Jetstar customer guarantee
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
how many litres in Warragamba
Currently 1,116,060,000,000 litres.
It is an interesting campaign clearly designed to give pax some comfort when they book. The bad press they get must take its toll.
the 'get what you pay for line' will haunt them.
It is an interesting campaign clearly designed to give pax some comfort when they book. The bad press they get must take its toll.
the 'get what you pay for line' will haunt them.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
jetstarpilot
You really need to have a good look at yourself. Thats quite unacceptable sexist nasty stuff.grow up.
The future may well be orange but only cos its a protected species that does not need to truly compete against its dad.
It is part of qantas and forms an important part of the business.
The future may well be orange but only cos its a protected species that does not need to truly compete against its dad.
It is part of qantas and forms an important part of the business.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The future is Orange ladies and you had better get with the program or get left behind on the scrapheap of outdated, tired, inneficient, expensive last century legacy workpractices
The fact that you (and others) are proud of it is amazing to say the least.
Yep the future is orange alright, cause it certainly isn't Rosy.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia, maybe
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetstarpilot, What is, as you put it, a "cusomer"? and Is it more efficient to spell inefficient with 2 'n's and only 1 'f' as you did with your attempt- "inneficient"?
(Better run back and edit your post before you look silly).
Otherwise, who really cares anyway, because you're the future, cheap and nasty. God help us all.
ps. 5 of those cc don't look girlie to me, but then you might kick the ball with your left foot, and see things differently.
Jetstarpilot, you deleted your contentious post. Why? Embarrassed at your literacy skills. Or have you realised that bragging about your rising star, by criticising mainline terms and conditions, is quite pathetic. We all know what's going on with J* but there is no need for you to be an arsehole about it.
(Better run back and edit your post before you look silly).
Otherwise, who really cares anyway, because you're the future, cheap and nasty. God help us all.
ps. 5 of those cc don't look girlie to me, but then you might kick the ball with your left foot, and see things differently.
Jetstarpilot, you deleted your contentious post. Why? Embarrassed at your literacy skills. Or have you realised that bragging about your rising star, by criticising mainline terms and conditions, is quite pathetic. We all know what's going on with J* but there is no need for you to be an arsehole about it.
Last edited by Trent 972; 14th Feb 2010 at 10:18.
Registered User **
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason they're grinning is that they finally got a job and have their uniforms.
I wonder if they will be still grinning when they find out how little they are paid and how many hours they will be expected to work.
The last flight I had with Jetstar the crew were chewing on chocolates during boarding in the front galley.
As the Jetstar ad goes "You get what you paid for"
The only problem I have is that they impact on mainline flying and on my choice of flights to go home on.
I wonder if they will be still grinning when they find out how little they are paid and how many hours they will be expected to work.
The last flight I had with Jetstar the crew were chewing on chocolates during boarding in the front galley.
As the Jetstar ad goes "You get what you paid for"
The only problem I have is that they impact on mainline flying and on my choice of flights to go home on.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The completely blatent and obvious flaw in this "charter" is NOT guaranteeing what the punters want which is on time flights or a cancelled flight. Most people booking a low cost flight couldn't give a hoot about the rest. They don't book for customer service. No airline in the world can say up front this flight is leaving on time until it actually leaves and thats why they haven't included that, but seriously, when reading through the charter is any of that going to help you if you are delayed/cancelled or now bumped flying Virgin or Qantas. No, you are not getting what you paid for, you are now leaving from a different gate WITH another airline, in 4 hours time, cant take on my 10kg's carry on that was ok with Jetstar, it's now 7kg with the others and my carry on must be checked in. I would call that "not what I paid for" and would be pretty pissed off. I have flown Jetstar in the past and they are a good airline but this is going to dig them deep.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason they're grinning is that they finally got a job and have their uniforms.
Just like any companies 'Mission Statement' words that mean 'jack' by saying the obvious.
I just looked at a package from the Dole Plantation in Hawaii, mission statement starts with, "Dole Food Company, Inc. is committed to supplying the consumer and our customers with the finest, high-quality products and to leading the industry ........" like hello, they wouldn't say that they are not committed to supplying the consumer.... or perhaps low-quality products.
Like an airline saying, safety is our no 1 priority rather than saying safety is not a priority.
Gives the Marketing Department something to work on avery 3 or 4 years and for the LCC's gives the publicity seeking CEO's (it seems as though they all want to be TV stars these days ! ) another opportunity to put their face on the TV again.
I just looked at a package from the Dole Plantation in Hawaii, mission statement starts with, "Dole Food Company, Inc. is committed to supplying the consumer and our customers with the finest, high-quality products and to leading the industry ........" like hello, they wouldn't say that they are not committed to supplying the consumer.... or perhaps low-quality products.
Like an airline saying, safety is our no 1 priority rather than saying safety is not a priority.
Gives the Marketing Department something to work on avery 3 or 4 years and for the LCC's gives the publicity seeking CEO's (it seems as though they all want to be TV stars these days ! ) another opportunity to put their face on the TV again.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lets not forget the biggest thing JQ has delivered....affordable air travel to millions and millions who would never have got a look-in under the old regulated regime.
And to mainline people who see it as a threat.....JQ is the best defence you have to keep your jobs because let's face it if Tiger or VB or anyone else was running around with 40 A320s, QF would be burned to the waterline.
And to mainline people who see it as a threat.....JQ is the best defence you have to keep your jobs because let's face it if Tiger or VB or anyone else was running around with 40 A320s, QF would be burned to the waterline.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: anywhere for cash
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geez what a load of crap. Look at ALL the ads on tv, the only reason people fly Jstar is $$$. Eveyone knows the product and service is ****e.
This is another attempt at clever marketing, offering something they know can't be delivered at their ticket prices with such a broad network in such a big country.
Mmmmmmm
This is another attempt at clever marketing, offering something they know can't be delivered at their ticket prices with such a broad network in such a big country.
Mmmmmmm
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: sydney
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One airline, more frequency, more choice, more backup, less mgt.
No reason budget can't board through the rear doors on a
Qf jet, they could even sit behind another curtain on different seats with no food and pay for everything.
What a load of crap you need another airline to do what
Jetstar or Virgin do. It could be done more effectively with
mainline, whilst also improving both ends of the market for less.
Better working conditions, better customer service and better profits and flexibilty.
Anyone taking up the us vs them is just a stupid pawn in mgt manipulation
and greed.
Wakeup
No reason budget can't board through the rear doors on a
Qf jet, they could even sit behind another curtain on different seats with no food and pay for everything.
What a load of crap you need another airline to do what
Jetstar or Virgin do. It could be done more effectively with
mainline, whilst also improving both ends of the market for less.
Better working conditions, better customer service and better profits and flexibilty.
Anyone taking up the us vs them is just a stupid pawn in mgt manipulation
and greed.
Wakeup
Rudderless,
Re;
"No reason budget can't board through the rear doors on a
Qf jet, they could even sit behind another curtain on different seats with no food and pay for everything.
What a load of crap you need another airline to do what
Jetstar or Virgin do. It could be done more effectively with
mainline, whilst also improving both ends of the market for less."
Isn't part of the 'economy' package for the company that they pay the crews less than 'mainline', and by so doing, are able to 'lower' the cost to the punters, whilst providing more frequency of acft, flights, and times of departure? In other words, more choice?
Re;
"No reason budget can't board through the rear doors on a
Qf jet, they could even sit behind another curtain on different seats with no food and pay for everything.
What a load of crap you need another airline to do what
Jetstar or Virgin do. It could be done more effectively with
mainline, whilst also improving both ends of the market for less."
Isn't part of the 'economy' package for the company that they pay the crews less than 'mainline', and by so doing, are able to 'lower' the cost to the punters, whilst providing more frequency of acft, flights, and times of departure? In other words, more choice?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 74
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rudderless et al,
Your suggestion about embedding a LCC within a Legacy carrier is certainly interesting and has much merit to it except for the major drawback that it won't work.
Certainly major carriers do and always will have discount pax as a significant % of their loads. That is true especially on flights of less than about 2 hours which is say about 85% of Australian passenger boardings each day. True in the US too.
It's just that the flexibility exhibited by LCCs (and yes their employees are usually not as well paid-but there are way more jobs overall) means that the legacy carriers cannot adapt and offer the across the board cost base needed to meet the competition.
Don't you think that if your idea could work then the myriad carriers worldwide being slowly eaten up by LCCs would have done it already? That may one day be the future if JQ and QF finally merge.....but not yet while the market is still really in it's adolescence.
Taking the very high density routes in and out of OOL (MEL and SYD to OOL especially). All but a tiny portion of traffic there is very price senisitive and there'd be no pax "up the front" of a legacy carrier however many there were behind the curtain.
Brand separation is the key to the LCC formula. You can leverage off the parent identity and image (as DFOs do with their full cost parents) but it takes a seperate entity to do it properly.
The proof of the pudding is there anyway....passengers now use the internet to "vote with their feet" and for the large % who are price sensitive they're choosing VB, Tiger and JQ.
Jetstar's Charter is out there in public. Doubters now have a great and visible yardstick to measure actual performance against. I think that's a great thing. We will certainly see whether they live up to it. I would find it hard to support the case that the world would be a better place had they considered such a Charter but decided NOT to offer it.
If the varying unions who make up QF's labour cost base feel that they could offer an "LCC friendly" EBA that would offer the cost and flexibility needed to effectively compete against Tiger and VB then I am sure that QF would love to look at it. Hasn't happened yet except as an actof desperation for airlines in Chapter 11 in the US but it could happen.
In the mean time, just ponder for a moment the thought of QF legacy lumbering along with it's $150,000 pa Second Officers at the lower end of their food chain while someone else's LCCs eat into the heartland of their price sensitive traffic.It wouldn't be pretty at all.....JQ may not be perfect....and almost certainly isn't....but it is way better for QF employees that any other option.
Your suggestion about embedding a LCC within a Legacy carrier is certainly interesting and has much merit to it except for the major drawback that it won't work.
Certainly major carriers do and always will have discount pax as a significant % of their loads. That is true especially on flights of less than about 2 hours which is say about 85% of Australian passenger boardings each day. True in the US too.
It's just that the flexibility exhibited by LCCs (and yes their employees are usually not as well paid-but there are way more jobs overall) means that the legacy carriers cannot adapt and offer the across the board cost base needed to meet the competition.
Don't you think that if your idea could work then the myriad carriers worldwide being slowly eaten up by LCCs would have done it already? That may one day be the future if JQ and QF finally merge.....but not yet while the market is still really in it's adolescence.
Taking the very high density routes in and out of OOL (MEL and SYD to OOL especially). All but a tiny portion of traffic there is very price senisitive and there'd be no pax "up the front" of a legacy carrier however many there were behind the curtain.
Brand separation is the key to the LCC formula. You can leverage off the parent identity and image (as DFOs do with their full cost parents) but it takes a seperate entity to do it properly.
The proof of the pudding is there anyway....passengers now use the internet to "vote with their feet" and for the large % who are price sensitive they're choosing VB, Tiger and JQ.
Jetstar's Charter is out there in public. Doubters now have a great and visible yardstick to measure actual performance against. I think that's a great thing. We will certainly see whether they live up to it. I would find it hard to support the case that the world would be a better place had they considered such a Charter but decided NOT to offer it.
If the varying unions who make up QF's labour cost base feel that they could offer an "LCC friendly" EBA that would offer the cost and flexibility needed to effectively compete against Tiger and VB then I am sure that QF would love to look at it. Hasn't happened yet except as an actof desperation for airlines in Chapter 11 in the US but it could happen.
In the mean time, just ponder for a moment the thought of QF legacy lumbering along with it's $150,000 pa Second Officers at the lower end of their food chain while someone else's LCCs eat into the heartland of their price sensitive traffic.It wouldn't be pretty at all.....JQ may not be perfect....and almost certainly isn't....but it is way better for QF employees that any other option.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the issue with the whole Jetstar vs QF cost thing is that Jetstar uses alot of QF infrastructure for free and then QF is accused of being 'too expensive'. If Jetstar was a truly separate operation I think you will find their cost structure to be much higher than what it is. The list of 'creative accounting' would go for a few pages I imagine. This is what gets the QF staff irate.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Australia, maybe
Posts: 559
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Sherm, You offer a good response, except you along with all the other dreamers, seem to think that most QF S/O’s earn $150k/annum. Just because a few of the super senior ‘Pacific S/O Barons’ may get that, in no way means that it is the norm. A midrange seniority S/O’s would need to work 1200 hours a year to make that amount. Second Officers are not present on most airline flight decks and are a cheaper compromise to operating ‘heavy’ (multiples of Capt’s and F/O’s) crews, as most other international carriers do. The only way LCC’s make money is in forward ticket sales. Come the day when that income does not cover operating costs you will be left with no option other than closure.
Unless the LCC achieves a greater prominence in higher yield fares i.e. becomes more like their 'Legacy' parent, they will have no guarantee of a long term future.
J* (in its current guise) along with Tiger, are the beginning of the end of a reliable and trustworthy airline industry, not the future that we should leave for those that follow us.
Unless the LCC achieves a greater prominence in higher yield fares i.e. becomes more like their 'Legacy' parent, they will have no guarantee of a long term future.
J* (in its current guise) along with Tiger, are the beginning of the end of a reliable and trustworthy airline industry, not the future that we should leave for those that follow us.