PDA

View Full Version : Dixon Spruiks LCC's


neville_nobody
6th Apr 2012, 23:51
Sounds alot like Geoff trying to justify the LCC/Jetstar rationale at Qantas. Even though a LCC strategy as a whole is somewhat questionable as a business model as very few pure LCC actually go the distance as a business. Jetstar itself cannot be considered a pure LCC as it is heavily subsidised/propped up by QF.

Anyways Geoff thinks that LCC's are the way of the future.


The growth of low-cost carriers underlines an astonishing change in the nature of modern aviation.
It was hatched over a few beers in an Italian restaurant in East Sydney. At Beppi's in March 2001, months before the collapse of Ansett, Qantas's then chief executive Geoff Dixon made entrepreneur Gerry McGowan an offer to buy Impulse Airlines he could not refuse.
The ''little Aussie battler'' was to become the genesis for Jetstar.
''We went very aggressively to get Impulse when we knew it was in trouble,'' Dixon reflects over a glass of pinot noir at a hotel just a short walk from his office overlooking Darling Harbour.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Impulse gave Qantas the building blocks for a budget offshoot with a cost base rivalling Virgin Blue's, which itself had been born on the back of beer coasters in a London pub several years earlier.
''We faced a real battle in losing market share because [Virgin's] cost base was 35 per cent to 45 per cent lower than ours in a two-horse race. We should buy Gerry McGowan a few beers,'' Dixon laughs.
''The reason Jetstar is here now and the reason Qantas is so successful relatively is because we bought Impulse and we kept all the industrial agreements in place.''
More than 11 years after that deal to buy Impulse was sealed, Jetstar has grown from a handful of planes to a fleet of about 80, with operations stretching from Australia and New Zealand to Singapore, Vietnam and shortly Japan. And, after Qantas signed a deal with China Eastern last week, a Jetstar affiliate will be set up in Hong Kong next year, on the doorstep of an emerging superpower.
The story of Jetstar is symbolic of how the aviation industry has been turned on its head in Australia and throughout the rest of the Asia-Pacific region in just over a decade.
Where full-service airlines once dominated the skies, budget airlines such as Jetstar and Malaysia's AirAsia have made major inroads and created their own market segment.
''It has democratised aviation,'' Dixon says. ''What you are going to have is a lot of carriers - and I mean a lot of carriers - set up, and more and more people will head to low-cost operations.''
More than a decade ago a regular overseas holiday was mostly the preserve of the well-off. Today, many people treat a sojourn to an exotic destination as an annual family ritual rather than a luxury.
Australians are travelling overseas in record numbers, which travel agents such as Flight Centre attribute more to cheap fares brought about by the advent of low-cost carriers and the rise of Middle Eastern and Chinese airlines rather than the strong Australian dollar.
The budget airlines are at the front line of the battle for the skies in Asia. While Western economies labour under a mountain of debt, China and its neighbours are undergoing unprecedented urbanisation, turning hundreds of millions of people into the world's new consumers.
Airlines are desperate to tap into the emergence of this large middle class in Asia - people who want the same luxuries such as air travel enjoyed by those in the West.
Budget airlines' share of the aviation market in Asia has grown from almost nothing to about 25 per cent over the last decade, the Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation says. By year's end, it expects 50 budget airlines in the region with orders for more than 1000 aircraft (mostly short-haul Airbus A320s and Boeing 737s).
''You are going to have a massive increase in intra-Asia-Pacific operations [by low-cost carriers], including India. China still doesn't sanction low-cost carriers, but once they start … it will be explosive,'' says Peter Harbison, the chairman of the Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation.
''It is an amazing combination of events at a time when you have this explosive economic growth.''
Harbison says the competition from low-cost carriers is partly why full-service airlines are struggling - even those regarded as successful, such as Cathay Pacific and Singapore Airlines. They are chipping away at the premium airlines' businesses, he says, forcing them to set up low-cost subsidiaries such as Singapore Airlines' new offshoot, Scoot.
In recent weeks Europe's biggest airline, Air France-KLM, has also been rumoured to be mulling a low-cost carrier to help arrest big losses.
Put simply, low-cost carriers are about flying high volumes of passengers, whereas full-service airlines are a margin game, giving the well-heeled superior products but charging them for it.
Conor McCarthy, an Irishman regarded as the operational brains behind AirAsia, says analysts were sceptical a decade ago of low-cost airlines breaking into the Asian market because the incumbent airlines operated on low unit costs compared with their peers elsewhere in the world.
''But what happened with AirAsia, and subsequently a number of other copycats, was that we discovered by applying the vigorous low-cost model in Asia we could very much explode the short-haul travel market and found we could compete with these big guys,'' he says.
McCarthy says low-cost carriers have built profitable businesses on short-haul routes in Asia, which legacy airlines have traditionally seen as ''loss-making feeders for their profitable long-haul networks''.
Large incumbent airlines often flew bigger aircraft such as Airbus A330s on routes that were three- or four-hour trips, McCarthy says. In contrast, AirAsia deployed smaller Boeing 737 and A320s, which allowed it to fly more times each day because the planes were quicker to turn around at airports.
''Now what you are seeing is the fragmentation of the market. So for us to compete on service we want to really up the ante in terms of what we are giving on board,'' says McCarthy, who worked alongside Qantas's chief executive, Alan Joyce, at Ireland's flag carrier Aer Lingus in the 1980s.
Joyce has been eager to shift the company's centre of gravity much closer to Asia, but suffered a setback when he was forced to ditch plans for a new premium airline in Asia last month.
The preferred base in Singapore was scuttled because Qantas was denied the traffic rights needed for a new airline, while the second option of Kuala Lumpur came unstuck after talks with Malaysia Airlines over a joint venture broke down.
It has left Jetstar as the main vehicle for tapping the unprecedented growth in Asia, while its parent scales back its long-haul international network.
Jetstar's plans to push into Hong Kong as part of a 50:50 joint venture with China Eastern has been widely credited as a breakthrough.
''Not only is this a good move strategically for Jetstar, it is about the only move open to them at the moment because the pace of regulatory reform is so slow,'' says an aviation insider who works in Asia. ''But it further relegates Qantas to the back seat.''
Hong Kong has long been on the radar for the airline. In 2008, a paper to Qantas management recommended the Asian financial centre as a base for the so-called North Asia ''mega region'', encompassing China, Japan and Korea.
It was seen as a logical spot because most of the biggest cities in Asia are within five hours flying time - about the maximum flying distances for Jetstar's workhorse A320s.
Although it will be operating out of what is regarded as an expensive city, Jetstar Hong Kong will be able to keep costs down by basing some of its pilots and cabin crew in China.
Setting up a base in Hong Kong will not be without its challenges. Top of the list is the likelihood of an aggressive response from Cathay Pacific and its offshoot, Dragonair.
Insiders also question whether Jetstar runs the risk of gifting its joint venture partner China Eastern its intellectual property, only to see the Chinese replicate its model on its own on domestic routes in China.
But Jetstar's chief executive, Bruce Buchanan, says the airline and its partners ''enter alliances with a long-term view, where the joint focus is on success of the franchise''.
After a focus on south-east Asia in recent years, Jetstar's foray into Hong Kong emphasises that the attention of airlines is increasingly turning to north Asia. In the coming months Jetstar and AirAsia will butt heads on domestic routes in Japan following an opening up of that market.
''The low-cost carrier environment will just intensify - it is where a lot of the structural growth is,'' says Andrew Orchard, an aviation analyst in Hong Kong at Royal Bank of Scotland.
''What you will probably get is further incursions by the low-cost carriers into second-tier cities as most of the key cities are already served. At the same time, because you do have an emerging appetite for travel, we will get more competitors wanting to come into Asia, and it will have an impact on [ticket] prices.''
But domestic routes in China remain the final frontier. Foreign low-cost carriers can fly to destinations in China but are still denied the chance to operate on domestic routes, even if they were able to form joint venture operations with the country's incumbent airlines.
Orchard believes it will be at least a decade before China's domestic market will be opened up to competition from foreign interests. ''Right now the Chinese government seems more keen to promote domestic-based carriers,'' he says.
An Australian aviation watcher based in China adds: ''China is a funny place because things appear to happen quickly but they don't. Change comes but it comes in baby steps.''
While travellers celebrate cheap fares, the stiffer competition and high fuel prices will put pressure on airlines to squeeze costs and search for new revenue streams.
Asia is littered with failed airlines, and Australia is no exception.
The most recent casualty, Air Australia, collapsed in February owing more than $80 million. It joins a long list of failed Australian airlines including Ansett, Compass and minor players such as Kendall and Hazelton, SkyAirWorld and MacAir (otherwise known as Slack Air). After all, this is in an industry well known for sudden shocks. Aside from spikes in fuel prices, who can forget ash clouds, midair engine explosions and industrial disputes?
Last month the International Air Transport Association reduced its forecasts for airline profits worldwide this year by $US500 million ($477 million) to $US3 billion due to high fuel prices. The peak airline body did, however, forecast that airlines in the Asia-Pacific region will post higher combined profits this year than previously expected.
The chief executive of Emirates, Tim Clark, also warned recently that more airlines will go bust this year as fuel costs and weak European and US economies blunt profitability.
Low-cost airlines might be enjoying growth in passengers in Asia, but it still a challenge for them to make a buck. That's because fuel is a bigger proportion of a budget carrier's costs.
Tiger Airways and Malaysia's AirAsia X - in which Virgin's Richard Branson has a 10 per cent stake - are cases in point. The long-haul affiliate of AirAsia blamed high jet fuel prices and weakening demand for air travel for its recent decision to abandon flights to Europe and India. It has since reoriented itself to its primary Asian markets after learning not to ''stretch ourselves too thin''.
Asia has its pitfalls. As Australian executives know well, it is not an easy place to do business due to political, cultural, economic and regulatory hurdles. Jetstar, too, has found Vietnam a difficult place to operate, while its Singaporean operations took years to turn a profit.
The low-cost carriers and high Australian dollar are also exacerbating the shift of Australians and their hard-earned money overseas, which is creating a headache for domestic tourism operators.
Historically, passenger traffic in and out of Australia was evenly split, but in recent years about 60 per cent of traffic is on flights to overseas destinations. Industry veterans say airlines increasingly see more value flying routes such as between Perth and Bali than Melbourne to the Gold Coast.
''The growth of low-cost carriers are very vital for Australia. The downside is that it takes a lot of people out of the country but it has potential to bring a lot of people in as well,'' says Dixon, who is now the chairman of Tourism Australia
''But what can you do about the dollar? We can all go on about it but what we need to do is make sure our product in Australia is attractive because we are at the moment a high-cost destination. And you cannot do anything about the fact that the dollar takes you a long way [overseas].''
As growth slows to a crawl in the West, airlines will increasingly turn to Asia, and low-cost offshoots as their best hopes. ''Jetstar does have first-mover advantage. The others are now going to be challenger brands, and that is a difficult position to come from,'' Dixon says.


Read more: Sky's the limit for new breed of budget airlines (http://www.smh.com.au/business/skys-the-limit-for-new-breed-of-budget-airlines-20120406-1wgov.html#ixzz1rJ6dGo5k)

gobbledock
7th Apr 2012, 01:30
Blah blah Darth got nothing better to do with his time and his millions?
Jetstar is not a true LCC. Let's see it operate as an LCC totally off it's own back, no subsiding from QF, no creative paperwork and accounting c/o big brother QF. Dixon act as if he and Joyce had some kind of holy miracle bestowed upon them buy the lord himself and act as if JQ is the messiah!

The LCC model, particularly is lean cost base is the way airlines are going into the future, no doubt about it. But Darth acting like he is some kind of revolutionary or creative genius is nauseating.

HEALY
7th Apr 2012, 02:27
So the plan isn't to provide a package for crew based on living costs in Hong Kong, you will be living in China. This is something that should be looked at very carefully when given the glossy brochure showing your new work place with views from the Peak and bustling western influenced living in the mid levels.

Your duty will start at 3 am with a bus or train to the Lo Wu border crossing followed by the N34 bus to the airport:ugh: Once completed it's back to your industrial and commercial orientated Chinese zoned city for your min rest break!

Is this the same reasoning behind Air Hong Kong and the fact you can't bond people in Hong Kong so we will base you elsewhere to avoid the issue?

Mstr Caution
7th Apr 2012, 06:40
Thankyou Geoff Dixon,

The advent of LCC certainly has made those sojourns to exotic locations more affordable.

I am in the process of booking a 8 day trip to Thailand in early December for travel with some non airline employed friends.

I have the option of Qantas SYD - BKK return economy for $1212AUD on the days I need to travel.

or

Jetstar SYD - MEL - SIN - BKK return over a 22 hour travel time (each way), throw in a hot meal & a checked bag for the bargain price of $1337AUD.

73to91
7th Apr 2012, 07:04
Now we know what the drinks were about last week.
Qantas chiefs chat: who gets the tab? (http://www.theage.com.au/business/qantas-chiefs-chat-who-gets-the-tab-20120330-1w287.html)

AJ - we need to get the press to spruik the LCC model,
GD - leave it to me, I can call on plenty of mates to interview me, I'll set the world right,
AJ - thanks Geoff, I owe you again,
GD - yeah Alan, you'll keep picking up the tab.

Mstr Caution
7th Apr 2012, 07:51
LCC aren't necessarily the panacea for legacy carriers.

Network carriers still control 50% of traffic around South East Asia & 93% of that in North Asia.

Any CEO running a Network carrier need only look at how LCC have reduced costs & implement those same strategies in the Network carriers.

Examples being self service check in, downward pressure on labour agreements, introducing CAO 48E, VR for existing staff & new casual labour agreements & shedding middle management numbers. Any of that sound familiar?

Talkwrench
7th Apr 2012, 11:22
The more important question is: Why doesn't Geoff just F.O.A.D.?

Clipped
8th Apr 2012, 11:00
'Cause he, Strong and Co. have much to plunder.

dr dre
8th Apr 2012, 12:22
Suprised this hasn't been mentioned yet, seems the LCC model may not be all that it's cracked up to be
How much do you really save on Australian budget airlines? | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/are-budget-airlines-really-worth-it/story-e6frfq80-1226317685709)

FLYING on a budget airline in Australia may not only save you very little, but it may actually end up costing you more. That is, unless you're lucky enough to score a sale fare.
Travellers save an average of just $21 flying with budget carrier Jetstar instead of Qantas on standard fares, according to recent flight sales data across a series of domestic routes.

And even those savings may be quickly eaten up, with Jetstar charging $12 for a light meal and $6 for a beer - a total of $18. The Qantas fares include meals and drinks.


Read more: How much do you really save on Australian budget airlines? | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/travel/news/are-budget-airlines-really-worth-it/story-e6frfq80-1226317685709#ixzz1rS1IxZ4N)

moa999
8th Apr 2012, 13:48
Any CEO running a Network carrier need only look at how LCC have reduced costs & implement those same strategies in the Network carriers.


So what are you suggesting again?

Mstr Caution
9th Apr 2012, 02:08
Moa999

What I'm suggesting is a regurgitation of a IATA or Bloomberg report (cant remember which one it was) that i read a while ago.

The report suggested that the rise in LCC was attributable to starting with a clean sheet & implementing newer technologies quicker & having fuel efficient aircraft at start up at opposed to "network Carriers" with an existing operation. Operating to airports with lower costs & less congestion.

As Dixon suggested in a recent interview, the purchase of Impulse airlines was more about buying the existing Industrial Agreements than anything else. Network carriers like Qantas are currently manoeuvering to reduce labour costs by moving to CAO 48 E operations & new arbitrated labour agreements. Cabin crew VR's are on the rise for long term staff & we'll soon see an announcement of more casual FA intake courses. All moving towards reducing labour costs.

In short, Network carriers are playing catch up to the more nimble new start LCC's, reducing the costs differential & preserving the premium differential in the process.

Look at the Qantas operation over the last 5 of 10 years, passengers now use self service check in facilities reducing the cost of ground staff labour. The company is moving towards a LAME on demand turnaround again reducing labour costs.

The move towards FRMS will see crew working operations that were previously restricted by CAO48. The evidence is already there that the Fatigue Risk associated with 320/737 CAO48E operations is acceptable. I'm sure we'll see 330 & 767 operations moving towards the same standard.

SYD-PER-SYD two crew 330/767 operations anybody?

Another report I read recently discussed the rapid increase in LCC thru Asia. The report went on to say that as traffic congestion increased (at secondary airports), delays (increased turn around times & traffic) would drive up costs. Which would be passed on to the consumer. At the moment LCC's look to operate out of these secondary airports where delays are less than the airports the Networks operate to.

So, I suppose what I'm saying is the Network Carriers are looking at what the LCC's are doing & implementing the same cost reductions where possible in the Network Carriers. And as the report I read stated that a Network Carrier starting a LCC is not necessarily the panacea to increased profitability.

Network Airlines are becoming lower cost carriers in the process.

MC

Keg
9th Apr 2012, 03:02
SYD-PER-SYD two crew 330/767 operations anybody?


Daylight? Sure. Overnight? Never. Still, it's something that AIPA has had on the table now for some years. Not sure why it's never been sorted out prior to now.

Wizofoz
9th Apr 2012, 05:15
I did exactley that trip, overnight, an average of seven times a month for over three years....

scrubba
9th Apr 2012, 05:15
Hey Keg,

I must be missing something. What is it about A330/B767 that requires three crew while it is no big deal for domestic operators to do it in B737/A320 with two?

Keg
9th Apr 2012, 05:16
And how 'safe' did you feel getting back into SYD each morning Wiz? I bet there were many days when you were praying for nothing to go wrong. Well, probably not praying! :ok:

stainedpantystealer
9th Apr 2012, 05:32
All JQ A330 flights are 2 crew except SYD-HNL-SYD & SIN-AKL-SIN.

ejectx3
9th Apr 2012, 06:19
And they're probably bloody exhausted

Livs Hairdresser
9th Apr 2012, 06:48
All JQ A330 flights are 2 crew except SYD-HNL-SYD & SIN-AKL-SIN.

Oh well, must be safe then. Nothing else to discuss really ..... what's your favourite colour?

Keg
9th Apr 2012, 07:02
I must be missing something. What is it about A330/B767 that requires three crew while it is no big deal for domestic operators to do it in B737/A320 with two?

What is it that requires three crew at the moment? The law and the CAO limits that apply to QF long haul operations- even if those operations are domestic.

Mate, I wish we could do daylight returns to PER from SYD. It's been on the 'list' of things we're prepared to consider for a couple of EBAs now. I reckon they'd go very senior given the hours per day they'd provide and the resultant time off.

As for doing it overnight, I know there are many who have done it for years. Whilst it may fit into the exemption, I reckon any half decent FRMS is going to nix that duty as being dangerously fatiguing. That the law allows it shows archaic the laws relating to FTLs actually are. That crew continue to do it shows how little we value our own licenses at times.

Longbow25
9th Apr 2012, 08:32
Wow,

If CrapStar do it must be great.

my oleo is extended
9th Apr 2012, 09:11
Rumor has it Darth spent some time with AJ, his husband and the Maltese over Easter!
Probably went to church together also, confessed to some sins, donated to charity and prayed for more earthly personal wealth. Or maybe they went on an egg hunt, or was that a hunt for a buyer for QF?
I imagine they spent at least one evening with Wirthless discussing how they can deliver a post Easter grounding?

ga_trojan
9th Apr 2012, 09:26
Under a FRMS you are not going to be able to do a 12 hour redeye. The whole idea is to be able to work longer during the day but shorter at night.

Not sure how anyone did SYD-PER-SYD return back of the clock under any type of rules as the CAO won't allow it and the FRMS is very restrictive in the middle of the night.

From my experience a FRMS is OK as long it isn't abused by the operator as you can get some massive days.

The The
9th Apr 2012, 11:22
Under 48E you can do 12 hrs duty, 9.5 hrs flight (more than 7 hrs night). That would fit a back of the clock SYD-PER-SYD.

unionist1974
9th Apr 2012, 11:39
Bring on Tony Abbott , then the fun and games will really begin for you Julia haters . Can't wait to hear the squealls

Keg
9th Apr 2012, 13:00
That was my point. The current rules allow it. Any FRMS worth it salt is going to say 'nyet' to that. Just because it's allowed under the current rules doesn't mean it's safe. Jut because it's not allowed under the current rules (such as the 767 not being able to operate SYD-PER-SYD, 2 crew, daylight, single tour of duty) doesn't mean that' it's unsafe. There is a middle road here.

My hope is that FRMS will be a part of that middle road. My fear is that like all things, it will be abused by management wanting to put everything hard up against the 'limit'.

ga_trojan
10th Apr 2012, 00:34
The only saving grace is that under a FRMS you can write reports and it should get to a point where they will have to change the pairings.

At the airline I work at there was a pairing which the airline thought everyone would be up in arms about yet it work well for many crews and they received very few complaints. Whilst others have been removed. I believe CASA actually audit the FRMS so the reports do count for something.