The Qantas dilemma: still your national carrier?

[Transition Layer]

While I appreciate the Moderators get a bit fed up with the huge number of Qantas threads running at any time, I think this may deserve a new one.

The Qantas dilemma: still your national carrier?
December 07, 2009

Qantas is in the process of reinventing itself, if you believe the company's own hype. It has spent millions on a customer service training centre in Sydney; at least on domestic routes to begin with, it is in the process of redefining the customer check-in experience to radically reduce the time it takes.

It sees the main brand as a premium carrier, complemented by Jetstar as a cheap alternative, with the group able to offer something for each part of the market.

But, particularly for long-haul travel, I'm wondering whether the Qantas group has already lost the battle for Australian hearts and minds.
The combined Qantas group share of the market is now below 30% on international routes from Australia, where once its share was nearer 50% (admittedly in the much more regulated old days). Its market share continues to shrink in spite of the invention of Jetstar, which was designed to increase it.

On the US route, Qantas is being clobbered by new capacity from V Australia and Delta, although Qantas still has the lion's share.

Between here and Europe, Qantas is being swamped, not only by traditional rivals like Singapore Airlines, which continues methodically and relentlessly to increase its Australia market share (in spite of this year's pause caused by the global slowdown), but also by the new Arabian Gulf carriers, Emirates, Etihad and Qatar.

More than a million Australians - about 20% of everyone heading overseas - are going to Europe, but only 40% of them to English-speaking Europe (that is, the UK).

Yet Qantas now has only two European destinations where it flies its own planes - London and the German business capital, Frankfurt.

Its key competitors have far more comprehensive European networks. Emirates, for example, now has more than 20 European cities.

In the past two decades, Qantas has axed Manchester, Paris, Rome and Athens - not because it couldn't fill its planes on those routes, but because there weren't enough business travellers to make those routes pay.

Jetstar plans to return to Rome and Athens. But I think Jetstar will not only struggle to find acceptance from Australians if it flies to Europe, but also needs to tap new markets for visitors to Australia - and most (though not all) of those are in Northern Europe. Think Spain, Germany's many big regional cities, Switzerland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Ireland -- countries from where travel to Australia is already (or potentially) the strongest.

Do you think of Qantas if you're heading to Europe? How would Jetstar go against Singapore Airlines and Emirates? Has the horse already bolted, particularly since its chief low-cost rival, AirAsiaX, already flies daily to London and has just secured rights to fly to Paris?

I'm up to reading comment number 20 out of 269 and every one has been anti-QF.

[C441]

Who's next?

Maybe Clive Dorman will have a crack at Westpac next....after all they are
"not the Jetstar of Banking"

[stubby jumbo]

Strewth !

I just finished trawling through nearly 300 of the Blog posts from todays SMH Travel blog of QF.

I counted about 12 in favour.

I off to take a Bex .......and have a good lie down !

'Hope Dixon reads it- his overwhelming endorsement should be a great boost to his ego........NOT

[Eastwest Loco]

My mainly high end Corporate clients, who generally choose premium Y or Business class prefer the rat - the comfy old shoe as I do.

There has been some leakage to quality overseas players simply due to price, but if QF provides a price they can justify to management, that is where they will roost.

Transition Layer, whether they are good or bad (and they generally are pretty damned good overall) the great white rat and its ladies and gentlemen is still home. It is ours and we are theirs.

Try EK during Rammadam and get the raghead crew on your side of the cabin in J class - no munchies for X hours and bouncing off everything with total confusion. Garuda's delightful but confused service anytime. Air Pacific - are we there yet? What was the question but lovely.

No Airline is perfect, but we know what he have with the Rat, and I will personally attest that I like it and it is the direction my bum will be heading if a seat is available.

Best regards

EWL

[assymetric]

Dixon is the criminal that got away.

Question is why do the QF share holders allow the criminals on the current board to get away with it. i.e. paying Dixons extra bonus due to change of tax rules.

(My grandfather never used to pay so much tax, maybe we can go to his ex employers and ask them to pay the difference between todays tax and what it was when he started working. What do you think)

[ozineurope]

As an expat living in Germany I am surprised at the lack of advertising done here by the QF group. We are swamped with EK,ETIHAD, Turkish Airlines et al, but no QF. My family and I flew here SQ in J class. Very disappointing experience, if QF had the real lie flat seats in J it would have been the rat definitely.

SQ J class was, in my opinion, sub standard and I had a better run with the rat in 08 when flown here for the interview.

Our son just returned home after flying from SY and he was full of praise for the CC and the service he received. Although an aircraft change from 2 class 744 to 3 class 744 saw a glitch with his exit row booking out of FRA. The reissue was mishandled by the 'computer' but the check in supervisor in FRA smoothed everything and the CC on the FRA/SIN leg looked after him really well.

So it will be the taste of home for us on our trips back to Australia.

[teresa green]

There is one thing never mentioned in these posts about the Rat. That is the Govt. of the day, can at any time day or night, demand that QF be made available in the name of national security. I know this has been the case since and probably before WW2. They can overide the unions, the shareholders, and God forbid, the TSV refueller if necessary, though I don't know just how many tech and cabin crew would be excited at being hauled out of their beds, and made fly to a warzone or whatever the emergency. So if the Rat shrinks to a mouse, who takes over? You can only cram so many troops into the Hercs etc, as was the case when QF 707s became troop carriers during Vietnam. Not that its likely, but the Govt have never given up that right, and I doubt have any plans to do so. Off the forum a bit I know, but something I find interesting.

[Transition Layer]

Has anyone from the FAAA (and I know there's a few of you out there) thought about publishing some of the unfavourable comments in your newsletter?

Whilst we all agree that cutbacks and some poor decisions by bonus-hungry management have played their part, the number of comments following this article referring to surly, rude, inattentive flight attendants is astonishing.

If some Cabin Crew hate the job so much that it affects the level of service they provide, then they simply shouldn't be there. The future of the airline and therefore the future of thousands of other jobs depends heavily on those people walking up and down the aisle every day.

[twiggs]

TL, unfortunately publishing those comments in a newsletter will do nothing to change the attitude of those responsible for them.
Those sort of people, whilst in a minority, really do give us all a bad name.
I'm sure most of them do get challenged about their attitude from time to time, but rarely would it get onto their personal record unless a passenger actually names them in a complaint.
Ground staff also have their share of staff with such an attitude.

[Pegasus747]

the FAAA doesnt need to publish the comments of a few disgruntled anonymous passengers. The vast majority of crew do an outstanding job under very challenging circumstances. Speclal meals ordered and not turning up, sub standard food from catering, insufficient catering, In flight Entertainment not working, seats not reclining, seating requests not met, frequent flyer points unable to be redeemed, old broken aircraft, and criminals managing the company in some cases. Ie Freight fraud, ripping off owners (shareholders) APA bid etc.

When the things that are out of the control of the flight attendants are working ok, then perhaps you might be able to have a crack at the crew. As i said before its a handful of crew that dont give a rats anymore.... if ever, and that's not uncommon in any workplace. Managing them out of the business is the responsibility of the OBM's and Cabin Crew Management not the FAAA elected officials.

Cabin crew do an amazing job in spite of successive incompetent management types who trawl the corridors with clip boards in hand trying to find a hair out of place or a shoe heel too high.

[Going Boeing]

A source recently told me that there is a type of manager that has been identified as a "blocker". Joyce has had a few consultants going through the management structure for a while now and they have created a list of all the "blockers" that are preventing effective two-way communication between senior management and workers. Those who suspect that they are on the list should start looking for a new job because the axe will fall soon.

All up, I'm starting to get a bit of confidence about the direction that Joyce wants to take the airline (& I freely admit that I was originally disapointed about his getting the CEO gig). He is spending time (& money) on mainline, reinventing the premium product, whereas his predecessor was totally focused on Jetstar.

I agree with TG about the reserve military capability that Qantas provides for the Australian Government. I understand that the Qantas B707's had a few extra features that made them more suitable for troop transportation than the standard aircraft and the current widebody fleets would be very effective in support of any large scale military deployment. A good example of this is the way that the British used civilian aircraft and ships to support the deployment to the South Atlantic during the Falklands War. The QF LH Certified Agreement even has a section on flying in Warlike circumstances. V Oz B777's would be able to provide a similar capability but I don't know if there is any provision to make the capability available to the government.

[Taildragger67]

ozineurope,



Whilst not as far from home as you, I agree your sentiments re QF () and SQ ().

I don't care how "cute" the F/As are, as long as they have proper catering for me () and I can actually see the movie on my PTV screen ().

So far QF 2, SQ 0 on those (pretty simple) criteria.

Pegasus 747,

Cabin crew do an amazing job in spite of successive incompetent management types

Agreed!

[ditch handle]

source recently told me that there is a type of manager that has been identified as a "blocker". Joyce has had a few consultants going through the management structure for a while now and they have created a list of all the "blockers" that are preventing effective two-way communication between senior management and workers.

Going Boeing,

You've described everybody in cabin crew management.

Most of my CC colleagues have resigned themselves to the fact that nothing will change with the toxic, self serving and ideologically driven nature of our department.

Your post will give hope.......

[Transition Layer]

509 comments now...including this one from the author of the original article:

Phew! I have never experienced anything quite like this in four decades in the journalism business - an avalanche of reaction against the national carrier. It wasn't pre-meditated on my part: at 9am on Monday (07/12/09) - two hours before the blog went live - I had not even decided what the subject was. I had simply thought to steer the discussion towards Qantas's coverage of Europe in view of its new, ferocious competition. I suspect Qantas management has already detected disenchantment in its market research, but I'd suggest this blog adds to its intelligence in an alarming way. There was no "push-polling" in the way reaction to this blog was solicited. On the other hand, people don't generally respond to a blog in such numbers if they're happy little Vegemites. The early indications are that this is one of the largest online audiences ever attracted to a travel blog at this site. - CLIVE DORMAN.

[ozineurope]

Here in Germany I can find as many people who can find fault with Lufthansa, complaints of poor service, mucked up check in, poor food, etc. as there are in Australia complaining about QF.

My recent flight to Paris was a dog's breakfast on the return leg. Checked in on line to be told at the gate that the 4 aisle seats we reserved were no longer available. Why? - Change of aircraft with fewer seats. When we insisted that there must be some available as we had gone from an A321 to A319 due poor load, yep there were. We arrived early which threw the LH system into chaos - parked on the cargo apron at FRA (which is about 5ks from the LH arrival gate) and bussed to the terminal. End result our 20 minute early arrival turned out to be 5 minutes late at the gate! None of this was relayed to the pax until just before the doors opened. AND the CC were the first off the aircrfat to sit in the nice new crew bus whilst we wandered over to the PAX bus, incluidng the lady with the baby, toddler and carriage, all without help or guidance from the LH groundies or CCs.

So every airline has its problems, just some make the news more than others. Bashing QF in Australia is a bit like bashing the Dockers in Perth, mostly to be ignored and largely full of fabrication. (well maybe not in the case of the Dockers!!)

[Taildragger67]

Here in Germany I can find as many people who can find fault with Lufthansa, complaints of poor service, mucked up check in, poor food, etc. as there are in Australia complaining about QF.

Likewise Poms in the UK - bagging BA is a national sport. Lots of them reckon the sun shines out of the Rat's freckle.

[Lodown]

For a Pom, anything British is fair game for bagging.

I hope Qantas does get its act together again. I don't think Joyce has a choice. He has to stop the bleeding. It used to be that Qantas could be relied upon for generally ontime flights, clean aircraft and for making long, tedious international flights somewhat palatable and almost pleasant, but then Dixon came along.....and after experiencing a series of long delayed and diverted flights with missed connections, U/S inflight services and cut-to-the-bone cabin services, I took my money and my bum elsewhere. It looks like a lot of other people did too.

Unfortunately for Qantas, the airlines I use now don't need to do much to retain my loyalty. If I'm indicative of the pre-Dixon era customer who was pushed out, then it's going to cost Qantas the equivalent of Dixon's bonus or more and a lot of time to get disenchanted customers back again.

[qf 1]

if the blokers days are up I O days are numbered,he cost the company 160 m with that LAME dispute,or is he like Joe Tripodi,a cockroach that never dies

[cart_elevator]

I have read all of the posts on that blog.
In reality,my 'grain-of-salt-meter' would put it like this:

20% of posts = competitor input
20% of posts = disgruntled QF staff or ex-staff
20% of posts = bagging for the sake of bagging (as a society,we are now whinging more than the POMS)

So that leaves 40% of posts possibly from actual customers. That is still a serious problem if our customers think that way about us. Joyce really has to do something about it.I work every trip with angry crew (cabin and tech) who really no longer give a toss. Yes we are all responsible for our motivation,but really management need to take some responsibility for crew motivation as well.There are simple things which are low-cost that could increase morale:

• Increased flexibility in rosters
• Better, less expensive and more flexible staff travel (it's only an empty seat) And fairness-why do tech crew get first class travel and not cabin crew
• Opportunities for promotion or moving to other departments (currently non-existent in the cabin crew world)
• Development opportunities (yes we all did the exceptional program-WOW that really changed my life)
• Managers who REALLY understand what our job is about (not someone recently poached from Coles)
• A bit of compassion for personal circumstances

A great lecturer at a university I once went to said "the principle of managing a customer service environment is if your staff are generally happy, then your customers will be too".
I fear my manager,if she wants to speak to me then I know I am in trouble-I avoid her like the plague. And the CSSs and CSMs are so focussed on how you wear your badges/hair/makeup,they dont actually see how well you do your job.They have to fill in a thousand pieces of paper every flight.It really is a poisonous environment to work in.And led by managers that have never even been in the role By the time I have done a 14hr sector to JNB,been blasted about what and what is not procedure, written up at for not having a oneworld badge or using a waiters cloth I dont really have enough energy for the customers.Sometimes great service makes up for the fact I forgot to put a oneworld badge on,but not at Qantas-they will turn someone happy to deliver great service into 'I dont give a toss' over a f*ckin badge !!!!! . It really is a micro-focussed cabin crew department, they never see the big picture -do the customers care if you forgot a badge?

I'm not saying management can make every individual happy every day,but it seems no-one is happy anymore,and the customers,therefore the sahreholders,arent either.

There needs to be a massive,total change in the way managers do things.Cos everyone (customers,crew,groundstaff) are miserable at the moment

[blueloo]

And fairness-why do tech crew get first class travel and not cabin crew

Only captains do. Duty travel is a different story.

Why? Probably because its part of their award. Maybe because they have earned it. Sometimes some positions like it or not have a pecking order.

I wish I could get it on staff travel too.