Qantas to start another airline offshore?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TIMA9X:
Isn't Qantas through 3K using a sham Singaporean structure to compete head on with SQ and its group of airlines? As I've said repeatedly, QF through 3K can now use SIN's very liberal ASAs to enjoy many of the rights that up till their arrival, SQ used to enjoy alone. Eg SIN-AKL is operated using the SIN AOC on the SIN-NZ Bilateral. Even NZ-USA can be operated using SIN AOC with 5th freedoms, because the SIN-NZ-USA Open Skies Agreement allows for 5th freedoms between NZ and USA.
Metro Man:
What exactly is the "Asian way" of doing things? Vietnam is not exactly Singapore, and Singaporean companies regularly get screwed when doing business throughout Asia too.
Isn't Qantas through 3K using a sham Singaporean structure to compete head on with SQ and its group of airlines? As I've said repeatedly, QF through 3K can now use SIN's very liberal ASAs to enjoy many of the rights that up till their arrival, SQ used to enjoy alone. Eg SIN-AKL is operated using the SIN AOC on the SIN-NZ Bilateral. Even NZ-USA can be operated using SIN AOC with 5th freedoms, because the SIN-NZ-USA Open Skies Agreement allows for 5th freedoms between NZ and USA.
Metro Man:
What exactly is the "Asian way" of doing things? Vietnam is not exactly Singapore, and Singaporean companies regularly get screwed when doing business throughout Asia too.
I meant cultural differences, there are so many ways to cause offence or loss of face and you wouldn't even know you're doing it.
Jetstar Asia flying to Taiwan before mainland China wouldn't have gone down too well in Beijing for example.
As for Jetstar's Vietnam experience, obviously they didn't pay off the right people.
However trying to pay off the "right people" in Singapore would have resulted in charges of bribery and corruption.
As the HSBC adverts state, local knowledge is everything.
Jetstar Asia flying to Taiwan before mainland China wouldn't have gone down too well in Beijing for example.
As for Jetstar's Vietnam experience, obviously they didn't pay off the right people.
However trying to pay off the "right people" in Singapore would have resulted in charges of bribery and corruption.
As the HSBC adverts state, local knowledge is everything.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn't Qantas through 3K using a sham Singaporean structure to compete head on with SQ and its group of airlines?
Yes, there are a few people in Asia who feel the Q/J* setup in SIN is a sham, and after today's announcement,
Mr Joyce said that Qantas doesn't rule out the idea of establishing an offshore unit to help boost profits from international services in the future.
Remember the SQ knock back by the Australian government for OZ US rights strongly opposed by Q management at the time, apparently ruffled a few feathers with the ruling families back in Sin.
The recent knock back by Australia for the takeover of the ASX to name a couple.
It really doesn't matter how good the ASAs are in Singapore, they need the business as Changi is a big part of the island states economy, simple as that really.
SIN-AKL is operated using the SIN AOC on the SIN-NZ Bilateral. Even NZ-USA can be operated using SIN AOC with 5th freedoms, because the SIN-NZ-USA Open Skies Agreement
I suppose I still believe in that old saying, many airlines are governed by "Nationalistic Pride." I believe SQ is one of those airlines and Qantas is another. I can also remember the old 707s painted in the old MSA colours approching r16 SYD, before a family member working for Q was sent to Sin to help set up Singapore Airlines. SQ have done a brilliant job with their fleet planning, Qantas has not. Somehow the current Q management believe that after bleeding it dry to set up J* it is necessary to move the heart and sole of a 90 year old airline to Asia. It is here I draw the line, I guess I am a traditionalist, I believe in the "high standards culture" developed by Q pilots, Engineers and CCs and still one of the best in aviation, Qantas was well on the way to be 50 years old before AJ was even born! He possibly thinks he is Willie Walsh.
Air India should have restructured 10 years ago: Willie Walsh - The Economic Times
What has been the biggest difference to the organisation after BA and Iberia merged?
Willie Walsh: We haven't merged the brands, IAG is not a brand, it's a holding company. We have cleanly set out 2 operating companies, 2 brands. What has happened is we can now take an over-arching view, in the interests of shareholders. We have retained flexibility, which is very important, but we can also coordinate and control when the need arises - we're looking for Euro 400 million in synergy by year 5 - 60% will come from cost savings, and 40% from revenues. What we also now have in IAG is a platform, that will allow us to participate with anybody, as the aviation industry sees more consolidation. We're open to more partners, but there is no discussion on at the moment.
Willie Walsh: We haven't merged the brands, IAG is not a brand, it's a holding company. We have cleanly set out 2 operating companies, 2 brands. What has happened is we can now take an over-arching view, in the interests of shareholders. We have retained flexibility, which is very important, but we can also coordinate and control when the need arises - we're looking for Euro 400 million in synergy by year 5 - 60% will come from cost savings, and 40% from revenues. What we also now have in IAG is a platform, that will allow us to participate with anybody, as the aviation industry sees more consolidation. We're open to more partners, but there is no discussion on at the moment.
.
Last edited by TIMA9X; 16th May 2011 at 23:29.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Asia
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the main, and largely undisputed, points of view regarding employees among heavyweight business thinkers and the HR community in general is that 'people are our greatest asset'. This has even trickled down to our own lightweight management.
Quote:
Rome was not built in a day and it was not destroyed in a day, but it was neither built nor destroyed by anything but people.
We are watching the destruction of Qantas by people (assets). However, in our case the assets are in fact liabilities. Liabilities more correctly called management.
Quote:
‘We see our employee groups as our biggest asset. We probably have the most experienced pilots in the group, we have the most experienced engineers in the group, we have unbelievable customer service delivered by cabin crew. So we see these as assets, we have to get the engagement right and are really focusing on getting that right.’ AJ interview Airline Business 23/03/10).
There is no doubting that people do indeed have the capacity to be great. And good people can help things go smoothly, help the profits grow, build goodwill and a great reputation. But people can also be a whacking great liability. People can cock things up, do the wrong thing, make bad choices, destroy reputations and leave organisations in ruins.‘We see our employee groups as our biggest asset. We probably have the most experienced pilots in the group, we have the most experienced engineers in the group, we have unbelievable customer service delivered by cabin crew. So we see these as assets, we have to get the engagement right and are really focusing on getting that right.’ AJ interview Airline Business 23/03/10).
Quote:
‘Qantas has an unbelievable history, an unbelievable brand. I'm very proud to be the custodian of this history going forward.’ AJ interview Airline Business 23/03/10).
While it is rare that individuals have the deep-rooted ineptitude to totally annihilate years of hard work and endeavour, they do nonetheless have the capacity to put an enormous spanner in the works. Rome was not built in a day and it was not destroyed in a day, but it was neither built nor destroyed by anything but people.
We are watching the destruction of Qantas by people (assets). However, in our case the assets are in fact liabilities. Liabilities more correctly called management.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: USA
Age: 51
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Qantas are determined to take on SA then they should know that back during the GFC that they had vast amounts of money in reserve for which they didnt need to turn a profit for years !!
SA has VERY VERY VERY deep pockets more so than Qantas. Qantas would get some extremely aggressive competition if they take this route, but heck maybe thats what they need to knock some sense into those boneheads up top echelons.
The day I see AJ and co taking pay cuts will be the day that they actually do have the best interests of this company at heart and want it to succeed.
Until then chance of AJ and co taking a paycut............ Slim to none
SA has VERY VERY VERY deep pockets more so than Qantas. Qantas would get some extremely aggressive competition if they take this route, but heck maybe thats what they need to knock some sense into those boneheads up top echelons.
The day I see AJ and co taking pay cuts will be the day that they actually do have the best interests of this company at heart and want it to succeed.
Until then chance of AJ and co taking a paycut............ Slim to none
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And now this today
Unions backing us into corner with ridiculous claims, says Joyce
Wow, how daft, today the share price is at about $2.10 and it doesn't have to be a war!
More like, outrageous fibbing Mr Joyce, and from your side of the fence, little wonder the unions are at their wits end in dealing with you. Have you no shame? The negativity coming from Q management towards its own brand is astounding, hardly an attractive proposition for potential investors. Oh yeah, and that elephant in the room, it's your management team, here lies the problem, and not with your staff.
go away.
Unions backing us into corner with ridiculous claims, says Joyce
Speculation that Qantas is planning to base a premium airline in Singapore or Malaysia has also raised the ire of unions, which say it is an attempt to cut wages and conditions.
Mr Joyce would not confirm or deny whether setting up a premium airline was an option being considered by a team he set up earlier this year to review Qantas's international operations.
Mr Joyce would not confirm or deny whether setting up a premium airline was an option being considered by a team he set up earlier this year to review Qantas's international operations.
''When we have these outrageous claims on the table we have nowhere to go,'' he said yesterday.
go away.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if I repeat anything already mentioned.
There is a massive article in the AFR MAY 14-15 2011.
At the back of the paper is this articleHardball tactics may deliver rough ride
Online you have to pay for it. Worth a read.
Good luck qf pilots.
(the article applies to all pilots)
There is a massive article in the AFR MAY 14-15 2011.
At the back of the paper is this articleHardball tactics may deliver rough ride
Online you have to pay for it. Worth a read.
Good luck qf pilots.
(the article applies to all pilots)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: sydney
Age: 76
Posts: 260
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what does all the hard line posturing coming out of QF bosses mean , well to me it is setting the scene for big changes . And the union leaders we have today cannot see through what is coming . In 2 years time the current Lab / Green/ Ind gov't will get the boot and by then the economy will be stuffed . So , what will the tories do . yes you guessed it, take to the IR legislation and what you feared today will become reality . for Gods sake you have a Labour Gov't yet the Unions are doing their best to crucify them . Wake up guys before you kill the goose/!
Focus your hate
Guys,
Singaporeans/Malays or where ever are proud.
Get them onside and against Qantas. Their governments will do the rest.
Think about it. Get them thinking that their national carrier tarnished.
Who the F*&^% do you QF executives think you are coming over here teaching us how to run an airline.
Singapore - SIA & Silk & Tiger
Malaysia - Malaysian & Air Asia
QF cant get the ones they have right.
Just a thought
Singaporeans/Malays or where ever are proud.
Get them onside and against Qantas. Their governments will do the rest.
Think about it. Get them thinking that their national carrier tarnished.
Who the F*&^% do you QF executives think you are coming over here teaching us how to run an airline.
Singapore - SIA & Silk & Tiger
Malaysia - Malaysian & Air Asia
QF cant get the ones they have right.
Just a thought
An A320 operation would be competing with Silk Air, which is a feeder to Singapore Airlines as well an operator on routes which can't justify a B777.
Typically SIA fly to the capital city with a wide body and Silk go to the secondary cities with narrow bodies. Silk are a full service airline with business class. If their prices need to drop to compete then SIA can afford it. This sort thing happens to new operators in Australia remember, QF aren't shy to suddenly drop fares on previously expensive and uncontested routes as soon as a competitor appears.
QANTAS already compete with SIA on routes from Singapore to Australia and London/Frankfurt.
A QF base in Singapore with B777s would open a greater route network into Europe at a cost which couldn't be matched on the Australian mainland given the lower labour costs, lower tax rates, ease of doing business and favourable depreciation rates on aircraft in Singapore.
Of course these aircraft could also fly between Singapore and Australia as well. Soon the only Australian thing about a QF flight between Sydney and London could be the expat Aussie captain who can't get a job at home.
Typically SIA fly to the capital city with a wide body and Silk go to the secondary cities with narrow bodies. Silk are a full service airline with business class. If their prices need to drop to compete then SIA can afford it. This sort thing happens to new operators in Australia remember, QF aren't shy to suddenly drop fares on previously expensive and uncontested routes as soon as a competitor appears.
QANTAS already compete with SIA on routes from Singapore to Australia and London/Frankfurt.
A QF base in Singapore with B777s would open a greater route network into Europe at a cost which couldn't be matched on the Australian mainland given the lower labour costs, lower tax rates, ease of doing business and favourable depreciation rates on aircraft in Singapore.
Of course these aircraft could also fly between Singapore and Australia as well. Soon the only Australian thing about a QF flight between Sydney and London could be the expat Aussie captain who can't get a job at home.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have worked for CAAS/CAG in the past and am pretty sure that SIA gets no preferential treatment. The establishment has made it very clear that Singapore is bigger than SIA. In fact in the 1990s SQ was pissed that QF consolidated most of its European ops in SIN. But CAAS told SQ that if QF didn't consolidate in SIN they would do it in KUL or BKK so better that they compete next to you than against you in another country.
It is good that Changi has courted airlines other than SQ - From 50% 10 years ago, SIA accounts for just 35% of SIN marketshare today.
Despite the Aussie govt not giving SQ the SYD-LAX rights, the SIN govt has been very supportive of 3K's expansion in SIN. We typically as a country do not do tit for tats because as a tiny country we don't usually have the clout to influence global policy - plus Australia lets our army train in QLD for A$1 a year, so on a country to country level Singapore gets a lot out of Australia. Taking "revenge" over the ASX takeover and similar behaviour would be very counter productive and I don't think Singapore would stoop to such a level.
It is good that Changi has courted airlines other than SQ - From 50% 10 years ago, SIA accounts for just 35% of SIN marketshare today.
Despite the Aussie govt not giving SQ the SYD-LAX rights, the SIN govt has been very supportive of 3K's expansion in SIN. We typically as a country do not do tit for tats because as a tiny country we don't usually have the clout to influence global policy - plus Australia lets our army train in QLD for A$1 a year, so on a country to country level Singapore gets a lot out of Australia. Taking "revenge" over the ASX takeover and similar behaviour would be very counter productive and I don't think Singapore would stoop to such a level.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your reply,
I pretty much agree with all you say and find the above point interesting. Qantas is in a much worse position with its marketshare over the past 10 years even with the advent of J* because (in my view) its over reliance on Singapore, a fuel stop, to only 2 European ports LHR & FRA. Everything else in Europe ATH, FCO, CDG etc was a failure, a bit like SFO, on again off again. In the last few years for Q I suppose China has opened up for them, but believe would have a very hard time competing against the likes of SQ CX TG etc. They have missed the boat.
Geographically Sin is a little close to the Oz ports say 7 hours from Melbourne or Sydney, and a lot of people flying to Europe prefer BKK as it cuts another two hours off that long sector to Europe from SE Asia. Qantas in its typical style moved QF 5 out of BKK in preference for consolidating everything via SIN. bean counting at its best! With that dumb move they let EK in through the back door via BKK. (Pepz I think we have been here before?)
Q has never been good at developing thin routes, (wrong equipment) unlike SQ who have excelled. GD a so called marketing man really let Q down with route development in preference to squeezing the life out of the traditional routes, eg SYD/LHR and SYD/LAX always operated under the potential capacities for the route. GD used to pride himself with that old "where always full" line. It is also my view, there is not much more Q can do in SIN and would be better off establishing another hub, say BKK as it has a larger population base.
The current management at Q would struggle developing anything like a premium airline in Asia, it has enough trouble just simply running Q/J* as it is.
It is good that Changi has courted airlines other than SQ - From 50% 10 years ago, SIA accounts for just 35% of SIN marketshare today.
Geographically Sin is a little close to the Oz ports say 7 hours from Melbourne or Sydney, and a lot of people flying to Europe prefer BKK as it cuts another two hours off that long sector to Europe from SE Asia. Qantas in its typical style moved QF 5 out of BKK in preference for consolidating everything via SIN. bean counting at its best! With that dumb move they let EK in through the back door via BKK. (Pepz I think we have been here before?)
Q has never been good at developing thin routes, (wrong equipment) unlike SQ who have excelled. GD a so called marketing man really let Q down with route development in preference to squeezing the life out of the traditional routes, eg SYD/LHR and SYD/LAX always operated under the potential capacities for the route. GD used to pride himself with that old "where always full" line. It is also my view, there is not much more Q can do in SIN and would be better off establishing another hub, say BKK as it has a larger population base.
The current management at Q would struggle developing anything like a premium airline in Asia, it has enough trouble just simply running Q/J* as it is.
They don't need to start a cheaper off shoot in Asia, they have one already in Australia. Its called Jetstar, and it now comes with Business class.
Qantas revamps frequent flyer program with new VIP tier
Qantas revamps frequent flyer program with new VIP tier
They have also renamed their 'StarClass' category to Business.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gota laugh, now it's all a conspiracy
Qantas's chief executive, Alan Joyce, has compared the theories about Barack Obama being born outside the United States to those surrounding his airline's alleged interest in starting a premium airline in Singapore.
Asked at news conference yesterday whether Qantas's loyalty partnership with the Singapore Inc part-owned Optus could be a sign of a more cosy relationship with the island state, Joyce responded: ''Absolutely not. That's the best conspiracy I've heard for a while.''
Optus's consumer division boss, Mike Smith chipped in: ''We are not intending to start an airline either, I should say.''
Joyce added: ''There is absolutely no link whatsoever, and that's probably a Donald Trump theory.''
Read more: No joy from Joyce on conspiracy theory
Asked at news conference yesterday whether Qantas's loyalty partnership with the Singapore Inc part-owned Optus could be a sign of a more cosy relationship with the island state, Joyce responded: ''Absolutely not. That's the best conspiracy I've heard for a while.''
Optus's consumer division boss, Mike Smith chipped in: ''We are not intending to start an airline either, I should say.''
Joyce added: ''There is absolutely no link whatsoever, and that's probably a Donald Trump theory.''
Read more: No joy from Joyce on conspiracy theory
