Jetstar Australia time in the sun expires
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well thats dead right, want employees to work more for the incompetancies of management.
I have been on this band wagon for quite some time, most management are legal criminals, they award themselves huge salaries while cutting costs and wages every where else.
I just love this new idea that shareholders could be judicial on these issues, most employees could run their company 10 times better than a lot of these slimes.
and they say we dont have a caste system in the western world, how is it that trickie-dickie gets 11mill for...how many months work?....
I have been on this band wagon for quite some time, most management are legal criminals, they award themselves huge salaries while cutting costs and wages every where else.
I just love this new idea that shareholders could be judicial on these issues, most employees could run their company 10 times better than a lot of these slimes.
and they say we dont have a caste system in the western world, how is it that trickie-dickie gets 11mill for...how many months work?....
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genex,
I agree on a few of your points and have added some of mine, namely;
-Shorter turn around times
-Better computer and crewing software
-less back office management/excessive pilot management
-Charging for food/revenue from hotels +car hire
-more online booking
The simple fact remains that the majority of airline costs as highlighted by the recent Qantas data book are fuel and aircraft/maintenance costs.
Flight crew costs are a very small segment of the overall cost base.
That is why airlines such as Southwest/ Easyjet and Ryanair all pay their crews well. Ryanair's relationship with crews is poor however they are well remunerated.
Qantas flying twenty year old gas guzzling aircraft that require lots of maintenance makes its overall cost base far more expensive than JQ regardless of flight crew costs.
If JQ were not to fly brand new A/C but the old QF aircraft I doubt the JQ business model would stack up.
To paint the picture of flight crew costs as the make or break figure is false and poorly researched.
I agree on a few of your points and have added some of mine, namely;
-Shorter turn around times
-Better computer and crewing software
-less back office management/excessive pilot management
-Charging for food/revenue from hotels +car hire
-more online booking
The simple fact remains that the majority of airline costs as highlighted by the recent Qantas data book are fuel and aircraft/maintenance costs.
Flight crew costs are a very small segment of the overall cost base.
That is why airlines such as Southwest/ Easyjet and Ryanair all pay their crews well. Ryanair's relationship with crews is poor however they are well remunerated.
Qantas flying twenty year old gas guzzling aircraft that require lots of maintenance makes its overall cost base far more expensive than JQ regardless of flight crew costs.
If JQ were not to fly brand new A/C but the old QF aircraft I doubt the JQ business model would stack up.
To paint the picture of flight crew costs as the make or break figure is false and poorly researched.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As true as the following quote by FearCampaign is:
Until last years stouch with ALAEA, believe the logic, which flowed from the 89 duispute, was along the lines:
However, nowdays at Qantas in particular, believe it is the aircraft engineers that that keep the Execs awake at night. 
'the picture of flight crew costs as the make or break figure is false and poorly researched.'
'keep the pilots in line and the rest of the workforce will follow'.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If JQ were not to fly brand new A/C but the old QF aircraft I doubt the JQ business model would stack up.
LCC's are here to stay
Any truth in the rumour that the next two A330's going to Jetstar will be flown from a new base in Singapore... and not by J* OZ pilots?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Old world legacy carriers in western countries with high labor costs will simply either slash operating costs in order to survive or go out of business. Western airlines were built in a market place devoid of full service competition from Middle Eastern and Asian based airlines and must change.
The dollar savings from trimming labor costs are significant at heritage carriers where there is plenty of fat to trim but a secondary effect that should not be overlooked is that of efficiency and mindset.
QF is a great example where high salaries are combined with outdated work practices. Reducing labor costs will assist the business to regain the “comparative advantage” alluded to by another poster, but this will only achieve so much. The way employees go about the work they do must also change. This is why QF (and AN) sends aircraft overseas for maintenance. Its not the labor cost so much as the “job building” that has been constructed over the past 50 or so years that provides an impediment to the business. The downside of organized labor is that it has priced western countries out of the market. Take a look at the job building that occurs on Australia’s docks. How many manufacturing plants have been built in the US, UK or Australia recently?
The cost of crewing aircraft at QF is unquestionably high. The salary differential between parent and JQ sibling is enormous in labor market norms. But this is not the full story. JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority. Few low cost or new world carriers have this burden. This is just one example of where labor practices can be as important to cost savings as labor costs.
It’s no coincidence that the cutting edge work practices take place at low cost carriers.
The dollar savings from trimming labor costs are significant at heritage carriers where there is plenty of fat to trim but a secondary effect that should not be overlooked is that of efficiency and mindset.
QF is a great example where high salaries are combined with outdated work practices. Reducing labor costs will assist the business to regain the “comparative advantage” alluded to by another poster, but this will only achieve so much. The way employees go about the work they do must also change. This is why QF (and AN) sends aircraft overseas for maintenance. Its not the labor cost so much as the “job building” that has been constructed over the past 50 or so years that provides an impediment to the business. The downside of organized labor is that it has priced western countries out of the market. Take a look at the job building that occurs on Australia’s docks. How many manufacturing plants have been built in the US, UK or Australia recently?
The cost of crewing aircraft at QF is unquestionably high. The salary differential between parent and JQ sibling is enormous in labor market norms. But this is not the full story. JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority. Few low cost or new world carriers have this burden. This is just one example of where labor practices can be as important to cost savings as labor costs.
It’s no coincidence that the cutting edge work practices take place at low cost carriers.
Registered User **
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The Ultimate Crew Rest....
Age: 69
Posts: 2,346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF is a great example where high salaries are combined with outdated work practices
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Professor, be careful with your generalisations.
Are you comparing the longhaul or shorthaul operations to JQ?
I believe that many 500+ shorthaul crew (~30% of Captains & FO's) would take exception with the following sweeping statement:
Yes, there is a cost differential between the rates of pay, but I suspect there is no difference in efficiency or mindset between QF & JQ shorthaul crew wrt work practices.
Perhaps you have a particular insight I don't, and would care to point out any flaw in my argument.
Are you comparing the longhaul or shorthaul operations to JQ?
I believe that many 500+ shorthaul crew (~30% of Captains & FO's) would take exception with the following sweeping statement:
But this is not the full story. JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority
Perhaps you have a particular insight I don't, and would care to point out any flaw in my argument.
Last edited by breakfastburrito; 15th Oct 2009 at 20:32. Reason: clarification
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Global Drifter
Age: 64
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joyce has stated in the paper today the replacing QF with JQ in New Zealand has turned a $30m loss into break even.
As the QF NZ operation was crewed by Jetconnect on salaries, conditions and work practices very similar to JQ, it shows that crew costs are not the holy grail to profitability as the professor seems to think.
More likely the turn around is due to:
1. More fuel efficient aircraft / utilisation
2. Add ons such as food sales
3. reduced overheads - cleaning etc
4. Scale economies such as utilising the Aus management / admin / marketing etc
As the QF NZ operation was crewed by Jetconnect on salaries, conditions and work practices very similar to JQ, it shows that crew costs are not the holy grail to profitability as the professor seems to think.
More likely the turn around is due to:
1. More fuel efficient aircraft / utilisation
2. Add ons such as food sales
3. reduced overheads - cleaning etc
4. Scale economies such as utilising the Aus management / admin / marketing etc
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Here & There
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear Professor,
With respect to your view:
I respectfully refer you to Ginger's comment:
Have personally read the engineering analysis provided to a number of legacy airlines and understand that just about all airlines acknowledge that the strategy can reduce aircraft leasing costs by 40%, but would require a collaborate and cooperative approach to overcome constraints contained in:
· Competition legislation
· ICAO bilateral agreements
· Maintenance and operational regulations mandated by Sovereign Aviation Regulators responsible for issuing International Air Operator Certificates
And unless
Ceases!
Any such cooperation isn’t realistically achievable and regretfully thus far, there is scant evidence that senior airline management comprehend what is necessary.
Regards
Struggling
With respect to your view:
'legacy carriers in western countries with high labour costs will simply either slash operating costs in order to survive or go out of business'
'the continuing obsession with tightening conditions, costs and remuneration (could be replaced )with a new strategy to reduce aircraft leasing costs by 40%.
Have personally read the engineering analysis provided to a number of legacy airlines and understand that just about all airlines acknowledge that the strategy can reduce aircraft leasing costs by 40%, but would require a collaborate and cooperative approach to overcome constraints contained in:
· Competition legislation
· ICAO bilateral agreements
· Maintenance and operational regulations mandated by Sovereign Aviation Regulators responsible for issuing International Air Operator Certificates
And unless
'the continuing obsession with tightening conditions, costs and remuneration'
Any such cooperation isn’t realistically achievable and regretfully thus far, there is scant evidence that senior airline management comprehend what is necessary.
Regards
Struggling
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Professor wrote:.
But this is not the full story. JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority. Few low cost or new world carriers have this burden. This is just one example of where labor practices can be as important to cost savings as labor costs.
JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority.
Sorry Proffessor I think you will find that the JetStar Contract does have Seniority. There is however a provision for "Hot spot" Commands.
That little bone of contention is getting up the nose of quite a few of the JetStar pilots who are not of the "Blue Shirt Brigade" tribe.
Wouldn't be a concession to that Management Perrogative ideal of paternalism and nepotism ,that allows unscrupulous management room to manoevre as they wish would it?
I ask the question , Professor "Imortant labour cost savings" ,short term
but at what cost ,long term?
Here's a little piece on why Pilot's worldwide fought long and hard to establish these "outdated work practices" as you call them. It's called" lifestyle stability".
Without such niceties as these types of work practices afford, I can't see future generations of Pilots investing so much money, time and effort into what is quickly becoming such a unrewarding career choice.
The more things change, the more they stay the same!
BRIEF HISTORY ON THE ORIGINS OF PILOTING UNIONS IN AUSTRALIA
The first pilots union in this country was the Australian Air Pilots Association (AAPA)
It was registered with the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission in 1946, the same year QANTAS became a government entity..
Australian pilots expected that they would enjoy legal and professional recognition as a result .However pilots soon became discontented with arbitrated decisions that were handed down by this body of the Menzies’ Government
This discontent ultimately led to the dissolution and withdrawal of the AAPA from the commission in 1959 and the formation of the Australian Federation of Air pilots (AFAP) based in Melbourne with an overseas branch formed and affiliated in Sydney for the Qantas Pilots.. A new constitution was drafted which allowed for support between the domestic pilots and overseas Qantas pilots, but not necessarily joint strike action. This new association was not a registered Union , consequently it was outside the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court. This now allowed Australian pilots to challenge a rigid system within a comprehensive framework of compulsory arbitration that had existed in various forms since 1901. It would seem the AFAP had achieved what it wanted, Collective Bargaining. Unfortunately for the pilots, events were to prove otherwise.
Airline Management of the day again employed delaying tactics wherever possible when negotiating with the AFAP. Invarably the Domestic operators would reach agreement with their pilots but Qantas under CEO ,C.O..Turner became more and more intransient. The period between 1961 and 1964 saw legal manoeuvres, threats and counter threats from both sides .Gradually the AFAP gained the upper hand through being outside the legal procedures of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act.
The AFAP succeeded in 1965 in having the Secretary of the Department of Labour and National Services, Henry Bland, introduce a neutral, independent, dispute-settling body.
The” Industrial Relationship Procedures Agreement “,was established, as a form of collective bargaining with mediation procedures in the industrial arena. This new agreement was highly successful and became known as the “Bland Procedure”.
By 1965 the domestic pilots of Ansett-ANA and Trans Australia Airlins (TAA) finally negotiated a bidding style contract into place which included provisions for stability throughout their working life. It is because airline pilots are not in a position to freelance their special skills in the same manner as other professional people that they pushed to define specifically their career expectations through hard contractual terms. Qantas management however opposed any form of collective bargaining methods because they were outside the control of the Arbitration Court and stated that they would face additional pressure from other aircrew unions. Eventually through industrial pressures applied by the overseas branch of the AFAP Qantas reluctantly agreed to an 18 moth trial of the Bland Procedures.
Once again because of, the intransient nature of Qantas management and their “management prerogative” ideology, they reneged on the deal and appeared to purposely fan the flames of conflict, the result being the big strike of 1966. Both sides dug in and a long drawn out industrial dispute resulted. However, through the solidarity of the pilots, Qantas management capitulated with a new offer to negotiate on collective bargaining arrangements based on the North American Bidding Style contract that the domestic arm of the AFAP had negotiated into place nearly two years previously for the Ansett-ANA and TAA pilots.
What did the numberous strikes in the late 50’s and early 60’s achieve? What were the benefits of this North American Bidding System (NABS) and why did the pilots of that era go to such lengths to obtain it? Major benefits to evolve from this period were collective bargaining, comparative wage justice,contractual obligations affecting both parties,orderly career progression for pilots airline expansion and stability due mostly to the North American Bidding System (NABS)
The North American Bidding System ensured contractual conditions for pay that departed from a calendar monthly system. NABS was based on a 56 day bid period which, in turn constituted a 28 day pay cycle and 13 pay periods per year and guaranteed duty free periods between flying duties. Pilots had the ability to bid for suitable holiday periods and promotion, based on seniority. Holidays could be delayed or accumulated. Grievance procedures ensured that a fair hearing would be obtained where a pilot could elect to be represented by a Pilot Liason Captain who was a member of the AFAP. Paternalism and nepotism no longer determined promotional opportunities .It basically created a descriptive contract that unscrupulous management could not manoeuvre around.
But this is not the full story. JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority. Few low cost or new world carriers have this burden. This is just one example of where labor practices can be as important to cost savings as labor costs.
JQ does not have the inefficiency bought about by seniority.
Sorry Proffessor I think you will find that the JetStar Contract does have Seniority. There is however a provision for "Hot spot" Commands.
That little bone of contention is getting up the nose of quite a few of the JetStar pilots who are not of the "Blue Shirt Brigade" tribe.
Wouldn't be a concession to that Management Perrogative ideal of paternalism and nepotism ,that allows unscrupulous management room to manoevre as they wish would it?
I ask the question , Professor "Imortant labour cost savings" ,short term
but at what cost ,long term?
Here's a little piece on why Pilot's worldwide fought long and hard to establish these "outdated work practices" as you call them. It's called" lifestyle stability".
Without such niceties as these types of work practices afford, I can't see future generations of Pilots investing so much money, time and effort into what is quickly becoming such a unrewarding career choice.
The more things change, the more they stay the same!
BRIEF HISTORY ON THE ORIGINS OF PILOTING UNIONS IN AUSTRALIA
The first pilots union in this country was the Australian Air Pilots Association (AAPA)
It was registered with the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission in 1946, the same year QANTAS became a government entity..
Australian pilots expected that they would enjoy legal and professional recognition as a result .However pilots soon became discontented with arbitrated decisions that were handed down by this body of the Menzies’ Government
This discontent ultimately led to the dissolution and withdrawal of the AAPA from the commission in 1959 and the formation of the Australian Federation of Air pilots (AFAP) based in Melbourne with an overseas branch formed and affiliated in Sydney for the Qantas Pilots.. A new constitution was drafted which allowed for support between the domestic pilots and overseas Qantas pilots, but not necessarily joint strike action. This new association was not a registered Union , consequently it was outside the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Court. This now allowed Australian pilots to challenge a rigid system within a comprehensive framework of compulsory arbitration that had existed in various forms since 1901. It would seem the AFAP had achieved what it wanted, Collective Bargaining. Unfortunately for the pilots, events were to prove otherwise.
Airline Management of the day again employed delaying tactics wherever possible when negotiating with the AFAP. Invarably the Domestic operators would reach agreement with their pilots but Qantas under CEO ,C.O..Turner became more and more intransient. The period between 1961 and 1964 saw legal manoeuvres, threats and counter threats from both sides .Gradually the AFAP gained the upper hand through being outside the legal procedures of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act.
The AFAP succeeded in 1965 in having the Secretary of the Department of Labour and National Services, Henry Bland, introduce a neutral, independent, dispute-settling body.
The” Industrial Relationship Procedures Agreement “,was established, as a form of collective bargaining with mediation procedures in the industrial arena. This new agreement was highly successful and became known as the “Bland Procedure”.
By 1965 the domestic pilots of Ansett-ANA and Trans Australia Airlins (TAA) finally negotiated a bidding style contract into place which included provisions for stability throughout their working life. It is because airline pilots are not in a position to freelance their special skills in the same manner as other professional people that they pushed to define specifically their career expectations through hard contractual terms. Qantas management however opposed any form of collective bargaining methods because they were outside the control of the Arbitration Court and stated that they would face additional pressure from other aircrew unions. Eventually through industrial pressures applied by the overseas branch of the AFAP Qantas reluctantly agreed to an 18 moth trial of the Bland Procedures.
Once again because of, the intransient nature of Qantas management and their “management prerogative” ideology, they reneged on the deal and appeared to purposely fan the flames of conflict, the result being the big strike of 1966. Both sides dug in and a long drawn out industrial dispute resulted. However, through the solidarity of the pilots, Qantas management capitulated with a new offer to negotiate on collective bargaining arrangements based on the North American Bidding Style contract that the domestic arm of the AFAP had negotiated into place nearly two years previously for the Ansett-ANA and TAA pilots.
What did the numberous strikes in the late 50’s and early 60’s achieve? What were the benefits of this North American Bidding System (NABS) and why did the pilots of that era go to such lengths to obtain it? Major benefits to evolve from this period were collective bargaining, comparative wage justice,contractual obligations affecting both parties,orderly career progression for pilots airline expansion and stability due mostly to the North American Bidding System (NABS)
The North American Bidding System ensured contractual conditions for pay that departed from a calendar monthly system. NABS was based on a 56 day bid period which, in turn constituted a 28 day pay cycle and 13 pay periods per year and guaranteed duty free periods between flying duties. Pilots had the ability to bid for suitable holiday periods and promotion, based on seniority. Holidays could be delayed or accumulated. Grievance procedures ensured that a fair hearing would be obtained where a pilot could elect to be represented by a Pilot Liason Captain who was a member of the AFAP. Paternalism and nepotism no longer determined promotional opportunities .It basically created a descriptive contract that unscrupulous management could not manoeuvre around.
Last edited by blow.n.gasket; 16th Oct 2009 at 08:19.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Professor,
I find it ironic that you sermon the merits of competitive crewing whilst our former CEO walked away with 10 million dollars for 5 months work.
This not long after he would have bankrupted the airline in a 90%!!!! leveraged buyout with a now defunct Allco. A lazy balance sheet or stupid and shortsighted management?
It was never a good idea to load an airline with that amount of debt, however 100 million does tend to cloud ones judgement.
The "institutional imperative" is what Warren Buffett named it.
Greed nearly led our execs down the same path of destruction that felled Allco, Babcock and Brown and Lehman Brothers.
Do you then expect long term employees on significantly lower salaries to be lectured to on working conditions from those that nearly destroyed their livelihoods?
Since Dixon's expensive departure the share price has doubled.
Time for an end of outdated overpaid executives if you really want to talk efficiencies.
Perhaps we should have a low cost executive team??? What a novel idea. Be hard for staff not to follow that one.
Will be interesting to see the shareholder revolt at the AGM. Mainline lost money but we pay our execs 10 Million. Price fixing??? Dixon took the bonus but not the responsibility. Hypocrisy.
Think it is time you let the JQ and Qantas pilots do the job they have been doing well for so long. Next time your overseas maintained Jet blows a hole in the side of it I bet you will be thanking the crews that may one day ultimately save your life.
A professor of economics you most definitely are not sir. A great fisherman perhaps.
I find it ironic that you sermon the merits of competitive crewing whilst our former CEO walked away with 10 million dollars for 5 months work.
This not long after he would have bankrupted the airline in a 90%!!!! leveraged buyout with a now defunct Allco. A lazy balance sheet or stupid and shortsighted management?
It was never a good idea to load an airline with that amount of debt, however 100 million does tend to cloud ones judgement.
The "institutional imperative" is what Warren Buffett named it.
Greed nearly led our execs down the same path of destruction that felled Allco, Babcock and Brown and Lehman Brothers.
Do you then expect long term employees on significantly lower salaries to be lectured to on working conditions from those that nearly destroyed their livelihoods?
Since Dixon's expensive departure the share price has doubled.
Time for an end of outdated overpaid executives if you really want to talk efficiencies.
Perhaps we should have a low cost executive team??? What a novel idea. Be hard for staff not to follow that one.
Will be interesting to see the shareholder revolt at the AGM. Mainline lost money but we pay our execs 10 Million. Price fixing??? Dixon took the bonus but not the responsibility. Hypocrisy.
Think it is time you let the JQ and Qantas pilots do the job they have been doing well for so long. Next time your overseas maintained Jet blows a hole in the side of it I bet you will be thanking the crews that may one day ultimately save your life.
A professor of economics you most definitely are not sir. A great fisherman perhaps.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Stralya
Posts: 577
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Kremin,
That rumour is correct, despite assurances to the contrary there will be "organic" growth based in Asia...The time in the Sun is coming to pass.
For a bunch of executives spruiking the "merits" of so called low cost, they do love their time at the pointy end. If they actually believed any of their oldmeadow inspired and Dixon repeated mantra they would be regularly turning right and heading down the back on J*. The only "cost" being manipulated is the labour.
That rumour is correct, despite assurances to the contrary there will be "organic" growth based in Asia...The time in the Sun is coming to pass.
For a bunch of executives spruiking the "merits" of so called low cost, they do love their time at the pointy end. If they actually believed any of their oldmeadow inspired and Dixon repeated mantra they would be regularly turning right and heading down the back on J*. The only "cost" being manipulated is the labour.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes! is well accepted that the APA bid would have bankrupted Qantas by taking it down the same path of destruction that felled Allco, Babcock and Brown and Lehman Brothers.
Nevertheless, Qantas still has to find a way to stump up the cash to purchase its new fleets and right now a number of aviation analysts are becoming increasingly concerned about how an airline that is generating just over $1B in free cash flow is going to do it. (Has to be a good reason why a fund that held on to Qantas shares and didn’t sell them for >$6 after the APA fiasco, is now selling down for <$3 a share- suggests a serious loss of faith in the long run business plan?)
Yes! agree with the view that 'the continuing obsession with tightening conditions, costs and remuneration' is not going to cut it. Also believe that the strategy tabled by Struggling can save both Qantas and its workforce from the fall out generated by cost reduction obsessions, but it will take a major realignment of the relationship between Qantas and its workforce.
Yes! ‘an Employee Buyin can outperform an equivalent Management Buyout by around 20%,’ because of tax concessions offered by governments to encourage employee participation and if the prophets of doom on this website are to be proven wrong, Qantas is going to ditch its 1989 adversarial industrial model, enter into serious collaborative negotiations with all its unions and cut its workforce into the shareholder pie, and the cream execs like Dicko have lapped up.
Obviously the fund selling - doesn’t believe it can/will?
Nevertheless, Qantas still has to find a way to stump up the cash to purchase its new fleets and right now a number of aviation analysts are becoming increasingly concerned about how an airline that is generating just over $1B in free cash flow is going to do it. (Has to be a good reason why a fund that held on to Qantas shares and didn’t sell them for >$6 after the APA fiasco, is now selling down for <$3 a share- suggests a serious loss of faith in the long run business plan?)
Yes! agree with the view that 'the continuing obsession with tightening conditions, costs and remuneration' is not going to cut it. Also believe that the strategy tabled by Struggling can save both Qantas and its workforce from the fall out generated by cost reduction obsessions, but it will take a major realignment of the relationship between Qantas and its workforce.
Yes! ‘an Employee Buyin can outperform an equivalent Management Buyout by around 20%,’ because of tax concessions offered by governments to encourage employee participation and if the prophets of doom on this website are to be proven wrong, Qantas is going to ditch its 1989 adversarial industrial model, enter into serious collaborative negotiations with all its unions and cut its workforce into the shareholder pie, and the cream execs like Dicko have lapped up.
Obviously the fund selling - doesn’t believe it can/will?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe the penny has finally dropped at the excessive remuneration end of Qantas.
They've worked out they've given away the ('06/'07 $1billion) golden goose and traded it in on an Orange duck.
The eggs aren't quite as tasty.
They've worked out they've given away the ('06/'07 $1billion) golden goose and traded it in on an Orange duck.
The eggs aren't quite as tasty.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Holland
Age: 60
Posts: 560
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel Costs vs LCC
Sunstar,
With the present high dollar rate , once the fuel hits around $ 107.00 USD thats when the LCC`s start bleeding and breaking even, anything above that and they hit the red. If it reaches $107.00 thats when Latestar will start scaling back some International services such as Japan (again).
With the present high dollar rate , once the fuel hits around $ 107.00 USD thats when the LCC`s start bleeding and breaking even, anything above that and they hit the red. If it reaches $107.00 thats when Latestar will start scaling back some International services such as Japan (again).
True, but fuel is rising again, closing closer to US$80. Dont know what the benchmark breakeven line is for a LCC and fuel price, but I would assume not much steeper than that.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: thelodge
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Woodeneye,
Think you may find Balanced Equity Management bought a fair amount of shares at $1.50 during the last capital Raising.
Agree it will be tough to finance the planned aircraft for Jetstar. Sorry the Qantas Group.
Good call not to pay a dividend methinks.
Think you may find Balanced Equity Management bought a fair amount of shares at $1.50 during the last capital Raising.
Agree it will be tough to finance the planned aircraft for Jetstar. Sorry the Qantas Group.
Good call not to pay a dividend methinks.