Woo-Hoo! Another airline bases itself outside of SYD! (Merged)
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: I prefer to remain north of a direct line BNE-ADL
Age: 49
Posts: 1,286
Likes: 0
Received 33 Likes
on
10 Posts
Now after my Gee Up back to Tiger I notice it has a unique criteria to be eligible as a pilot
"The ability to swim 50m unaided"
Is this going to be part of the selection process? And importantly will hosties have to do it as well? Naked of course as your clothes may have been shredded in an accident!
"The ability to swim 50m unaided"
Is this going to be part of the selection process? And importantly will hosties have to do it as well? Naked of course as your clothes may have been shredded in an accident!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a load of fuss about not much.
I've already aired my extensive ramblings on what will happen when Tiger join the fray. In summary: Not much.
On the domestic front...
In the short-term 'honeymoon' period they'll bag some curious domestic passengers, but fares will settle into much of a muchness across Tiger, J* and VB with time and Tiger's complete lack of perks and bare-bones 'point-to-point', no frills ethic will irk people. If they run as late as they do in Asia, then they're ******. Most of my Tiger flights in Asia and from Darwin / Perth have been late. Call me unlucky.
Internationally...
Take a typical route into consideration... let's say MEL - BKK...
Jetstar: Direct.
Typical cost: around 500 dollars all-in, give or take 50.
Duration: 8-9 hours.
Tiger: Change Darwin ( and re-check all your baggage in again ).
Change Singapore ( and re-check all your baggage in again ).
Typical cost: after honeymoon? probably between 380 and 500.
Tiger's motto should be: 'less for slightly less!'
As for being good competition for the Oz market... utter bull****. It will mean all airlines will have to become leaner to survive, meaning less or cheaper crews amongst other things - and when businesses go lean, they stick with the lean mentality, regardless of future fortunes.
Eventually one of the airlines WILL go. I know which one.
I've already aired my extensive ramblings on what will happen when Tiger join the fray. In summary: Not much.
On the domestic front...
In the short-term 'honeymoon' period they'll bag some curious domestic passengers, but fares will settle into much of a muchness across Tiger, J* and VB with time and Tiger's complete lack of perks and bare-bones 'point-to-point', no frills ethic will irk people. If they run as late as they do in Asia, then they're ******. Most of my Tiger flights in Asia and from Darwin / Perth have been late. Call me unlucky.
Internationally...
Take a typical route into consideration... let's say MEL - BKK...
Jetstar: Direct.
Typical cost: around 500 dollars all-in, give or take 50.
Duration: 8-9 hours.
Tiger: Change Darwin ( and re-check all your baggage in again ).
Change Singapore ( and re-check all your baggage in again ).
Typical cost: after honeymoon? probably between 380 and 500.
Tiger's motto should be: 'less for slightly less!'
As for being good competition for the Oz market... utter bull****. It will mean all airlines will have to become leaner to survive, meaning less or cheaper crews amongst other things - and when businesses go lean, they stick with the lean mentality, regardless of future fortunes.
Eventually one of the airlines WILL go. I know which one.
Last edited by harrogate; 3rd May 2007 at 17:28.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Endor
Age: 83
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The point about Tiger is that it will increase international CAPACITY into and out of Melbourne (and elsewhere). This is vital, otherwise the "Qantas Tax" destroys economic growth prospects from overseas tourism and foriegn investment.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a theory on the direction of the domestic airline operations in Australia. As has been proven in the past, this country cannot support 4 domestic airlines. So 1 will GO! The question being which one? Usually the ones with the support and cash reserves from a parent company in the industry have survived. So out of the airlines operating here, who is not supported by such a company? This airline is going against it's business model it brought to the market in 2000, which it swore they would never do! One a/c type, keep it simple, now look what they are doing. E-jets, 777's, what the!!! Was there no lesson learn't from the 7 different a/c types AN flew? The timing couldn't be worse for this airline, reading the article in the Australian today, flight cancellations which they claim is not caused by a pilot shortage, all will be sorted in June. The word on the ground is not f
g likely. They were also only "lucky" to survive back in 2001 because AN collapsed, the HR mgr quoted, "we were 2 weeks from shutting the doors", luck will not play a part in this war but good management will prevail. Bring on the competition!
g likely. They were also only "lucky" to survive back in 2001 because AN collapsed, the HR mgr quoted, "we were 2 weeks from shutting the doors", luck will not play a part in this war but good management will prevail. Bring on the competition!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: REAL WORLD
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bigger picture
YesTam you are incorrect in your assessment as i the last year or so BA/Austrian/Gulf has pulled out of Melbourne due to low yields. lets not forget there is a lot of competition out of melbourne but at very low returns. not defending Qf but if you want to fly tiger to Sin via DRW good luck. every sector check in/out luggage, line up and so on, you get my drift. no thanks. lets also not forget AirAsia is coming to Melbourne soon 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite some negative elements there are many of us who hope to keep an Australian aviation maintenance industry competative.
With a bit of luck and some more runs on the board you will no doubt bring the red jet checks back from Christchurch.
Go get em....................
With a bit of luck and some more runs on the board you will no doubt bring the red jet checks back from Christchurch.
Go get em....................
we'll be in there swinging once we get the acquisitiopn completed and bedded down. Maybe there's a sensible way to work together with ANZES. Who knows, but let's be absolutely clear - any (legal) deal we can do to bring commercially attractive work to Tullamarine or our other sites will be considered.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I have a theory on the direction of the domestic airline operations in Australia. As has been proven in the past, this country cannot support 4 domestic airlines. So 1 will GO! The question being which one? Usually the ones with the support and cash reserves from a parent company in the industry have survived. So out of the airlines operating here, who is not supported by such a company? This airline is going against it's business model it brought to the market in 2000, which it swore they would never do! One a/c type, keep it simple, now look what they are doing. E-jets, 777's, what the!!! Was there no lesson learn't from the 7 different a/c types AN flew? The timing couldn't be worse for this airline, reading the article in the Australian today, flight cancellations which they claim is not caused by a pilot shortage, all will be sorted in June. The word on the ground is not f g likely. They were also only "lucky" to survive back in 2001 because AN collapsed, the HR mgr quoted, "we were 2 weeks from shutting the doors", luck will not play a part in this war but good management will prevail. Bring on the competition!"
I agree with you that one may well go, but it's definitely not going to be VB.
VB is not going against its business model at all - their model has evolved, like every good model should. It's a relatively sophisticated progression from the 'classic' lo-co model and is, frankly, far better for having evolved.
VB has shown that its model is reactive. You don't just veer from what's seemingly your business plan and buy different types of planes on a large scale as VB have done as part of some kind of whim. Give them some credit, like them or not. And if you're privvy to the intricacies of their business model, you're obviously in a position of privilege, although I sense you're not and you're just speculating like the rest of us.
What you've seen them do in the past is only part of their business model, which I have no doubt whatsoever has reacted somewhat to recent developments in the market.
I've said before, Tiger just isn't bringing enough to the party. The Australian market has become accustomed to lo-co fares with a bevvy of perks.
Tiger's slightly lower fares (which is EXACTLY what they will be, after the obvious honeymoon period) for considerably less value in terms of what else they offer, just isn't good enough.
Much like you're not privvy to the inner workings of the VB business, nor am I to the Tiger plan. However, if Tiger do what they're doing elsewhere, which is what they've strongly hinted at ( with Davis shouting about the 'robust, proven model' they'll be bringing to Australia ), then they're not bringing enough.
Conversely, if they're planning on 'evolving' and looking more towards a proven VB style model, then they're going to be on more of a level playing field in terms of model, but at a considerable disadvantage in terms of market knowledge, size/capacity, and general reach. Slightly lower fares alone won't carry them through without LOTS of cash being poured in over a very long period, as existing airlines put on the inevitible squeeze, a squeeze that will last as long as it takes.
I really can't be arsed going into depth again, but for anyone who's interested in another totally impartial man's thoughts on the issue, then feel free to look at my earlier post and comment/abuse as appropriate.
It's good to talk.
I agree with you that one may well go, but it's definitely not going to be VB.
VB is not going against its business model at all - their model has evolved, like every good model should. It's a relatively sophisticated progression from the 'classic' lo-co model and is, frankly, far better for having evolved.
VB has shown that its model is reactive. You don't just veer from what's seemingly your business plan and buy different types of planes on a large scale as VB have done as part of some kind of whim. Give them some credit, like them or not. And if you're privvy to the intricacies of their business model, you're obviously in a position of privilege, although I sense you're not and you're just speculating like the rest of us.
What you've seen them do in the past is only part of their business model, which I have no doubt whatsoever has reacted somewhat to recent developments in the market.
I've said before, Tiger just isn't bringing enough to the party. The Australian market has become accustomed to lo-co fares with a bevvy of perks.
Tiger's slightly lower fares (which is EXACTLY what they will be, after the obvious honeymoon period) for considerably less value in terms of what else they offer, just isn't good enough.
Much like you're not privvy to the inner workings of the VB business, nor am I to the Tiger plan. However, if Tiger do what they're doing elsewhere, which is what they've strongly hinted at ( with Davis shouting about the 'robust, proven model' they'll be bringing to Australia ), then they're not bringing enough.
Conversely, if they're planning on 'evolving' and looking more towards a proven VB style model, then they're going to be on more of a level playing field in terms of model, but at a considerable disadvantage in terms of market knowledge, size/capacity, and general reach. Slightly lower fares alone won't carry them through without LOTS of cash being poured in over a very long period, as existing airlines put on the inevitible squeeze, a squeeze that will last as long as it takes.
I really can't be arsed going into depth again, but for anyone who's interested in another totally impartial man's thoughts on the issue, then feel free to look at my earlier post and comment/abuse as appropriate.
It's good to talk.
Last edited by harrogate; 4th May 2007 at 15:13.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: The Dog House
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tiger Interviews?
Anyone know what stage of the pilot selection process Tiger management have reached?
Anyone completed an interview or had one booked?
Probably too busy to scratch....
Anyone completed an interview or had one booked?
Probably too busy to scratch....
Inthemarket. You could have also referred to the verbal agreement by Branson to sell Vigin Blue to the Air New Zealand - Ansett Group.
Branson failed to honour the agreement after pressure from Godfrey.
Branson failed to honour the agreement after pressure from Godfrey.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Leeds
Posts: 702
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More fool the Air New Zealand group, then.
If Inthemarket is talking about good management winning the day, then those companies who are naive enough to regard verbal agreements as being a satisfactory and effective way of conducting high-end business deals will surely be amongst the first to fall by the wayside.
That example merely shows the utter incompetence, or at best the short-sighted complacency of the Air New Zealand management. It also shows that Godfrey knows what he's doing, surely? He's the one running the VB show, afterall.
There's very little room for honour in any business, let alone the highly competitive cut-throat Australian airline market.
If Inthemarket is talking about good management winning the day, then those companies who are naive enough to regard verbal agreements as being a satisfactory and effective way of conducting high-end business deals will surely be amongst the first to fall by the wayside.
That example merely shows the utter incompetence, or at best the short-sighted complacency of the Air New Zealand management. It also shows that Godfrey knows what he's doing, surely? He's the one running the VB show, afterall.
There's very little room for honour in any business, let alone the highly competitive cut-throat Australian airline market.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can somebody explain to me how Jetstar makes any money on the DRW - SIN route? Are all passengers connecting from Cairns?
The return fare with Jetstar is nearlly $900 whereas Tiger is about $350 (cheaper than flying to Brisbane).
Do they not even try to compete?
Qantas mainline used to be about $1050 return to SIN, even that was too much. I would not pay $450 for a one-way Jetstar flight, especially Jetstar Asia.
I guess the only other way they get business is on the QF codeshare connecting to LHR.
The return fare with Jetstar is nearlly $900 whereas Tiger is about $350 (cheaper than flying to Brisbane).
Do they not even try to compete?
Qantas mainline used to be about $1050 return to SIN, even that was too much. I would not pay $450 for a one-way Jetstar flight, especially Jetstar Asia.
I guess the only other way they get business is on the QF codeshare connecting to LHR.
