Jackson at it again
Registered User **
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jackson at it again
QANTAS chairman Margaret Jackson predicts that the current "purple patch" in the world aviation industry could hit "turbulence" in a year or two.
Speaking on the eve of her retirement after 15 years on the Qantas board, the last eight as chairman, Ms Jackson said her successor, Leigh Clifford, would probably have a year or two before he had to deal with "some speed bumps" in the industry.
She said the arrival of new-generation aircraft such as the Airbus A380 and the Boeing Dreamliners would add significant capacity to the world airline industry over the next few years -- changing the profitability of the industry.
Ms Jackson also expressed her concerns at the potential impact of federal Labor's industrial relations policy on Qantas, warning that it could reduce flexibility in the airline's 34,000-strong workforce.
In an interview in her office in Melbourne this week, she said Qantas had made use of the industrial relations changes brought in under the Howard Government.
She warned that rolling these changes back could have an impact on the airline's staffing levels "down the track".
Ms Jackson also said [SIZE="3"]Qantas shareholders should say a "big thank you" to the private equity consortium that made an unsuccessful $11 billion bid for the airline, as the bid had helped push up the share price.[/
SIZE]
Speaking on the eve of her retirement after 15 years on the Qantas board, the last eight as chairman, Ms Jackson said her successor, Leigh Clifford, would probably have a year or two before he had to deal with "some speed bumps" in the industry.
She said the arrival of new-generation aircraft such as the Airbus A380 and the Boeing Dreamliners would add significant capacity to the world airline industry over the next few years -- changing the profitability of the industry.
Ms Jackson also expressed her concerns at the potential impact of federal Labor's industrial relations policy on Qantas, warning that it could reduce flexibility in the airline's 34,000-strong workforce.
In an interview in her office in Melbourne this week, she said Qantas had made use of the industrial relations changes brought in under the Howard Government.
She warned that rolling these changes back could have an impact on the airline's staffing levels "down the track".
Ms Jackson also said [SIZE="3"]Qantas shareholders should say a "big thank you" to the private equity consortium that made an unsuccessful $11 billion bid for the airline, as the bid had helped push up the share price.[/
SIZE]
"A big thank you" for the consortium in pushing up the share price is one way to describe it!
I see it as a comical failure on the part of the board and management in not promoting the obvious and inherent value of the company for years.
I see it as a comical failure on the part of the board and management in not promoting the obvious and inherent value of the company for years.
Last edited by Wingspar; 10th Nov 2007 at 23:33.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Dame has been weighed, measured and found wanting. Mag, talk to the hand love! What you realy understand about the airline industry, besides what you read of mr Creedys', would cover the top of a match box.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Up left - Down right
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, A big big thank you to the private equity consortium that made my (MJ) share price go up by, how many MILLION of DOLLARS !!!!!!!!!
I would be singing that from sunrise to sunset if I were her to.
I would be singing that from sunrise to sunset if I were her to.
Last edited by Short_Circuit; 11th Nov 2007 at 08:49.
Wingspar said:
Isn't hindsight a wonderful thing?
The reality is that Dixon was promoting Qantas just as much as Ziggy Switkowski was promoting Telstra. He wasn't very successful, of course, and that frustration came across strongly.
Please don't tell me that Dixon was, all the time, just "talking down" the value of Qantas, because that is utter, utter rubbish. CEOs just don't do that sort of thing. He deliberately kept all his statements as accurate and realistic as possible.
Of course Dixon and the board believed the company was undervalued - they probably still do - but no matter how hard they tried, they just could not get the sharemarket to see that unrealised value.
Margaret Jackson is right, right and right. It took the APA bid to force the correction to the Qantas value. APA performed an invaluable service for the Qantas shareholders.
When are you lot going to realise that what you can see so clearly with hindsight just was not visible in the months prior to the APA bid?
I see it as a comical failure on the part of the board and management in not promoting the obvious and inherent value of the company for years.
The reality is that Dixon was promoting Qantas just as much as Ziggy Switkowski was promoting Telstra. He wasn't very successful, of course, and that frustration came across strongly.
Please don't tell me that Dixon was, all the time, just "talking down" the value of Qantas, because that is utter, utter rubbish. CEOs just don't do that sort of thing. He deliberately kept all his statements as accurate and realistic as possible.
Of course Dixon and the board believed the company was undervalued - they probably still do - but no matter how hard they tried, they just could not get the sharemarket to see that unrealised value.
Margaret Jackson is right, right and right. It took the APA bid to force the correction to the Qantas value. APA performed an invaluable service for the Qantas shareholders.
When are you lot going to realise that what you can see so clearly with hindsight just was not visible in the months prior to the APA bid?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Missed the point.....?
Prior to the APA bid,Margaret Jackson and Geoff Dixon had failed to achieve what is it is that they get paid to do........ and that is maximise share value for the shareholders!!! They then spent three months away from their fiduciary duties trying to have the APA bid succeed. The facts are that it was always a bad deal for Qantas when APA would extract $3 billion from accumulated reserves and pay themselves back what they were putting in. The balance was provided by lenders, so the debt/equity ratio changed from 25/75 to 75/25. Qantas would no longer have the cash put away for the "rainy day" when another SARS, 9/11 or other severe circumstances occurred.
And don't tell me that the millions of dollars provided to the board members in bonuses did not sway their decision making.
Dixon and Jackson had played no part in the share price increase as this was stimulated by the APA offer........ not them !!!
And don't tell me that the millions of dollars provided to the board members in bonuses did not sway their decision making.
Dixon and Jackson had played no part in the share price increase as this was stimulated by the APA offer........ not them !!!
And don't tell me that the millions of dollars provided to the board members in bonuses did not sway their decision making.
Geoff Dixon had failed to achieve what is it is that they get paid to do........ and that is maximise share value for the shareholders!!!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
aircraft...what planet are you on?
A mere matter of days after the bid collapsed, the QF board came up with their radical new plan (which involved many new destinations, breaking up the airline into individual business units etc).
Given that it was only a few days in the making, the Board should be condemned for making a kneejerk plan as a reaction to the bid failing. What sort of a way is that to plan for the future?
More likely however is that it wasn't a kneejerk plan but one that was always planned to be announced after the buyout proceeded. If that's the case then the board deliberately withheld a vital business plan that was very much material to the bid itself and thus shareholders value. Is that not a serious breach of the Corporations Act (or similar)?
Either way the Board, and Jackson especially (given her hype about the shares freefalling if the bid failed) have a great deal to answer for.
How anybody can prattle on about Ms Jackson being 'right, right, right' is beyond me.
And bloody Dixon (as per data in the AFR Boss magazine) got a 47% payrise this year whilst he fought tooth and nail to erode the benefits of his employees. And Jackson cries about Labour eroding her rights to screw staff.
These people are truly sickening.
A mere matter of days after the bid collapsed, the QF board came up with their radical new plan (which involved many new destinations, breaking up the airline into individual business units etc).
Given that it was only a few days in the making, the Board should be condemned for making a kneejerk plan as a reaction to the bid failing. What sort of a way is that to plan for the future?
More likely however is that it wasn't a kneejerk plan but one that was always planned to be announced after the buyout proceeded. If that's the case then the board deliberately withheld a vital business plan that was very much material to the bid itself and thus shareholders value. Is that not a serious breach of the Corporations Act (or similar)?
Either way the Board, and Jackson especially (given her hype about the shares freefalling if the bid failed) have a great deal to answer for.
How anybody can prattle on about Ms Jackson being 'right, right, right' is beyond me.
And bloody Dixon (as per data in the AFR Boss magazine) got a 47% payrise this year whilst he fought tooth and nail to erode the benefits of his employees. And Jackson cries about Labour eroding her rights to screw staff.
These people are truly sickening.
Registered User **
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That is not Dixon's job
IF it is not Dixons and the boards ...WHO'S JOB IS IT THEN?
But this thread is all about MJ.
She said during the takeover bid that you would have to have a mental problem if you did not sell your share's to APA.This basically meant that the shares would not reach the takeover bid price and therefore you would be crazy not to accept that offer.
.....Now she is saying we should be thankful that the bid was made because it raised the share price but who was it that said that if the bid did not go through the share price would plummet ????????
Is it not the board's job to look after the interest's of the shareholder?
and what was MJ's position on that board?
Last edited by lowerlobe; 11th Nov 2007 at 19:34.
Just Ignore Aircraft.
Just ignore Aircraft, he is either a complete idiot or a troll.
There is no way you could know that, and there are many, many ways a Director can benefit perfectly legally without a cent changing hands...
.....I've had to put a stop to one such scenario myself that involved a very nice seat on the investment committee of a Venture Capital fund for me and a very nice Directors position on the Board of a Venture Capital Fund for one of my Directors.
I ignored that very nice carrot and killed the proposal stone dead after analysing their investment portfolio and concluding it was awful. Said Director then went behind my back to try and get a favourable report that would have justified the $10 million investment in the fund....they really wanted that nice little Board seat on their resume.
None of the board members stood to gain anything if the bid succeeded. It was only Dixon and a couple of others in the executive that stood to gain.
.....I've had to put a stop to one such scenario myself that involved a very nice seat on the investment committee of a Venture Capital fund for me and a very nice Directors position on the Board of a Venture Capital Fund for one of my Directors.
I ignored that very nice carrot and killed the proposal stone dead after analysing their investment portfolio and concluding it was awful. Said Director then went behind my back to try and get a favourable report that would have justified the $10 million investment in the fund....they really wanted that nice little Board seat on their resume.
A. Le Rhone said,
Dixon's "increase" was mostly made up of various performance based "bonuses". Jackson and Dixon were both just doing their jobs. They have a certain role, or "job" in this capitalist world. Do you have a problem with people just doing their job?
lowerlobe said:
I suggest you reread my post. Try again to read just whose job I was saying it wasn't. If you read closely you will see I did not mention the board.
As for your comments on MJ, I say: Isn't hindsight a wonderful thing?
And bloody Dixon (as per data in the AFR Boss magazine) got a 47% payrise this year whilst he fought tooth and nail to erode the benefits of his employees. And Jackson cries about Labour eroding her rights to screw staff.
lowerlobe said:
IF it is not Dixons and the boards ...WHO'S JOB IS IT THEN?
As for your comments on MJ, I say: Isn't hindsight a wonderful thing?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Heaven
Posts: 584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad Maggies Tea Party
Recent comments made by MJ are an indication of the vaccuum that these individuals live in.
Totally removed from reality.
Anyone been invited to the "Qantas Family" soiree after the AGM?
Apparently about 100 people who see themselves as Qantas Brothers and Sisters will be attending.
Totally removed from reality.
Anyone been invited to the "Qantas Family" soiree after the AGM?
Apparently about 100 people who see themselves as Qantas Brothers and Sisters will be attending.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doing their jobs???
Quote: "Dixon's "increase" was mostly made up of various performance based "bonuses". Jackson and Dixon were both just doing their jobs. They have a certain role, or "job" in this capitalist world. Do you have a problem with people just doing their job?"
How ludicrous can you get???
Are you telling the rest of us that they were responsible for the share price increase when APA made their offer???? Either they were in cahoots with APA or they had not been doing their job prior to this!!!!
OPEN YOUR EYES......
How ludicrous can you get???
Are you telling the rest of us that they were responsible for the share price increase when APA made their offer???? Either they were in cahoots with APA or they had not been doing their job prior to this!!!!
OPEN YOUR EYES......
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: burrow
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mad Maggies Tea Party
This is one of THREE retirement parties for her and son of KP! With snouts at the trough and backslapping all round it will be glory days for the Qantas Family (which is what exactly?)
Wonder how much this is all going to cost when we we continue to have major service failures across the board and the punters are the ones at the sharp end along with the staff with the ever threatening AWA and diminishing conditions. Shareholders should be up in arms! Go and ride off into the sunset Madge (or to your Nagano ski resort nicely serviced by Jetstar thankyou) and leave behind one of the most blatant examples of corporate greed to the memory of those most affected - the real Qantas Family- all 30,000 hard working employees.
Wonder how much this is all going to cost when we we continue to have major service failures across the board and the punters are the ones at the sharp end along with the staff with the ever threatening AWA and diminishing conditions. Shareholders should be up in arms! Go and ride off into the sunset Madge (or to your Nagano ski resort nicely serviced by Jetstar thankyou) and leave behind one of the most blatant examples of corporate greed to the memory of those most affected - the real Qantas Family- all 30,000 hard working employees.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: airside
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KARMA:
"As you sow so shall you reap" This is the Law of Karma. Interestingly, both science and religion recognise this law. In science it is often stated, “For every action there is an equal and opposing reaction.” Its religious counterparts are, “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”; and “As you do unto others, it will be done unto you.” Even today’s common knowledge expresses this principle in the saying, “What goes around, comes around.” This is the law of karma, of cause and effect.
If there is such a thing as KARMA then DIXON, The DAME, and a number of the BOARD should be afraid, very afraid!
PS:
FOG
"As you sow so shall you reap" This is the Law of Karma. Interestingly, both science and religion recognise this law. In science it is often stated, “For every action there is an equal and opposing reaction.” Its religious counterparts are, “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”; and “As you do unto others, it will be done unto you.” Even today’s common knowledge expresses this principle in the saying, “What goes around, comes around.” This is the law of karma, of cause and effect.
If there is such a thing as KARMA then DIXON, The DAME, and a number of the BOARD should be afraid, very afraid!
PS:
FOG
Your description of Karma is quite mixed up max autobrakes, and reveals you have a weak, possibly nonexistent, grasp of physics! Anybody with a proper understanding of the "for every force..." law would know it has absolutely nothing to do with religion or philosophy and would not be using it in that context.
And the "eye for an eye..." dictum is all about justice but nothing about religion or philosophy.
They were just doing their jobs. Get over it.
The "FOG" thing is rather juvenile - what do you think it is achieving (other than making you look much younger than you really are)?
AEROMEDIC said:
Err, no. I suggest you reread my post.
And the "eye for an eye..." dictum is all about justice but nothing about religion or philosophy.
If there is such a thing as KARMA then DIXON, The DAME, and a number of the BOARD should be afraid, very afraid!
The "FOG" thing is rather juvenile - what do you think it is achieving (other than making you look much younger than you really are)?
AEROMEDIC said:
Are you telling the rest of us that they were responsible for the share price increase when APA made their offer????
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
Your description of Karma is quite mixed up max autobrakes, and reveals you have a weak, possibly nonexistent, grasp of physics!
The point is MJ is goooonneee....!!! hehe thats all that matters! we can argue till the roosters come home but she stuffed up!
And next is GD, yes there will be a change just wait! Gooooneeee!
I am sorry Aircraft, but its not an apology! hehe any parrallels? F*** yes!!!
See ya!
OMG I am so happy! And even Aircraft cant make me depressed!
I guess its the impending result of the election harharharhar!!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I don't normally bite but this time I find it difficult not to.
Aircraft,
These people (MJ, GD et al) are paid large amounts of money and can employ all the gurus they want, to 'see' things. If 'things' were visible to the members of the APA consortium, then (unless there was inside information being passed somewhere - and I'm not making any accusations in that regard) this visibility came from Qantas's publicly available information.
Alternatively, it came from a combination of Qantas's publicly available information and analysis of the market in which it operates - something which Qantas management should be undertaking continuously.
My point being, if APA were able to 'see' things which meant there was lots of extra value in Qantas, then so should Qantas's management have been able to see this, and communicate it to the market. Crikey, the proprietor of Australia's biggest media concern was on the board, you don't get much better help than that!
The fact that other carriers were able to get their point across is what, I would argue, gives fuel to the claims of incompetence (or at least lack of value for money) being made here.
These things were visible. Someone saw them. It just doesn't look like it was the people who were/are being paid (lots) to see them.
Aircraft,
When are you lot going to realise that what you can see so clearly with hindsight just was not visible in the months prior to the APA bid?
Alternatively, it came from a combination of Qantas's publicly available information and analysis of the market in which it operates - something which Qantas management should be undertaking continuously.
My point being, if APA were able to 'see' things which meant there was lots of extra value in Qantas, then so should Qantas's management have been able to see this, and communicate it to the market. Crikey, the proprietor of Australia's biggest media concern was on the board, you don't get much better help than that!
The fact that other carriers were able to get their point across is what, I would argue, gives fuel to the claims of incompetence (or at least lack of value for money) being made here.
These things were visible. Someone saw them. It just doesn't look like it was the people who were/are being paid (lots) to see them.