Qantas ripe for Private Equity takeover

[fishers.ghost]

A LEADING airline investor believes Qantas is the ''perfect scenario for private equity'' firms making a takeover bid because it has attractive assets in Jetstar and is considerably cheaper than a year ago.
Richard Branson's right-hand man, David Baxby, said it would make sense for large investors to be ''running the numbers over [Qantas] because it has come down so far, so fast''.
Qantas shares have lost almost three-fifths of their value since the start of last year.
''Structured the right way, with the right management team and the right vision, [Qantas] is the perfect scenario for private equity,'' he said yesterday.
>
''TPG, the people who were involved last time, must be opening the books again and having another look at it because those guys have a fabulous track record in making money in aviation.
''We have done some co-investments with those guys in the past, and I know how they think.''
A Texas Pacific Group-led consortium unsuccessfully made an $11 billion bid for Qantas in late 2006.
More than five years later, the plunge in Qantas' share price has prompted
While he represents the largest shareholder in Qantas' rival, Virgin Australia, Mr Baxby is seen as an authoritative voice because of his stint as an investment banker at Goldman Sachs and his oversight of several airline investments. The aviation assets of Sir Richard's Virgin Group include Virgin Atlantic.

[SOPS]

anyday now, anyday now its coming.:yuk:

[StallBoy]

Yeh right plummeting traveller numbers and countries going broke, just the right time to be buying an airline!!!!:*:*:*
The same old "If it's australian it must be the best in the world " syndrome:ugh::ugh:

[Flyingblind]

If the annalists thinking is correct then good. Get rid of the darn thing.

[Romulus]

Does it meet the basic criteria?

1: Is it a strong brand?
2: Does it have a lot of assets that can be sold (and leased back if need be)?
3: Can it sustain a lot more debt allowing funds to be taken out?
4: Is it experiencing an "image" problem with investors?
5: Does it appear to be badly managed so a "we will supply strong management" line will win over shareholders?
6: Is there an obvious exit strategy available via a trade sale, refloating or somesuch?

Tick those boxes and you have a target.

[scandistralian]

Hit the nail on the head Romulus.

I guess another alternative would be they sell off Jetstar to the Texans to boost cash and use it to weather the global doldrums for the next few years. It would be very interesting to see how Jetstar would perform without the backing of Qantas.

[swh]

It would be very interesting to see how Jetstar would perform without the backing of Qantas.

Likewise, it would be very interesting to see how Qantas would perform without the profit from Jetstar.

[Sonny Hammond]

Ah yeah, swh, showing a massive lack of knowledge on this topic there buddy.

Any J* profits are entirely at QF mainline expense. J* has been gifted its very existence.
Read up, then post.

[Sunfish]

Could I be forgiven for thinking that Qantas has been deliberately "managed" into becoming a perfect morsel for private equity to purchase?

All the boxes Romulus mentions are ticked:

1: Is it a strong brand?
2: Does it have a lot of assets that can be sold (and leased back if need be)?
3: Can it sustain a lot more debt allowing funds to be taken out?
4: Is it experiencing an "image" problem with investors?
5: Does it appear to be badly managed so a "we will supply strong management" line will win over shareholders?
6: Is there an obvious exit strategy available via a trade sale, refloating or somesuch?

As I have said repeatedly before, all the Qantas problems are of its own making and are easily fixed.

I don't buy the line that Qantas International is "unprofitable" given the constant allegations of dodgy cost allocations from Jetstar to International.

I don't buy the line that Jetstar is "profitable".

The Qantas employee relations strategy is a disgrace - easily fixed.

The fleet problems can be solved - easily fixed, just go to Boeing like Ansett did around 1977 and ask for a complete makeover.

The U.S. Thirty year Treasury Bond rate is 2.57% today. Qantas can load up with cheap debt tomorrow - because its a strong brand and it has the Australian domestic market - and both sides of Parliament for the forseeable future - by the balls. Easy money.

Qantas management is bloated with multiple layers, including a "Group General Manager" level. - Easily fixed.

* Once Qantas is taken private, simply roll Jetstar and all the other "departments" back into one Airline - Qantas. Jetstar has served its purpose - Virgin has now moved up market.

* End the loss making foreign Jetstar programs - they just irritate Asian players, consume too much management time and attention and will never make money.

* Since the business is now private, no one needs to know about the cross subsidies Jetstar was receiving, nor the real state of profitability of the entire airline.

Polish the entire airline up with new lean management and a new lean management structure, buy off the unions, load it up with cheap debt, produce a credible fleet renewal plan and business plan and Voila!

......Qantas II. Refloat and walk away with billions.

Leaving the Australian general population still thirsting for decent cheap direct flights to the destination of choice.

[troppo]

and all this is based upon the premise that Qantas continues to exist

[Keg]

Maybe it's being managed this way to put real pressure on the government to change the Qantas Sale Act and perhaps some of the tax law relating to aircraft depreciation amongst other things. Once that's done then PE steps in and snaps it up. :suspect:

Heck, even AIPA is campaigning in Canberra re the taxation issues!

[Cockpit Door-Closed]

As AJ let slip during an interview last year, it could be the Singleton/Dixon connection..........John Singleton and Qantas (http://wotnews.com.au/news/John_Singleton__and__Qantas/)

[parabellum]

Singapore Airlines (SIA) have been trying to get into the Australian market for years, (they could have saved Ansett, in one form or another, had they not been blocked by NZ). SIA have the kind of equipment that QANTAS needs, B777 and A380 but above all they are cash rich with over 14billion dollars in the bank. If it ever got to a bidding war I suspect SIA would pay over the odds just to secure a major interest but I think Australian law prohibits a majority interest?

[TheWholeEnchilada]

"Never let a crisis go to waste" was the catch-cry of the previous iteration the pre-private equity management.

Or as a training Captain told me once, during a candidates training, if a "crisis" didn't appear, one would be engineered.

All the plans are sitting in the bottom draw, just awaiting the next crisis, real or engineered.

[Baileys]

Plenty of better uses for private money than buying a legacy airline that's only going backwards. It's a losing bet. Have a look at the competition. Qantas is getting killed on just about every front. You guys are wishing and dreaming. It's just going to bump along the bottom for years now going sideways or backwards.

[swh]

Ah yeah, swh, showing a massive lack of knowledge on this topic there buddy.

Any J* profits are entirely at QF mainline expense. J* has been gifted its very existence.
Read up, then post.

Sonny,

That is what QF drivers think to give themselves a nice warm feeling. Fact is J* makes a profit for QF as it has a much lower cost structure, and returns a greater return on the investment than QF international does. J* is an investment, it is not a gift, it returns real money, money that is paying for the inefficiency in QF mainline.

No route ever "belonged" to QF, the QF group can put whatever service it like on a route to generate the greatest amount of profit. Frankly I do not understand why QF domestic still exists these days, about time to ditch them all and bring back TAA.

If QF put all the cash it has invested in QF international in a term deposit, they would make more money, that is not the case with J*. QF pilots have no idea what real word terms and conditions are these days, you guys already signed your own demise. You got senior captains working what 15 out of 60 days, doing 600 hours a year, and SOs doing less, you could get rid of 400 pilots and still have enough crew to legally fill the roster.

Sounds unrealistic ? that is what QFs competition is doing, they have their crews working harder, their cost structure is much lower. Sad thing is, you cannot see it coming, you think you won. If Akbar Al Baker gets in, he will rip you guys a new $$$##### like he has done in Cargolux. Your heads will spin.

If QF does have a private equity takeover, the efficiency experts will be in, and terminations and redundancies will be given out freely until costs are under control.

Ever wonder why Qatar have advertisements in the back of every Flight International ? People do not last, you are worked like a dog, and sacked for anything from taking extra fuel, to being slightly fast on approach. No tolerance given, unless you are a local.

You will be nothing more than a taxi driver on some Arabs magic carpet.

This post was supposed to provoke you, people in QF still are living in another world. Be part of the process to secure your future, or roll over.

[Keg]

QF pilots have no idea what real word terms and conditions are these days, you guys already signed your own demise. You got senior captains working what 15 out of 60 days, doing 600 hours a year, and SOs doing less....

swh, I don't dispute that Qantas is not without it's issues.

However, if the above is an example of what you understand to be the 'normality' of the Qantas operation then I have to call into question the rest of your assertions if they're based in part or in full on the above. Your information way, way off the mark for 'normal' times. I'd also question where you're getting that information from? Wherever it is, you need to reappraise the reliability of said source given how inaccurate the information you've quoted actually is. If you're so far off the mark with these comments then what else are you off the mark on?

Of course, at the moment we are hardly in 'normal' times. There are some of us who are flying only 500 hours a year (although none of the crew on those hours would be 'senior captains', rather they're likely to be the junior ones) but that's as a result of a transfer of flying rather than any degree of inefficiency on our behalf. Any senior captain flying less than 500 hours a year is probably taking heaps of annual or long service leave and thus it's a liability the airline has been happy to accept over the years when the numbers were tight and they weren't farming flying out to the subsidiaries.

[Keg]

Further,

You will be nothing more than a taxi driver on some Arabs magic carpet.

So Qatari is held up as the beacon of aviation as a successful airline, and yet......

....people in QF still are living in another world. Be part of the process to secure your future, or roll over.

Being part of the process and securing our future to making a successful airline results in us being nothing more than a taxi drive on some Arab's (or Irishman's) magic carpet. You can't have it both ways here.

[Tankengine]

Only a few years ago the 747 guys were all pushing the 900 stick hour per year limit. How is that so inefficient? Wage differences would not be enough to bridge the gap between Qantas on high load factor and yield versus Jetstar with lower load factors and presumably yield. The difference in fuel due to old aircraft and the bloated ground staff of Qantas [some of whom do Jetstar work on Qantas pay] does make Qantas inefficient.:rolleyes:

[swh]

Keg,

The info came from 74 skipper, he has only been in QF around 20 years, that must make him junior.

I have already flown 80 hrs this month, and I have another trip and a week on call yet to go, I will end up doing over 100 hrs this month. We would have 50+ guys and gals off work at the moment on my fleet as they have hit their max.

Make any excuse you like about things not being normal, in the mean time other airlines are expanding in and around Australia.

To me it is a classic example of QF not being able to adapt, and the work practices are part of that. The bid line system makes it hard for the airline to be flexible, when you are competing with airlines that do not have it.

[Keg]

20 years in Qantas would be a VERY junior 747 captain at the moment given that those of us with 17 1/2 years are very junior 767 Captains. Perhaps he's been around a bit longer than that.

If he (or she) is only doing 500 hours a year it's because they're rotating onto a blank line every 8 weeks. Given the reduction in flying, there are more guys and gals on reserve than their used to be and thus less flying for everyone to do. I'm a rotator and I'm doing 500 hours a year. I'd LOVE to be doing more- as would all of us.

Doing more than 100 hours in the month? Yahoo for you. Sadly, FTLs prohibit QF crew from doing the same! :rolleyes:

Yep. The question we should be asking is why isn't Qantas expanding? According to you logic it's all down to pilot salaries. Whilst I agree there are inefficiencies that need to be addressed, why is it the pilot's fault that these are not being addressed? Over multiple EBAs Qantas itself have signed off on these conditions as being acceptable. Over multiple EBAs (including the current one) Qantas has wanted to 'simplify' the EBA only to back away from making wholesale change. Even on this current one I bet they won't get the simplification they were after because they were too stupid to negotiate and instead are going to leave it to the FWA who I suspect will go the 'minimalist' route in sorting the thing out.

So enlighten me as to how the bid line system prohibits flexibility? The flying is the flying. You put it into trips that are as efficient as possible. You allocate the flying in seniority order. That doest prohibit any flexibility at all.

Got a gripe against rotating? So do most Qantas pilots and believe if it were shared around not only the average hours pick up and the O/T for assigning some people over divisor would come down. My understanding is that there is some agreement between AIPA reps and company pilot reps on this issue for the EA under arbitration at the moment. Whether AJ will ratify these agreed points remains to be seen. If past behaviour is a pointer to future behaviour I wouldn't put any money on him taking the sensible option. That said, it wasn't that long ago that crew on reserve were doing more flying and hours than those on rostered patterns due to crew shortages. At that time many crew were regularly knocking up against the flight time limits for 30/7, 100/30, 900/365. So tell me again why QF crew were inefficient?

So, it appears that so far, your comments about the hours are poorly sourced or selective of a situation that isn't the normal state of operation at Qantas. It appears that your comments about the willingness of Qantas pilots to adapt is incorrect. Your assertion about bid lines is partially correct in terms of having some crew doing not much flying on reserve but it wasn't long ago crew on reserve were at max hours- as were many on rostered blocks of flying- so that's not a solid basis to be basing your assertion on. Do you want to keep trying?

[Trent 972]

The info came from 74 skipper, he has only been in QF around 20 years
Unless "around 20 years" is another way of saying "at least 24 years" (the most junior 74 Cap), then i'm calling bullsh!t on your 'info', swh.

[The The]

swh,

You seem to compare apples with oranges. A few facts:

Joyce has recently admitted Jestar Asia longhaul is losing money (but wont say how much). Jetstar Asia has NEVER made a decent return (except on fudging leases). Profit last year $14m - WOW! Accumulated losses to date $S81m!

In Aus, Joyce will not say whether Jetstar International makes any money. Happy to split QF Int v QF Dom, why not show the results for Jetstar Int?

QF Dom has always been a huge profit driver for the group but unfortunately, the mismanagement and narrow focus on Jetstar is now allowing Virgin to leap over QF Dom.

I posted this previously about last years results:

If QF international lost $200m, the EBIT for QF Domestic and Qlink would be $428m.

Total QF Domestic (including Qlink) passengers is 21,930,000. So each passenger earns QF $19.50 profit.

Total Jetstar passengers is 15,315,000, with an EBIT of $169m So each passenger earns Jetstar $11.03 profit.

When you look at the ASK's, QF Domestic makes a profit of $0.012 per ASK. Jetstar makes $0.0049 per ASK.

So QF Domestic is 2.5 times more profitable than Jetstar per ASK and makes 77% more profit per passenger.

Jetstar Asia made $A14.25m. That gives it a profit of $5.28 per passenger or $0.0024 per ASK. QF domestic is thus about 3.7 times more profitable per passenger or 5 times more profitable per ASK.

Jetstar Pacific is obviously such a complete basket case, they provide 2 lines on it with not a single financial detail.

If you take Jetstar Asia out of the Jetstar numbers, then the Jetstar profit per pax increases slightly to $12.27 and the ASK profit rises to $0.0054. Still a long way off QF domestic!!!

All these numbers are based on the financials provided by QF in the annual results including the $200m international losses, I have made NO assumptions, just broken down the numbers. Even if we did say QF had exaggerated the international losses and say said that QF international lost only $50m and so QF domestic made $278m, the QF domestic business still far outperforms the Jetstar business in profit per ASK and profit per passenger


So using your argument, why not put the service on the routes that generates the greatest profit? And that would be?

[Tankengine]

swh will be doing over 100hrs this month?:confused:
I was under the impression that for QF any more than 100/30 would be illegal.:suspect:

[swh]

Keg,

I said 600, not 500. I do not have their exact start date, I just know the 20 year mark has been passed. From the 2 month roster that was discussed, I was at work for about the same amount of time they were at home over a 2 month period.

The The,

Those numbers for Jetstar look about right, they are in line with other LCCs. LCCs work by moving lots of passengers, for minimum costs, and charge them for extras everywhere. Jetstar offer fares very similar to Virgin, and with a lower cost base, I think they are making money. It is not like they are flying around empty and charging nothing. I do not know enough about the overseas operations to comment in detail, however staff costs should be a lot lower than Australia, fuel cost should be better, and the cost of leasing the aircraft probably would be higher than planned with the historically high AUD.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1264/643261849_78fa421cf1_o.jpg

The difference between the legacy (QF) and LCC (Jetstar) is in the same as IATA has reported in Europe. Easyjet earns about 35% less, and Ryanair about 55% less per ASK than legacy carriers, that has not stopped them from being very profitable despite being in a higher cost environment than Australia. It also has not stopped the some legacy carriers from succeeding, at the same time a lot have failed while the LCCs have flourished.

Virgin has carved a large market share in Australia, they have not done so with the highest yields in the market, they have done it with a good product at a reasonable price, that is reliable. So many time I hear now of QF staff flying full fare on Virgin domestically, even international you have QF staff traveling on other airlines over staff travel on QF.

I see a lot of QF people snivel or complain in a peevish, self-pitying way about how Jetstar is taking over their flying and routes. I think you will find where the real value was ripped out of the QF domestic network has been the expansion of Virgin, they have taken volume AND yield. Having the highest yield is nothing, if your market share is declining, that goes for international and domestic.

Tankengine,

100 hrs a month is not worldwide, you are allowed to do over double that in some countries in commercial operations. I have done 80 hrs in 10 sectors so far this month with 4 days off.

[kellykelpie]

100 hrs a month is not worldwide, you are allowed to do over double that in some countries in commercial operations. I have done 80 hrs in 10 sectors so far this month with 4 days off.

That doesn't sound sustainable - then what?

[Bundy Bear]

You got senior captains working what 15 out of 60 days, doing 600 hours a year, and SOs doing less, you could get rid of 400 pilots and still have enough crew to legally fill the roster.

SMH

That is because QF gave all the work to jetstar. It's not what we choose to do. And yes this does exist, but it's not normal unless you are junior long haul.

We joined an airline like you did, hoping for opportunities, but they have all dried up...

FFS


:ugh:

[Tankengine]

Makes you wonder about fatigue, doesn't it!:hmm:

[moa999]

TheThe,
Suggest you look at the books a bit further.

QF Int v QF Dom v JQ etc.
You have quoted EBIT figures and are comparing them to pax, ASKs this is totally misleading... Why...
For a leased plane the "operating lease" is an expense and hence is already deducted before you get to EBIT.
For an owned plane (or at least debt funded), only the depreciation is deducted, the interest "the I" part is not.
As far as I am aware JQ Int and Dom run predominately leased fleet so their EBIT on any metrics will always be at a comparative disadvantage to a carrier with a decent percentage of owned jets (ie QF Int and Dom)

Because of the fact that Jetstar and its offshoots leases almost everything the equity, or cash contributed is very low... I suspect Jetstar (in all its guises) return (profit not EBIT) on investment is far superior.

The AirAsia chart is very telling (is Jetstar the dot not marked??)
Also see if you can find a prospectus for Cebu Pacific (Philippines) - even lower again.

Jetstar Pacific - Qantas only owns 30%, has limited control so doesn't report/ consolidate. That said I am not aware of any further equity injections here so it is not loss making - As it is with only 6 narrowbodies it is small in the scheme of things.

[swh]

kellykelpie,

Not all commercial operations can be conducted year round, regulators in other parts of the world understand that. In Canada for example float operators which are limited to warmer parts of the year can do 900 hrs in 180 days. Airline pilots can do 60 hours in a week, 120 hours a month, 300 hours in 90 days, and 1200 hours a year.

Bundy Bear,

QF never owned the flying or passengers, nothing was given away. Passenger vote with their feet, not only to Jetstar, Virgin, and Tiger. More and more passenger vote with their feet and buy tickets on other airlines to fly internationally.

If you want opportunities, there are plenty of jobs overseas, if you have the guts to move out of your comfort zone. There are even very attractive packages with Chines carriers based in SYD with a tax paid salary.

[Tankengine]

Right about one thing.:hmm:
Passengers have voted with their feet on old Qantas routes like Tassie, Gold Coast and Hamilton Island - they have gone to Virgin!:ugh:

[Daylight Robbery]

There only needs to be reasonably minor changes to gain significant productivity. Long haul needs to give Syd-Per return 2 pilot. Syd-Singapore 2 pilot, modify overtime and get rid of things like home transport. Cherry picking the 48 exemption, is the answer. Whilst at it, dismantling the existing bidding seniority will allow better balance and share the workload for all.

smh, Cathay work the same or less days than QF long haul. I would suggest for the very senior in long haul at QF it is around 10-14 days/ calendar month, not your figures. i.e. LA return and London return. If you are to do this job for 30 years flogging yourself year in year out is not going to work.

[The The]

Fair enough moa999.

But what if you take out the lease costs and depreciation? QF also publish an EBITDAR that excludes fleet operating lease rentals. QF still earns more per pax (59.12/30.70) and per ASK (0.017/0.014). QF yield is 44% better than JQ.

[ga_trojan]

Passenger vote with their feet, not only to Jetstar, Virgin, and Tiger. More and more passenger vote with their feet and buy tickets on other airlines to fly internationally.

People are not voting with their feet they are buying QF tickets and winding up on Jetstar. It is THEN that they are voting with their feet.

QF lost a major Australian company's account over this very issue.

[Keg]

Long haul needs to give Syd-Per return 2 pilot. Syd-Singapore 2 pilot, modify overtime and get rid of things like home transport. Cherry picking the 48 exemption, is the answer. Whilst at it, dismantling the existing bidding seniority will allow better balance and share the workload for all.

I agree. A couple of quick corrections though. We can already so SYD-SIN two man. The reason we don't is either a 30/7 problem (normally for the SIN-SYD leg) or the S/Os are needed in SIN for the northbound service. Alternatively, we could fly four man to somewhere like Dubai and then go two man to Europe. That would save considerable costs also.

PER returns (daylight) have been on the table previously. I'm not sure why they've never come off. My understanding is that they were on the table this time as well. That's gone pretty quiet though so not sure where it's at. PER returns overnight are permissible under the exemption but are dangerous to the point of stupidity. I'm not sure how any objective risk assessment can permit them.

Home transport is an interesting one. I'd be interested in trading it away for something- particularly if that 'something' wasn't a big cost to the company. Not sure what though. Then again, it is handy turning up to work having already read the weather and NOTAMs.

Overtime? Yeah, there are better ways of doing that... I'm just not sure what they are. The hassle is that so many people are addicted to the sweet sugar that is the extra 15-25% (for the heavier fleets) that it's a massive drama to 'fix'. Then again, if the AUD were at 60c to the USD, it wouldn't be the massive problem it is at the moment.

[WorthWhat]

Gees! talk about flogging a dead horse

ASIC makes corporate reform proposals to Treasury
By Andrew Fraser

ASIC chairman Greg Medcraft says it is now up to federal Treasury to recommend if there are to be any changes to the takeover laws, after confirming the regulator has lodged three proposals for corporate reform, including one on the "creep" provisions.


While most public attention has been focused on his proposal to limit creep provisions so that company takeovers by stealth are made more difficult, Mr Medcraft said ASIC had also made recommendations to Treasury concerning the level of disclosure of holdings and the role of schemes of arrangement in takeovers.

[crystalballwannabe]

If Qantas needs extra revenue (which it does), I can't understand why they can't offer a much broader staff travel policy.

Ie VA staff staff can give away sectors to unlisted people and have birthday fares to give away confirmed etc.

Imagine if every QF employee could list friends for cost plus (x) percent to see this downtime through.

Profit = Revenue - Costs

Costs can only be cut so far..... this would be an opportunity to grow revenue.

It would be a brave (foolish) private equity firm that would take on QF whilst the price of oil is so high and perhaps now almost certainly totally detached from fundamental supply and demand pricing.

I'm not sure where to look for this "lead". Perhaps US foreign policy, perhaps China devaluing the Yuan, perhaps the sovereign owned oil companies that now dwarf companies like Exxon/BP/Chevron.

Buffett has always cited Airlines as a must not buy stock for two reasons:
1) Highly unionised workforce
2) Price competitive - lowest price generally wins no "durable" competitive advantage.

People will always need to travel, so that is good news. Bad news is airline ROE and ROA is rubbish. People want to travel from A-B for $69 when a taxi to the airport costs $30 bucks and that is just fact.....

Its a race to the bottom and that is sad........

I don't think it will be too long before Netjets or an equivalent sets up here and then the fractional ownership of jets will make the circus of parking/security/expensive coffee obsolete for the "juicy" corporate clients.

I think the harsh reality is airline travel is now just public transport and that is sad for a highly skilled profession like pilots.

At least we don't have a high speed train network doing the golden triangle.........yet:ugh:

[waren9]

PER returns overnight are permissible under the exemption but are dangerous to the point of stupidity. I'm not sure how any objective risk assessment can permit them.

Curious how its too dangerous for one part of the group, yet quite acceptable for another part.

Funny how that works.

[PPRuNeUser0198]

Jetstar have a combination of leased and owned hulls - predominately owned.

Crystalwannabe - FBT is an implication for QF.

[600ft-lb]

predominately owned.

and paid for by Qantas. Meanwhile, tired old clapped out 767s fill the sky.

[Keg]

Curious how its too dangerous for one part of the group, yet quite acceptable for another part.

Funny how that works.

Yes. Strange that the QF risk assessment had them also withdraw from doing PER-MEL-SYD and PER-BNE-SYD red eye services as well with the tour of duty terminating in either MEL or BNE due to the demonstrated fatigue levels from the research project.

Perhaps J*'s statement about adhering to all of QF's safety standards doesn't hold much water when put to the test. Didn't we discuss that recently WRT the recruitment of crew? :ugh:

Do J* crew submit fatigue reports at the conclusion of a tour of duty such as an overnight SYD-PER-SYD highlighting the issue and any errors they may have made? If not, why not?

[DirectAnywhere]

Having flown more SYD-PER-SYD sectors on overnights than I care to remember I can honestly say these are one of the worst possible flights for fatigue I ever came across.

In terms of duty, they're similar to say a SYD-NRT with a diversion to Guam and and a two hour refuel. (You end upon the ground in PER for two hours or so to comply with SYD curfew).

The departure out of PER is about 3am body clock time for east coast based crew and from about 20,000' on climb until the adrenaline kicks in three hours later at about 6am on arrival in SYD that crew is basically non compos.

The idea of doing it two pilot return ex SYD is nuts. Just because it's legal (under the exemption not plain old CAO48) doesn't make it safe.

Sorry for the thread drift.

[indamiddle]

qantas should be making a nice profit from the reduction in jet fuel prices, last increase in the fuel surcharge was march at the top of the curve US$3.26 per gallon. this has dropped to US$2.68 as of june. this is west coast USA price. couldn't easily find the singapore chart. how long before someone in the media figures this out and starts asking questions.... sorry about thread drift

[Nigel747]

Indamiddle,

I agree re jet fuel prices. It occurred to me that given the high load factors across the international network that part of our massive losses (alleged or perhaps true) may in part be due to some fuel hedging gone wrong.

Nigel

[standard unit]

Nigel747,

they have a history of harping on about what financial geniuses they are when through dumb luck they get hedging right.

The deafening silence you hear on the matter now might very well suggest you are right.

[scandistralian]

Wouldnt be the first time hedging has bitten them. They managed to get 2 of the head clowns locked up in Vietnam because of their "best practice" fuel hedging losses, I wonder when they repaid the Vietnamese government to which brand the losses were attributed?

I cannot believe anyone would do a SYD-PER-SYD back of the clock, with 2 hour turn, that is criminal...

[crystalballwannabe]

Im pretty sure it not just fuel hedging, QF is also exposed to currency hedging.

The "brains trust" looking after these policies will have to be MENSA champions to have half a chance at success at a fuel hedging program over the next few years.

High fuel prices always precede a recession (although no one seems to want to ever use that word anymore). We can expect fuel prices to go down sharply over the next few years as the economy picks up. "Peak oil" is absolute rubbish but its concept provides a nice "mantra" for the masses. The price of oil is a geopolitical tool. So is the price of Iron ore. I don't think this is a great "secret" to anyone.

We can also expect the OZ dollar to correct towards its long term average of 85c - although I think 65c will be more accurate when the commodity prices correct - which they will.

I know Southwest made a shrewd fuel hedge some years ago and it has become fashionable to "provide certainty to the business", but in my humble opinion, a zero hedge policy will be far better over the next decade.

A fuel surcharge if there is an "oil crisis" would be a necessary evil I suppose but as an Airlines biggest expense this could get really, really ugly. Oil was 15 dollars a barrel as recent as 1999 and that is about its cost to extract and supply - believe it or not!!!!!!

[waren9]

Do J* crew submit fatigue reports at the conclusion of a tour of duty such as an overnight SYD-PER-SYD highlighting the issue and any errors they may have made? If not, why not?

Oh, you can't have heard the one about the JQ Capt who was rostered a DRW SIN DRW back of the clock duty about 3 years ago. He got out in SIN for the most obvious reason and was afforded some fairly special treatment until his resignation a short time later.

[Keg]

Strewth. Did THAT one get mentioned at the senate inquiry?

[73to91]

Here we go again.


QF Group gets new General Counsel

The Qantas (QF) Group’s General Counsel Brett Johnson will retire in October 2012, making way for newcomer Andrew Finch in November.

QF’s chief executive officer Alan Joyce announced Mr Johnson’s departure and wished him well during the next stage of his career.

“Brett has had a major impact on the success of Qantas and his sound advice to the Board and me has been invaluable over many years.”

“Being General Counsel of this great Australian icon has been an honour and I have enjoyed working with all Qantas employees, particularly the great professionals within Qantas Legal,” Mr Johnson said.

Mr Johnson’s successor, Andrew Finch join Qantas from Allens, where he specialled in corporate law and was a partner of the company since 2002.


Mr Johnson will assist with Mr Finch's transition and will remain as a consultant with Qantas.

QF Group gets new General Counsel - People On The Move - etravelblackboard.com (http://www.etravelblackboard.com/article/133931/qf-group-gets-new-general-counsel)



Andrew Finch join Qantas from Allens, where he specialled in corporate
law
but wait, there's more, Allens: Our lawyers: Search (http://www.allens.com.au/experts/search.asp?form=index.htm&name=&position=&location=&teamid=MandA) shows that his area of expertise is, Mergers & Acquisitions, Corporate Governance and Private Equity:E

[Animalclub]

Quote:

Andrew Finch join Qantas from Allens, where he specialled in corporate
law

but wait, there's more, Allens: Our lawyers: Search shows that his area of expertise is, Mergers & Acquisitions, Corporate Governance and Private Equity

I see that Allens assisted in the attempt at the takeover of QANTAS by a private equity group!!! Could it happen again?

[Alien Role]

Is it true that a swag of Q freight people have just been given the heave-ho?

So is the cleanout continuing, such that the present "shareholders" are the one's being subjected to the cost of redundancies so that when the PE takeover occurs, the new management have a clean track? :confused::confused:

Role on....

[TIMA9X]

A lot going on this week....:hmm:

I see that Allens assisted in the attempt at the takeover of QANTAS by a private equity group!!! Could it happen again? Qantas shares soar on tie-up speculation


Qantas shares soar on tie-up speculation (http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-business/qantas-shares-soar-on-tieup-speculation-20120726-22t4o.html)

AAP
Shares in Qantas Airways have soared around seven per cent, following reports that the national carrier is set to establish an alliance with the world's largest international airline, Dubai-based Emirates.
At 1141 AEST on Thursday, Qantas shares were 6.5 cents, or 6.57 per cent, higher at $1.055, after reaching 107.5 cents in early trading on the Australian Securities Exchange.
The Australian Financial Review reported on Thursday that Qantas was working on a tie-up with Emirates that could boost Qantas's ailing international operations.
A code-sharing deal would result in Qantas flying to Dubai, and Emirates transferring passengers to destinations in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

The media report said that Qantas was set to withdraw from its last remaining port in mainland Europe, Frankfurt, and route many of its London flights through Dubai instead of Singapore.
The alliance would give Qantas the option of retiring aircraft early or pushing into Asia more aggressively.
A Qantas spokeswoman said that at any one time, Qantas was talking to a number of airlines about a number of initiatives.
"However, we don't confirm or deny who we are in discussions with," she saidand more on this,

Qantas GCs grounded | Lawyers Weekly (http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/news/qantas-gcs-grounded)

Qantas GCs grounded


Allens partner Andrew Finch (pictured) will replace Brett Johnson as the general counsel of Qantas, with the airline gagging both men from talking to the media.

On Monday (23 July), Qantas CEO Alan Joyce announced that Brett Johnson would be stepping down from his 17-year tenure as general counsel.
“Brett has had a major impact on the success of Qantas and his sound advice to the board and me has been invaluable over many years,” said Joyce in a statement.

Joyce also announced that Finch, a partner at Allens since 2002 who counts Qantas as a client, would step into Johnson’s shoes on 1 November, with Johnson staying at the airline until the end of October.

Lawyers Weekly approached Qantas to speak with Johnson, but that request was declined.

Lawyers Weekly also approached Allens to speak to Finch, but that request was also declined at the request of Qantas, who have barred him from media interviews.

Finch is officially at Allens until the end of October, but it is not known if he will remain an active member of the partnership for the duration of that period.
A Sydney-based corporate heavy-hitter, Finch is no stranger to the corridors of Qantas HQ.

He acted for Qantas with regard to the proposed $10 billion merger with British Airways in late 2008, which was abandoned.
He also acted for Hutchison Telecommunications on its 2009 merger with Vodafone and also counts Brambles Industries and Leighton Holdings as clients.

Firms’ friend
Qantas uses a number of law firms, with the airline coming under the microscope of legal bodies and regulators regularly over the last few years due to its involvement in a price-fixing cartel and its stoush with its pilots, ground staff and engineers, which came to a head in October last year when the entire fleet was grounded.

Freehills acted for Qantas in its dispute with its workers and union groups, with Melbourne-based employee relations partner Graeme Smith leading his firm’s team.

In November 2007, Qantas was fined $US61 million by the US Justice Department after it pleaded guilty to price fixing in the air freight industry. It received a $20 million penalty from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in 2008 for breaching price-fixing rules, and in November 2010 the European Commission fined the airline carrier $12.1 million.
Johnson Winter & Slattery has acted for Qantas with regard to investigations by competition regulators.

In January 2011 Qantas settled an American class action for $US26.5 million. That settlement was negotiated by Qantas' US legal advisers, Todd Miller and Kimberly Shaw, from Washington DC firm Baker & Miller.

Allen & Overy and Minter Ellison have also acted for Qantas on corporate matters.

[TIMA9X]

and this just in.... from Ben S

Qantas has nothing material to say about Emirates stories | Plane Talking (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2012/07/26/qantas-has-nothing-material-to-say-about-emirates-stories/)

Qantas has informed the ASX that it has nothing material to report concerning a possible commercial deal with Emirates.
This is its statement:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/files/2012/07/QF-response-ASX-600x227.jpg (http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalking/2012/07/26/qantas-has-nothing-material-to-say-about-emirates-stories/qf-response-asx/)
It should be noted that there is nothing wrong with the AFR story that caused the excitement, and a share price upswing this morning.
That report was qualified and detailed. And correct. The response in some media was to treat it as a done deal about to be announced.

[DrPepz]

"route many of its London flights through Dubai rather than Singapore"

Like 2 of them ?! How will BA, AF, AY JL and MU feel without the feed? If QF were to adopt a dual hub SIN DXB stategy (SIN for Asia and DXB for Europe), I'm not sure it will work out. They barely have feed into Europe anyway, and sending some flights to SIN and some flights to DXB will be problematic since besides SYD and PER, the other destinations are only served daily. And then you have Jetstar Intl CNS/DRW to SIN.

[The The]

Always look for positives. All those QF crews will now be able to attend EK interviews whilst on layovers. Allowances and accomodation care of QF!