Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

QF-JStar Japan performance comparison

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

QF-JStar Japan performance comparison

Old 10th Apr 2010, 01:30
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Oz
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well I can vouch for the fact that Qantas mainline aircraft can be required to pay exhorbitant money if they need to use a Jetstar gate, having experienced it personally. In fact it was so costly that we were told to hold in the apron area until a QF designated gate became available, pax on board, engines running, even though a JQ one right next door was vacant. And QF "group" owns the terminal!

So Simon, please stop lying to us. Didn't your mum ever tell you it's naughty, or is that principal beaten out of you these days in Australian Business School?
DutchRoll is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2010, 01:40
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Abeam Alice Springs
Posts: 1,109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And who last week made what seems a very dumb decision to divert a CNS-BNE JQ flight to HMI with an engineer to fix a u/s Airbus....?

Talk about all the bad press from the pax that had to wade thru that diversion etc... when a charter out of CNS would have done the job most likely quicker and cheaper without all the bad PR...

Makes one wonder!!
triadic is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2010, 09:38
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I had a look at the BITRE site and worked out the loads for a few months, included both inbound/outbound in the figures. Buchanan keeps saying how good they are doing in Japan, when is Jetstar ever doing bad in a market! Time to dump Osaka mabye, its hardly doing any good. Swap it for a Singapore run.

Nov 2009
OOL-NRT- 81%
OOL-KIX- 53%
CNS-NRT- 63%

Dec 2010
OOL-NRT- 69%
OOL-KIX- 55%
CNS-NRT- 70%

Jan 2010
OOL-NRT- 78%
OOL-KIX- 55%
CNS-NRT-76%
Sunstar320 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2010, 10:29
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mars
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I wonder how much JQ has used on advertising in Japan.Pretty sure it has been more than QF in the last two years, and well sure more than AO in the whole four years of operation. JQ paying big yen, using the C grade celebrity "Becky", again...Half English in the first place. Pour que? JQ's big exposure advertising campaign on trains, in papers, and other media outlets, has obviously not paid off. Why else would they be advertising "Specials" from Japan, cheaper than airline staff benefit travel. What would the profit margin be on these tickets? Bums on seat at any cost? ....And there are rubbery figures....
OchreOgre is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2010, 10:50
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sydney
Age: 58
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jetstar must [be seen to] succeed at any cost
ditch handle is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2010, 22:47
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 396
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Got it in one Ditch!

It doesn't matter how much you jump up and down. The fact is they will not let it be a failure.
To ensure that is the case, JQ are given guaranteed sources of revenue from mainline. That being in one form or another.
The only point is whether some wil ever accept it or not?
Wingspar is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2010, 23:39
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Perhaps upcoming changes to Australia’s aviation policy will encourage Qantas to sell a % of Jetstar to a foreign airline?
Should this happen, any (undisclosed) cross revenue/cost sharing between Qantas and Jetstar would come to an end forthwith.

Last edited by Gingerbread; 12th Apr 2010 at 00:08. Reason: clarity
Gingerbread is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2010, 00:40
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Enjoy the fun of your slanging and sledging kiddies

Whatever you think of life in the Qantas Group with Jetstar I trust you never find out what the Group would be like without it. "Ankle deep in blood" would be a good start if you're having trouble with word pictures.

Qantas is a GROUP.......a collection of units which add together to perform better than the sum of the parts......get over it.
genex is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2010, 00:48
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 396
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry, but just to correct myself
To ensure that is the case, JQ are given guaranteed sources of revenue from mainline.
Better description is;
To ensure that is the case, JQ are given guaranteed sources of value from mainline.
Wingspar is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2010, 00:55
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The Land Downunder
Posts: 765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Genex,

I couldn't agree more, Qantas 'Group' comprises many different entities of which Jetstar is just one. All the bitch*ng that goes on about Jetstar seems to forget the convenient fact that it was only started as a 'blocker' to Virgin Blue totally taking a massive share in the domestic market working with costs that would mean Qantas as it existed would not be able to compete with. Jetstar was formed on a reduced cost basis in direct competition with Virgin Blue and was given certain advantages by its parent company. Why would you go to the trouble of spending all that money on a new operation without giving it every chance of success. Funny thing happened then.... the public actually had a taste for this 'low cost' carrier and drove demand for more services, was it to the detriment of the Qantas 'Group', NO, it is still highly profitable and it has successfully stopped other competitors from dominating the market. Has it been detrimental to the career aspirations of some Qantas mainline employees, YES. This is not a new thing though, companies the world over chop and change all the time to remain competitive, there are always casualties in this sort of business environment. Try and think though, would your jobs and careers have been any further ahead in a 'non-Jetstar' world once Virgin, Tiger etc... had moved in an destroyed Qantas mainline domestically?? I am afraid Jetstar is here to stay, they will continue to receive help from Qantas Group resources because they are part of the Group.
Artificial Horizon is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2010, 04:55
  #31 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 5 Posts
I haven't published anything about Jetstar domestic. The issue here is Jetstar Intl.

So far we have found that almost half of its quoted passengers are actually domestic passengers in Australia and NZ. Then we find that the routes and aircraft that were gifted to it from mainline are operating at a substantial reduction in load factor in comparison to mainline, and very probably yield as well.

Jetstar International has shrunk the Group's Japanese market. It has probably done that elsewhere as well, but it is difficult to make a direct comparison on most routes.

Maybe you should pay attention to the actual thread?
Capt Kremin is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2010, 06:44
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Jetstar has, by itself, as a direct result of QF policy, actually shrunk the Japanese market!! Wow...that is a big call. Sure the Board will be calling you anyday for your rare forensic insights into the lemming like behaviour of management who for some reason seem to seek loss rather than profit. Are you really sure Japan wasn't being subsidized by mainline losses before and now is closer to the long run trend which from all accounts I read is downwards anyway.

Subsidies are such interesting things. For example the severe constraints on Sydney due the size of the airport and the curfew is a heavy subsidy by travellers toward those carriers with privileged positions at KSA. One in particular. Imagine the free market value of the acres of staff car parks at the Qantas base? Wow....If Sydney West airport had even one 12,000 ft Cat 3 strip up and running now, 24/7 with open skies access, yields would have fallen and markets expanded. So the monopolist carrier would have have to slim down heaps. In that world the $150 k Second Officers would be long gone. What is the "free market" value of a Qantas S/O job if they had to pay the full costs and not be subsidized by the rest of the Group (including one wonders.... JQ's blue singlet Y class travellers?) I'd guess that buying your own 744 rating and starting at $65k would be the going rate if you advertised 200 jobs tomorrow and saw what the market would bear.

The mere fact that Qantas mainline operates such an inefficient fleet with way above world level salaries for pilots is a function of hidden subsidies of all sorts. It would be fascinating to sort it all out. Years back, (and if anyone wants it I think there's a copy in Genex's library) the old BTE produced a report saying that Qantas' costs and protection were such a net drain on Australian industry and tourism that we would all be better off to scrap QF, announce open skies and let the free market rule. Jetstar is a start at reversing that travesty and if pampered/subisized AIPA/Qantas pilots could think a little positively and read history books instead of sledging, the world might be a better place.
genex is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2010, 07:39
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The Land Downunder
Posts: 765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Oh I see, so Qantas management are replacing huge chunks of their overseas markets with Jetstar knowing that they will be making less money!! Then they are fiddling the figures to hide that fact whilst all the time planning to give even more of the profitable routes to an airline that will also bring in less money
Artificial Horizon is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2010, 08:13
  #34 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 5 Posts
I see you aren't really interested in discussing the figures, only illustrating your bias.

Some more figures. The only competition the QF group has on this route is Jalways. Analysis of their figures does indeed point to a reduction of overall traffic on the Japan Australia route, but the load factors are very interesting.

In the 2008 calendar year Jalways carried 375360 Pax at an average monthly load factor of 68.6%

Australian Airlines was shutdown at the end of 2008 and replaced by Jetstar. The Jalways LF's immediately leapt.

In the 2009 calendar year Jalways carried less passengers, 279869, but at a LF of 76.5%. A jump of almost 8%. While there could be many reasons for that, the obvious one is that the Japanese do not like flying on Jetstar.

Genex in your world a car park for a business of 35,000 people may be seen as a subsidy, others may view it as a necessary expense of running business in a city like Sydney.

No SO in QF gets 150K as their base pay. If SO's are making 150K then they are doing that on LH overtime payments on top of their base pay. With other airlines crewing complements those OT payments would be getting added at Captain and FO rates. The SO is actually saving QF money.

I don't know what that has to do with looking at the comparison of QF-JQ on a route where they operate similiar equipment and one has recently assumes the routes of the other. Maybe you can explain...
Capt Kremin is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2010, 08:35
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Genex.

The history of commercial aviation is littered with management decisions which were quite obviously contrary to logical business interest. Frank Lorenzo at Eastern comes to mind.

Qantas senior management has been charactarised for some time by ego, hubris and a focus on short term remuneration targets. Have a look at the APA debacle for the prime example if you don't believe me.

Because of this mindset, Jetstar cannot be seen to be less then a resounding success. Even if it drags down the parent airline with it in the process of being 'successful'.

Personally, I don't care about transfer pricing and cross subsidisation - hell. 'economies of scale' is high school economics 101.

What I, and every other mainline employee wants as well, is for senior management to stop lying about whats going on. If JQ needs to be supported by mainline revenue to block VB / Tiger / Air Asia ect, then I defer to the superior business judgement and acumen of those paid the big bucks.

Until the lies stop, engagement is impossible. Pure and Simple.
mohikan is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2010, 09:07
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Genex, QF are the only airline in the world who carry 2 second officers as part of the crew complement. Cathay and Air NZ carry one s/o and 2 f/o's. BA, United, Emirates and others all carry a heavy 4 crew complement of 2 Captains and 2 F/O's.

By the admission of management at various briefings in years gone by, the total crewing cost of operating a heavy long haul (4 pilot crew) is significantly cheaper for Qantas than most major carriers due to our ability to carry second officers.

Then here you stand and bleat about how overpaid QF crews are. No wonder the industry is heading to where it is. It is your attitude which is the cancer in this industry.
Bazzamundi is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 00:58
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes on 8 Posts
and the topic is ????

I think Kremin has raised (again) some very pertinent points regarding the way jetstar int figures are published.
Diversion onto pay for crew and carparks etc just drifts away from an important issue.
I am a qf employee and shareholder and if J* is not quite what they want us to believe I want to know.

Thanks to capt kremin for some independent analysis.
ampclamp is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 07:49
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: australia
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Gotta agree with amp here.

It has been very evident for a long time now that Jetstar is a parasite on it's parent, despite the constant management spin to the contrary. Intimations that Jetstar is profitable whilst mainline is losing money is laughable at best, shonky and deceitful at worst.

That Kremin has taken the time to come up with these figures is a credit to him. It is way more than anyone else has done. That crikey.com has utilised his figures and filed complaint to the ASX is great - they demand accountability for the shareholders and employees. That this should have been required in the first place is abhorent - you should hang your head in shame QF management.

AH:

Oh I see, so Qantas management are replacing huge chunks of their overseas markets with Jetstar knowing that they will be making less money!! Then they are fiddling the figures to hide that fact whilst all the time planning to give even more of the profitable routes to an airline that will also bring in less money
Yes. Yes I believe they are. Sad isn't it?

Another AH gem:

I am afraid Jetstar is here to stay, they will continue to receive help from Qantas Group resources because they are part of the Group.
Quite true, unfortunately. All that is being asked though by Kremin, and quite reasonably so IMHO, is some honesty from management. Not spin. Not rubbery figures. Not lies. Just the truth. But also unfortunately, QF management couldnt lie straight in bed.

To address the AH and genex anti QF sentiment: sorry lads but you are defending the indefensible, and supporting this attitude will come back and bite us all in the @rse one day. It probably already has....
balance is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 11:06
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes on 8 Posts
Hi balance,
I'm not anti jetstar per se' far from it.The reality is qf needs its cheap offshoot.Thats rpt these days.

all of us just trying to earn the best living we can. Captain or cleaner we all answer to the boss.
The qf v jq peeing competition annoys the heck out of me.

It is purely the way the qf management has chosen to operate , divide , conquer, gifting of routes, denegrating the mainline as too expensive etc etc.They preach we are one group but not once have I seen them preach teamwork.Its always segregation lest we infect the orange family with bad qf attitudes.
Well lo and behold they run the show, insist on having more mangement levels than ever.The qf board and exec committee are resposible for the efficient running of the company, full stop.

If Kremin's posts manage to rattle some ones chains thats great isnt it?
Dont care if its BHP qantas RIO or some tiddler miner, the principal is the same.

Again I commend kremin for his attempt at clarity.There are plenty of sheep in the financial press.Very few actually do any analysis at all.

many I am sure just echo the PR blurb issued by the various companies.
I well remember the fawning over of the types of Skase, Bond, Groves, Babcock and brown OneTel FAI.
Qantas is way above those as a business and draw no inference there, we make real money with a real business, but I am sure you get the principal I am driving.
ampclamp is offline  
Old 13th Apr 2010, 23:59
  #40 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes on 5 Posts
Can I put forward my basic position as that I agree that Jetstar Domestic appears to have done the job in countering the threat from the LCC's on the Australian scene.

The only issue I have ever had with Jetstar Dom is the method of it's creation and it's effect on the career progression of junior mainline pilots who were systematically excluded from taking any meaningful part in the expansion of that part of the Group.

Jetstar International however is a problem. Senior management, and I mean Board level, put forward the opinion a couple of years ago that there were real questions hanging over Jetstar International. Nothing we have seen in these figures changes those questions.

We have seen Jetstar senior management constantly talking up Jetstar International with over the top claims about its growth and popularity. The massive growth claims are fallacious. The popularity claims are fallacious.

When they attempt to foster these claims by including purely domestic passengers to pad the figures I believe their motives become clear. When the load factor comparison with mainline shows a systemic deficit the motives yet again becomes clear.

I believe the Board is being derelict in its duty to represent the shareholders. The plan to increase the number of A330's to 12 and have a 787 fleet size of 25 or so, cannot be sustained on these figures. There is a better option available. The poor old Qantas brand, given half a chance, would seem to represent better shareholder value based on these figures.

If anyone cares to argue that fact lets see your evidence?
Capt Kremin is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.