have their jab at QANTAS, its service and the staff if things don't go their own way. A lot of people choose not to fly QANTAS. Fair enough. A lot of people choose to stay with QANTAS, despite the PR and media, as they see the airline for what it is and what they bought a ticket for. To get to where they want to go (what's left of the routes).

In the end, you still get in an aluminium tube that has different "classes" from one end to the other, and everyone arrives at the same time, despite what price you've paid for the ticket.

[QF94]

Here's a story released yesterday about a male passenger told to move seats because he was sitting next to two unaccompanied minors on a Virgin Flight.

Sydney fireman John McGirr accuses Virgin of discrimination | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/news/sydney-fireman-john-mcgirr-accuses-virgin-of-discrimination/story-fnejlrpu-1226447666931)

Read this story about Virgin's company policy, and you'll realise a pair of unavailable set PJ's wasn't even worth mentioning and debating about.

Now tell me that was handled well on the spot and didn't make the guy feel ashamed to not only be male, but also made to feel like a paedophile because he was sitting next to a couple of kids flying on their own. This is a seat assigned by the airline. This is a policy of the nation's new favourite airline.

Reality check people. Reality check.

[standard unit]

This is a policy of the nation's new favourite airline.

It's also the current policy of Australia's previous favourite airline.

[bloated goat]

Gold!!!!!!!

[TIMA9X]

SU, Seconded, Double gold :D

[Arnold E]

If a person buys a First Class ticket on the basis of getting a pair of PJ's and any little cheap extras, then they miss the point of First Class.Well then, perhaps you would care to explain what is the point of buying first class if it's not for the "little" extras. For god's sake man, we are not taking here of a $1.50

Don't get me wrong, do I believe that these people were a little out of order, absolutely, do I believe the pilot that made the announcement was a tool, absolutely.

[Johhny Utah]

In response to this:
What a sad tale, from several points of view. While the pax's behaviour cannot be defended, neither can whoever made this alleged announcement
Quote:
'Just to inform you all, the reason we've had the delay is because two of our first class passengers refused to fly on this plane as there was no extra large pyjamas on board for them'
Isn't it time that staff accepted the fact that the adage 'the customer is always right' applies no matter how wrong we think he or she might be?
When the passenger announced to the CSM that he WOULD be getting off due to the unavailability of the XL-sized 1st class pyjamas (as promised) the Captain made a PA to let the rest of the passengers know that there would be a delay - he informed them that there were 2 customers who had decided at the last minute not to fly, and as a result of the security regulations there would be a delay while the holds were searched & their bags retrieved.

Upon hearing this, the customer in question told the CSM that he wasn't happy with the announcement, as it made it sound like he was being a PITA and it was his fault that the flight was being delayed; the CSM relayed that information to the Captain, along with the customer's demand that the Captain make another PA and either apologise, or explain the 'real' reason for the delay.

THAT is when the Captain made the PA and stated, as explicitly demanded by the customer, the exact reason for the delay (the unavailability of XL First Class pyjamas).

Before you ask "How would you know what happened...?" - I was there.

[Arnold E]

Before you ask "How would you know what happened...?" - I was there. Don't care if you were there,........ poorly handled

[Johhny Utah]

I agree - there's no excuse from a supply point of view for not having the pyjamas on hand for a First class passenger; if not on the aircraft, then certainly somewhere not too far away. In defence of the customer - it later emerged that there hadn't been XL sized pyjamas for him on the previous First Class MEL-LAX sector for him either :ugh:

It's a sad indictment on the current fixation with cost cutting at Qantas - "cannot see the forest for the trees" comes to mind. In this day & age I can't believe that such special request information isn't kept 'on file' to prevent a re-occurrence :mad:

[Arnold E]

In defence of the customer

I don't have a problem with the customer, if I had paid $10000 for a seat I would expect everything to be right, and I would not expect some tool to make an issue of it.

[DirectAnywhere]

I'm going to apologise to the moderators for this but the thread has probably run its course anyway.

FFS, some of you guys need to get a grip. Today 60 people died in floods in Manila, 3000 people died of malaria in sub-Saharan Africa, a family of six was wiped out in a car accident in Queensland.

Now I don't give a flying f$&k whether old mate was Jesus Christ reincarnated, there is no excuse for this sort of childish, pompous outburst. Being a First Class passenger, yes, all amenities should have been available but this guy needs a serious reality check if this is the worst thing to happen in his world today.

If you too need a dose of reality have a flick through some of the images on here:

malnourished children - Google Search (http://www.google.com.au/search?q=malnourished+children&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari#biv=i|5;d|bn9uJ8g65BctdM:)

I'm getting sick of the f$&king whinging.

[judge.oversteer]

Why didn't the said captain go back and apologise to the customer and offer him his own PJ's.
I would have.
JO.

[catch18]

Next advertising campaign should feature B1 and B2 sitting in A1 and A2 in Qantas PJ's

[Arnold E]

FFS, some of you guys need to get a grip. Today 60 people died in floods in Manila, 3000 people died of malaria in sub-Saharan Africa, a family of six was wiped out in a car accident in Queensland.

And what has all of that got to do with anybody getting value for money????

[DirectAnywhere]

About as much as walking off an aeroplane and holding up another 400 people does because you didn't get your jimmy-jams.

Any right-thinking person would think the response was completely disproportionate, particularly when one considers what else is going on in the world.

[crystalballwannabe]

What could be going on in "his/her" world

Corporate jet was unavailable
14 hour work day
200 million dollar deal goes tits up - dealing with lawyers all day
Raced to the airport wearing a $5G suit
Popped some pills, just wants to sleep.

Guess what........No PJ's

"Your the Reason we fly" failed here.

[Arnold E]

holding up another 400 people does because you didn't get your jimmy-jams.

You dont get it do you? the customer didn't hold up 400 other people, QANTAS did.:ugh::ugh:

[DirectAnywhere]

You're right, I don't get it. (Sorry mods. Over to you.)

[Arnold E]

Any right-thinking person would think the response was completely disproportionate, particularly when one considers what else is going on in the world. You are probably right, but who sits down and thinks of the kids starving in Ethiopia when something that they are affected by happens to them, do you???

Actually on reflection you are 100% correct, lets let QANTAS go down the the drain because we dont care what the customer thinks, be it right or wrong, as long as some tool pilot can mock people that are paying his wage.

[Keg]

Was he mocking them? That's a big call to make? Surely he had a duty to be honest to the remaining passengers? What's he supposed to say? Two passengers failed to board? Nope, that's a lie. Two passengers have elected to not travel with us this evening? Sure, could have lead with that. Wholly unsatisfying to the remaining P and J class passengers (who have also paid a ****e load of money) as to why they've made that decision.

So be honest. Two passengers have elected to disembark because we didn't have the right size pyjamas. It's the truth. People can draw their own conclusions as to what sort of people those P class passengers may be. It doesn't appear the Captain made any comment on the issue beyond setting out what had occurred. I'd probably have done the identical thing. In fact, now I think of it, I've done the identical thing a number of times. i've just never had the reason of no XL PJs on board as a reason to give the rest of the passengers for our delay!

[SpannerTwister]

Two first class tickets return SYD-LAX is in excess of $40,000

I'm not sure that the pilot was right to mock the passengers concerned, I'm pretty sure that there's not much excuse for not keeping enough of all size PJ's for these customers and I'm really not seeing why management wasn't fawning over these customers.

While they would of been pretty annoyed at not having the PJ's supplied, at that stage recovery may of been possible.

Publicly mocking them from the flight deck probably removed any chance of recovery.

Now that they have been publicly identified, and "Named and shamed", I'd suggest that there is significantly less than zero per-cent chance they'll ever fly with us again.

I wonder how many $40,000 trips they make a year, none with QF now !

ST

[SpannerTwister]

Keg........

Yes, What the pilot said may of been 100% true, but that doesn't mean that it needs to be advertised.

Do you make a PA every time something bad or different or untoward happens on your flight ?

Do the passengers deserve privacy, even if they are acting in a less than stellar way ?

ST

[Arnold E]

Was he mocking them? That's a big call to make? Surely he had a duty to be honest to the remaining passengers?

He sure was mocking them and you know it, all he had to say to "tell the truth" was that the flight was held up due to passengers not wishing to continue as so disembarking.
Sorry for the delay, end of story. As I have implied, if Q pilots want to continue down this road (mocking the customer) that's fine, but dont whinge when your job disappears because the customers have disappeared.

[Johhny Utah]

Arnold - wrong. The customer, having told staff that he was getting off the aircraft, then refused to do so until the captain complied with his demand to either apologise OR explain to everyone the 'real' reason he was getting off; I guess he expected the Captain to make a groveling apology, and not a clear statement of the facts (as demanded).

The Captain had already made a polite PA "telling the truth" advising the passengers that they were going to be delayed due to two customers electing not to travel on the flight at the last minute (without going into any more detail) - but the customer demanded more.

The remaining First Class passengers were (from all reports) quite surprised that a fellow passenger would attempt to delay 400+ other paying passengers, all for a pair of pyjamas.

Passengers were already emailing/texting media outlets whilst the aircraft was sitting at the gate as the bag search was delaying the departure.

[QF94]

You dont get it do you? the customer didn't hold up 400 other people, QANTAS did.:ugh::ugh:

They still got to their destination on time. Lost two pax, made up 30 minutes.

[Arnold E]

Dont get me wrong, I dont have much time for people as these passengers have been described, I also have some personal experience with people with too much money, my own sister ( whom I rarely talk to) would not dream of getting on an aircraft unless she could get at the very least a bussiness class ticket, she wouldn't dream of flying with us peasants down the back. But the fact is when either one of us flys as a passenger, she contributes much more to the wages of those concerned with the flight than I do sitting in cattle class. Do you follow what I am getting at. Just as a matter of interest, she has long since stopped flying QANTAS. I haven't bothered to ask the exact reason but it would have something to do with expectations of service I am sure. Money is not an issue.

[smilie]

Not a great way to run a business unless you have a monopoly and endless customers.

It sounds like the public service mentality towards the customers, how long has Qantas been private!

Wakey, Wakey, it's not just your CEO causing the slide in popularity.

[ruprecht]

So we accept douchebag behaviour because the person has money...

No wonder we're all in the state we're in.:(

[QF94]

Dont get me wrong, I dont have much time for people as these passengers have been described, I also have some personal experience with people with too much money, my own sister ( whom I rarely talk to) would not dream of getting on an aircraft unless she could get at the very least a bussiness class ticket, she wouldn't dream of flying with us peasants down the back.

Not having a go at your sister, but some people's expectations can never be fully satisfied. Some people just need to find fault in something to satisfy their own self-importance.

It may their twisted little way of trying to get a freebie out of the company (any company for that matter). e.g. My coffee is too hot. My seat only reclines 179 degrees and not 180 degrees. The sun's too bright, etc, etc.

[QF94]

Wakey, Wakey, it's not just your CEO causing the slide in popularity.

He is the reason people choose not to fly with us. His disengagement from staff, is what causes the staff to be disengaged from their jobs.

Credit to a great majority of the staff who can still put on a smilie face when their jobs are under constant threat, and have PITA passengers and managers.

Staff didn't shut down the airline last year and leave up to 100,000 people stranded worldwide. No, industrial action was not the reason the airline was shut down either, as there really wasn't any that effected a decision to shut down an airline.

[Arnold E]

but some people's expectations can never be fully satisfied.

Mate, you are right, but if you are in a service industry, which we are, then sometimes, or even a lot of times we have just got to suck it up, smile, and say thank you for paying my wage.

[Stalins ugly Brother]

The 767 is covered and has been covered under the LHA since it's introduction into the Qantas fleet many moons ago.

What's your point??

[Romulus]

If a person buys a First Class ticket on the basis of getting a pair of PJ's and any little cheap extras, then they miss the point of First Class. Big seats that recline and become a flat bed, personalised service and being addressed by their name, eating off Bone China and having real meals, big IFE screen and lots of little electrical buttons to play with and personal space, etc, etc.

A lot of people are quick to have their jab at QANTAS, its service and the staff if things don't go their own way. A lot of people choose not to fly QANTAS. Fair enough. A lot of people choose to stay with QANTAS, despite the PR and media, as they see the airline for what it is and what they bought a ticket for. To get to where they want to go (what's left of the routes).

In the end, you still get in an aluminium tube that has different "classes" from one end to the other, and everyone arrives at the same time, despite what price you've paid for the ticket.

Thanks for that Alan Joyce. You do realise 94 that what you wrote effectively justifies Joyce's posiiton? Because, in the end, "everyone arrives at the same time, despite what price you've paid for the ticket" which means you see price as the one and only determinant in peoples' choice.

First class is about something else. Call it experience, or status, or whatever you like, it commands a massive premium in exchange for it being "just right". So when it's not "just right" then it's wrong. Simple as that.

Compounded by the bitchy ego trip of the message this one was handled very badly.

[Romulus]

Two first class tickets return SYD-LAX is in excess of $40,000

Spot on mate.

Those two people spent about 20 times what I and the vast majority of the plane passengers spend. For that they're pretty much entitled to ask wtf Qantas are doing if they can't get the service exactly right.

I've been lucky enough to use QF 1st class check in a couple of times and they were brilliant, nothing was too much hassle. That's what the customer has paid for, that's what they should get. Sure that's a "first world" attitude, but guess what - the customer paid a fee well and truly above what most first world people pay, let alone anywhere else.

[Worrals in the wilds]

Why don't they ask customers what size they are when they make the booking and get the right number of XXXS/5XL/three armed pjs on board plus a few generic spares? There'd be a bit of ringing around, but 20 grand a ticket pays for a lot of receptionist hours.

However, I think disembarking because there aren't the 'right' pjs is a little OTT. It would be like storming off from cattle class because they'd stuffed up the special meals...again. :zzz: IMO the passengers were extremely childish. Surely Qantas would have sent them two sets of the designer pjs in the right size later if they'd wanted some to keep.

It's probably a good reason for a nasty letter and an 'I'll never fly you again' declaration, but throwing a big hissy fit and disembarking? I thought I had an impulsive, prickly nature. :E

[peuce]

Once again, we're only hearing one side of the story.

Customer couldn't get what they wanted, so they left.

I wonder how the situation was handled by the crew? If it was in line with the "not so subtle" announcement from the flightdeck, then perhaps it was the reaction that sent them scurrying ... not the lack of pjs.

For example, the way that QF accepts as "normal operationsl" ... dodgy IFE ... after widely promoting it, seems to point to a lack of respect for passengers' entitlements. Sorry, tough titty Sir!

I can't help but agree with the other posters ... if I pay $20,000 for a service that has been hyped to the heavens, and don't get that service ... I'd be pretty cheezed off.

[C441]

I don't have a problem with the customer, if I had paid $10000 for a seat I would expect everything to be right, and I would not expect some tool to make an issue of it.

....Even if said passenger asked for it to be made an issue of?

An unfortunate incident but sadly an indication of the state of our once great airline, all the way from the unavailability of the pj's through to the fact that such an event is even newsworthy.

[Stalins ugly Brother]

767 salaries have nothing to do with the so-called Longhaul losses.
The losses are just creative accountancy on the part of AJ. LH is not part of the future plan of this current management and is being loaded up with debt (from other entities) to bolster their argument to shareholders to shut it down or palm it off.

It's that black and white.

To believe that Aircrew salaries are the reason for airline losses considering the minimal percentage of costs they contribute compared to the overall costs of the whole operation is just being naive. :=

[TIMA9X]

Qantas call a win for commonsense

Date August 13, 2012
Ross Gittins (http://www.smh.com.au/business/by/Ross-Gittins)

The Sydney Morning Herald's Economics Editor


Both parties in the Qantas dispute have been 'bloody-minded'. Photo: James Davies

FAIR Work Australia's monumental rebuff to the Transport Workers Union in its dispute with Qantas strikes a blow to the credibility of claims the Fair Work Act is some kind of conspiracy against employers. The commission (which is what Fair Work Australia is in all but name) had no choice last week but to support Qantas management because, in both its tactics and its demands, the union was being so bloody-minded.
That's true even though, by grounding its planes worldwide and locking out all its staff last October, Qantas management could come up with no more creative solution to its bargaining problem than to be as bloody-minded as some of its unions.This was not so much a win for ''managers' right to manage'' as the commission's commonsense judgment that all the industrial parties needed to face up to the harsh commercial realities threatening the survival of their business.
Here we had a union demanding 5 per cent annual pay rises at the same time it was fighting to prevent its employer from turning to cheaper sources of labour. That makes sense?

It will be a pity if the commission's refusal last week to split the difference in the old way encourages other militant employers to seek to resolve disagreements with their workers the chaos-causing Qantas way. Even so, the commission's refusal to go anywhere near splitting the difference provides powerful evidence it can be trusted to adjudicate issues sensibly in a system that hasn't swung the balance too far the unions' way.


Perhaps this explains why the national dailies - which, in their campaigning against the evils of Fair Work, seem to find another story about union atrocities for the front page most days - were not excited by the employers' big win last week.

Read too much of their stuff and you come away thinking the union movement has risen from its death bed to pose the greatest threat to our continued prosperity. Remember, union membership is down to 18 per cent of the workforce (from 50 per cent in 1982) and 14 per cent of private-sector workers.

Another figure to keep in mind when you read about the union monster poised to eat the economy's lunch: more than 80 per cent of enterprises don't have a union presence.

Two labour lawyers, Dr Anthony Forsyth, of Monash University, and Professor Andrew Stewart, of Adelaide University, note in their submission to the Fair Work review that ''the concerns about union activities that so animate certain employers in the resources, manufacturing and construction sectors are very far removed from the issues confronting businesses in other parts of the economy''.

''For the small to medium enterprises that predominate in sectors such as retail and hospitality, both unions and, indeed, collective bargaining are largely absent. Their concerns are much more likely, in our experience, to revolve around the costs and 'inflexibilities' imposed by the award system, and the renewed exposure to unfair dismissal claims that the Fair Work Act has brought.''

So far, Fair Work has failed in its aim to greatly increase the extent of collective bargaining, with the proportion of employees covered by collective agreements increasing from 39.8 per cent of the workforce in 2008, to just 43.4 per cent in 2010.

Dr Forsyth and Professor Stewart argue many of these new agreements are effectively non-union instruments drafted by employers to replace the individual workplace agreements formerly available under Work Choices.
Genuine collective bargaining is likely to be confined mainly to large, unionised workplaces in the public sector and to some sections of the private sector.

Much of the bitter complaint about Fair Work comes from the miners. The labour lawyers say what some employers in the resources sector are seeking is a capacity to manage their businesses without the involvement of unions, and to undertake projects entirely free of any threat of industrial action.
'These aspirations are simply not compatible with the principle of freedom of association … Indeed, to allow them to be fully realised would involve restrictions on the taking of industrial action, or on union rights of entry, that would go far beyond anything envisaged by the Howard government, even during the Work Choices period,'' they say.

Talk of Fair Work having unnecessarily bolstered ''union power'' should not only be kept in proportion but understood in the context of a broader ideological agenda that is profoundly antithetical to the principle of collectivism, they conclude

my bold
Read more: Qantas call a win for commonsense (http://www.smh.com.au/business/qantas-call-a-win-for-commonsense-20120812-242r5.html#ixzz23LRlCbNV)Well I'll be, it's Deja vu for me... why are they so shocked to think people are questioning the system....?

The way things have turned out over the last two years, my thoughts only, highlights the fact there is a lot a fat ($s) for manger, and lawyer types, (non operational) in the Qantas case, showing a heavy dose of disrespect for the guys and girls left who physically operate the airline each day... other words, how do you begin to repair the damaged staff relations when the suits appear to way outnumber the actual people who keep the show on the road...? all trust appears to have evaporated ..

We are only a few days away (again) from the profit results and nothing appears to have moved forward.... other than our friends in suits getting their way of course..

Is this what "legacy" means when big business always use it prior to saying the word "airline" these days..?" reinforcing the belief shared by many that Qantas was gutted to pay for Jetstar..

Today the suits think they have won the war, but it will come back to bite them when it is realised in a few years, Australia will have a generation of highly trained/untrained out of work people sharing the podium because we gifted our expertise to Asia & elsewhere.. (exactly what happened in the UK recently the service industry couldn't hold up the show any longer) sooner or later we can't all keep doing each others washing.. :}

Don't think the Asian's won't do the state government power bill type price rise thing (up the costs) when all's quiet on the aviation front back here in Australia.

What bugs me more, Qantas management dined out on the demise of Ansett, had it easy for many years, now all of a sudden things are bad....

The Question is, what took the powers to be so long to wake up? Many on here could see it coming, people have been firing warning shots for years now, just look back over the the last couple of years, all that has been said pretty much has come true.

What annoyed me throughout the recent events, inflated Captains wage figures where endlessly floated around the media. What was never understood by the general public, many Australian pilots spend years working their way up the ladder, many from the hard $$$ slog GA division... I admire them all as I know how hard it is for young Australian pilots to climb the seniority ranks just to become a Captain.. having said that, I believe the seniority system has served the profession well, producing here in Australia one of the best tech & safety records in the world.. if the guys in the suits want to keep messing with it, sooner or later they will come unstuck, and it appears, the system allows them to be not responsible.. go figure..







.

[Ultergra]

Well written mate!!

[crystalballwannabe]

Poor pay in GA and doing it tough does not equal Airline dollars.

Airline dollars = People paying for tickets at a reasonable price.

Cheap airfares are here to stay and this same conversation will drag on forever.

There will be a downward drive on pilot prices for the foreseeable future.

[Romulus]

There will be a downward drive on pilot prices for the foreseeable future.

There's the crux of that particular problem. As long as piloting is seen as a cool job and plenty of people want to do it there will be downward pressure on T&Cs.

As there are more and more training academies producing qualified pilots that will add to the numbers wanting to earn a living, even one below the current salaries, that supply will put further downward pressure on salaries. Even more so if they've paid for their own ratings.

Thus the airline that can obtain lowest cost qualified labour has a keen advantage.

Same could be said for corporate jobs as well, problem being they require locating in the corporate environment so there's often not such an easy path to outsourcing them. Unfortunately.

[QF94]

Thanks for that Alan Joyce. You do realise 94 that what you wrote effectively justifies Joyce's posiiton? Because, in the end, "everyone arrives at the same time, despite what price you've paid for the ticket" which means you see price as the one and only determinant in peoples' choice.

Romulus, my statement is factual, no matter which way you look at it. Your response however is presumptuous. Also, by your response and labelling me AJ does you no favours either. It appears you have the same temperament as the two that didn't get their PJ's. You don't agree with me, so you accuse, imply and allege. All incorrect and unfounded.

I am going to respond to this for the last time, as the two in question and their compromised position in life has gotten more publicity than they deserve.

First class is about something else. Call it experience, or status, or whatever you like, it commands a massive premium in exchange for it being "just right". So when it's not "just right" then it's wrong. Simple as that.

I agree with the service part, as I have stated earlier. But I don't agree that a set of brand name PJ's would add to the overall "experience" of the service, before, during and after the flight.

Have a read of the two articles below, both from very prestigious car makers, and the faults in them, after the very high premiums have been paid, and after potentially causing accidents. Using your analogy, the PJ deprived passengers are in the same category as those who paid a high premium for their prestige cars and whose vehicles weren't "just right".

In reality, the PJ's make no difference whatsoever other than a sense of entitlement and a keepsake of their "experience". The mechanical problems however, no matter the price of the car, are ones worthy of demand and entitlement.

Porsche recalling 2012 911 Carrera S over possible fuel leak (http://www.autoblog.com/2012/03/26/porsche-recalling-2012-911-carrera-s-over-possible-fuel-leak/)

Luxury image suffers after Rolls Royce recall - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-26/rolls-royce-image-takes-a-hit-after-recall/3974416)

Compounded by the bitchy ego trip of the message this one was handled very badly.

Agreed, it wasn't handled as good as it should have been, but goes for both sides.

If people don't have the maturity to match their wealth, they should stay in economy.

[ampclamp]

Qantas, where to now? Gold coast! Thank you, at last !! Should never have given it all to JQ.

[Romulus]

First class is about something else. Call it experience, or status, or whatever you like, it commands a massive premium in exchange for it being "just right". So when it's not "just right" then it's wrong. Simple as that.
I agree with the service part, as I have stated earlier. But I don't agree that a set of brand name PJ's would add to the overall "experience" of the service, before, during and after the flight.


There's part of the problem. those damn PJs *ARE* part of the experience, they make THESE individuals feel special. And in reality that's all first class is. Economy to Business is a major improvement. Business to First isn't such a huge step.

But when you get to fly First it's an incredible feeling (done it twice via upgrades).

If you do it regularly it confirms your status and position, that's what is being sold. Not just PJs but social differentiation. Some people are prepared to pay for it and they are prepared to pay massively. So Qantas takes their money and good on them. They sold what the customer wanted.

Think it doesn't have a powerful level of command and respect? Think again.

As a pretty regular customer I garnered enough status points to be a Platinum and use the First class check in line. I have to admit, that's where I reckon the most benefit is, that whole process is made brilliantly easy rather than a long laborious queue.

Anyway, I was once coming back from Europe and as with all things when you're away from home the infrastructure isn't as large as it is when flying QF in Aus. Got to the airport and there's a woman giving every staff member in sight a hell of a hard time, she wanted this and that and everything else and was mouthing off everywhere and telling the whole airport how important she was. Complete bitch quite frankly. Handled about as well as was possible by the QF staff who showed great restraint.

But then something amusing happened.

After finishing my duty free shopping (like my Scotch just a little bit too much some would say) I rocked up to check in and wandered down the First queue. And guess who happened to be at the head of Business queue (all of abotu 5 or 6 people/couples so not a terribly long line but still too long for her highness)? Still mouthing off. everything was taking far too long. And there was no way she was giving way to this bloke who rocked up after her so she decided she was next.

Only to be told, in a very sweet and polite manner by a very smiley QF staffer, that customers in First had priority and she would have to wait.

That completely and utterly shut the big mouth up. Not a peep in the next 5 minutes or so and I never saw her again after that but I certainly didn't hear her again. She was totally deflated because her own sense of importance got overridden.

Now you could argue that we both got on the same plane and we both left and arrived at the same time etc. But the invisible social power of that differentiation seen by very few people was enough to put her right back in her box. That's what those PJs represent to those particular customers. They give them demonstrable social cachet. Be that right or wrong, and I would agree they appear incredibly insecure and shallow people, that is what they value. A tiny detail in the scheme of things, but it is those tiny details that the customer pays for.

Think credit cards. Platinum cards cost several hundred dollars a year for generally meagre, if any at all, benefits. Yet people pay. It impresses others. It marks them in a positive manner. Simple as that.



Have a read of the two articles below, both from very prestigious car makers, and the faults in them, after the very high premiums have been paid, and after potentially causing accidents. Using your analogy, the PJ deprived passengers are in the same category as those who paid a high premium for their prestige cars and whose vehicles weren't "just right".


Sort of. At the utilitarian level there is no reason to buy an expensive car, we should all drive el cheapo Hyundais or whatever. These days there is VERY little difference between the various marques. Yet because BMW, Mercedes etc were once a long way ahead in terms of quality and they have maintained and built on that tradition people still pay a premium. Personally I can't stand BMWs, to me they're worse than Volvos in terms of what they say. And they're predominantly made in China and SAfrica factories rather than by the traditional German craftsmen.

But I do like Italian cars, I own one. Not a Ferrari or even a Maserati but an Alfa. A tiny, stupid, inconvenient, underpowered, athsmatic and illogical 2 door convertible (now 12 years old). It's worth maybe $10K tops but when I drive around I feel like a million dollars. I just love the experience. I can't explain it but that's what it does for me.

The intangible. That's what First is. That's what my Alfa is.

And when anything goes wrong with my Alfa (somewhat bizarrely the most reliable car I have ever owned - that can be interpreted as either a statistical improbability, as a tribute to improved Alfa build standards or perhaps to the fact every other car I have owned has been a real sh*tbox and thus the bar is very low) I absolutely hate it. I'll pull it apart or pay overpriced mechanics (compared to their peers) to fix it. That's just my thing. For some people they get the same gratification from First. That's the power of the intagible and that's what Joyce is, in my opinion, destroying. Hence my comment.



In reality, the PJ's make no difference whatsoever other than a sense of entitlement and a keepsake of their "experience". The mechanical problems however, no matter the price of the car, are ones worthy of demand and entitlement.

Your customers disagree.

Are you prepared to listen to them?

Or will you just tell them you are right and their opinion is invalid?


If people don't have the maturity to match their wealth, they should stay in economy.

Amusing.

[73to91]

Business to First isn't such a huge step.
is that correct? isn't there a little secret that QF do not like to advertise? i.e. pickup from home/hotel etc to airport? valet at the airport?

I was told that this is what JB introduced, it was not advertised because 'it was suppose to be the Australian way, i.e. don't brag, just do it'

[Redpanda]

The customer is not always right..............



But they are always the customer!

[wilcoleaks]

Where to now?

Why stop at the Gold Coast:

Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane........

The strategy department must be working overtime

This is pure genius:D

[Trevor the lover]

Ref Mr and Mrs Pyjamas

Maybe this case wasn't isolated for them. Let's consider they travel with QF first class or business class reasonably frequently. Have they been let down time and time again by sh!tty little things that just shouldn't happen when they are spending so much money.

Just maybe this wasn't just a case of ONE set of Pyjamas. Maybe it was more a case of "well stuff it, I have finally had a gut full of this airline."

Always two sides to a story and I'm not sure that one isolated incident such as this would create such a meltdown.

[dizzylizzy]

Trevor: you'll find they expressed to media sources they were happy to fly Qantas again. Given the way the problem was dealt with ect, he even expressed to the crew "you can tell them if you want" and so he did. Perhaps one needs to get their head around the sky isn't falling over an odd situation like this.

[moa999]

is that correct? isn't there a little secret that QF do not like to advertise? i.e. pickup from home/hotel etc to airport? valet at the airport?
I was told that this is what JB introduced, it was not advertised because 'it was suppose to be the Australian way, i.e. don't brag, just do it'


No limo on QF First. :(

If departing SYD/MEL, call the day before to book a spa appointment and given number of QF Host. Curbside baggage at SYD/MEL and dedicated checkin area.
In the First lounge they will reserve a table while you have your massage.
You will be greeted by a host who has done some research and engage you in commentary (how was your last flight to xxx, we have seen many people from company yyy recently)
On Board, the food is slightly better (but a direct comparison shows many choices shared with Business), the alcohol and service substantially better, the seat and IFE bigger..
And the PJs are brown not grey, and rather than a massive black roo, they have a far more subtle brown one, and a tag on the back collar that simply says "FIRST"

[Worrals in the wilds]

It reminds me of the scale of force/force continuum used by law enforcement agencies. The idea is that you respond to a situation with the same or one level greater use of force.

Someone threatens you verbally? The acceptable level of force may be verbal or basic physical control, depending on the circumstance.

Someone threatens you with a machete or a gun that you believe is loaded? The acceptable level of force is much greater and may be fatal. However, it's not appropriate to shoot someone dead just because they verbally threatened you.

Likewise, IMO not having the right peejays is a problem when you've paid a lot for a first class ticket. Probably worthy of a verbal spray, a nasty letter and a change of carrier for future flights.

Worthy of a tantrum? Probably a little excessive, a bit un:cool: but within the acceptable level of force.

Worthy of stomping off and delaying everyone else, including a number of first class pax who also paid top dollar? Don't think so. Just how good are these jammies? Do they sing you to sleep or something? :confused:

Life is full of small disappointments. The 60 buck restaurant main is average, the expensive French champagne tastes like Yellow, the Alfa breaks down, costs a bomb to fix and a month waiting for what turns out to be the wrong parts (not that that should be surprise, mi amore ;))...**** happens. Don't most people just deal with it? You still get the big bed, the fancy wine, the knowledge that your seat is swankier than everyone else's and that everyone knows you're a Big Cheese 'cos your luggage tags say so.
First World problems...:(
And the PJs are brown not grey, and rather than a massive black roo, they have a far more subtle brown oneBrown, eh? Queensland Corrective Services issue brown peejays too. Very swanky colour, brown...lots of wealthy guys have worn it; even a few pollies. Until they served their time, anyway. :E:}

[GUARD]

The point here is that QANTAS LAX never keep enough PJs of any size and these pax have probably been let down on a number of occasions including not having their desired meal available and IFE being on the fritz on more than one occasion.

The problem is we usually talk the talk but NOTHING ever changes. So, a business person who doesn't want to sit in their suit for 14 hours is left with one sound means of 'getting through' to management. Angry letters and all that stuff don't have any effect. This reaction does and good on them I say.

It's high time we started walking the walk. The world is full of Y-gen bull**** artists. So there!

[73to91]

No limo on QF First
thanks for that update moa. Makes me think that they are attempting to sell one story to new recruits (that is who told me) as the oldies wouldn't believe them.

Also makes me think of the latest announcement regarding the OOL service. Ch 9 flogged it this morning. So are management listening to their customers? might be a big supply heading to LAX now to ensure that there are always XL, XXL or XXXL PJ' ready !!

[Romulus]

Business to First isn't such a huge step.
is that correct? isn't there a little secret that QF do not like to advertise? i.e. pickup from home/hotel etc to airport? valet at the airport?

I was told that this is what JB introduced, it was not advertised because 'it was suppose to be the Australian way, i.e. don't brag, just do it'

That's a nice to have I certainly agree (not that I've ever experienced it).

What I meant was the jump in service level from Business to First (even allowing for the transit) is not as great as the jump in service when you go from Economy to Business. Diminishing returns and all that.

[AEROMEDIC]

I travel business regularly enough and these days for pleasure, but I have used first several times to understand the differences are not value enough.

So why pay the difference? Romulus is right to say "for the experience"

It IS an experience, and while the "experience" is great, it does wear off. Like buying a new car, it's great driving it and getting used to the bells and whistles, but you get used to it.
Business and skybeds are great as well, and the experience isn't that different.
If you have used first enough, you get used to it and you find you don't use most of the services for which you have paid.
Mostly I've travelled overnight so it's really only the bed. It's the same comfort in business as first in my view.

That's my "experience". :ok:

[Captain Gidday]

I have it straight from the horse [shall we say] that a couple of weeks before the alleged pyjama incident a crew delayed in LAX waiting for First Class doonas [the quilty things that first class pax are provided with to sleep on].
At 30 minutes to departure the Duty Manager was notified that the doona department were 8 short. At departure time, still no show. Pressure, pressure - gotta go.
Oh, well, not really - not without the doonas anyway.
So, the waiting began. It took about another 20 mins., but 8 doonas duly arrived and the flight pushed back soon after. Blows the Manager's KPIs out of the water, but hey, it kept the suits happy.
It isn't rocket science.

[packrat]

Its transport,pure and simple.All this other nonsense about cheap PJs indicate that many people live in a goddam bubble of self absorbment.
Academics have this inane attitude that the world revolves around them.
It doesn't.They eat,****e and die like the rest of us.
Tools tossers wankers

[unseen]

Academics or pilots?

[The Green Goblin]

Its transport,pure and simple.All this other nonsense about cheap PJs indicate that many people live in a goddam bubble of self absorbment.
Academics have this inane attitude that the world revolves around them.
It doesn't.They eat,****e and die like the rest of us.
Tools tossers wankers

Maybe, but they are paying your wage. So smile and treat them how they wish to be treated.

One ticket is worth 10 economy tickets for the same payload uplift. It's called yield and the company needs more of it.

[unseen]

Its transport,pure and simple.All this other nonsense about cheap PJs indicate that many people live in a goddam bubble of self absorbment.
Academics have this inane attitude that the world revolves around them.
It doesn't.They eat,****e and die like the rest of us.
Tools tossers wankers

Maybe, but they are paying your wage. So smile and treat them how they wish to be treated.

One ticket is worth 10 economy tickets for the same payload uplift. It's called yield and the company needs more of it.

My point exactly

If they wanted pure transport they would go economy.

They chose to give us a lot more money.

[evertonliverpool]

Just Heard a rumour That the !0 LAMEs to go in Late Oct will be receiving a letter off Qantas Legal telling them they will not be getting there 12 weeks severance pay that the last departing engineers where payed, This will help save the KPI of the managers (nice little bonus ) They have been told if they want to go now they will receive NO VR .The average years off service is over 26 years, What a way to reward your staff, LOW LIFE SCUM THE LOT OFF THEM. POX ON THEM ALL.

[Romulus]

Its transport,pure and simple.All this other nonsense about cheap PJs indicate that many people live in a goddam bubble of self absorbment.
Academics have this inane attitude that the world revolves around them.
It doesn't.They eat,****e and die like the rest of us.
Tools tossers wankers

So you believe in utilitarianism.

Have you ever bought branded clothes? Tool, tosser, ******. After all, Its (sic) clothing, pure and simple.

Sunglasses?

Ever bought anything but the cheapest car? Tool, tosser, ******. After all, Its (sic) transport, pure and simple.

And so on.

You've missed the point packrat, the customer who PAYS out of discretionary funds CHOOSES what they wish to pay for and they expect to get it. To believe otherwise is to subscribe to what many see as the Alan Joyce theory of life - lowest price wins, nothing else matters.

[Worrals in the wilds]

Its transport,pure and simple.By that logic, restaurants are purely about feeding people. Look out for my new chain of Gruel Express stores coming to a food court near you!
I'll make zillions...:}
However, I do think he made a bigger fuss than was called for.

[packrat]

If a an aircraft owned by an airline is not transport then what is it?
A restaurant?.A nursery?.A delivery room?
Economy Business and First all arrive at the same time.The population of the entire aircraft will suffer from dehydration and jetlag in travelling long distances.
Aircraft are the fastest way to arrive at your longhaul destination.If time is not of importance travel by ship.
Transport def:To carry from one place to another; convey.
Thats what aircraft do.The rest of it is product differentiation.
As for restaurants.I eat out so I dont have to do the washing up.
I have eaten at some of the best restaurants the world has to offer.They are all a place to eat and share conversation and ideas.Im not there for the waiters or the decor.Food and company.If the food flows smoothly and the company good the rest is bull****e.Its easy to deal with prima donna waiters and some dodgy paint job.
Getting miffed and deplaning because your PJs arent available indicates that you are living in a parallel universe to the rest of us.you are also inconveniencing 400 other people.WTF make you so special?This sense of importance is what bought about the GFC.Bankers and wankers agree:we are better than everyone else.Etiquette manners and consideration are not necessary for us.We are the elite.We are above it all.
To them I say Fark Orf

[Worrals in the wilds]

If time is not of importance travel by ship.Fundamentally, ships are also nothing more than transport. Why use them as an example if service is an irrelevance to transport? I assume you are referring the big swanky ships rather than bulk carriers or oil tankers.

As for restaurants.I eat out so I dont have to do the washing up.Maybe you do, but a lot of people are purely there for the pose factor. Is that prissy, pretentious and overly materialistic? Probably, but it makes Matt Moran et al a lot of money. I bet he doesn't turn the posers away at the door. Of course the dodgy looking Italian joint down the road with the checked table cloths and Chianti candles probably does better food, but the posers aren't actually interested in that.

Likewise first class. No human being needs first class. Most of us would be happy with a fully functioning economy class that delivered everything it promised :ouch:.

By definition, first class is a pose factor and enough posers are willing to pay to make it viable. For the price they get charged it should be 100% awesome and Jabba The Hutt should be able to get jammies, because that's what they're paying for. You don't pay exorbitant amounts at ARIA to be told they're out of chicken and you shouldn't pay exorbitant amounts to Qantas to be told they're out of jammies, which (if PPRuNe is to be believed, which it often is :E) has been a recurring problem out of LAX.

Worth stomping off? No, IMO but still lousy service. The pax hasn't won himself any medals for this incident, but nor should Qantas.

[low_earth_orbit]

Sorry to take the topic off PJs however back to the thread title - Qantas - Where to now? - how about take a leaf out of this man's book.....:D


How top leaders are changing the game

The gospel according to John Borghetti, Virgin CEO
15 August 2012 Anthony Black
LeadingCompany | Advice, Articles and News for Business Leaders (http://www.leadingcompany.com.au)


“A chief executive’s real job is to provide vision, inspire and create hope for company employees. My job is to provide the tools our staff need to deliver on that vision. An important element is face-to-face communication. I’m on a plane at least once a day. You have to talk to people – they know more about things than you do."
That's the view of Virgin Australia chief executive John Borghetti, who likes to think of himself as a “people man”. He works in a people industry, a focal point, he says, that’s too often lost on other airline chief executives around the globe.
“Talk to CEOs in aviation around the world and what most want to discuss is cutting costs,” Borghetti says. “Of course, that’s normal business. But very few of them talk about how to improve their airline’s revenue streams, their service, or how to engage more with their customers or staff.
“Aviation can be complicated, but fundamentally it’s pretty basic. It’s firstly a people business, not a numbers business. Every airline in the world flies the same aluminium tube through the air. The paint-jobs and seats might be different. But what separates airlines are the people they employ. Run the business right and the consequence will be good numbers.”
After becoming chief executive in May 2010, Borghetti’s strategy included repositioning an airline that had lost its way.
The turnaround
He says before joining the airline – Virgin Blue, as it was known then – it had deviated from its initial model as a low-cost carrier to a mid-tier one by introducing loyalty schemes, a limited range of lounges and premium economy. This led to higher costs, and competitors took advantage by offering cheaper fares.
Also, Virgin Blue was almost totally dependent on the leisure market, exposing the company to big losses from natural disasters. Borghetti says Virgin lost more than $100 million in six months due to the Christchurch earthquakes, Queensland floods and volcanic ash clouds.
“We had to diversify our revenue base from our dominant leisure market,” Borghetti says.
His aptly-named “game change” strategy included competing against Qantas in the more lucrative business segment. Qantas dominated the business travel segment before Virgin entered the space in January 2011.
“In any business, when you enter an almost monopolistic market, there’s only two things that are guaranteed,” Borghetti says. “The monopolist will wind up losing market share and the new entrant will win some. The only question is how much? When you see a monopoly, you think, I could take a crack at that.”
To entice business travellers, Virgin started a price war, undercutting Qantas business fares by 27%, which Borghetti says is sustainable over the longer term. “We’re gaining on Qantas,” he says. “We now have about 30% of capacity in the market while Qantas has about 65%. Take out Jetstar, and Qantas has about 45%. I don’t call it a price war – I call it competition. We haven’t cut fares for the short term.”
A new vision
Borghetti, a former Qantas senior executive and employee for more than 35 years, had a vision for Virgin just before he was appointed. He told the board: “If I’m going to take this role, here’s the strategy, so if you buy the strategy, then I’ll take the job.”
He says the company had too many brands – Virgin Blue, Pacific Blue, Polynesian Blue – and their different offerings confused customers. So he changed the company name to Virgin Australia last year to provide a new identity and a single customer proposition.
Aircraft interiors were modified for business class, new lounges were built, existing lounges were renovated and terminals upgraded. “On the service side, we had to create a network that gave us global coverage,” he says. “We elected to do it through strategic alliance partners, so we could co-operate on pricing, scheduling, co-ordination and reciprocity in terms of frequent flyer programs.
“So now we have a global network that can fly you into more than 400 destinations around the globe, to destinations on other people’s airlines with our code and passengers can still earn frequent flyer points. That was the other important thing – we needed a frequent flyer program that covered the globe and was competitive. When I joined, we had 1.8 million frequent flyers and I was told the program was pretty well matured. Today, we have way over three million and it’s growing by about 1600 members a day. We needed that critical mass.”
Borghetti changed the composition of the aircraft flown on different routes to extract the most value. Long-range planes were taken off relatively short routes and wide-bodied aircraft, providing more room and comfort, were introduced between Australia’s east and west coasts.
More fuel-efficient planes, the ATR 72s, were introduced on new regional routes from capital cities; the routes Borghetti considered to be monopolised, such as Emerald, Gladstone and Port Macquarie. Borghetti also increased the number of flights between Melbourne and Sydney from the low 20s to 31 a day. He considers the three growth routes in Australia to be from the east coast to Western Australia, regional markets within a state and between Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane.
But, as he says, having a strategy is one thing, and executing it is quite another. Borghetti is almost two years into a three-year plan that he continues to roadshow at least twice a year to his 7000 staff, sharemarket analysts and journalists.
Why it works
“To make a strategy work, it’s all about communication,” he says. “You have to be able to convince the staff that what you’re doing is the right way forward and is going to benefit the business. It’s easier to convince people if you believe in it. Everyone likes clarity – you can’t execute a plan if it’s confusing. And stick to the strategy; it might need tweaking here and there, but it has to be consistent. Don’t drastically change it every two or three months – that’s a certain highway to failure.
“A chief executive’s real job is to provide vision, inspire and create hope for company employees. My job is to provide the tools our staff need to deliver on that vision. An important element is face-to-face communication. I’m on a plane at least once a day. You have to talk to people – they know more about things than you do.

“What a pilot sees in an hour, management won’t see in a week. Management sending emails and letters is all very nice, but 90% of them don’t get read. They get deleted. I talk to passengers in lounges and ask where we can improve and how we can make them more comfortable. They may be very basic questions, but the feedback delivers a lot.”
By all accounts, Borghetti’s strategy appears to be working. Investors will find out when he delivers the company’s full-year results in late August.
About this time last year, the company reported a net loss after tax of $67.8 million for the 12 months to June 30, 2011. This result included $36 million in unrealised foreign exchange losses due to the rising Australian dollar. But for the half year to December 31, 2011, Virgin Australia reported a statutory net profit after tax of $51.8 million, up 118% on the prior corresponding period. Total revenue for the six-month period increased by 18% to $2 billion.
The right staff
Borghetti is also fussy about who he hires.
“I would rather employ someone without a degree, but who has a lot of energy, passion and a can-do attitude than someone who’s got 10 degrees, lacks personality and lacks any form of urgency,” he says. “Because you can’t teach those skills. You can teach technical skills, but you can’t always teach people about character.
“If I’m employing someone in senior management, I will never read a person’s CV until I’ve made up my mind. The reason is everybody’s CV looks brilliant – they’re geniuses. Have you ever read a bad CV? I would rather talk to prospective employees face-to-face. If you think there’s something there, then you go back and look at the CV. I put a lot of emphasis on a person’s character and attitude. You can tell when someone has the right attitude and that’s what I want.”
The gospel according to John Borghetti
Q: What is the one thing a leader should never say or do?
A: A leader should never say: “It can’t be done”. A leader should never become complacent.
Q: What elements are critical to achieving change?
A: Vision, belief and communication. When I arrived, I had the vision, but how was I going to make it work? You have to be able to sell a story. And the only way you can sell it is with honesty and conviction. If the board, management and staff see you are confident and you believe in the story, they will generally come along in the same direction.
Q: What makes a workforce productive or more productive?
A: Strong leadership. You have to lead from the front, by example. You should never tell or ask anybody to do something that you haven’t done yourself. The moment you do that, you lose touch with reality. There’s only three things staff have to do to make a customer happy. They have to look people in the eye, smile and call them by their name. Those three things will hide a multitude of errors.
Q: What important qualities do you look for in your direct reports?
A: Urgency, attitude, decisiveness and an ability to lead people.
Q: What is your favourite source of leadership inspiration and ideas?
A: Life in general. I learn from as many people as I can. I learn from mistakes. I don’t have a mentor. One person can’t get everything right all the time.
Q: What was the worst moment of your career?
A: September 11, 2001. I was with Qantas and two of our staff died when the planes hit the buildings in New York. Qantas also had planes in American airspace at the time of the attacks, and were ordered to land at the nearest airfields. Ansett was about to go broke at the time, so we had been working long hours in case it did. I was awoken to be told of the terrorist attacks. I turned on the TV to see shocking pictures; the worst nightmare. It was surreal. All these things going through your head at the one time. Terrible.

[blow.n.gasket]

It's blatently obvious isn't it?
Qantas' loss was Virgins gain.
What an insightful Board, Qantas is blessed with!:}

[ampclamp]

JB aint the messiah but I lament a lost opportunity in him being passed over .:sad: Q needs and needed change and he would have made enemies in doing things his way but I do believe he would have a done a far better job at making the changes with a lot less acrimony.

[blow.n.gasket]

Only too true Ampclamp.
However any man who loves ferrari's can't be all that bad.:}

[AEROMEDIC]

Now there's a statement that ticks a lot of the right boxes.....:ok:

[Ace Wasabe]

Sorry for the thread drift.
JB might like Enzo's creation but he drives a Porsche
Have to agree with Packrat.The PJ guy is an elitist prique

[73to91]

Flying 'roo in danger of becoming roadkill

Flying 'roo in danger of becoming roadkill (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/politics/flying-roo-in-danger-of-becoming-roadkill-20120819-24gey.html)

[Angle of Attack]

China Southern is just a waiting dragon, their service is well below par ATM but it will improve. For the last 20 years they have been building their resources. China southern flying college has received a lot of flak over the last decade but it is there for a reason, to provide flight crew for their ambitions. If they get their service up to scratch they will dwarf emirates, time will tell.

[QF94]

Flying 'roo in danger of becoming roadkill

Flying 'roo in danger of becoming roadkill (http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/opinion/politics/flying-roo-in-danger-of-becoming-roadkill-20120819-24gey.html)

Maybe some one should contact WIRES (Wildlife Information Rescue and Education Service) 1300 094 737. The Roo is definitely injured.

The people in QCA need to be educated in running a business, and not into the ground.

[Capt_SNAFU]

767's getting a refurb it has been announced. I swear they don't know if they are arthur or martha. I thought they were for the scrap heap. Why refurb something the is meant to be gone by 2016. Not that they don't need it.

[crystalballwannabe]

That must be change 92:{

[QF94]

767's getting a refurb it has been announced. I swear they don't know if they are arthur or martha. I thought they were for the scrap heap. Why refurb something the is meant to be gone by 2016. Not that they don't need it.

Sounds like when the 743's were refurbished to the 400 status not long before they left the fleet.

[DirectAnywhere]

Where's EBU these days out of interest?

Disregard following a quick Google search.

Photos: Boeing 747-338 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Boeing-747-338/2081409/&sid=779534cd3b1b56cde3b99bd42ab95583)

[dizzylizzy]

As far was the 767's refit its making the best of a bad situation until the stolen generation return to domestic ops. OR would you prefer to be rattling around squinting your eyes at the projector screen until 2016?

It would be marvellous for the 787's to come straight to QF ops, many things would be marvellous but the board has made their decision.

[TIMA9X]

YOU could never accuse Alan Joyce of having his head in the clouds.
The latest in an ever-lengthening conga line of corporate leaders to resist the temptation for a few extra million dollars in take-home pay, the Qantas boss yesterday declared he, too, would not accept a bonus this year.

A noble gesture, to be sure. But it immediately begged the question: After a year of turmoil at the airline, culminating in an expected loss of more than $200 million, why would he even imagine he was entitled to one? :D

The Macquarie Dictionary defines bonus as ''something given or paid over and above what is due''.

Corporate Australia, however, views them not as bonuses at all, but as entitlements that should be awarded regardless of performance.

Perhaps it is time the entire bonus system be declared a failure
and replaced by one where executives simply are paid to do their job and suffer the usual consequences for failure. It is clear our corporate leaders sense trouble. After a decade and a half of senior executives demanding and receiving massive pay increases each year, even as shareholders endured massive losses, the mood suddenly has shifted. This year, austerity is in.
Rio Tinto boss Tom Albanese led the charge in February. But it was BHP head Marius Kloppers who set the hounds running earlier this month when he relinquished his right to a bonus after heavy write-downs on BHP's recently acquired American shale gas territories.

Since then, a raft of manufacturers, financiers and funds managers have all donned the hair shirt, desperately hoping that shareholders refrain from voting down their salary packages at the annual meetings scheduled for later this year.
The catalyst for this sudden change of heart was legislative change last year that empowered shareholders to dump a company's directors if they were unhappy with the salaries they were awarding executives.
Under the two strikes rule, if more than 25 per cent of shareholders vote down the executive pay scheme two years running, then the board will automatically
be spilled and new elections must be held.
In the first year of the new world order, 108 listed companies recorded first strikes.

That focused attention on the huge divergence in the way salaries and bonuses are paid, the complexity in the way these schemes are constructed, the manner in which they are awarded and the ease with which the goals and hurdles can be shifted to ensure bonuses are paid.
The Qantas boss is a good case study, although it should be pointed out that his payment scheme is typical of the modern chief executive. Alan Joyce is far from unique.

Just a week ago, Joyce was awarded 583,000 Qantas shares. Given his declaration over the weekend that he wouldn't be taking a bonus, it seemed a little odd until you realise those shares relate to a previous year's bonus.
Despite the loss the airline is about to announce, Joyce could still attract a bonus this year. That is because at Qantas - and many other companies - bonuses are determined both by financial performance and personal goals.
The financial hurdles, such as returns to shareholders, make up 65 per cent of his bonus payment and clearly, this year he will miss out.

But the personal goals, the non-transparent ones, make up 35 per cent of his bonus. Exactly what these mysterious hurdles are is anyone's guess.
If the system worked - and clearly it does not - there would be a good case for including non-financial hurdles into a bonus system. For during a boom, many chief executives pick up massive bonuses for simply being in the right place at the right time.

There is little doubt that executives work harder during tough times when earnings suffer and share prices drop. And it is clear that Joyce has endured a much tougher period at the helm than his predecessors.
Time and again, however, we have witnessed executives happily accepting massive bonuses during boom years and then demanding the hurdles be rearranged during lean years because they had no control over the negative factors that affected share prices.

One of the best examples of this was QR National. When the Queensland government-owned company was floated on the stock exchange two years ago, chief executive Lance Hockridge's salary doubled from an already hefty $800,000 a year to $1.7 million.

On top of that, he was entitled to an extra $1.7 million a year in short-term bonuses. And there was a similar amount on offer in long-term bonuses. And all for doing the same job he'd done as a public servant.
Then, late last year, after the devastating floods that swept Queensland threatened to damage Hockridge's annual pay, the board conveniently shifted the goal posts to ensure he wasn't left out of pocket.

So embarrassed have our banks been in recent years at the exorbitant salaries paid to executives that they have attempted to portray an image of restraint.
The Commonwealth Bank's Ralph Norris famously froze his salary several years ago but managed a huge rise regardless after we learned it was only the base pay that was frozen, not the bonuses.
Westpac's Gail Kelly followed suit, but the following year was awarded a 15 per cent lift in base pay to make up for the previous year.
Those days are drawing to a close. The power is shifting back into the hands of shareholders

Read more: The mood has shifted on bonuses for high-flyers (http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-mood-has-shifted-on-bonuses-for-highflyers-20120820-24ikn.html#ixzz246krHOoj)
Compared to this time last year, the tone of the media has changes, and so close to Thursday's numbers. I noticed a couple of other Qantas stories circulating the mainstream media in the last 24 hours.. it's all happening, shaping up to be a big week me thinks...

.

[Worrals in the wilds]

Perhaps it is time the entire bonus system be declared a failureWhat I loathe about bonuses at a middle/upper management level is that they're conditional on cutting costs and increasing 'efficiencies' (which means doing less stuff with fewer people and ageing equipment). The manager who gets his/her bonus has usually done so by scrimping on something, whether it be maintenance, service, equipment purchases or something else that's necessary for the business to function. The system assumes that costs can be cut indefinitely in a sort of exponential decay fashion, and that the business doesn't actually have to deliver anything. :ugh:

In the short term (ie that manager's tenure :hmm:) the 'effiencies' are maintained which makes the bottom line look groovy, but in the long term the business suffers because the bonus system doesn't take into account the fact that sometimes a company needs to spend money on boring things like staff and maintenance.

The business ends up being held together with string, duct tape and a skeleton staff, and the manager collects their bonus and buggers off to their next victim (sorry, 'future challenge' :cool::}) before the string and duct tape give out. Then it falters and the management blame everyone but themselves (their horrid bolshy staff, internet sales, foreign competition, lack of government support, aliens). It couldn't be their fault because after all, they were efficient.

[crystalballwannabe]

I think the previous management did the real damage.

Just out of curiosity, can someone shed some light on the book - "The men who killed Qantas" - Who does the author single out and why?

[AEROMEDIC]

Where's EBU these days out of interest?

Resting at Avalon.....being used from time to time for anti-terrorist training.
No future apart from that.
Should have been flown to the Arizona desert while they had the chance, but once again, the task was bungled by management.

:sad:

[DirectAnywhere]

Yeah, I managed to find a photo dated February this year. I was wondering if she's still there.

Surely they can't be planning to leave her there until she just rusts away? There must be plans to cut her up or do something with her. Terribly sad. I flew her shortly before she ended up down there. An undignified end for a grand old aircraft.

[AEROMEDIC]

Alan Joyce has already pocketed a 71% rise in base pay and bonuses from last year, and statements from him with regard to "forgoing a pay rise and bonus" relates to THIS year.
Having helped themselves to hefty pay rises, this board can easily afford to make "sacrifices" this year as any such extra payment may alienate the institutional investors that currently support them.
It is outrageous that they think this action should be seen as them doing their part and show the way down the austerity pathway.
It would have been better to hand back the previous pay rise and bonuses as these were based on poor KPI's and poor past performance. THAT would have shown the measure of the man to acknowledge that they did not do well at all and did not earn their money.
Not going to happen. THEY know how to run the company.

[AEROMEDIC]

Surely they can't be planning to leave her there until she just rusts away? There must be plans to cut her up or do something with her. Terribly sad. I flew her shortly before she ended up down there. An undignified end for a grand old aircraft.

As far as I know EBU will remain at Avalon as they don't know what to do with it otherwise.:sad:

[ohallen]

It is obscene that there is any inference that the bonus has been foregone because that implies there was an entitlement to them.

The results will show whether that is fact or a misrepresentation.

If the hurdles were not achieved (and how could they possibly be with the indicated results) someone should slam this lot once and for all.

[1A_Please]

But the personal goals, the non-transparent ones, make up 35 per cent of his bonus. Exactly what these mysterious hurdles are is anyone's guess.

This could be for very meaningful things like being on time to work, being well presented, completing performance appraisals on time. All very important tasks that deserve to be rewarded on top of a $2M+ salary.
:ugh:

[The The]

Let's not forget that Joyce was awarded $600,000 worth of shares 2 months after the grounding for "meeting performance hurdles" :ugh: They even paid too much for the shares! Muppets!

QANTAS chief executive Alan Joyce has finished his year on a high note, being granted nearly $600,000 of the airline's shares yesterday.
Two months after Mr Joyce grounded the airline, stranding 70,000 people worldwide for days, the Qantas board awarded him 375,014 shares bought for him by the company's share plan trustee at $1.58 each, the result of Mr Joyce meeting performance targets.


Read more: Qantas chief reaps $600,000 share bonus (http://www.smh.com.au/business/qantas-chief-reaps-600000-share-bonus-20111230-1pfny.html#ixzz249aejHCM)

[TIMA9X]

Qantas works soft news as Thursday’s hard landing looms

Qantas works soft news as Thursday's hard landing looms | Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2012/08/21/qantas-works-soft-news-as-thursdays-hard-landing-looms/)


This commentary appeared in the Crikey Daily Mail today
Qantas appears to be preceding Thursday’s announcement of a much flagged ‘real money’ statutory loss for the financial year to June 30 with text book media manipulation diversionary stories.
Since Monday these have included:


Lingerie model Miranda Kerr becoming the face of a yet to be reannounced relaunching of the Qantas Club loyalty program. Tick young male executives
The refurbishing of 16 aged 767s that were supposed to be retired by delayed Dreamliners by 2010, which will turn up from late next year but go to Jetstar instead. Tick adult executives tempted by Virgin’s new leather sets, in Virgin’s new jets
Free wi-fi in major domestic terminals. Tick nerds and unaccompanied minors
CEO Alan Joyce opts out of bonuses dropping pay from $5 million to an estimated $2.3 million. Tick angry shareholders
Qantas pilots being stood down for arguing about takeoff calculations at Dallas Fort Worth as a thunderstorm approached. Spot the story that undermines costly legacy pilots before new route cuts to Qantas long haul are announced at the financial results conference.

Thursday will not be pretty for Qantas. Its losing money, its share price has been trashed, its in the middle of a fare war with resurgent Virgin Australia and Tiger attacking the quality and price ends of the spectrum, and Jetstar may no longer be working as intended to curb the competition.

The Joyce strategy, of not investing in Qantas long haul until it becomes sustainably profitable in two to four years times, comes when its international competitors, and those damned Virgins, are growing at around 5-6% per annum, meaning that if the flying kangaroo roo isn’t getting new stuff in that period of time, its enemies will be maybe 25% bigger, and have taken away market share Qantas might never recover.

The rumors about an Emirates rescue plan for Qantas have reached the point where the UAE giant has taken control of the agenda, tersely noting that it is only interested in doing code shares, setting a six month, now five month, deadline for the Australian carrier to get over it and do the deal.

Considering the time ACCC approvals and the political discussion may take, that’s a very tight deadline. Uncontroversial code share or alliance deals typically take longer than six months for regulatory approval. The tick is clocking.

As it is for the Jetstar Hong Kong venture, and as it no longer does for the much hyped but discontinued attempt to base a premium single aisle carrier in Kuala Lumpur, a city to which Qantas doesn’t fly, if we don’t count Jetstar Asia, which is emphatically not premium anything.

But, can Joyce bring better news on Thursday? This remains possible. The recent Qantas decision to pull three Jetstar flights off the Gold Coast route, and add three full service Qantas 737 services after it abandoned the routes four years ago has been grasped as evidence that the airline has realized that the patience of its core customers, higher fare paying business and discretionary travellers, has run out when it comes to Jetstar, and run away to Virgin.
The underlying theme of Qantas statements of guidance in recent times has been consolidation, not expansion, which may be ill timed given the massive expansion of its competitors, but may also be prudent given the broad scale economic uncertainties.

That is a difficult proposition to juggle. Its most profitable activity, selling frequent flyer points to third parties, ultimately depends on being a large and highly rated brand, not a smaller brand diluted by a two brand strategy.
Joyce stands to gain investor support in delivering the already promised increased transparency to the Qantas financials on Thursday from its earlier decision to divide the domestic and international divisions into business units with their own CEOs and managements. It really depends what costs get allocated to which division, and how they are related to the loyalty program.
Does Qantas have any more capital cost increases, or decreases. Will there be more new jets than previously announced, or fewer?

If there are any more feel good stunts between now and Thursday morning the news is likely to be worse not better all around.
I think Ben nails it again... a couple of years ago no one would have asked the questions...

[crystalballwannabe]

Have heard the Boston Consulting Company (BCG) have been given the flick in favour of Bain in Co.

I wonder how much has/is being spent on MGMT Consulting? Would be a good question for the shareholder meeting on Thurs.

Surely with the salaries being paid, management should be able to "strategize" in house.

Im sick of people inventing ways to avoid personal accountability.

[blow.n.gasket]

Wasn't it Jimmy Bow Tie who signed up Boston Consulting for a 15 year contract which has only just lapsed to be replaced by Bain & Co.
How many ex Bain & Co people on the Board?
How much exactly has Qantas paid out to Boston consulting over the years? The figure I heard was $1.5 Billion. Could that be correct???
Now that Bain & Co rule the roost could this account for Boston Bruce's departure?:E

[crystalballwannabe]

1.5 Billion - No Way

I would think somewhere between $5-$15 million but I'm only guessing.

In any case - I dont think they got their monies worth:{

$1.5 Billion has been shaved off the shareprice though and the rest:D

[rodchucker]

And the best bit is that in consulting world you get free kicks for 12 months to start all over again and contradict everything that has already been said to justify the fee.

Maybe someone should ask what management are doing while this fiasco goes on.

[Romulus]

I would think somewhere between $5-$15 million but I'm only guessing.

That's about 1500 - 4500 days of work at their rates so I think you're a bit light on with that call. Work on $3K a person day and you'll get pretty close.

[TIMA9X]

Joyce does it tough

QANTAS chief executive Alan Joyce seems to have a more Samaritan spirit than some of his counterparts throughout the Asian region. On Monday, Qantas said Joyce - who has overseen a slump in his airline's share price to its recent all-time low and tomorrow is expected to report the airline's first full-year loss since its listing - will forgo his annual bonus.

That means Joyce will have to make do with an estimated $2.3 million in fixed remuneration for the 2012 financial year.

But some Asian airline bosses have not been so restrained. Take the chief executive of Singapore Airlines, Goh Choon Phong, who was paid a bonus in the year to March 31 when his airline reported a $S1.13 billion ($862 million) profit.

Singapore Airlines disclosed its chief executive was paid a $S732,976 bonus, taking his total short-term pay to $S1.74 million. He received another 95,000 restricted stock and performance options, worth about $S1 million.
That means Goh - with his short-term and long-term incentives - earned about the same as Joyce in the 2012 financial year. But only if he ultimately hits his performance targets on his options. How greedy for the chief executive of an airline that not only reported a profit but is worth more than three times Qantas on the sharemarket.

Cathay Pacific chief executive John Slosar had the temerity to bag $HK11.82 million ($1.45 million) in total remuneration despite the airline in its latest set of full-year accounts reporting a measly $670 million in profits. His remuneration included about $495,000 in base pay and a $360,000 bonus. Cathay is worth more than double Qantas on the sharemarket.

Read more: Mirvac chief not keen on addition (http://www.smh.com.au/business/mirvac-chief-not-keen-on-addition-20120821-24klq.html#ixzz24EBEwRgz)

When you compare notes, AJ is doing fine.... the old boy club (board types) in Australia are doing fine as well me thinks...:ugh:

[Jethro Gibbs]

Todays Geelong Advertiser Richard Marles MP Thinks Qantas is going send The refurbishing of 16 aged 767s to Avalon because he thinks they should Richard Qantas could not care less what you think .:ugh:

[greenslopes]

Jethro, have you been smoking weed again?

[ampclamp]

Qantas to be featured on 7.30 ABC tv Thursday night. ( in Sydney anyway)

[Jethro Gibbs]

greenslopes
You May want to read the news instead of the MM .:ok:

[OneDotLow]

I think Jethro was referring to this, but was unable to find the punctuation keys on his keyboard. ;)

Avalon Pushes For Qantas Refit (http://www.geelongadvertiser.com.au/article/2012/08/22/345861_news.html)

[TIMA9X]

zga4rqsDDIw


where to now? the 7.30 report in full, for the record of the thread.

YZ6IJKmkFxg

[Irish Rose]

An explanation of the CEO's methods could be that he is the love child of Mrs Brown and the Rev Ian Paisley?

[catch18]

You can grow a business by acquisition i.e. Network - and you can also create shareholder value by a BUYBACK.

How are "landing slots" owned in Australia? Surely Rex would be a good takeover prospect for QF just for the Sydney landing slots????????

Considering they last diluted shareholder value to raise capital at 1.40, I think a share buyback would be appropriate.

[TIMA9X]

For the record of the thread.... shares up 7 per cent after the announcement as well..

FGGMcmX5sI4

Matt O'Sullivan makes some good points in this story...

Emirates alliance a flying leap of faith

TO QANTAS chief executive Alan Joyce, it is a coup that marks a step change for Australia's de facto national airline.
Not only is it a key to returning Qantas' international premium operations to the black after huge losses over the past year, but a deal that heralds a new era in global aviation.


After failed attempts to set up a premium airline in Asia, a decimated share price and a fare war in its home market, Joyce desperately needed a deal with Emirates to give investors confidence in his leadership.
He delivered that in the form of a ''benefit-sharing'' alliance with Emirates, the Middle Eastern airline which until yesterday had shown a distaste for tie-ups under the leadership of Tim Clark.


The deal was far more extensive than envisaged when the serious talks began between both sides more than six months ago. It was far more wide-ranging than investors had expected, too.


Importantly, Joyce bought time to prove he can turn Qantas around.
But to some aviation veterans, the unveiling of the deal with Emirates signifies a further retreat by Qantas and the possibility of it one day ending up as a mere regional airline - a raising of the white flag in the face of an aggressive onslaught from Middle Eastern and Chinese airlines, they said. ''It is a code-share on steroids but not real steroids,'' exclaimed one.

Their fear remains that Qantas will end up gifting its passengers to Emirates.


And that the ditching of Qantas flights to Frankfurt - its last remaining destination in continental Europe - merely signifies a further shrinking of the Flying Kangaroo's network to Asia and a few other countries such as the US, Chile and South Africa.
The question remains: is a deal with your fiercest competitor the key to your fortunes?


Read more: Emirates alliance a flying leap of faith (http://www.smh.com.au/business/emirates-alliance-a-flying-leap-of-faith-20120906-25h75.html#ixzz25hbBVxWW)



Interesting times ahead me thinks....:confused:

[Capt Kremin]

Alan Joyce the wrong man for Qantas's top job, says John Singleton

ADVERTISING man John Singleton rained on Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce's parade yesterday, claiming there was a "crisis of management" at the national carrier on the day it unveiled a major alliance with Middle Eastern powerhouse Emirates Airlines.
Mr Singleton said the low share price, poor marketing and international ratings, and combative industrial relations were evidence of management failings. He added that Mr Joyce was the wrong man for the job.
"Qantas is one of only two companies it and Telstra where Australians see them as a reflection of themselves," Mr Singleton said in an interview on Sky Business last night.
"Qantas now is undergoing a crisis of management because a wrong decision was made about a CEO. There is nothing good about Qantas any more: the marketing is wrong, its advertising is wrong and the persona of the company is wrong."
Qantas yesterday ditched long-standing partner British Airways to form an alliance with Emirates on European routes as part of its efforts to restore the international division, which last year lost $454 million. The deal mirrors similar arrangements struck by Virgin Australia chief executive John Borghetti, who was overlooked for the top job at Qantas and has since rebuilt profits at the No 2 airline through alliances with Etihad and Air New Zealand and an improved domestic offering that has taken market share from Qantas.


Mr Singleton last night cited the collapse in the share price -- down from $5.44 in 2008 to $1.20 yesterday -- and a slide in customer ratings as evidence of management failings at the airline.
Mr Singleton said Qantas had two better candidates for the chief executive's job in Mr Borghetti and former Qantas chief financial officer Peter Gregg, now CFO at Leighton Holdings.
Asked whether it was too simplistic to blame the chief executive, considering other cost and competitive pressures, Mr Singleton pondered why Mr Borghetti had been able to get it right under many of the same cost challenges.
"If Borghetti and Joyce swapped airlines, the Qantas share price would go up and Virgin's would go down, no question," he said.
Mr Singleton, whose long-running "still call Australia home" advertisements for Qantas have only recently been replaced, is one of a group of wealthy investors including venture capitalist Mark Carnegie and former Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon who have been repeatedly rumoured to be looking at a play for Qantas.
"We have always been interested in assets that are good value and given the share price, you'd have to say it looks like good value," Mr Singleton said.
As chief executive, Mr Dixon had endorsed a private equity bid in 2007 that valued Qantas at $11bn and would have delivered him $70m, but was thwarted by shareholders. He was subsequently paid an incentive to find a successor in Mr Joyce, who had run the Jetstar low cost airline started up by Qantas.
Mr Joyce grounded the airline over a confrontation with unions last year, cancelled an order for new Boeing Dreamliners and has presided over the airline's first loss since listing in 1995.
Mr Singleton said there was a leadership black hole at the airline after the company enjoyed years of strong executive and board leadership from Gary Pemberton, James Strong, Margaret Jackson and Mr Dixon.
"Nowadays there is an invisible chairman -- does he make himself available for interviews? -- and an invisible CEO in Alan Joyce, who is probably doing his best but every time he bobs up there's more bad news," Mr Singleton said. "He has no people skills and it's all bad, bad, bad."
Mr Singleton thinks the leadership has to be held responsible for the plight the company is in.
"When they start announcing record losses instead of record profits and the solution is no new planes, you know they haven't got a clue," he said.

[Sunfish]

If that is a fair report of what Singleton says, then the knives are out.

Joyce was too stupid then even Dixon calculated. The Sydney boyz wanted to buy the Qantas brand for peanuts, but now Emirates gets to trash it for free.

[DirectAnywhere]

I would suggest those words are more Geoff Dixon's than Singleton's given their known closeness.

You're right Sunfish - the knives are out. This "crisis of management" (a sentiment with which I agree wholeheartedly by the way) and this article look like the first move in a coup and then probably another private equity play.

[QF94]

Not a truer word spoken. I know it's Singleton's words and that his advertising agency dumped, but it's a public figure trashing AJ and saying what staff have been saying for a long time. Although it was Dixon and co that chose AJ.

Get those knives out and sharpen them and let the culling of management begin. Not a moment too soon either.

[Offchocks]

:eek:Get those knives out and sharpen them and let the culling of management begin.

I don't think AJ will be culled just yet, not that I agree yesterday's announcement was the saving of the airline, but it will have bought him some time until he stuffs up again! :sad:

[Nassensteins Monster]

Alan Joyce wrong man for job: Singo

ADVERTISING man John Singleton rained on Qantas chief executive Alan Joyce’s parade yesterday, claiming there was a ‘‘crisis of management’’ at the national carrier on the day it unveiled a major alliance with Middle Eastern powerhouse Emirates Airlines.
Mr Singleton said the l ow share price, poor marketing and international ratings, and combative industrial relations were evidence of management failings. He added that Mr Joyce was the wrong man for the job.
‘‘Qantas is one of only two companies – it and Telstra – where Australians see them as a reflection of themselves,’’ Mr Singleton said in an interview on Sky Business last night.
‘‘Qantas now is undergoing a crisis of management because a wrong decision was made about a CEO. There is nothing good about Qantas any more: the marketing is wrong, its advertising is wrong and the persona of the company is wrong.’’
Qantas yesterday ditched long-standing partner British Airways to form an alliance with Emirates on European routes as part of its efforts to restore the international division, which last year lost $454 million. The deal mirrors similar arrangements struck by Virgin Australia chief executive John Borghetti, who was overlooked for the top job at Qantas and has since rebuilt profits at the No 2 airline through alliances with Etihad and Air New Zealand and an improved domestic offering that has taken market share from Qantas.
Mr Singleton last night cited the collapse in the share price — down from $5.44 in 2008 to $1.20 yesterday — and a slide in customer ratings as evidence of management failings at the airline.
Mr Singleton said Qantas had two better candidates for the chief executive’s job in Mr Borghetti and former Qantas chief financial officer Peter Gregg, now CFO at Leighton Holdings.
Asked whether it was too simplistic to blame the chief executive, considering other cost and competitive pressures, Mr Singleton pondered why Mr Borghetti had been able to get it right under many of the same cost challenges.

‘‘If Borghetti and Joyce swapped airlines, the Qantas share price would go up and Virgin’s would go down, no question,’’ he said.
Mr Singleton, whose longrunning ‘‘still call Australia home’’ advertisements for Qantas have only recently been replaced, is one of a group of wealthy investors including venture capitalist Mark Carnegie and former Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon who have been repeatedly rumoured to be looking at a play for Qantas.
‘‘We have always been interested in assets that are good value and given the share price, you’d have to say it looks like good value,’’ Mr Singleton said.
As chief executive, Mr Dixon had endorsed a private equity bid in 2007 that valued Qantas at $11bn and would have delivered him $70m, but was thwarted by shareholders. He was subsequently paid an incentive to find a successor in Mr Joyce, who had run the Jetstar low cost airline started up by Qantas.
Mr Joyce grounded the airline over a confrontation with unions last year, cancelled an order for new Boeing Dreamliners and has presided over the airline’s first loss since listing in 1995.
Mr Singleton said there was a leadership black hole at the airline after the company enjoyed years of strong executive and board leadership from Gary Pemberton, James Strong, Margaret Jackson and Mr Dixon.
‘‘Nowadays there is an invisible chairman — does he make himself available for interviews? — and an invisible CEO in Alan Joyce, who is probably doing his best but every time he bobs up there’s more bad news,’’ Mr Singleton said. ‘‘He has no people skills and it’s all bad, bad, bad.’’
Mr Singleton thinks the leadership has to be held responsible for the plight the company is in.

[armchair quarterback]

um, yes, yes and yes.

[73to91]

Very interesting comments indeed. It surprises me considering that Singo is a great mate of Dixon and it has been suggested, would be a partner with Dixon if there was a buyout by Dixon and his other mates like Carnegie.

I guess we have all assumed that Dixon still has a major say in regards to QF and AJ consults with Dixon seeking advice.

So it does get confusing,
- Singo is his own man for sure but
- Does Dixon feel the same way ? or
- Has the 'board' decided to try and get the airline back on track and have they told Dixon to 'p... off' ?

One thing for sure Singo and Dixon are still partners John Singleton buys up Marlborough Hotel in Newtown | Realestate | Real Estate | Property & Real Estate | Daily Telegraph | thetelegraph.com.au (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/realestate/buying/john-singleton-buys-up-12m-pub/story-fndbpo91-1226467103139)

[32megapixels]

What a joke The Australian is. So do they think he is the business man of the year still???


The editor at the Australian and majority of News Corp papers would turn really nasty toward Qantas if one thing was withdrawn from this group...the advertising dollars.

After the failed APA bid in 2007 and even before this, the focus of running Qantas as a quality product was in decline due to asset stripping and trying to make it look better on the books than what the product actually was.

I wonder if Singo is still upset about the failure of APA or is looking to be the saviour investor! Yeah right!

It is amazing reading the historic posts on this website over the last few years to see just how accurate many of the projections were.


These 'managers' did one thing and that was to be the best paid airline managers in the world. The only thing this boys club did was look after itself. Now the panick has set in due to decisions/ or lack of made in the last decade.

Who's living in cloud cuckoo land?:rolleyes:

[QF94]

It's about damned time someone told it as it is, other than QANTAS employees. Sure QANTAS don't use Singo's advertising anymore, but tell it as it is.

Singo 1 v Joyce 0

[ohallen]

Dont forget the rules of QF PR.

1 Don't believe a word that anyone says.
2. What is happening is not what you read.
3. When announcements are made, it is spin at 100 mph to get headlines.
4. It takes a while for the true position to emerge and then they go quiet and dream up the next plan.
5. No one breaks ranks.
6. Self is the major factor.

So where were we?

[Squawk-7600]

Joyce is a muppet put there by Dixon to continue his legacy of talking down the airline so he and his mates (including Singleton) could buy it for peanuts and raid the $3.5 billion piggybank. Joyce has turned on his "mates" and made it more difficult for them to do that. Joyce was always going to be the fall guy and Singleton wouldn't sweat one second on publicly shafting Joyce, as Joyce's head was always intended to be the one going up on a stick when Qantas fails.

[1A_Please]

‘‘Nowadays there is an invisible chairman — does he make himself available for interviews? — and an invisible CEO in Alan Joyce, who is probably doing his best but every time he bobs up there’s more bad news,’’ Mr Singleton said. ‘‘He has no people skills and it’s all bad, bad, bad.’’
Mr Singleton thinks the leadership has to be held responsible for the plight the company is in.

Usually don't agree too much with Singo but have to agree with him on one thing. AJ maybe an alright manager but he is no leader and QF (and QAN the listed corporation) now needs a leader who can inspire the staff, win back the customers and reassure the shareholders. Unfortunately it seems the ideal candidate is currently sitting happily in the No. 1 chair at VAH's headquarters.

[Start4]

I'm not fan of AJ but I am always majorly suspicious of the dynamic duo Singo and Dicko and their investor club mates.

The events as they have unfolded:


2008 AJ appointed as QF CEO taking over from Dicko.

AJ and Dicko having regular dinner dates and appear to be best mates.

2011 Dicko and Singo admit that they were part of a consortium considering taking a large stake in QF but fail for whatever reason.

2012 QF share price tumbles as a result of a last minute profit warning leading to speculation that the Dicko/Singo consortium were back in the game.

AJ, using Macquarie and Citigroup, mount a defence against a takeover bid potentially stabbing his mate Dicko in the back.

AJ and Dicko reportedly have a falling out and no longer doing regular dinner dates.

Singo suddenly feels the urge to put his 2 cents forward and undermine AJ.


I actually agree with most of what Singo is saying . I am just a little skeptical about his motivation. I hope you are getting the picture I am trying to paint here.

[AEROMEDIC]

Mr Singleton said there was a leadership black hole at the airline after the company enjoyed years of strong executive and board leadership from Gary Pemberton, James Strong, Margaret Jackson and Mr Dixon.


Two out of four is just a pass.

Remember Margaret Jackson's statement to shareholders during the failed bid. She reckoned any shareholder not accepting the offer needs a psychiatrist.
And..... Dixon's stated primary aim was to increase shareholder returns. Customers and employees were not part of that.
Good business practice ALWAYS looks after the customers and employees because profits and returns will automatically follow (assuming the business model is sound).

[DirectAnywhere]

Remember Margaret Jackson's statement to shareholders during the failed bid. She reckoned any shareholder not accepting the offer needs a psychiatrist.

Mate, at the offer price of $5.60 she was spot on.

The airline would have been out of business 12 months later but that's a seperate matter entirely.

[teresa green]

Obviously Singo has been reading PPrune. It has been full of the same comments ever since Dixon took hold of the yoke. All downhill. It just took him ten years to realise it, but ask any employee from the cleaners to the almost top brass, they could have told him anytime he wanted to ask.

[Ngineer]

I actually agree with most of what Singo is saying . I am just a little skeptical about his motivation. I hope you are getting the picture I am trying to paint here.

You mean pick a bottom in the share price before buying in (and the Emirate's deal should put a floor under the current lows), then try and put a message out to the shareholder that the current management is no good....just before launching a bid perhaps?

[balance]

An interesting interview. I do like Singo's new ad.

Sky News Australia - Video (http://www.skynews.com.au/video/?vId=3511793&cId=Programs&play=true)

[kumul1]

Good light hearted interview but for a supposedly well versed entrepeneur, Emirates, FREE fuel??? really, that myth has got to go to bed. Do some homework. Even the allegation of subsidised fuel????

The EK fuel bill has grown so high that there was no profit share last year in light of the fuel prices.
Aeroplanes tanker fuel back from destinations where the price is lower than Dubai for the next service.
Pilots are 'encouraged' to avoid extra uplift to comply with a very tight Fuel Policy.

I do admit that labour cost in DXB is cheaper than OZ but that is buisiness. Everybody looks for countries with cheaper labour...even the big Q.

He is right about AJ though.

[AEROMEDIC]

The airline would have been out of business 12 months later but that's a seperate matter entirely.

Yes, but she din't know it at the time. Like the others, she was" blinded by the emotion at the time".

:ugh:

[Kangaroo Court]

Any housewife could run Qantas better than it's being run right now.

[onetrack]

Yes, but she din't know it at the time.

Shouldn't that be, "didn't care"? Anyone with more than 2 working brain cells would have to understand that any purchaser who shelled out $11BN for QF at its peak, wouldn't have been able to service the debt, and QF would have been on the auction block, shortly after the GFC hit in late 2008 - and sold for less than the value of the office equipment.

Too many corporate "leaders" have one solitary aim - to fill their own pockets with as much loot as they can scam out of shareholders - and then depart the scene rapidly, leaving others to pick up the crash wreckage. It's a much-repeated scenario.

[Kangaroo Court]

The Ponzi scheme has reached its end though. There's nothing left to trade but tired aircraft, loss making routes and a disgruntled workforce.

The change has to start at the top.

HE'S GOTTA GO!!

[Ace Wasabe]

John Ward and Bill Dix were against the privatisation of Qantas.They left as a result.Enter James Strong.It was supposed to be Qantas taking over TAA.Wrong!.It became the submerger with TAA and its managment taking over QF.They had no skillset to run an international airline.They met with a lot of resistance.Out of frustration and a cardiac event Strong left.Enter the unremarkable 52 year old Geoff Dixon.He too met with resistance.Consultants began running the show.Operations were put under marketing.Silos created and the staff became the enemy.The culmination of all this was the failed takeover bid which would have netted Dixon $60 mill.Not bad bickies for an employee selling out the firm he is employed by.Jackson becomes the scapegoat for the bid's failure.Oldmeadow was always in the shadows.Impulse was purchased and turned into Australian Airlines.It failed but morphed into Jetstar.Management soon realized it was a great way to threaten the unions in the main business by driving down wages and conditions.The war against employees starts in earnest.Any remants of the old Qantas guard were either forced out or retired and replaced by compliant inexperienced children.
Against its own corporate constitution Strong finds his way back as a Director.Clifford takes on the role of Chairman.Two self charecterized alpha males cant share the same space so Dixon exits.Dixon has mentored a successor with Alan Joyce.Joyce is Dixons earpiece which does not sit well with Clifford.Joyce is compliant and the new chairman calls the shots.Clifford stays in the background but his agenda of union busting is evidenced by the grounding of the airline.
Qantas mainline cedes more and more so called unprofitable routes to Jetstar.Cost apportioning sees mainline loaded up with Jetstar costs making the Orange cancer seem incredibly profitable.The whole Qantas Group depends on mainline for its existence.It is also in the most competitive environment.QF management still have no skillset to run an international airline.They need an experienced partner.Many doors are knocked on.None are opened.Clarke of emirates sees an opportunity in the crippled Kangaroo.The rest is history.
The whole debacle is a combination of agendas(Strong,Dixon and Clifford)and management ineptitude.There has been no long term plan save for maximising Exco remuneration.The greed in the mix.Joyce has no clue where Qantas is going.That is now in the hands of Clarke the experienced airline campaigner
The name Qantas will survive.The international operation most probably will not

[TIMA9X]

LacaBCeivnw


RI1VbdY0C_k

By QF94 - Not a truer word spoken. I know it's Singleton's words and that his advertising agency dumped, but it's a public figure trashing AJ and saying what staff have been saying for a long time.Spot on, in my view but I also agree with

By Offchocks - I don't think AJ will be culled just yet, not that I agree yesterday's announcement was the saving of the airline, but it will have bought him some time until he stuffs up again!I have maintained for a while now, if the image of your product is not right in the public eye, then you have to agree with Singleton whatever his motives are, what he said on Thursday is probably the best summation anyone has come up with in the public arena .. AJ in real life is probably a nice bloke (not that I am in a hurry to find out) but there is no doubt in my mind the current lot running the show at Q are way out of touch with the realities of running a premium service orientated business, something the Qantas brand was always known for.

LC and AJ have no idea about this, they have failed badly by pursuing the two brand strategy, favouring the Jetstar model over a tried and proven product.. which they and they only must take responsibility for and fall on their sword..

It is Jetstar that has damaged the iconic brand value Qantas maintained for all those decades. Having said that, I don't blame the staff at Jetstar, not one bit, they do a fine job, but the two products should have been kept very separate from each other since conception, they simply just don't fit.

bTreoE_Z--o

And another thing, note how OW has been removed from the frontline when the media is concerned.. only a year ago she was everywhere AJ was when it came to media coverage... Why is that? It is my view, OW enhanced the poor image of the Qantas brand ten fold because of her perceived complete lack of industry knowledge, a well supported feeling by many behind the scenes in the media. Again not her fault, she too was a poor choice for that job, a lack of people skills.... the endemic problem right throughout the top management at Q, it's all me me me I know best stuff with no consideration for the real people who keep the show on the road, the operational staff..

The operational staff, (pilots, CC and Engineers etc) are the airline and believe it or not, the very people the punters relate to.. if they sense that the frontline staff are disillusioned then it all breaks down, plenty of evidence of that these days as a direct result from poor managers bereft of handling people in a people business.

Now more than ever, if Qantas is to survive, the chairman, CEO and the board must go... and go soon... before it is too late... they simply are not up to the job.... they are already junk status in my view... no idea, John Singleton is right in what he said on this issue.. for me, no doubt about it..

As Singo said, it's a Sol kind of feeling

iYUTFBygLfY

.

[DEFCON4]

Make no mistake Tim Clarke and Emirates are now calling the shots at Qantas.Hopefully the Emirates expertise will transform the airline.But at what cost?
Joyce and clifford are the two biggest impediments to Qantas' success.Interesting to see what happens at the upcomging AGM.

[QF94]

And then!
At the end. When asked, how he would turn the business round, he called for a change a the top. Fair enough.
Then proceeded to suggest the Australian Government should apply protectionist taxes, due the fact that Emirates is "subsidised", receive "free petrol", and pays AUD$2 per hour "slave wages".

I was astonished. How could a guy sound initially so impressive and then completely destroy his own credibility in the space of one interview?
And he wants to buy Qantas?

That's why he wants to buy QANTAS. Pay wages of not much more per hour than the share price, have government protection for the business, turn a neat profit, and then on-sell the business to the next sucker after he's ripped the guts out of it.

[ampclamp]

In this case, your enemy's enemy will not be your friend. Singo may get some excited with his anti AJ rhetoric but be fearful if that consortium is making its move.

[Stalins ugly Brother]

Just watched that interview with Singo, Gotta say that Advertisement he ran during the interview for Qantas was Brilliant, gave me goose bumps!

An Australian that gets it, unlike Joyce. :ugh:

[Ken Borough]

Impulse was purchased and turned into Australian Airlines.It failed but morphed into Jetstar.

In a word, this is 'wrong'. For the record, Impulse morphed into Jetstar, and had nothing to do with AO.

[QF94]

In this case, your enemy's enemy will not be your friend. Singo may get some excited with his anti AJ rhetoric but be fearful if that consortium is making its move.

Don't mistake me for thinking Singo will be our saviour. He will cut the company up and sell it for whatever profit he can. This is what he does. I only backed what Singo said about AJ due to the fact he's the only public figure with some clout, to dish it out to AJ and call it as it is, and as QANTAS staff have been for a long time.

He and Dixon are circling for the kill. The last thing I want for QANTAS is these grubs getting their hands on the company and then using it for their own financial benefit.

Get rid of the current board, and replace them with people (preferably QANTAS people) who have an idea about the airline and how to run it properly.

[dizzylizzy]

With EK essentially calling the shots for most of the east bound QF sectors, would not be surprised if QF is used on markets that EK has used all their allotted traffic rights. Doubt it would be a market like YYZ but similar to that... Germany, France ...

[packrat]

Wouldnt it be ironic if Joyce has just displayed some integrity and did the dirty on Singo and Scrotum face?
Hence Singo's outburst

[packrat]

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s480x480/392089_10151159198743734_2047903124_n.jpg

[TIMA9X]

3UCp2u6bjjk



Make no mistake Tim Clarke and Emirates are now calling the shots at Qantas.He is certainly a good speaker, comes over well..

[Sunfish]

Its increasingly obvious what the Dixon/Singleton plan for Qantas was - put an incompetent idiot in charge (Joyce) drive the share price into the ground and buy the airline for a song.

After purchase, get rid of Joyce and do exactly what Singleton just told you he would do: trade on Australias fondndess for the Qantas brand, cut the guts out of the bloated Qantas management, by killing Jetstar (which has exactly zero brand value) and folding all the elements of "The group" back into one airline - thereby getting rid of the duplication, or triplication inherent in multiple layers of group general managers, and of course use Qantas superb lobbying capabilities to knobble overseas competitors.

What Singleton has just realised is that Emirates has beaten them to the punch. His only chance now is to lobby the Government to kill the deal.

Let me tell you what happens next, Singleton already knows, to put it bluntly - Emirates will "Partner" Qantas to death, I've seen it done, so has Singo:

Comparisons are odious according to the old saying, but that is what is going to happen.

Joyce hinted the the deal goes beyond code share - and it does. You are going to see a great deal of people from Emirates "consulting" to Qantas, you are also going to see various Qantas managers "learning" from Emirates. To put that another way, no door in Qantas will be closed to Emirates - not one.

If Clarke gets his way, I wouldn't be surprised if he is offered a seat on the Qantas Board, perhaps with a quid pro quo to Clifford.

What will then happen is that Emirates develops an in depth understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of Qantas, Qantas will also develop an extremely painful understanding of just how dysfunctional its management has been and just how unpleasant its future is likely to become if it ever tries to detach itself from Emirates. In my experience, this will take a year to Eighteen months.

At some point there will be a heart to heart secret talk by the chairmen of both companies about the matters referred to above, followed by Board meetings, followed by the absorbtion of Qantas into Emirates after suitable lobbying to Government. It would be easy to do, with credit markets now dysfunctional with no prospect of improvement (the ratings agencies just downgraded Qantas by the way) the Arabs might like to make an "investment" in Qantas in return for a rather large share issue, thus solving Qantas need for capital for a better fleet. I'm sure such action could be easily sold to the public.

Qantas management will have no idea what is happening until its too late. They will have been suitably blinded by the prospect of secondments to Emirates. Some may even think there are permanent management jobs available there.

[hiwaytohell]

If Clarke gets his way, I wouldn't be surprised if he is offered a seat on the Qantas Board, perhaps with a quid pro quo to Clifford.

Rubbish! Tim Clarke does not need a seat on the Board to know whats going on in QF. And Sheikh Ahmed is way too smart to want Clifford anywhere near his train set!

Although Qantas management will have no idea what is happening until its too late. They will have been suitably blinded by the prospect of secondments to Emirates. Some may even think there are permanent management jobs available there.

Sadly you may just be right.

[Squawk-7600]

Rubbish! Tim Clarke does not need a seat on the Board to know whats going on in QF. And Sheikh Ahmed is way too smart to want Clifford anywhere near his train set!

Agree. About the only person on the board who even knows what an aircraft looks like is Strong. The board was criticised as lacking airline experience, so they took on Mr Meaney. Rather strangely I notice Mr Meaney has a few, errr, "gaps in his resume" as it appears on the QF site. I'm sure that's just an oversight. ;) Hilarious!

[LondonSloop]

Have done a quick search of what you’ve posted Squawky and suspect you’re not an airline pilot. Not to worry, I reckon what you have to say is frightfully close to the truth in quite a few areas.

Indulge me if you would and share with those who read this site what you would say if asked to interested bystanders already thinking about-

· Qantas and Emirates getting into bed together to fill in global network holes Emirates on its own can’t access. I.e. Asia/China nonstop Europe and Asia/China nonstop North America.

[Squawk-7600]

Have done a quick search of what you’ve posted Squawky and suspect you’re not an airline pilot. Not to worry, I reckon what you have to say is frightfully close to the truth in quite a few areas.

Indulge me if you would and share with those who read this site what you would say if asked to interested bystanders already thinking about-

· Qantas and Emirates getting into bed together to fill in global network holes Emirates on its own can’t access. I.e. Asia/China nonstop Europe and Asia/China nonstop North America.

What makes you suspect I'm not an airline pilot?

Regarding the second question, I would have to answer "don't know", sorry it's not something I have really considered until you asked. As far as the QF side, they're pulling out of the full-service side of Asia to Europe (at least as it stands at the moment), so I reckon they would be as useful to EK in that regard as a tissue paper canoe! The J* hubbing model isn't at all useful to that aim, and besides EK wouldn't go near it with a 20 ft barge pole!

America (both north and south) yes absolutely. It would enable an EK/QF global service. BUT, the problem is QF's (international) cost base, it simply won't maintain the critical mass of hull numbers to maintain the extraordinarily bloated back-office it tries to maintain. This is where it really needs to focus attention if it has even the slightest hope of surviving. Any imbecile (as has been proven) can cut costs by cutting away at the service offered. But the real costs are "behind the scenes" and this is what needs to be addressed, not by under-catering A$5 business class noodles! Possibly one of the funniest things (in a morbidly tragic kind of way) I've seen from this is AJ saying that QF will expand back into Europe once it has it's poo back in a pile. Trust me, once QF loses the (premium) customers to EK, they'll never see them again. The one upshot out of this, that nobody seems to have mentioned, is that this stops the customers leaving the FF program. It's often the only thing that keeps passengers tied to an airline.

[LondonSloop]

Hmmm! Makes sense.

Assuming a new venture with its centre of gravity in Asia can freely access adequate capital and secure the necessary route rights, expect any such venture can also resolve much that you have raised.

You can’t possible be a pilot. Your spelling is far too good.

[Worrals in the wilds]

At some point there will be a heart to heart secret talk by the chairmen of both companies about the matters referred to above, followed by Board meetings, followed by the absorbtion of Qantas into Emirates after suitable lobbying to Government. It would be easy to do, with credit markets now dysfunctional with no prospect of improvement (the ratings agencies just downgraded Qantas by the way) the Arabs might like to make an "investment" in Qantas in return for a rather large share issue, thus solving Qantas need for capital for a better fleet. I'm sure such action could be easily sold to the public. Would it be a bad thing? :confused:
We all love our 'Aussie' icons. Such icons as Vegemite (owned by Kraft), Golden Circle (owned by Heinz), Holden (owned by General Motors since 1391, not that Holden fans thank you for mentioning it :}), Arnott's (owned by Campbells, the ginger nuts have never been the same since :() ... the list goes on. Arguably, a well run foreign owned Qantas would be in keeping with most of our national 'icons' and at least we'd be spared seeing it flail around dying like a beached whale, which is all the Aussie management seem to have been able to accomplish. A part of me would rather see the Arabs have a crack at it than Singo, Dixon et al. At least they know how to run airlines.
IR? Well, they'll learn. We'll learn. It'll be a learning experience for everyone. :E
You can’t possible [sic]be a pilot. Your spelling is far too good.
Was that deliberate? :hmm::}

[Squawk-7600]

What would be wrong with a strong and viable Australian icon airline owned and run by Australians? That was, after all, the whole intent of the Qantas Sales Act ;)

The tragedy of all this, at least in my eyes, is that there is no particular reason that this all needs to be this way. Qantas has (had?) a brand recognition and consumer confidence that most companies would kill for. Yet it's been totally squandered. Case in point, take the latest advertising campaign. At a time when the majority of its revenue is from domestic sales, and there was an Olympic games on with unequivocal patriotism what did the Qantas Einsteins roll out? The tried and trusted "Still call Australia home" to tug at its Australian customers' heart-strings and get them feeling great about booking flight with "their" airline? No. Instead it was a bunch of barely known athletes looking up into the sky (presumably to try to discover just what bird had taken a crap on their head). It was a shoker! Yet I'd hate to be paying the bill for it. Singleton spent 30 minutes in the booth and coughed up something better using just a half dozen scenes! Yet another example, in a very long list, of dreadful management decisions by executives who have absolutely zero idea what exactly it is they're trying to sell and to whom they're trying to sell it, never mind how they're going to run the company itself.

[Sunfish]

Guys, it's over.

Qantas as an independent Australian entity is gone.

When I penned my post above, I hadn't read about Clarke and Joyces "Bonding session" in May. Bushwalking and fireside chats indeed. It just reinforces my own opinion.

Folks, I've been to these sort of sessions at very expensive country retreats, drinking fine wines with multiple Directors of merging companies long past midnight. Joyce was a supplicant - "Will you still respect me in the morning?". The answer is always no.

Emirates will build a detailed picture of the Qantas business. They will offer to take as much operational control as Joyce feels free to give them.

Once they have a clear picture, there will be a heart to heart talk at chairman level, Joyce will be excluded. Emirates will make a value proposition to the Qantas Board about their future as part of Emirates and explain the painful truth to Qantas about their demise were they to reject Emirates advances.

Folks, i've been through this crap from the "Flowers and chocolates" phase, as my Lawyer calls it, through to the "Divorce court" phase. Joyce obviously hasn't. Ask any successful professional services firm about how we do this. Singo will have done it multiple times absorbing advertising rivals. Every successful management consultant has been through this on both sides of the table at least once.

To put that another way: "The partnership of XXX and YYY will lead to new customer experiences, blah blah blah", "Leveraging the synergies between XXX and YYY", with XXX strength in ZZZ markets and YYY strength in WWW markets we will offer our customers a seamless experience, etc. etc."

The reaiity, to paraphrase my former boss, is that Qantas and Emirates will collaborate tooth and claw, and Emirates will win.

Don't bother to blather on about how Qantas has these slots to gift to Emirates and all that technical airline stuff. Emirates will take what it wants as it absorbs Qantas. When I was young I thought the same as you do right now - "but surely Emirates will need me and my unique Australian experience" the answer is sadly No. They don't need you and they don't want you - you will "pollute the Emirates culture".

You are finished.

[SOPS]

Sunfish...Emirates Domestic between capital cities?

[TWT]

Is the stamp of approval from the ACCC a given ?

[ramius315]

The one question I always ask when reading your posts Sunfish is "why is it that someone who apparently rose to the upper echelons of management feels the need to post 4385 times on an anonymous bulletin board?"

:hmm:

[Sunfish]

Ramius: The one question I always ask when reading your posts Sunfish is "why is it that someone who apparently rose to the upper echelons of management feels the need to post 4385 times on an anonymous bulletin board?"

Dear Ramius, I thought the answer was obvious - because I can, and as a very junior private pilot I learn a bit here and there, very occasionally I can provide a different. and perhaps useful, perspective from a different point of view from the cockpit.

I have been through these "Partnerships" three times before, once I even had the hilarious task of negotiating one. There is always a senior partner and a junior partner. They all open with bonding sessions, nice country resort strategy conferences, professions of undying love, pictures of a beautiful future together and honeyed words about how this is a "win/win" situation, as a corporate lawyer aptly put it "The flowers and chocolates stage".

Unfortunately Mr. Clarke has a business to run, and once the ink is dry on the various agreements, he will depart, leaving you to the tender mercies of the various Emirates managers that Qantas must engage with as Qantas middle management get told to "make this partnership work..or else". At this point the blood starts to be shed because the Board of Qantas, and Alan Joyce will be talking shared facilities, cost savings by reducing duplication, etc. and making life a living hell for middle management as they try to avoid their little empires being swallowed by the Emirates octopus.

Pretty soon Qantas management, trying to reach decisions, finds themselves always asking "what will Emirates think"? Pretty soon strategic paralysis sets in - "What will we do about this? What does Emirates think? How can we make this decision without asking Emirates?" It eventually dawns on management that they are captured. It doesn't dawn on the Board until later - after the aforementioned fireside chat by the Two Chairman, because middle and senior management in the junior partner are too scared for their own jobs to tell the boss what their "partners" are doing to them, and the business.

To put that another way, Emirates business interests are not the same as Qantas business interests and will eventually diverge, even if they do appear parallel right now.

For example, Emirates is based in Dubai - what happens to Qantas when, not if, there is another geopolitical explosion in the Middle East? What happens when the Shia in Saudi arc up, let alone their brothers on the other side of the Strait of Hormuz? Thought about that one Alan?

To be fair, it is possible that the Government may put conditions on the deal that preserve some Qantas infrastructure in Australia, but those will be honored in the breach because the Australian Government doesn't have the tools or experience necessary to make them stick.

All I can say is: you poor kids having this wished on you, the only thing worse is bankruptcy.

[TheWholeEnchilada]

Sunfish please clear you PM inbox, its full!

[Squawk-7600]

Folks, I've been to these sort of sessions at very expensive country retreats, drinking fine wines with multiple Directors of merging companies long past midnight.

The irony of the meeting was that these clowns are so inept at management, they forgot to book the venue :D FFS!

Sunfish the scenario as you've described it isn't possible for 2 reasons. The first is the Qantas Sales Act, which would, in a round about way, prohibit board representation as you've described it. The other is the ACCC, and they are not the complete push-over some suppose they are.

Both the above presume however that Qantas still exists. I am confident that, despite the circus act running it, QF domestic will actually increase capacity. Sooner or later the Singaporeans will admit the Tiger is toothless and close up shop, Virgin will move increasingly upmarket instead of not really knowing what it's trying to be (that's already happening). Virgin is bringing with it it's lower cost base, so they should do very well as long as they don't get too ambitious. Jetstar will continue to fleece welfare payments out of unsuspecting dole bludgers making their way to Bali/Thailand to renew their hair braids. Australia will be back to a 2 premium + one no-frills country; what is should have always been all along.

[The Green Goblin]

You forgot one thing 7600.

Tiger is not there to make money. It's a strategic move to weaken Qantas in the oceana region. See if Qantas can milk the cow of domestic and cash up, they can then wage war in Singapores market. By keeping them competing in domestic by setting pricing, they reduce the yields and keep Qantas hungry.

Qantas are doing the same thing back to them with Jetstar Asia

[Squawk-7600]

Gobo, no sorry with all due respect I can't agree with you there. Tiger does sweet FA in the Australian market, wouldn't touch QF domestic at all, and be little more than an annoyance to Jetstar (at least at this stage). The only reason it's not called "one time only" airlines is because someone in Africa already took that name! https://www.1time.aero/ I think Tiger flies something like 60 sectors a day IIRC, bugger all really.

That wasn't the hope of the Singaporeans however, they've been wanting in to the Ozzie market for as long as I can remember, and only went back on the AN deal as even they could see that at that stage News Corp had bled it dry and there was nothing worth buying. The LCC market offered an entry into AUS and they can then move up from there. But it simply hasn't worked. In contrast to Western management, who's idea of a long-term strategic business plan is what happens after lunch, Asian businesses are very patient and take a long-term perspective on their business. They obviously have confidence they'll be able to turn things around and make inroads to J* where none of us can see it. But that's certainly a long way off. I don't buy into the ego argument however. Sorry

[The Green Goblin]

7600

By only operating 60 sectors a day offering bottom basement prices at a huge loss, gives them pricing power in the market.

This in turn costs Jetstar/Qantas yield as they need to compete on a much larger scale. (One could argue Jetstar have done the same thing to Qantas).

Virgin used the same strategy with business. They have far fewer seats on their jets and went into the market a lot cheaper. Qantas needed to adjust more seats on a larger scale at a cheaper price. Put simply, their aircraft have more business class seats, and they have more aircraft with more business seats in total.

Business 101 matey.

[Squawk-7600]

Business 101 matey.

Correct, that's precisely what it is. Those who have graduated beyond business 101 would know that low fares mean absolutely zilch unless they're matched by capacity, something that Tiger doesn't (currently) have. They either have very few seats available on city pairs, or don't operate the pairs at all! No J* don't have to compete on a larger scale. Jetstar certainly do "match fares" on the few routes served by Tiger, but I defy you to actually book one of them. Smoke and mirrors me lad, don't get sucked in by the headline fares as their target market constantly do, I suspect you have far too few hair braids and dead VB cans laying next to the computer for that. ;)

Regardless, I don't want to get in to an argument over it, you're free to believe whatever you like, and if you believe Tiger is making such a massive dent to the Qantas Group's bottom line, go for it. What I'll say is that isn't happening at the moment and possibly never will. The Singaporeans certainly believe differently and since it's their cash they're burning they can do with as they please. Given that they didn't pull out of Australia when most thought they would it's clear they're committed to the Australian market.

Edit: Just to elaborate on the above and make it clearer still what I'm alluding to. Imagine I began "Squark Airlines" operating a Cessna 152 RPT between Avalon and Adelaide. Humour me on the legalities of trying that. I sell my one available seat for 1 cent. "Business 101" would then say that J* will match the fare on all its flights between Avalon and ADL. But of course if it does it matches the fare AND the capacity ie it also sells ONE fare at 1 cent and proudly announces it's matching "1 cent fares". What's it done to its bottom line, absolutely nothing, nor has "Squawk Airlines" done anything to affect the fares on all the other destinations not serviced by my proud little 152. Smoke 'n' mirrors!

[The Green Goblin]

Do you feel better now? :ok:

Remember we all are different, we think differently and we have very different ideas about how to achieve similar goals.

This does not I'm afraid mean that there is cans of VB laying next to a PC just because of a differing opinion to your own.

Perhaps you need to follow your mantra (7600) down comms and cool off a bit!

[limelight]

Did anyone see the AJ interview on Inside Business on Sunday, if not iView it. For once there was a chance to ask some hard questions, but from my point of view it was totally scripted, what a cop out!

Whoops, just forgot, Alan Kohler works for News Corp now.

Where is Ben when needed.

[Squawk-7600]

Goblin I think it's actually you who needs to cool down. Please re-read my post again. My comments about VB cans was a tongue in cheek comment about the target market of Jetstar/Tiger, and had absolutely nothing to do with you personally. I was implying you were a little smarter than to get sucked in to the hype these airlines use to attract customers before fleecing them. Please correct me if I'm mistaken :rolleyes:

Furthermore, it was actually ME who suggested that we have different opinions on this and if you would like to believe something other than my opinion that's entirely your right to do so. :ugh:

[Captain Gidday]

Sunfish wrote:
It eventually dawns on management that they are captured. It doesn't dawn on the Board until later

Anyway, just where is the Qantas Board hiding? Nary a peep from that famed collection of iron ore miners, aircraft leassors and merchant bankers. No trips to The Wolgan Valley Resort either. They seem to have gone missing in action.

[Squawk-7600]

No trips to The Wolgan Valley Resort either.

Maybe they forgot to book it. Again ;)

[Captain Gidday]

The Wolgan Valley Resort is 100% owned by Emirates. It is up to them to book it, or not.

[denabol]

Alan Kohler and John Durie are two of my favorite business reporters and they were on Inside Business on Sunday when the Joyce interview went to air, but Ben asked the harder questions they didn't in this analysis of Joyce saying the 787s would fly to Europe via Dubai after 2016.

Qantas intends to fly 787-9s into Europe after 2016 | Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2012/09/09/qantas-intends-to-fly-787-9s-into-europe-after-2016/)
Dunno about anyone else, but Joyce looked flustered to me.

These are the points he made.

The Boeing 787-9s would, he said, fly to Dubai and beyond into continental Europe.
But that actually depends on a number of things.
1. Qantas has to exercise its options or purchase rights for the jets around 18 months before it intends to so use them, since it doesn’t hold any firm orders for them anymore since it announced their cancellation on 23 August.
2. Emirates has to co-operate.
3. The 787-9 has to deliver on its promises, and as a smaller jet nevertheless be competitive on a cost basis against the Boeing 777-300ERs flown by Emirates, as well as the A380s it uses for both trunk feed into Dubai and beyond to what will be then be much more than the seven European cities to which it now flies A380s.
4. The EU has to deliver on the traffic rights. It is one thing to have unlimited access to Dubai, and another to recover or initiate the necessary access to cities Qantas has down the years abandoned or never previously served.
This is not a criticism of the Qantas ambition, but it is a reality reminder that there can be issues with traffic rights between Australia and Europe and these are not negotiated between airlines but governments, and those governments in turn may or may not have rules as to who gets what part of which entitlement.
By the time, assuming the 787-9 isn’t further delayed, that 2016 comes around, Qantas will have been inactive in its own right across the entire reach of continental Europe since early 2013, and the actual market may have grown by around 20% if the global market forecasts of Airbus and Boeing are correct, and they are unnervingly accurate over the medium term.
This means that what Joyce said this morning in so far as returning to Europe is concerned, is Alice-in-Wonderland stuff, or to be kind, overly simplistic and improbable.
The notion that the future of Qantas in Europe depends on not being there for a prolonged period, and then being welcomed back, with a jet which it no longer actually has on order, and which many, including Emirates, regard as too small to be useful is definitely fairy tale stuff.
The-world-(so far as Europe goes)-is-moving-on-and-Qantas-is-a receding-memory.
Not only that, but as of 1 April, with impeccable timing, Qantas gives all of the one-stop or direct, even two stop flying to Europe from Perth, Adelaide and Brisbane to Emirates, and Emirates has already turned the page on its play book that says that as such markets grow it will as required replace 777-300ERs, the jet with which it scored a huge advantage over Qantas, with some of its 90 A380s, the jet with which it picks up tens of millions of dollars more in revenue per airliner per year when dealing with airports that are or will be incapable of taking any more movements, or giving them to Emirates, as the case may be as the market grows.
By the time Qantas thinks it will re-enter continental Europe it will have long ceased to be a real, as in a real Qantas jet service from all but two states of Australia.
It is worth studying the Emirates route structure. While Qantas will cease to fly between Europe and Asia on routes to or from Australia, Emirates will continue to do this, both as the chosen alliance airline for Qantas on routes between Australian cities and Bangkok, and Singapore, but from those cities and also Hong Kong, Seoul, Shanghai, Kuala Lumpur and Tokyo, and who knows what else, to its Dubai hub, from 2016 and beyond.
The marginalisation of the Qantas brand in this respect is comprehensive and devastating, even though the logic of the Qantas link with a Middle East hub carrier is undeniably correct, yet tragically late, and negotiated from a position of abject weakness rather than strength.
There are two slogans to reflect upon. They are Qantas, You’re the reason we fly Emirates and Emirates, we fly you because of Qantas.

[TIMA9X]

Dunno about anyone else, but Joyce looked flustered to me.

yeah, sort of like the grim Reaper

Ctz3CFREPkE

[The Green Goblin]

There is a gotcha moment there.

He said of the 450 million international loss, 150 million was from industrial action.

So I take it all the costs were apportioned to international? Domestic losses also from grounding the entire fleet, all the TWU workers etc?

Sprung...

[maggot]

someone (with the skillz that i dont have) save that video

[TIMA9X]

SprungYep, what people on here have been saying for a while now.. I think a lot of credit must go to AIPA last year for bringing this issue to a head... it stuck... :D

"Qantas group has a user pay system" hmm :rolleyes:

SZuq4q4ZFho

[Squawk-7600]

The Wolgan Valley Resort is 100% owned by Emirates. It is up to them to book it, or not.

Sorry Gidday, I'm not sure if you got the joke. Always difficult to tell and, as evidenced by Goblin misunderstanding and turfing his toys from his pram at a great rate of knots for in fact no reason, the written word is often perceived in a far different way to that in which it was intended by the writer.

Just to clarify my comments above. Much was written about the "secret" Wolgan Valley Resort rendezvous. However it was reported, rather humorously I felt, that when the Airline Grand Poobahs actually showed up at said address, nobody had thought to actually book the resort out. I could just imagine the discussion "I taught you booked id for ta turd of Sebtembr?" "No I thought you booked it" "No, I taught you booked id" "No, I thought you booked it ..."

Two words come to regarding this lot's managerial skills; piss-up and brewery!

[ohallen]

Maybe that was lesson number 1.We will tell you if you have a booking or not.

There should be some positive sign that the rat team were not despatched to a pub in Lithgow for the night. Suspect there was such desperation for a deal, they may even have come back the next morning regardless.

[Captain Gidday]

Squawk, afore ye go [and personally I hope you stay]. 'Booking the resort out' when read in the context of the original article means 'Offer all the other people who have booked already at that time alternative accommodation so the Big Cheeses can have the whole resort to themselves for their deliberations. Something only the owner of the resort [i.e. Emirates] can do. I guess you say something like 'So sorry, but our hot water has failed and we will have to close the resort for a few days'. There was no suggestion either side didn't have a room reservation on arrival.

Personally, there seems to me to be unfortunate symbolism in Emirates hosting the show at their only resort in Australia. If I'd been invited on the Qantas side [and of course no chance of that] I would have felt like a school boy in short pants being summoned to the Headmaster's office and I would have made damned sure the venue was different and the symbolism 'read' in a different way.

[Sunfish]

Tying up with an airline from a Muslim country looks like a really good idea this morning.

[scandistralian]

@Sunfish, judging by the insight from your last post, you must be another one of our well cultured Australian globetrotters. Are you the same insightful gentleman I met in Kuta last month wearing a Bintang singlet, whos travels had taken him as far north as Pattaya and as far west as Kalgoorlie? :ugh: :ugh:

[QF94]

Sunfish, I guess it's the same as making them your chosen airline to fly.

[73to91]

Tying up with an airline from a Muslim country looks like a really good idea got me thinking, what happens with organisations and general passengers from another religion who may be effected by this?

How did pax flying out of Oz get to Tel Aviv who wanted to fly QF ? Assume QF to SIN or BKK and then change.

Will these pax be lost to QF now?

[scandistralian]

Pax from any religion can fly EK?... The UAE constitution provides for freedom of Religion. Anyone thinking this is some backward state, living in the dark ages is grossly mistaken. Hopefully this partnership will give people the opportunity to experience Dubai and see it for what it is.

QF will still fly to Asia, where you will have the opportunity to transit to TLV, it's just the timings and frequencies will not be the same.

[HF3000]

Qantas has Muslim crew

[framer]

Geez-Wayne......back on topic, if religious differences were added to the D&G mix it would become even more toxic.
Let's start a viable list of destinations that QF could operate to ex Ausi that EK does not operate to, I'll start..........1/ Kiribati

[Ultergra]

News going around that the older flight attendants on the 380 are being tagged with the title: Boilers in Burqa's..

Change the QF uniform to burqua's, it better represents the Qantas base, Sydney.

[Tidbinbilla]

Leave the religious slant out of it, and get back on topic thanks.

TID

[lame cop]

Agreed...this has nothing to do with religion.Get back on track. Deflametry remarks wont help anyone

[framer]

2/ Norfolk Island

[qantel]

3/wallis and futuna

[clear to land]

4. Port Moresby 5. Nauru 6. Christmas Island 7. Cocos Island. 8. anywhere else that won't make money!

[XM02A]

9/Beijing.... apparently. :E

[73to91]

Meanwhile, Qantas released a statement to the ASX today showing that the chairman, Leigh Clifford, bought 100,000 shares in the airline at $1.285 a piece last Monday.

The purchase was made several days after Qantas signed an alliance deal with Middle Eastern airline Emirates.

Read more: Qantas | Qantas code with SAA share cleared for take-off (http://www.smh.com.au/business/qantas-code-share-with-saa-cleared-for-takeoff-20120917-261nk.html#ixzz26hO30WkW)

Confidence or ?

[ohallen]

In my experience this is usually:
1. Prior to bad news coming to shore up the market, or
2. Bravado to try and convince the market that all is well,

and usually has nothing to do with investment strategy for an individual. Now we wait and see which one it is.

[TIMA9X]

interesting piece here,
Joyce takes home $2.3m, declines bonus | News | Business Spectator (http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Joyce-takes-home-23m-declines-bonus-pd20120914-Y5QYB?opendocument&src=rss)

a bit of a change from the mood, this time last year.. and it is almost AGM time soon, Wow, time flies..


Joyce takes home $2.3m, declines bonus

quote Mr Joyce, whose package included $2.1 million in base pay and $171,000 in other benefits, turned down the $792,000 bonus, which he was entitled to under the airline's performance-based annual incentive scheme.

Mr Joyce was not awarded new shares because he failed to meet a three-year performance hurdle. quotemeanwhile LC has been updating his share portfolio with Qantas.. brought for 1.28...

by ohallen, In my experience this is usually:
1. Prior to bad news coming to shore up the market, or
2. Bravado to try and convince the market that all is well,
good points, I dun no either, hard to be sure..
todays close
Last Price ($A) $1.2400 Change 0.0000 0.0% Prev Close 1.2400
:confused:

I sense possible early warning signs of, a change in the air forthcoming, sir .. ?

I think it is clear now, Joyce has had enough time, let's hope he is a ham, saving the best to last, and announces something big and positive at the
AGM that will put a smile on all the faces once again...



The last twelve months, is testimony to the amazing professionalism all the techies had to endure, particularly with all this other stuff going on in the background.. or more to the point, constantly reminded about it..

There is a saying "history does repeat itself" the last couple of years at Q constantly reminds me, more and more, of the Robert Ayling CEO BA saga, back at the turn of the century, Link below for those who can remember .. This saga lasted for about five years. seemed to go on forever..

NOTAM Background
.http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/03/07879983/0787998303.pdf

Lack of People skills at management level was a major factor at BA at this time.. Ayling was dumped.

When the dust settled the Rod Eddington lead management team had to repair the damage... it sort feels like what is needed at Q sooner rather than later. .

[Lodown]

Is there a pool running for how long Mr. Joyce is anticipated to remain in office after the AGM? The AGM is scheduled for Friday, 2nd Nov.

[ampclamp]

Tima9x, The AGM is a showpiece .

There would need to be a trading halt if anything big were to be announced during trading hours. If anything else is to come I suspect it would be before the AGM so it is added to the show piece and reflected in the voting and remuneration report.

The Emirates deal is his big news imho.

[Shark Patrol]

turned down the $792,000 bonus

So let me get this straight ....

You lose $450 mill, see the share price plummet, slash the international network and you're STILL entitled to a $792,000 bonus!!!!

What do you have to do to qualify?!!? KEEP BREATHING!!???!!

[C441]

Mr Joyce, whose package included $2.1 million in base pay and $171,000 in other benefits

Internal mail is reminding us that our fearless leader has taken a 44% pay cut.

turned down the $792,000 bonus, which he was entitled to under the airline's performance-based annual incentive scheme.

...a bonus for that performance? I would have thought it would require at least one parameter to be in positive territory to generate a "bonus".

I assume it's the board that set the bonus parameters. On that score alone they have demonstrated their incompetence and lack of suitability in carrying out their required duties.

[TIMA9X]

There would need to be a trading halt if anything big were to be announcedIf I recall correctly the day after the AGM last year there was a trading halt, he woke up and decided to ground the airline... :hmm: With this current lot anything could happen...

The Emirates deal is his big news imho. probably right on that one ampclamp

jokes aside, I agree, the AGM is a showpiece but I believe this year there is a lot more pressure on the managers than there was this time last year..

[Squawk-7600]

Squawk say, Juice man wishing he play baseball and not play with aeroplane. Least baseball man get 3 strikes before he go back to eat more burger! Juice man only get 2 strikes and he eat burger. No take bonus, no get strike. Juice man happy, he get keep job.

[ampclamp]

TIM , there should be a lot more pressure on them! Been an awful year.

Not sure of your knowledge of the share market so sorry if I am peeing in your pockey here....The grounding was undertaken on a Saturday so the market had time to be become "informed" prior to recommencement trading on the ASX . That was the thinking behind my 'nothing big will be announced at the AGM' statement .The market must be seen to be provided with market sensitive info equally. That's the theory anyway:rolleyes:

[piston broke again]

There was a trading halt....it was a Saturday!

[TIMA9X]

ZYzpLhgTZUY

Let's revisit some of the things said at the 2011 AGM last year.... I think LC has highlighted for himself that he didn't deliver over the past year with regards to the share price.... keeping in mind the grounding which indeed was the next day and it was a Saturday...

It is still my belief that, behind the scenes people knew what was about to happen the next day, including some in Canberra..just can't prove it..

[ampclamp]

Tim, I also think some had prior knowledge. Joe Hockey said so before back-pedaling at the speed of sound.
Government seizes on Hockey's Qantas comments - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-02/albanese-renews-attack-over-qantas/3614710)

Quote:
On ABC TV's 7.30 last night, Mr Hockey told Leigh Sales he heard the aircraft would be grounded "weeks ago".
"They've [Qantas] been saying it. Weeks ago. Publicly and privately, they have been saying for weeks," Mr Hockey said.
Asked if he had heard it "personally in a meeting with a Qantas representative at some time in the past few weeks?" Mr Hockey replied, "Yeah, sure".


Now, how the hell has that not been investigated more vigorously I do not know.

[golfjet744]

It is still my belief that, behind the scenes people knew what was about to happen the next day, including some in Canberra..just can't prove it..

Everybody who needed to know knew what was happening. The board knew, the executive knew, senior managers knew, major investors had been briefed on the possibility (wink wink), various politicians had been briefed to give them time to maneuver and the media had been flooded with appropriate propaganda leading up to it.

Everyone knew, which is why they got away with it in the media. As for the legal side. Good luck to the unions and the half dozen ASIC staff trying to prove it.

[Bagus]

Unless politician and the ACTU wake up aviation jobs will all be lost in auatralia,so far thousand of aircraft maintenance jobs have been lost by outsourcing.SO WAKE UP U LEADERS.

[Mstr Caution]

The Australian 28/9/12
New Kid Jetstar Japan off to a Flying Start

"The airline has just added it's fifth Airbus A320 aircraft and expects to have 13 by the end of the financial year as it heads towards it's initial commitment of 24 planes"

"Ms Hrdlicka would not say when she expected the Japanese joint venture to break even, noting only that it was ahead if it's business case and was maintaining a cost advantage"

So Qantas International must show a return on the cost of capital before more money is put into capital expenditure. Meanwhile the folly's in Asia continue.

Rumour has it that Qantas has already poured near $600 million into JQ Asia & for what return?

[Bagus]

Occupation snapshot
15,800 aircraft maintenance engineers in Australia1
4,313 aircraft maintenance engineers in Victoria (27.3%)1
Average gross weekly earnings AUD$1,3802
Average weekly hours 42.13
Download the Australian Workforce and Productivity Agency's labour market report for aircraft maintenance engineers (RTF, 134kb)
*
Victoria is currently offering visa nomination for eligible aircraft maintenance engineers. To be eligible to apply aircraft maintenance engineers must:
have a minimum of five years experience
have an IELTS score of six or above in each band
meet Victoria's other minimum eligibility requirements
address Victoria's*nomination assessment requirements in your application.
Detailed information about applying for Victorian Government visa*nomination is available in the Visas and Immigration section
Licensing and registration
To work as an aircraft maintenance engineer in Victoria you must be licensed or registered with the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). For further information please contact:

Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)

CASA Licensing and Registration Centre (CLARC)
GPO Box 2005
Canberra
ACT, 2601, AUS
Telephone: +61 2 6217 1449
Fax: +61 2 6217 1401
Email: [email protected]
Website: Civil Aviation Safety Authority - Home (http://www.casa.gov.au)
Tip

Think about applying for licensing and registration before you arrive in Australia, once you have your visa, as the process can take some time.
Industry contacts
Professional bodies and industry associations are a good source of information about aircraft maintenance engineers in Victoria.
The Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association represents its members, providing technical advice, training and networking opportunities
Engineers Australia is Australia's largest and most diverse professional body for engineers.
Finding a job
Aircraft maintenance engineers are employed across several industries including: Transport, Postal and Warehousing; Manufacturing; Administrative and Support Services; and Public Administration and Safety.3

Specialty job seeker sites

Chandler McLeod
John Holland Aviation Services (JHAS)
LTQ Engineering
QANTAS Engineering
Australian JobSearch for Aircraft Maintenance Engineers (Victoria)
Tip

We suggest that you only apply for jobs when your visa to live and work in Australia has been issued. The visa application process can take time, and employers are less likely to employ you if you don’t know when you will arrive in Australia and don’t have a work visa.
To search for Victorian recruiters who specialise in aircraft maintenance engineers, visit the Recruitment and Consulting Services Association's Member Index.
For more general information on Victoria’s job market, including where and how to find jobs, and workplace culture, visit our Working and Employment section.

Migrating to Victoria
Detailed information about how to migrate to Australia, including information about visa nomination from the Victorian Government, is available in the Visas and Immigrating section. You can also find detailed information about visa pathways including employer sponsorship on the Department of Immigration and Citizenship’s website.

[1a sound asleep]

Qantas announces successful refinancing
Published 3:59 PM, 28 Sep 2012



By a staff reporter

Qantas Airways Ltd has announced the successful refinancing of the $300 million undrawn tranche of its unsecured loan facility, which was due to mature in May 2013.

In a statement to the Australian Securities Exchange, the national carrier said the undrawn tranche was increased by $100 million, with commitments accepted from a syndicate of existing key relationship banks.

The revolving loan facility, worth a total of $400 million, will mature in September 2015.

Qantas chief financial officer Gareth Evans said the refinancing reiterates the strength of the company's key banking relationships.

The announcement has no bearing on the Qantas Group's overall debt position.


inShare

[AEROMEDIC]

Qantas's HR man John Scriven shows what he thinks the key HR values are.

It's a pity words don't translate into practice......:sad:

It'll be a hard road ahead with Joyce at the helm.


.Jon Scriven – Group Executive People and Corporate Services at Qantas
MONDAY, JUNE 27, 2011 AT 12:16PM
Excerpts from Jon’s presentation at the COI Group June 2011 workplace conference.



Jon Scriven gave generously of his time to present at COI’s June conference to discuss what he sees as the key drivers of leadership success, workplace change and workplace effectiveness.

Jon spoke about the importance of the 6 C’s for leadership.

Clarity,
Consistency,
Character,
Care,
Curiosity and
Courage.
Jon spoke about the critical drivers of workplace change.

1. The importance of the Senior Leadership Team as owner with ultimate responsibility
2. The importance of Communication
3. The importance of Line Managers

Here are some excerpts.
‘Clarity, Consistency and Character.

Clarity of vision is essential in leadership.
Consistency of message and behaviour builds alignment and trust.
Character – this is about your integrity, your values.
It’s what you do when nobody is looking.
If you are not of good character as a leader, don’t think you can hide it.

Jon then added another three more C's.

Firstly,
Care.
Great leaders genuinely care: they care about their people, their customers and their
business.

The next,
Curiosity.
Whilst some may believe that curiosity killed the cat what I find is that at the heart of every great idea is somebody who was curious.
Somebody who asked an important question, somebody who was open to how others tackle similar issues, somebody who collects lessons.

The final one is Courage,
Courage to take a position, Courage to be persistent.
Courage to challenge the way things are done.
So the 6 C’s:

Clarity,
Consistency,
Character,
Care,
Curiosity and
Courage.
At the heart of those good two-*way communications are good conversations.
I have a view that business is basically a series of conversations between individuals.
Whether it’s buying and selling. Negotiating terms and conditions.
Sorting through facts and agreeing on strategy, talking to your people and agreeing on tasks, timelines and deliverables -* or their wages and conditions.
They are all conversations.
Conflict and disharmony are never good for business, yet it is amazing how often they can occur.
They often occur through ineffective conversations.
Two people can sit in a room and disagree, so how do they move forward?
The first assumption should be that neither of them is stupid: they are there because they are smart and they have used their “smartness” to get to their side in the argument.
The second assumption should be that they are not lacking goodwill.
So if people can’t get to an agreed outcome it is almost certainly because one or both of them is operating on either the wrong facts, or a misinterpretation of them or sometimes wrong mental models.
A good conversation should include sorting through the assumptions and understandings until the root cause of the misunderstanding is reached, and then the dialogue can proceed on a shared basis.

That means not defending your position, but opening it up.
It means genuine questions, and listening to answers.
It means investing the time.
It means being very specific, not generalising.
I know this search for the root cause is a real passion here at the COI.

Of course… it’s the immediate manager who is critical.
They are the ones who build the relationship with employees.
The ones whose day to day actions build or breach trust.
A conversation that generates shared understanding, is based on mutual respect and leads to
agreed actions.
A critical part of the training is helping people to learn how to have a proper conversation.
Now Lanning in his invitation said there are five critical things to know about building high performance workplaces.
Well here are mine:
First: You need a committed leadership team.
Second: They need a clear vision and strategy and aligned values.
Third: You need great front line managers who operate as coaches, managers who are
well trained, able to have meaningful conversations and who are informed about the business and its priorities.
Fourth: People need the tools and resources to play their part.
Finally: There should be ongoing feedback, feedback about performance, feedback about behaviours. Recognition for work done and successes achieved.

[busdriver007]

Let me see how Qantas fared?
1. Clarity? How many times has the plan changed? Fail
2. Consistency? See number 1, Fail
3. Character? Cannot be trusted, Fail
4. Care? Except for their own bonus? Fail
5. Curiosity? Well hasn't learnt from mistakes which keep on getting made, Fail
6. Courage? Hmmmm let's see brave to piss off 75000 passengers in 2011, so therefore in the started aim of further destroying a great reputation of an airline, Pass

Not bad, amazing that the Manager of people with a great résumé, Coca Cola etc would be associated with such a disastrous PR exercise. Macquarie Graduate School of Management use Qantas as the lesson of how NOT to treat your staff and now your customers.

[hotnhigh]

All part of the winning formula.....
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/aviation/qantas-numbers-losing-altitude/story-e6frg95x-1226483772938)

And lets not worry about the bills.
Qantas announces successful refinancing | News | Business Spectator (http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Qantas-announces-successful-refinancing-pd20120928-YK7FX?opendocument&src=rss)

[stubby jumbo]

Care.
Great leaders genuinely care: they care about their people, their customers and their business.

I nearly puked into my bowl of Fruit Loops -when I read this. Surely -he is speaking metaphorically -'cause he sure as hell ain't talking about any of the current crop of "leaders" at QF.

To have treated all staff with such abject disdain for the last decade has got them into this mess. This combined with the shut down last year -its no wonder customer equate the Qantas brand with Franklins.

Dark days indeed.:(

[Mstr Caution]

Jon Scriven the executive manager of people at Qantas.

Ask any employee who he is or had they heard of him and 99% will have no idea who he is.

Remind them that he's the guy who's initiated the $100 free staff travel vouchers & they'll still say Jon who?

There's a difference between being a good leader on paper & doing the rounds making speeches.

Compared to the reality of running (ruining) an airline & managing it's people.

[packrat]

Qantas has remote managment who inhabit a citadel and make pronouncements.Problem is they haven't bothered to introduce themselves to the workforce.The chasm between employees and management operate on a number of fronts.Generally management have little expereince in running an airline.Most employees have been involved with the business for 10 or more years.They are stakeholders in the business' future.They know a thing or two about how an airline should be run.Management are referred to as "visitors".They come from outside the business,and have no skillset to run an airline.They are motivated by bonuses which breeds a short termism view of decisions and how they are made.They are not long term stakeholders

[unionist1974]

Jon Who, facelees , what a joke he is

[SOPS]

The question to be asked is...What is the average years of service for a manager compared to the average years of service for and employee??..Which one has put most into the airline?

[Twin Beech]

The business press is starting to refer to such management as "looter executives". Psychopaths in charge of the size and disbursement of the bonus pool based on KPIs which themselves are so facile as to be counter-productive.

Staff have a career of thirty-odd years compared to the average executive drive-by of five or less. Staff have to live with the idiot decisions of six generations of executives (and their facilitating paid consultants), all the way to bankruptcy court.

Future direction of Qantas? Hint: it has an S-bend, and you circle it before you pass the event horizon.

[TheWholeEnchilada]

Parallels with Qantas?

Gunns and the Elites (http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2012/09/gunns-and-the-elites/)

Posted by Sell on News in Capitalism (http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/category/capitalism/) on September 29, 2012 | 21 comments (http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2012/09/gunns-and-the-elites/#comments)




An intriguing discussion was had on the Radio National breakfast (http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/lessons-from-the-collapse-of-timber-giant-gunns-ltd/4280744) program this week about the conclusions to be drawn from the demise of Gunns, Tasmania’s biggest paper and pulp mill. It is, sadly, the kind of debate that only occurs in Australia after the fact. People fear creating ripples in a small pond. Plus Australia’s horrifically suppressive libel laws means that strenuous and legitimate criticism of corporate behaviour is rarely attempted, let alone aired. Pick up an American newspaper or magazine, where there is constitutional protection of free speech and easy libel laws and you will immediately see the difference. The kind of negative commentary that occurs in the United States would simply not be allowed here. Instead, we are served up with a perpetual diet of anodyne dissimulation from corporates. The only question is whether the dishonesty is an outright lie, distortion of the truth, a partial truth or spin and exaggeration.
Thus we have to wait until companies die before people dare to be honest. Alec Marr, general manager of Triabunna Investments, which owns Tasmania’s largest pulp mill was not missing the opportunity. He exposed several issues about Australia’s corporate and financial elites which deserve far greater scrutiny, scrutiny they will almost certainly not get. Marr (former executive director of the Wilderness Society) said:“It’s a sad day that could easily have been avoided by more sensible leadership earlier … It doesn’t matter how big you are, if you are really determined to go off an offend people all over the world, which was what (chairman) John Gay did — he offended the Japanese customers in the woodchip market, he offended the banking industry, he offended the investment community, he sued the community — I mean, those guys just didn’t think gravity applied to them. As a result they have turned a large company into a very small company and that should be a lesson to everybody who gets carried away with spending other people’s money. You have to remember that the vast bulk of this money came from people’s superannuation funds handed over by imbeciles in the investment community — I say that very calculatedly because I and others sat down in front of the CEOs and argued with their fund managers that they should not pour hundreds of millions of dollars of other people’s money into this company — and they did it anyway. And despite repeated massive losses hey just kept pouring money in. It was just crazy.”Apart from saying the kind of thing that he could never have said when the company was still operating and able to sue him, Marr is highlighting some really important issues about the principal-agent problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal-agent_problem) — how agents of enterprises act on behalf of the owners. In this case there are two agents: the Gunns board, and specifically its chairman, and the fund managers who invest on behalf of superannuants. The latter especially gets insufficient attention, and you may notice that while Marr feels safe to name John Gay, he does not name the CEOs and fund managers in the investment institutions, because they might sue him. As usual, the fund managers get off scott free.
As I have commented before, tongue in cheek, Australia is a Marxist state in the sense that the workers own the means of production. Public companies and many private companies are owned by superannuation funds, which are administering the savings of workers. Ergo, the workers own much of the industry base, including the banks. One might also add that Australia is a Marxist state in that the apparatchiks — boards, senior managers, investment managers and bank managers — really have the power and use it very much at the expense of the ordinary workers they purport to be helping. Anyone who has worked for a period inside a big corporation will have noticed the extraordinary similarities between the absurdities of communist bureaucracies and the absurdities of corporate bureaucracies. Especially in the language. Management jargon is remarkably similar to communist jargon. Meaningless, but with a vicious power dynamic underlying it. The real capitalists are the entrepeneurs and SMEs risking their own money and efforts. Corporations are not capitalist, they are corporatist.
Adam Smith is often quoted as rejecting the joint stock company (the cornerstone of capitalism) in The Wealth of Nations:“The directors of such [joint-stock] companies, however, being the managers rather of other people’s money than of their own, it cannot well be expected, that they should watch over it with the same anxious vigilance with which the partners in a private copartnery frequently watch over their own…. Negligence and profusion, therefore, must always prevail, more or less, in the management of the affairs of such a company.”Smith’s defenders have countered that he was referring to a very different entity and what he was really rejecting was monopoly power. But the basic observation is surely right. Those who watch over other people’s money are usually less vigilant than they would be with their own. There have been many solutions proposed, most notably Michael Jensen’s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jensen) theory of the firm, which contributed to the use of stock options (although of course the main contributor was executive greed). It was theorised that by making executives owners they would become principals as well as agents.
I would suggest that the principal agent problem is to a large extent intractable, and that it cannot be solved by clever manipulation of incentive structures. Expecting it to disappear is to expect that people will suddenly stop enjoying having power and money. It won’t happen. Instead, what is needed is better limits to power, such as avenues for moral censure. That already exists to some extent with public companies, who are subject to AGMs, public scrutiny and the two strikes rule. But it is not possible with the people who have the money: the superannuation firms and their fund managers. As Marr states caustically, they are the ones who hide their bad decisions behind a wall of confidentiality. If we are to move beyond being a Marxist state, that needs to change.
macrobusiness.com.au (http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2012/09/gunns-and-the-elites/)(registration may be required to view full article & comments)