SIA misses out on SY-LA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Footlights College, Oxbridge
Age: 47
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SIA misses out on SY-LA
Sad luck, Sunfish!!!
AUSTRALIA'S new aviation policy is set to reject Singapore Airlines' bid to fly Qantas's most lucrative route, from Sydney to Los Angeles.
The policy, which is expected to be considered by federal cabinet tomorrow, could deeply divide ministers and backbenchers.
Although Singapore Airlines is poised to miss out on the Sydney to Los Angeles route, Qantas is expected to face more competition from other airlines, including budget carrier Virgin Blue.
This could lead to lower prices for air travellers on popular domestic routes and possibly some international ones.
One option being considered is to relax the rules limiting foreign ownership in the carrier to 49 per cent to allow a merger with another airline.
The Prime Minister, John Howard, believes Qantas and Singapore Airlines should one day merge into a giant new airline.
The Government is divided over the policy. A number of backbenchers are worried about the impact on Qantas of allowing Singapore Airlines to fly between Sydney and Los Angeles.
Government backbenchers Bruce Baird and Warren Entsch have lobbied Mr Howard on aviation policy changes, arguing that jobs at Qantas as well as routes in rural areas would be lost if the carrier was put under intense competitive pressure.
Backbenchers also argue that Qantas is not competing on a level playing field because Singapore Airlines enjoys lower tax rates than Qantas.
But other Coalition backbenchers, including West Australians Geoff Prosser and Michael Keenan, have pushed for Qantas to face greater competition on the Sydney to Los Angeles route as well as within Australia, arguing that it would lower air fares for Australians.
Mr Baird has argued that many of Qantas's 38,000 jobs could move to Singapore if the island's airline was allowed to operate the Australia-US west coast route.
But the Minister for Small Business and Tourism, Fran Bailey, believes Australian tourism would be boosted if there were more airlines flying between Australia and the US
All of a sudden the gov't is worried about jobs in aviation??? WTF???
What about Ansett?
What about LAMEs' work being farmed off to the Chinese?
And as if they really care if the ugg-boot crowd can get a cheaper air-fare. But then as if I do either.....
AUSTRALIA'S new aviation policy is set to reject Singapore Airlines' bid to fly Qantas's most lucrative route, from Sydney to Los Angeles.
The policy, which is expected to be considered by federal cabinet tomorrow, could deeply divide ministers and backbenchers.
Although Singapore Airlines is poised to miss out on the Sydney to Los Angeles route, Qantas is expected to face more competition from other airlines, including budget carrier Virgin Blue.
This could lead to lower prices for air travellers on popular domestic routes and possibly some international ones.
One option being considered is to relax the rules limiting foreign ownership in the carrier to 49 per cent to allow a merger with another airline.
The Prime Minister, John Howard, believes Qantas and Singapore Airlines should one day merge into a giant new airline.
The Government is divided over the policy. A number of backbenchers are worried about the impact on Qantas of allowing Singapore Airlines to fly between Sydney and Los Angeles.
Government backbenchers Bruce Baird and Warren Entsch have lobbied Mr Howard on aviation policy changes, arguing that jobs at Qantas as well as routes in rural areas would be lost if the carrier was put under intense competitive pressure.
Backbenchers also argue that Qantas is not competing on a level playing field because Singapore Airlines enjoys lower tax rates than Qantas.
But other Coalition backbenchers, including West Australians Geoff Prosser and Michael Keenan, have pushed for Qantas to face greater competition on the Sydney to Los Angeles route as well as within Australia, arguing that it would lower air fares for Australians.
Mr Baird has argued that many of Qantas's 38,000 jobs could move to Singapore if the island's airline was allowed to operate the Australia-US west coast route.
But the Minister for Small Business and Tourism, Fran Bailey, believes Australian tourism would be boosted if there were more airlines flying between Australia and the US
All of a sudden the gov't is worried about jobs in aviation??? WTF???
What about Ansett?
What about LAMEs' work being farmed off to the Chinese?
And as if they really care if the ugg-boot crowd can get a cheaper air-fare. But then as if I do either.....
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Dubai ex Brissie
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many of our devoted politicians own Qantas shares?
What am I saying - I'm sure they are putting the best interests of the country and their constituents ahead of their own.
What am I saying - I'm sure they are putting the best interests of the country and their constituents ahead of their own.
If I was a politician, there would be only two issues:
It's over to you, QANTAS.
- If QANTAS is to be treated as just another commercial entity then competition should be opened up ... thus potentially reducing fares and improving service. If the airline's profits drop, or it goes bust ... who cares ... there's plenty of other airlines to come in and fill the void.
- However, if we are to treat QANTAS as THE Australian Airline/THE Australian Icon/THE Australian company, then we need to ensure that its competition is reduced and its profits maximised. To be afforded this treatment/protection the Airline has certain responsibilities ... Australian ownership, Australian Staff, Australian maintenance.
It's over to you, QANTAS.
Evertonian
So, whilst I know they'll deny it, hanging Van Nguyen may have tipped the balance against SQ. Perhaps sending more QF jobs offshore will tip it back again...
Patience Grasshopper....
Patience Grasshopper....
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
do they care
do you really think the goverment cares if the trade between lax and syd is opened up to sia lets just refresh ansett went out.the goverment loved virgin coming in sweetheart deals and all,werent they an aussie icon too,also the polies couldnt give a stuff more tourists more tax dollars and more jobs on tne bad side 3000 job cuts but millions more $ per year.the punters dont care they love the no frills no class sit next to a redneck for 49 dollar fares just ask the once beautful hamilton island jetset crowd there cheering (not) about yobbos in thongs i myself hate the box lunch and what australian airline makes you buy piss before four oclock sacrilage i say ,how many of the goverment never workrd a day in there life baclbenchs fly no frills really we fund there j class trips so do they care? no and no and let me think no
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Usually Oz
Posts: 732
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's about time a few folks who post here get out and have a good look at the rest of the World!
The ONLY [that's a word meaning uniquely singular] country in the World I can think of in my 38th year of international flying that would even dream of giving away the traffic rights of its own carriers is; you guessed it - AUSTRALIA!
We are blessed with a Government that at every chance [bar one] has grasped the nettle to go along with opening up trade to the World, no matter what the cost to our Industry. Be it GATT or whatever, we've been in there first to "drop our daks in Pitt St" for the World to have a go!
Try to do what SIA are pulling anywhere else and see how you get on? Not past the first post. Note also that I make the point here about "Australian carriers". Watch what happens if Qantas [for one] loses its 51% Ozzie ownership; bilaterals will fall like a pack of cards. Whether or not the World should have bilaterals in this day & age is another matter, but if that's the playing field, let's keep it level.
As to the export of Oz jobs to overseas to keep QF going [??
], that's a side issue of no mean importance and not the subject of this rant. My point is that throwing away your traffic rights to third parties is plain stupid!
Enough for one day.
G'day
The ONLY [that's a word meaning uniquely singular] country in the World I can think of in my 38th year of international flying that would even dream of giving away the traffic rights of its own carriers is; you guessed it - AUSTRALIA!
We are blessed with a Government that at every chance [bar one] has grasped the nettle to go along with opening up trade to the World, no matter what the cost to our Industry. Be it GATT or whatever, we've been in there first to "drop our daks in Pitt St" for the World to have a go!
Try to do what SIA are pulling anywhere else and see how you get on? Not past the first post. Note also that I make the point here about "Australian carriers". Watch what happens if Qantas [for one] loses its 51% Ozzie ownership; bilaterals will fall like a pack of cards. Whether or not the World should have bilaterals in this day & age is another matter, but if that's the playing field, let's keep it level.
As to the export of Oz jobs to overseas to keep QF going [??
], that's a side issue of no mean importance and not the subject of this rant. My point is that throwing away your traffic rights to third parties is plain stupid! Enough for one day.
G'day
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 99
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You people don't realise that this is bad news for Australia. We have to look at economic rationalistaion and globalisation. There are no borders these days and the sooner you lot recognise this, the better off the Australian economy will be. SIA would have created many more jobs in Australia, even at the expense of Qantas....
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 99
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The world economy is all about supply and demand these days. Everybody has to learn to adjust, it's a fact of life. By creating all of the extra jobs that SIA could have done, would have done wonders for the economy. It's a shame the government has taken this decision as I have just signed up in SIA's frequent flyer program and was looking forward to buying cheaper tickets with them as I've always wanted to go to Disneyland.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I am no supporter of Qantas, the alternative proposed by SIA and the idiot total free market gurus, just defies belief. Trade albeit in goods or services should be bilateral not unilateral. SIA and the government are a bunch of wingers, they sprout open skies yet QF cannot fly through Singapore to most European destinations. There is very little, or no benefit to Australia in granting open skies to SIA, unless QF or any other Australian operator is offered open skies through Singapore to European destinations, which Singapore cannot offer !
Giving open skies to the likes of SIA is just outsourcing the last vestiges of the once proud Australian industry to Singapore. The only thing Singapore outsources is rational and free thinking for its people.
Canberra now should get on with encouraging competition from the likes of VB or any other Oz carrier that may be willing to give it a go and or North American carriers, not SIA.
Giving open skies to the likes of SIA is just outsourcing the last vestiges of the once proud Australian industry to Singapore. The only thing Singapore outsources is rational and free thinking for its people.
Canberra now should get on with encouraging competition from the likes of VB or any other Oz carrier that may be willing to give it a go and or North American carriers, not SIA.
Last edited by Skinny Dog; 21st Feb 2006 at 10:18.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gee im so good
Originally Posted by The_Cutest_of_Borg
A fatted calf to the man who can read aloud that last post without passing out from lack of oxygen!
And PPRuNe isn't about the language you post!
You have been warned!!! No further warnings!!
Woomera
Last edited by Woomera; 22nd Feb 2006 at 09:52.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[quote=chemical alli]maybe ill order the wrong nut or bolt next time i fix your big plane
Alli,
I'm more than a little concerned that as you are obviously sipping from those chemical containers in your stores, you have probably already ordered the wrong nut or bolt or even many of them. Have you considered taking up another career? Journalism perhaps.
Alli,
I'm more than a little concerned that as you are obviously sipping from those chemical containers in your stores, you have probably already ordered the wrong nut or bolt or even many of them. Have you considered taking up another career? Journalism perhaps.
methyl ethyl ketone rocks
Happy happy, joy joy. Australia loses again. I knew it was never going to happen because QF is run by for the benefit of the Sydney push, all of whom are one big corrupt happy family.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 99
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sooner Qantas gets away from its Sydney roots the better for this nation as a whole. It also means that I may have a better chance of using my frequent flyer points and getting cheaper airfares.
Last edited by Woomera; 23rd Feb 2006 at 12:06.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scumfish has just established that he/she does not live in Sydney and does not really care for Australian jobs but is only interested in his frequent flyer points with SIA.
I wonder if the government were to allow a foreign company which has various tax and other financial advantages to enter Australia and compete with his business ,then would scumfish be as happy with that arrangement.
Of course he would …..unfair competition is fine because we are one big happy world without borders….that is unless an Australian company wants to trade or do business overseas and is a threat to that country and their business and population.
Wake up scumfish,the only government that thinks the world is all rosy and fair is the Australian government,that is why we export technology that we have developed to China and other parts of the world because the only plans our egotistical politicians have is to be players on the world stage.
The beauty of this forum is that we are able and indeed allowed to discuss this very thing but if we were in Singapore you would find out what their concept of free press and other individual freedoms are like.
I wonder if the government were to allow a foreign company which has various tax and other financial advantages to enter Australia and compete with his business ,then would scumfish be as happy with that arrangement.
Of course he would …..unfair competition is fine because we are one big happy world without borders….that is unless an Australian company wants to trade or do business overseas and is a threat to that country and their business and population.
Wake up scumfish,the only government that thinks the world is all rosy and fair is the Australian government,that is why we export technology that we have developed to China and other parts of the world because the only plans our egotistical politicians have is to be players on the world stage.
The beauty of this forum is that we are able and indeed allowed to discuss this very thing but if we were in Singapore you would find out what their concept of free press and other individual freedoms are like.
The argument about free trade is long finished and the results are well and truly on the side of the free traders. All Australians will suffer as a result of this decision because experience has conclusively shown that protection costs more jobs than it protects.
Has it crossed anyone's mind that an increase in passenger numbers will require more seats and hence more flights - that means more crew, more aircraft and more maintenance jobs. It would even mean that SIA would have to hire more pilots - creating more jobs. Qantas would also pick up additional pax - meaning more flights, more crew etc.etc., and might actually maintain profitability.
Then of course those increased passenger numbers would include a signifigant number of inbound US Tourists, which would creat demand for domestic QF flights, more aircraft, more crew etc. etc.
It's not theory anymore guys. Were any of you out of short pants when industry protection started getting phased out? All the pundits said the sky would fall in. It didn't. Look at the economy today.
The longer QF puts off taking the tough decisions about supporting an open skies policy, the harder its going to fall when the walls come tumbling down.
Has it crossed anyone's mind that an increase in passenger numbers will require more seats and hence more flights - that means more crew, more aircraft and more maintenance jobs. It would even mean that SIA would have to hire more pilots - creating more jobs. Qantas would also pick up additional pax - meaning more flights, more crew etc.etc., and might actually maintain profitability.
Then of course those increased passenger numbers would include a signifigant number of inbound US Tourists, which would creat demand for domestic QF flights, more aircraft, more crew etc. etc.
It's not theory anymore guys. Were any of you out of short pants when industry protection started getting phased out? All the pundits said the sky would fall in. It didn't. Look at the economy today.
The longer QF puts off taking the tough decisions about supporting an open skies policy, the harder its going to fall when the walls come tumbling down.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nah, I think some things are just too Australian to give up! Screw Singapore, they can go somewhere out of Asia to fly to/from. Leave Australian premium routes to Australian based companies.
Last edited by Chris Higgins; 22nd Feb 2006 at 03:14.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps we could re-phrase the thread Virgin Gains ?
As mentioned on another thread, now that SIA has been locked out, Virgin will accelerate its plans to fly the US routes. So this could create a multitude of new opportunities from top to bottom.
Bring it on.
As mentioned on another thread, now that SIA has been locked out, Virgin will accelerate its plans to fly the US routes. So this could create a multitude of new opportunities from top to bottom.
Bring it on.