News blamed for Ansett collapse
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
1989.........................(or was it Air Sheep and 2 me in TNO's case?)
Enough to drive you to drink
...bourbon & Coke, thanks!
So TNO do you think that Air New Zealand really knew how serious Ansett's financial problems were, but were gambling on SQ wanting to get in badly enough, that they (Air NZ) went ahead and bought in anyway???
In hindsight - and being a dyed-in-the -wool conspiracy theorist
- and with Ms Margaret Jackson's (of QF) latest comments (""We have been very disappointed that we have been unable to form an alliance with Air New Zealand") , AND with the Howard Liberal Government (John Anderson's party) in power stated preference for Air NZ to have AN....do you believe that it could have been an attempt to torpedo Air New Zealand
thereby giving QANTAS a boost in the trans-Tasman traffic?
Enough to drive you to drink
...bourbon & Coke, thanks!So TNO do you think that Air New Zealand really knew how serious Ansett's financial problems were, but were gambling on SQ wanting to get in badly enough, that they (Air NZ) went ahead and bought in anyway???
In hindsight - and being a dyed-in-the -wool conspiracy theorist
- and with Ms Margaret Jackson's (of QF) latest comments (""We have been very disappointed that we have been unable to form an alliance with Air New Zealand") , AND with the Howard Liberal Government (John Anderson's party) in power stated preference for Air NZ to have AN....do you believe that it could have been an attempt to torpedo Air New Zealand thereby giving QANTAS a boost in the trans-Tasman traffic?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe, Kap, that AirNZ knew exactly what they were getting themselves into, and that they were relying on the NZ government to bail them out if it all went pear-shaped. If they were NOT aware, then they have only themselves to blame for the trouble they encountered and it's then even MORE of a pity that they had to bring us down by their unmitigated greed.
I reiterate - I am convinced they wanted SQ's investment funds for their own expansion plans, while simultaneously frustrating SQ's ambitions for AN acquisition and all that it promised for them in terms of access to OZ markets. I'm probably a conspiracy theorist, like yourself, but with different theories.
Having observed QF's shenanigans in the past, I would put NOTHING past the devious minds of its management, of whichever sex, and would trust them to have only their own, personal, futures and bonuses at the forefront of their minds. If that meant shafting AirNZ, or any other entity, in the furtherance of their aims, then YES, I would believe the possibility.
Kind regards,
TheNightOwl.
I reiterate - I am convinced they wanted SQ's investment funds for their own expansion plans, while simultaneously frustrating SQ's ambitions for AN acquisition and all that it promised for them in terms of access to OZ markets. I'm probably a conspiracy theorist, like yourself, but with different theories.
Having observed QF's shenanigans in the past, I would put NOTHING past the devious minds of its management, of whichever sex, and would trust them to have only their own, personal, futures and bonuses at the forefront of their minds. If that meant shafting AirNZ, or any other entity, in the furtherance of their aims, then YES, I would believe the possibility.
Kind regards,
TheNightOwl.
One of the saddest things about AN's demise is that ANZ plundered its rotables by the pallet load and anything else that they could take of value.
The receivers, being accountants, knew SFA about the value of aircraft spares.
The receivers, being accountants, knew SFA about the value of aircraft spares.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: PERTH
Age: 77
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How sad that our govt of the time allowed TL to have such a huge gamble with ANSETT,Most of us in the industry know the reasons but to my mind it was madness to allow such a small airline as TL take out a major Australian carrier.After my time with AN I now gain from the cheap airfares wich prevail at the moment as they help fill my tourist park but I can see that Virgin is headed for hard times as they compete with Howard and Andersons prefererd airline.My view is that any threat to QF will be managed by Andersons team which seems insane to me because no airline did such Australia wide coverage as Ansett (we all know where he lives) Good luck Virgin as our destinies are tied together but I think your opportunities are not of your making.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Asia
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hate to ruin a good stoush so will go no further back in time than the late 90's.
Personally, I think our friend the Night Owl gives conspiratorial credit where it is not totally due.
Indeed Singapore plays a central role in this pantomine but for somewhat different reasons. By 2000 it had long become the HQ of one Brierley Investments, the major shareholder in AirNZ and therefore indirectly a major figure in the 50% of Ansett not owned by News Corp.
Air NZ had pre-emptive rights on the balance 50% of Ansett should it come up for sale.
News Corp wanted and needed to exit. They found a buyer in SQ and spent a lot of time stitching together a deal for AUD 500m that would ensure the recapitalisation and fleet renewal of Ansett and provide a footprint for the Star Alliance in Oceania.
Whilst I agree that AirNZ tried to blindside and outsmart SQ, this was only cobbled together in response to immense pressure from Selwyn Cushing and his fellow travellers who shared the same conflict of interest...namely being directors of both Brierley and AirNZ.
Air NZ,given the price they paid for the first 50% of Ansett, and through them Brierley, would have to make substantial write-downs on their investments (AirNZ in Ansett and Brierley in AirNZ) if the direct deal between Ansett and SQ went through.
Selwyn Cushing used his immense influence (and Brierley voting block) as Chairman of AirNZ to force AirNZ to bet the whole company.
Sure they banked on the NZ Govt to come to their rescue, and there was a certain amount of naive arrogance in thinking that SQ would pour good money after bad, but that all came after Selwyn Cushing (as Chairman of AirNZ and Brierley) decided to put HIS national carrier at risk to protect Brierley Investments balance sheet (which could ill afford to take a write down of that magnitude).
In my view the Hall of Shame is missing one potrait...and one that is very much alive and indeed very wealthy at the expense of
many.
Well he may be knighted but I suggest he be better stuffed and mounted in the above Hall of Shame.
Personally, I think our friend the Night Owl gives conspiratorial credit where it is not totally due.
Indeed Singapore plays a central role in this pantomine but for somewhat different reasons. By 2000 it had long become the HQ of one Brierley Investments, the major shareholder in AirNZ and therefore indirectly a major figure in the 50% of Ansett not owned by News Corp.
Air NZ had pre-emptive rights on the balance 50% of Ansett should it come up for sale.
News Corp wanted and needed to exit. They found a buyer in SQ and spent a lot of time stitching together a deal for AUD 500m that would ensure the recapitalisation and fleet renewal of Ansett and provide a footprint for the Star Alliance in Oceania.
Whilst I agree that AirNZ tried to blindside and outsmart SQ, this was only cobbled together in response to immense pressure from Selwyn Cushing and his fellow travellers who shared the same conflict of interest...namely being directors of both Brierley and AirNZ.
Air NZ,given the price they paid for the first 50% of Ansett, and through them Brierley, would have to make substantial write-downs on their investments (AirNZ in Ansett and Brierley in AirNZ) if the direct deal between Ansett and SQ went through.
Selwyn Cushing used his immense influence (and Brierley voting block) as Chairman of AirNZ to force AirNZ to bet the whole company.
Sure they banked on the NZ Govt to come to their rescue, and there was a certain amount of naive arrogance in thinking that SQ would pour good money after bad, but that all came after Selwyn Cushing (as Chairman of AirNZ and Brierley) decided to put HIS national carrier at risk to protect Brierley Investments balance sheet (which could ill afford to take a write down of that magnitude).
In my view the Hall of Shame is missing one potrait...and one that is very much alive and indeed very wealthy at the expense of
many.
Well he may be knighted but I suggest he be better stuffed and mounted in the above Hall of Shame.
One of the reasons Ansett went was because, contrary to what you may think, the Government does pick winners and losers and it does have preferred visions of various industries structures and futures.
For example, Qantas is a Sydney Icon. Nothing will EVER be allowed to happen to it while the NSW Labor AND Liberal branches have the power in Canberra.
Thats why the Federal Government played with a dead bat during Compass I and II and sat back and watched while Virgin fouht with the Sydney Airport Corporation.
Ansett was doomed from about 1986 onwards by the prevailing wisdom that the Country could only afford one international flag carrier and that Qantas was it. Thats why the Fed's just sit back and say "its just nature taking its course" sometimes and yet leap to a company's defence at other times (think Manildra and gasohol).
Same mindset completed the demise of the old Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation (although it was just about ossified already).
Same mindset still exists and will shortly do in Tenix's Williamstown dockyards - they will never build another ship, no matter what. The votes are needed in Adelaide.
For example, Qantas is a Sydney Icon. Nothing will EVER be allowed to happen to it while the NSW Labor AND Liberal branches have the power in Canberra.
Thats why the Federal Government played with a dead bat during Compass I and II and sat back and watched while Virgin fouht with the Sydney Airport Corporation.
Ansett was doomed from about 1986 onwards by the prevailing wisdom that the Country could only afford one international flag carrier and that Qantas was it. Thats why the Fed's just sit back and say "its just nature taking its course" sometimes and yet leap to a company's defence at other times (think Manildra and gasohol).
Same mindset completed the demise of the old Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation (although it was just about ossified already).
Same mindset still exists and will shortly do in Tenix's Williamstown dockyards - they will never build another ship, no matter what. The votes are needed in Adelaide.
Sunfish - you have a very jaundiced view. The demise of AN had nothing to do with International Ops and late nineties politicians had nothing to do with the terminal financial situation of AN. The only political interference happened during the domestic pilots dispute when the then PM assisted his good mate and from what I have heard he also had a hand in the demise of Compass Mark 1. The current government is a different brand and I am convinced that they had no role in AN's demise apart from allowing market forces to play their part.
Goeing Boeing, you are absolutely right when you said that the government had no role in AN's demise. They just stood back and watched nature take its course.
Contrast that behaviour with their efforts to keep Mitsubishi afloat in Adelaide, and that was for a lousy 3000 jobs compared to 10000+ in AN!!!! There are plenty of other examples where Government has bailed out industry for all sorts of reasons.
My point is that if Qantas was in AN's situation any government would come running with its chequebook.
I got the drift way back in the days of Compass One when as a consultant, I asked the ACCC what they would do if an accusation of predatory pricing was made against Qantas by Compass.
The answer was that it might take them a month to decide to investigate and about six months to reach some determination. As anyone who has been involved with an airline knows, the huge cash flows involved in this behaviour would easily bankrupt a fledgling airline in six weeks let alone six months.
There are **** all people who know anything about airline costing and pricing in this country and none of them work for government. Qantas gets what it wants from the Government and the rest get ****all.
Contrast that behaviour with their efforts to keep Mitsubishi afloat in Adelaide, and that was for a lousy 3000 jobs compared to 10000+ in AN!!!! There are plenty of other examples where Government has bailed out industry for all sorts of reasons.
My point is that if Qantas was in AN's situation any government would come running with its chequebook.
I got the drift way back in the days of Compass One when as a consultant, I asked the ACCC what they would do if an accusation of predatory pricing was made against Qantas by Compass.
The answer was that it might take them a month to decide to investigate and about six months to reach some determination. As anyone who has been involved with an airline knows, the huge cash flows involved in this behaviour would easily bankrupt a fledgling airline in six weeks let alone six months.
There are **** all people who know anything about airline costing and pricing in this country and none of them work for government. Qantas gets what it wants from the Government and the rest get ****all.
Sunfish
Qantas was not involved in anything to do with Compass Mark 1 as at that time they were purely an international airline - they weren't allowed to fly domestically until they purchased Australian (TN) Airlines late in 1992 (approx 10 months after Abeles had arranged for his mate the PM to pull Compass's AOC.
Bushy
In the world of business, airlines are considered very poor return on the sums invested. Qantas has many billions invested in equipment and infrastructure and its recently reported "record" profit did not impress serious investors as in the last 3 years QF has been spending billions in an expansion program and with this increased capital equipment they had expectations of a much larger profit. a good comparison is QF made under $700million profit from just under $12 billion in revenue - Commonwealth bank made $4 billion profit from the same revenue. The only way to truly compare the performance of airlines based in Australia is to look at profit versus capital invested - it might turn out that an operator such as Air North gets much better returns.
Qantas was not involved in anything to do with Compass Mark 1 as at that time they were purely an international airline - they weren't allowed to fly domestically until they purchased Australian (TN) Airlines late in 1992 (approx 10 months after Abeles had arranged for his mate the PM to pull Compass's AOC.
Bushy
In the world of business, airlines are considered very poor return on the sums invested. Qantas has many billions invested in equipment and infrastructure and its recently reported "record" profit did not impress serious investors as in the last 3 years QF has been spending billions in an expansion program and with this increased capital equipment they had expectations of a much larger profit. a good comparison is QF made under $700million profit from just under $12 billion in revenue - Commonwealth bank made $4 billion profit from the same revenue. The only way to truly compare the performance of airlines based in Australia is to look at profit versus capital invested - it might turn out that an operator such as Air North gets much better returns.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I appreciate that this may be a little off topic, but I find Kaptin Ms revelation back on page 5 quite startling.
He learnt to control his physical violence back in 1973??? I don't think sooooo. The reason you were rejected by AN when you attempted to acquire scabdon of the first order in Sept 89 was for your role in a melee in Brisbane terminal in the early stages of the dispute so that is quite clearly not accurate.
But,if you've learnt to control your physical violence, and we won't argue about the date, and you no longer call people "scabs", we woul dhave to assume that you no longer abuse people. Correct?
OK, now we 've established that I assume that there will be many who will be receiving apologies for your character assassinations on these forums. Attacks with absolutely no foundation in truth, and some perpetrated by your 'mates' because your identity was too well known.
We will relaxwith a gin and tonic, and peruse the pages here as we wait for those apologies I love witnessing humility.
He learnt to control his physical violence back in 1973??? I don't think sooooo. The reason you were rejected by AN when you attempted to acquire scabdon of the first order in Sept 89 was for your role in a melee in Brisbane terminal in the early stages of the dispute so that is quite clearly not accurate.
But,if you've learnt to control your physical violence, and we won't argue about the date, and you no longer call people "scabs", we woul dhave to assume that you no longer abuse people. Correct?
OK, now we 've established that I assume that there will be many who will be receiving apologies for your character assassinations on these forums. Attacks with absolutely no foundation in truth, and some perpetrated by your 'mates' because your identity was too well known.
We will relaxwith a gin and tonic, and peruse the pages here as we wait for those apologies I love witnessing humility.
Last edited by ys120fz; 1st Sep 2004 at 06:40.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
"We will relaxwith a gin and tonic, and peruse the pages here as we wait for those apologies I love witnessing humility."
You'd better order several tanker loads of the stuff then - and then some more
Outright lies like that one only add further proof that the characters of you and your's helped Ansett's slide down the plughole accelerate, once you got inside - like worms inside an apple.
Abeles got what he deserved with you lot
Cheers!
You'd better order several tanker loads of the stuff then - and then some more
..your role in a melee in Brisbane terminal
Abeles got what he deserved with you lot
Cheers!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When you know the full story about Kap's "return", please post again, instead of the half truths and slander.
When one weighs ALL facts about "that incident" involving Kap (not the supposed melee), I still FIRMLY believe it took more conviction and moral fortitude than being a bloody scab! He KNEW that there would be absolutely positively no chance EVER of returning to AN after he walked away (no, he was NOT rejected by AN as being too "unstable" - that has been confirmed by several people that leaked info out from crewing, admin, and even FA's that were there).
Again, we shall all beg to differ no doubt, and some will try to paint with the same tarry brush.
Don't bother with the feathers after the tarring - only COWARDS get feathers. Don't try to bring others down to that LOWEST of levels.
Whilst I can NEVER condone that Kap ALMOST did (a thought I never had), I fully recognise the strength needed to walk away. For that, I admire the man!
When one weighs ALL facts about "that incident" involving Kap (not the supposed melee), I still FIRMLY believe it took more conviction and moral fortitude than being a bloody scab! He KNEW that there would be absolutely positively no chance EVER of returning to AN after he walked away (no, he was NOT rejected by AN as being too "unstable" - that has been confirmed by several people that leaked info out from crewing, admin, and even FA's that were there).
Again, we shall all beg to differ no doubt, and some will try to paint with the same tarry brush.
Don't bother with the feathers after the tarring - only COWARDS get feathers. Don't try to bring others down to that LOWEST of levels.
Whilst I can NEVER condone that Kap ALMOST did (a thought I never had), I fully recognise the strength needed to walk away. For that, I admire the man!