Why does Joyce hate Qantas so much?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So let me get this right.
ALLCO makes the bid for Qantas in partnership and it now appears they didn't even have "the money"??
Does this whole APA-Qantas takeover fiasco look at all kosher , on any level?
What was it again? $100 Million for the top dog execs, was to be siphoned off for all their hard work?
KPMG auditor suspended over Allco bungle
He will also pay a fine of $10,000 after botching the audit of Allco Financial Group.
In an investigation of Allco's accounts, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission said it was "concerned" Sydney-based Christopher Neville Whittingham "failed to carry out or adequately and properly perform his duties as an auditor".
It also said it was concerned Mr Whittingham failed to ensure the audit was conducted in accordance with Australian Auditing Standards.
ASIC found that Mr Whittingham had misclassified an entry of $1.8 billion in interest-bearing loans as a non-current liability rather than a current liability when he led the audit of the company's accounts for the 2006-07 financial year.
But the corporate regulator did not consider that Mr Whittingham's actions caused the group's demise last year.
Mr Whittingham, who is not in the country, has been a registered auditor since December 2002.
He led a KPMG team of more than 20 auditors in performing audit duties in 2007 for the now defunct financial services group.
Allco was one of the high-profile collapses during the global financial crisis. It was placed in liquidation after it was discovered in May that it could not repay more than $1bn in loans.
A KPMG spokesperson confirmed Mr Whittingham remained on the payroll of KPMG despite the ASIC suspension.
"ASIC notes that Mr Whittingham acted swiftly and appropriately when the error came to his attention and proactively engaged in discussions with ASIC on the matter," KPMG representative Kristin Silva said.
In the notes to the undertaking, Mr Whittingham said he disagrees with ASIC's assessment but he agreed to the enforcable undertaking which has resulted in his suspension and a fine.
The undertakings also require Mr Whittingham to take 10 hours of continuing professional education during the suspension period and have his first three audits reviewed by another auditor.
While Mr Whittingham cannot work as an auditor in Australia, he was sent by KPMG to Thailand last year to work as a consultant. He is not expected to return from the secondment until April 2012.
ALLCO makes the bid for Qantas in partnership and it now appears they didn't even have "the money"??
Does this whole APA-Qantas takeover fiasco look at all kosher , on any level?
What was it again? $100 Million for the top dog execs, was to be siphoned off for all their hard work?
KPMG auditor suspended over Allco bungle
- Tracy Lee
- From:The Australian
- December 07, 2010 12:00AM
He will also pay a fine of $10,000 after botching the audit of Allco Financial Group.
In an investigation of Allco's accounts, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission said it was "concerned" Sydney-based Christopher Neville Whittingham "failed to carry out or adequately and properly perform his duties as an auditor".
It also said it was concerned Mr Whittingham failed to ensure the audit was conducted in accordance with Australian Auditing Standards.
ASIC found that Mr Whittingham had misclassified an entry of $1.8 billion in interest-bearing loans as a non-current liability rather than a current liability when he led the audit of the company's accounts for the 2006-07 financial year.
But the corporate regulator did not consider that Mr Whittingham's actions caused the group's demise last year.
Mr Whittingham, who is not in the country, has been a registered auditor since December 2002.
He led a KPMG team of more than 20 auditors in performing audit duties in 2007 for the now defunct financial services group.
Allco was one of the high-profile collapses during the global financial crisis. It was placed in liquidation after it was discovered in May that it could not repay more than $1bn in loans.
A KPMG spokesperson confirmed Mr Whittingham remained on the payroll of KPMG despite the ASIC suspension.
"ASIC notes that Mr Whittingham acted swiftly and appropriately when the error came to his attention and proactively engaged in discussions with ASIC on the matter," KPMG representative Kristin Silva said.
In the notes to the undertaking, Mr Whittingham said he disagrees with ASIC's assessment but he agreed to the enforcable undertaking which has resulted in his suspension and a fine.
The undertakings also require Mr Whittingham to take 10 hours of continuing professional education during the suspension period and have his first three audits reviewed by another auditor.
While Mr Whittingham cannot work as an auditor in Australia, he was sent by KPMG to Thailand last year to work as a consultant. He is not expected to return from the secondment until April 2012.
Last edited by blow.n.gasket; 7th Dec 2010 at 05:42.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lisbon
Posts: 995
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Cactus. Don't shoot the messenger and don't attack the man. That's is the tactic best left for the losers. Anyway, your character assessment is so far from the mark it is just laughable. ,
BTW, ever heard of the adage that goes along the lines that the burden of proof rests with he who makes the assertion? I suspect not as it is almost certainly not deep enough for people with your obvious intelligence.
Now leave me, and others with whom you disagree, alone. Attack the topic with vigour, debate it for all you're worth but don't resort to personal villification. OK?
PM,
I think the jury has considered the APA Bid. A lot has been said, written and investigated, but not a soul has been charged or sued to my knowledge, criminally or civilly. I'm not prepared to comment one way or the other but you don't know for example what those involved on the edges were fed by those at the centre of things.
It is very easy to make (outrageous) claims as is often the case on PPRUNE but the proof is invariably absent. Rather than sensibly debate etc., there are quite a few dick-heads who just want to defame and otherwise say scurrilous things, especially about those who might be more successful than are the claimants.
I think the jury has considered the APA Bid. A lot has been said, written and investigated, but not a soul has been charged or sued to my knowledge, criminally or civilly. I'm not prepared to comment one way or the other but you don't know for example what those involved on the edges were fed by those at the centre of things.
It is very easy to make (outrageous) claims as is often the case on PPRUNE but the proof is invariably absent. Rather than sensibly debate etc., there are quite a few dick-heads who just want to defame and otherwise say scurrilous things, especially about those who might be more successful than are the claimants.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
And do Allco still own a number of the QF fleet. I remember seeing somewhere the numbers but it elludes me now.
That whole Allco/APA thing stinks worse than a WWTP on a bad day
That whole Allco/APA thing stinks worse than a WWTP on a bad day
Without exception, all have been dedicated to making Qantas a better place for staff, customers and shareholders.
I have said it before and I'll say it again. Airlines do not work in a free market under the shareholder model.
They become profit driven rather than safety driven.
Airlines are essential infrastructure (like buses, trains etc) and should be owned and operated by the taxpayer, reportable to the federal government, and managed as a private company outside of government bureaucracy.
Qantas under the taxpayer may not have been the most profitable airline, but it achieved it's safety record and reputation of exellence while operating in this manner. You always knew you would get home, safety was paramount and profits were a lower priority.
It has only taken 15 years for the private sector to destroy it.
They become profit driven rather than safety driven.
Airlines are essential infrastructure (like buses, trains etc) and should be owned and operated by the taxpayer, reportable to the federal government, and managed as a private company outside of government bureaucracy.
Qantas under the taxpayer may not have been the most profitable airline, but it achieved it's safety record and reputation of exellence while operating in this manner. You always knew you would get home, safety was paramount and profits were a lower priority.
It has only taken 15 years for the private sector to destroy it.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ken said....
It might surprise the cynical here that not once did I see any decision-making at Qantas with a view to a bonus or higher salary. Without exception, all have been dedicated to making Qantas a better place for staff, customers and shareholders.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Marion, South Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Green Goblin,
Agree. Qantas in answerable to the Shareholders. And many Shareholders are Institutions that only remain interested in Dividends and other Financial returns.
Mike
Agree. Qantas in answerable to the Shareholders. And many Shareholders are Institutions that only remain interested in Dividends and other Financial returns.
Mike
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Skating away on the thin ice of a new day.
Posts: 1,116
Received 13 Likes
on
8 Posts
The only time I saw Dixon smile was when he was cuddling up to Marge and company during the bid.
50 million dollar smile.
Yes the takeover money would have delivered then holders with a windfall but the airline would have utterly crumbled under the mountain of debt that would absolutely have been placed on its balance sheet.
We'd all be on contracts lower money crap T&C if you had a job at all.
A very senior man, JB I think, said after the bid failed that for the 6 months leading up to and during the bid it was the entire focus of the exec committee. eyes off the real game.Over and out.
Ken you seem a decent fellow but frankly out of touch with what is going down there.
50 million dollar smile.
Yes the takeover money would have delivered then holders with a windfall but the airline would have utterly crumbled under the mountain of debt that would absolutely have been placed on its balance sheet.
We'd all be on contracts lower money crap T&C if you had a job at all.
A very senior man, JB I think, said after the bid failed that for the 6 months leading up to and during the bid it was the entire focus of the exec committee. eyes off the real game.Over and out.
Ken you seem a decent fellow but frankly out of touch with what is going down there.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have said it before and I'll say it again. Airlines do not work in a free market under the shareholder model.
They become profit driven rather than safety driven.
They become profit driven rather than safety driven.
Yep
and
.... the APA Bid .....
For me, happy staff is an airlines biggest asset, after all, they are the delivers to the shareholders, they do it everyday under all market conditions.
The company image is set by the managers.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joyce impersonates as a CEO, he has not the capabilty nor the foresight.
He is at best a mid level accountant used to plotting passenger loads and nothing more.
We are in the hands of one who is incapable and god now can only help us, Joyce along with his sponsor Clifford will destroy the last great australian icon and they will not care.
Jetstar is Joyce's pride and joy, Qantas is merely the host that the parasite feeds off and it will leave behind a shell that will collapse unto itself.
A sad tale to end the legacy of a once truly great airline
He is at best a mid level accountant used to plotting passenger loads and nothing more.
We are in the hands of one who is incapable and god now can only help us, Joyce along with his sponsor Clifford will destroy the last great australian icon and they will not care.
Jetstar is Joyce's pride and joy, Qantas is merely the host that the parasite feeds off and it will leave behind a shell that will collapse unto itself.
A sad tale to end the legacy of a once truly great airline
Look at AirNZ. Private industry ran it into the ground through bad decisions, the government bailed it out, retained a large portion, and look at it now.
I think Qantas will go the same way. The loons will continue on this destructive path, and the tax payer will end up with the wreck and bailout.
Personally I hope it is soon.
I think Qantas will go the same way. The loons will continue on this destructive path, and the tax payer will end up with the wreck and bailout.
Personally I hope it is soon.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just about sums it up Mr F.
Clifford is the one pulling the Irishman's strings. He has blurred his responsibilities as Chairman but is moreso a psuedo CEO.
Oh and about that APA bid.... white collar crime, nothing more and nothing less than an act of sinister greed. As someone mentioned earlier, noone was prosecuted .... well that just about gives you an insight of our real corporate, regulatory and legal framework ... it is a very elite boys club up there.
Clifford is the one pulling the Irishman's strings. He has blurred his responsibilities as Chairman but is moreso a psuedo CEO.
Oh and about that APA bid.... white collar crime, nothing more and nothing less than an act of sinister greed. As someone mentioned earlier, noone was prosecuted .... well that just about gives you an insight of our real corporate, regulatory and legal framework ... it is a very elite boys club up there.
Look at AirNZ. Private industry ran it into the ground through bad decisions, the government bailed it out, retained a large portion, and look at it now.
Surely passengers see through Qantas and not just those of us with an interest in the industry we work within. So much of what they do is appalling and it is just the little things sometimes which make you think, what is this amateur hour at my little airline?
Now in all fairness my last few flights were an improvement, the food was good, almost SQ good. But the product overall is confused and not really becoming of a 'premier' airline.
And JetStar... despise it, truly despise it. Never in my life would I willingly purchase a ticket to fly with them.
We all know things work in cycles, it's just a shame that so much turmoil has to occur until things right themselves.
Nunc est bibendum
Without exception, all have been dedicated to making Qantas a better place for staff, customers and shareholders.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airlines do not work in a free market under the shareholder model.
They become profit driven rather than safety driven.
Airlines are essential infrastructure (like buses, trains etc) and should be owned and operated by the taxpayer, reportable to the federal government, and managed as a private company outside of government bureaucracy.
Part of the reason for privatizing airlines is that various governments determined that the airlines weren’t essential infrastructure. If one airline company collapses, another will spring up. You might have a supporter if you argue that the major aerodromes are essential infrastructure, but not one particular airline.
Qantas under the taxpayer may not have been the most profitable airline, but it achieved its safety record and reputation of excellence while operating in this manner. You always knew you would get home, safety was paramount and profits were a lower priority.
It has only taken 15 years for the private sector to destroy it.
The other issue has been that Qantas has its cake and wants to eat it too. It wants the overseas investment, wants new routes and markets, but wants the route (government) protection in place. The company wouldn't likely be a viable entity without the route protections.
Last edited by Lodown; 7th Dec 2010 at 14:19.
Ken Borough:
Evidence?
1. The APA Bid in its entirety. There is at least one very good thread as to why this was an idea that was not in either the shareholders, employees or Australias interests. QF would be gone or on Government life support by now had it succeeded.
2. The "Hamilton Island" letter by Dixon - giving management his approval to denigrate potential customers.
3. Margaret Jacksons Christmas gift of Grange to Senior Managers while other staff were taking pay freezes.
4. Engagement surveys that demonstrated disengagement.
5. The famous "The Board is making the profits" or equivalent claim that devalued the staff.
6. The last Qantas Engineers EBA.
7. Numerous technical decisions that proved to be sub optimal, starting with the IFE decision, then continuing to variety of fleet upgrade and replacement decisions, the latest fiascos being the A380 and B787.
8. My personal favourite - outsourcing critical corporate capabilities - which has only just bitten QF over the A380 incident.
9. Numerous reports of the ego driven behaviour of senior management.
10. The creation of "Jetstar Asia".
11. The creation of Jetstar itself - often called brand cannibalism or in Polish; "Pissing in the soup".
12. The creation of a notional entity called "The Qantas Group" - entailing a layer of "Group General Managers" and associated support staff. This slows decision making even further.
13. The dumbing down of Qantas pilot requirements.
14. The closure of engineering facilities and the reduction in corporate technology and engineering capability.
Many of these decisions are yet to have their full negative impact. All demonstrate what I can only describe as a "perverted" world view of the role of senior management and the Board in a public company. If you want to understand what a better role model would be, look at Fyffe of Air NZ and Richard Branson.
To put that another way, an acquaintance of mine who was a Director of a major bank explained: "My job is to make sure that the people can succeed at what we ask them to do." Numerous threads on Pprune demonstrate that QF has reversed this idea.
Oh! And finally, and conclusively....................... the share price.
P.S. My interaction with Qantas Management was confined to being acquainted with a senior manager who made monthly visits to Melbourne, regularly regaling me with tales of his importance before swanning off to spend the night with his girlfriend of many years. He had a wife and Two kids in Sydney at the same time. Some model manager.
Over the years I have engaged professionally and socially with quite a few Qantas executives. It might surprise the cynical here that not once did I see any decision-making at Qantas with a view to a bonus or higher salary. Without exception, all have been dedicated to making Qantas a better place for staff, customers and shareholders.
Here's a challenge to the nay-sayers: are any of them able to produce positive proof or even evidence that the Qantas people with whom they interact have been looking to procure or enhance his or her bonus rather than doing 'what's right'?
Here's a challenge to the nay-sayers: are any of them able to produce positive proof or even evidence that the Qantas people with whom they interact have been looking to procure or enhance his or her bonus rather than doing 'what's right'?
1. The APA Bid in its entirety. There is at least one very good thread as to why this was an idea that was not in either the shareholders, employees or Australias interests. QF would be gone or on Government life support by now had it succeeded.
2. The "Hamilton Island" letter by Dixon - giving management his approval to denigrate potential customers.
3. Margaret Jacksons Christmas gift of Grange to Senior Managers while other staff were taking pay freezes.
4. Engagement surveys that demonstrated disengagement.
5. The famous "The Board is making the profits" or equivalent claim that devalued the staff.
6. The last Qantas Engineers EBA.
7. Numerous technical decisions that proved to be sub optimal, starting with the IFE decision, then continuing to variety of fleet upgrade and replacement decisions, the latest fiascos being the A380 and B787.
8. My personal favourite - outsourcing critical corporate capabilities - which has only just bitten QF over the A380 incident.
9. Numerous reports of the ego driven behaviour of senior management.
10. The creation of "Jetstar Asia".
11. The creation of Jetstar itself - often called brand cannibalism or in Polish; "Pissing in the soup".
12. The creation of a notional entity called "The Qantas Group" - entailing a layer of "Group General Managers" and associated support staff. This slows decision making even further.
13. The dumbing down of Qantas pilot requirements.
14. The closure of engineering facilities and the reduction in corporate technology and engineering capability.
Many of these decisions are yet to have their full negative impact. All demonstrate what I can only describe as a "perverted" world view of the role of senior management and the Board in a public company. If you want to understand what a better role model would be, look at Fyffe of Air NZ and Richard Branson.
To put that another way, an acquaintance of mine who was a Director of a major bank explained: "My job is to make sure that the people can succeed at what we ask them to do." Numerous threads on Pprune demonstrate that QF has reversed this idea.
Oh! And finally, and conclusively....................... the share price.
P.S. My interaction with Qantas Management was confined to being acquainted with a senior manager who made monthly visits to Melbourne, regularly regaling me with tales of his importance before swanning off to spend the night with his girlfriend of many years. He had a wife and Two kids in Sydney at the same time. Some model manager.
Last edited by Sunfish; 7th Dec 2010 at 17:28.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Australia
Age: 47
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW, ever heard of the adage that goes along the lines that the burden of proof rests with he who makes the assertion? I suspect not as it is almost certainly not deep enough for people with your obvious intelligence
Lets see now if you can provide us with at least 15 dot points listing what QF Management have done that has been good for the airline in terms of employee engagement, aircraft maintenance, safety and customer service that hasn't involved a cut back in spending to increase profits and put money in their own back pocket in the form of a performance bonus.
Over the years I have engaged professionally and socially with quite a few Qantas executives. It might surprise the cynical here that not once did I see any decision-making at Qantas with a view to a bonus or higher salary. Without exception, all have been dedicated to making Qantas a better place for staff, customers and shareholders
So glad you could join us on this Ken, perhaps when you next "engage" with your executive friends you could ask them, on our behalf, to clean the crap out of their ears, open their eyes and take a reality check because they clearly have no idea of reality when it comes to running an airline.
Pitts2A:
No! No! No! Pittsy, how many times do we need to tell you that we aren't "running an airline" as you put it! We are running the Qantas GROUP!
The airlines as you put it are merely part of the Qantas Group portfolio. They are mere investments by us, that's all.
We don't actually "run" as you quaintly put it, any airline , we run the GROUP. The day to day operations and decisions about the airlines we invest in are made by "little people" we employ, after all, if we need technical advice we will hire it at an hourly rate, and the day to day decisions about running an airline are so simple any fool can do it. We concern ourselves with far more important and difficult things, such as our vision for where the group should be heading in Twenty years time. We must not, and need not be distracted by mundane trivial technical matters, let alone individual customer experiences. That is what we employ staff for!
We are thinking strategically and looking at the big picture of where the group should position itself in the rapidly expanding great east Asia co-prosperity sphere. You have to understand that the world we live in today is dynamic! There are challenges that must be met! Concepts that must be mastered if we are to survive and prosper in an Internet enabled global village!
We need to optimise our investment portfolio for growth in emerging economies and structure our offerings in the transportation marketplace to offer meaningful value propositions to potential stakeholders. We also have had to instruct our staff that we are not made of money and careful attention needs to be paid to minimising input costs if we are to generate the returns on investment that the capital asset pricing model requires us to achieve.
Pittsy, be realistic! All this takes time and effort! Do you really want us to be focussing on little unimportant things like customer service, so called "staff engagement" and the non appearance of the B787? Don't you understand that pay rises are not possible as they impact our input costs? There are much bigger issues to be confronted! Be reasonable.
So glad you could join us on this Ken, perhaps when you next "engage" with your executive friends you could ask them, on our behalf, to clean the crap out of their ears, open their eyes and take a reality check because they clearly have no idea of reality when it comes to running an airline.
The airlines as you put it are merely part of the Qantas Group portfolio. They are mere investments by us, that's all.
We don't actually "run" as you quaintly put it, any airline , we run the GROUP. The day to day operations and decisions about the airlines we invest in are made by "little people" we employ, after all, if we need technical advice we will hire it at an hourly rate, and the day to day decisions about running an airline are so simple any fool can do it. We concern ourselves with far more important and difficult things, such as our vision for where the group should be heading in Twenty years time. We must not, and need not be distracted by mundane trivial technical matters, let alone individual customer experiences. That is what we employ staff for!
We are thinking strategically and looking at the big picture of where the group should position itself in the rapidly expanding great east Asia co-prosperity sphere. You have to understand that the world we live in today is dynamic! There are challenges that must be met! Concepts that must be mastered if we are to survive and prosper in an Internet enabled global village!
We need to optimise our investment portfolio for growth in emerging economies and structure our offerings in the transportation marketplace to offer meaningful value propositions to potential stakeholders. We also have had to instruct our staff that we are not made of money and careful attention needs to be paid to minimising input costs if we are to generate the returns on investment that the capital asset pricing model requires us to achieve.
Pittsy, be realistic! All this takes time and effort! Do you really want us to be focussing on little unimportant things like customer service, so called "staff engagement" and the non appearance of the B787? Don't you understand that pay rises are not possible as they impact our input costs? There are much bigger issues to be confronted! Be reasonable.