OPEN SKIES - bull****! Australian Industry protected from cheap imports?
Thread Starter
OPEN SKIES - bull****! Australian Industry protected from cheap imports?
Qantas/VA as Australian airlines NEED protection from these cheap "imports". You say its an open market? WHY
Try buying a car overseas, even if it complies to ADRs here. For example buy a BMW IN the UK and import it at a $50,000 saving over Aussie costs. Try buying a Harley in the USA at 50% under the Aussie cost and importing it. You cant register and use those vehicles here, simply because the local industry is protected.
So why are the airlines allowed open slather on any route they want? Look at Emirates being limited to routes in Europe and Canada. If Emirates wants to fly to Australia tell them they are must fly into Cairns, Gold Coast and 1 flight a day into capital cities. Its called protecting Australia industry and jobs - just like they do in the motor industry.
Same with the likes of Air Asia X. Wheres the import tax and gst on their tickets, just like the taxes you pay when you import a car? 40 years ago a flight to the UK was $2000, same as it is today. Back then a Holden was $5000, now its $35000. Somewhere a long the line Qantas has been screwed by this open skies nonsense. If the UK was $3000 it would still be a bargain.
If the Government can protect the motor industry why isnt the Aviation Industry afforded the same protection from what are effectively "cheap imports" ?????
Have you noticed the millions of dollars handed to the foreign companies like Ford, Holden and Toyota. Yes foreign companies handed tax payers dollars to save Australian industry.
Simple - ad $200 tax to every international flight on every airline. Then hand the Australian owned airlines a subsidy - just the same as they hand the subsify to car makers. At least the subsidy to QF/VA is going to an Australian owned and based company
Its time to start fighting the Government. These foreign airlines pay no company tax in Australia the way Qantas does AND their employees dont pay income tax the way Qantas employees do!!. What does the Government give back to Aviation? Yet it gives millions to the car makers, why? It's not all Qantas' fault it cant compete. Imagine if everybody was free to buy a new BMW off a Malaysian distributor the same way you can buy a ticket to the UK of a Malaysian airline.
I think its time unions started on the Government the way the car unions do
Try buying a car overseas, even if it complies to ADRs here. For example buy a BMW IN the UK and import it at a $50,000 saving over Aussie costs. Try buying a Harley in the USA at 50% under the Aussie cost and importing it. You cant register and use those vehicles here, simply because the local industry is protected.
So why are the airlines allowed open slather on any route they want? Look at Emirates being limited to routes in Europe and Canada. If Emirates wants to fly to Australia tell them they are must fly into Cairns, Gold Coast and 1 flight a day into capital cities. Its called protecting Australia industry and jobs - just like they do in the motor industry.
Same with the likes of Air Asia X. Wheres the import tax and gst on their tickets, just like the taxes you pay when you import a car? 40 years ago a flight to the UK was $2000, same as it is today. Back then a Holden was $5000, now its $35000. Somewhere a long the line Qantas has been screwed by this open skies nonsense. If the UK was $3000 it would still be a bargain.
If the Government can protect the motor industry why isnt the Aviation Industry afforded the same protection from what are effectively "cheap imports" ?????
Have you noticed the millions of dollars handed to the foreign companies like Ford, Holden and Toyota. Yes foreign companies handed tax payers dollars to save Australian industry.
Simple - ad $200 tax to every international flight on every airline. Then hand the Australian owned airlines a subsidy - just the same as they hand the subsify to car makers. At least the subsidy to QF/VA is going to an Australian owned and based company
Its time to start fighting the Government. These foreign airlines pay no company tax in Australia the way Qantas does AND their employees dont pay income tax the way Qantas employees do!!. What does the Government give back to Aviation? Yet it gives millions to the car makers, why? It's not all Qantas' fault it cant compete. Imagine if everybody was free to buy a new BMW off a Malaysian distributor the same way you can buy a ticket to the UK of a Malaysian airline.
I think its time unions started on the Government the way the car unions do
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austrtalia
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We suggested that to Senator X as a possible solution but apparently the chicago convention prohibits this form of action. But I agree, Australian based and owned airlines could still be offered some form of tax rebate by employing Australian staff and keeping their operations based in Australia. The moment however (lets say for argument) Jetstar Asia flies into Australia, they do not get any tax benefits from the government.
They should also prevent Emirates from flying Australia to NZ! Who approved this! It takes away from OZ and NZ based airlines, and places too many seats on that run!
I agree the government needs to step up and protect our companies (like most other countries do!).
They should also prevent Emirates from flying Australia to NZ! Who approved this! It takes away from OZ and NZ based airlines, and places too many seats on that run!
I agree the government needs to step up and protect our companies (like most other countries do!).
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: AU
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can buy a Harley from the US and import it into Australia, You just need to know the right shop to comply the bike :P
Add about $7k AU on top of the price of the bike to get it to AU and get it complied and registered.
Add about $7k AU on top of the price of the bike to get it to AU and get it complied and registered.
Qantas doesn't need tax concessions for employing Australian staff.
Qantas Group EBITDAR for FY2010 was $2195million
Qantas Group Tax bill for FY2010 was $62million
I think Qantas already does VERY well as a corporation paying 2.8% tax on its earnings.
Qantas Group EBITDAR for FY2010 was $2195million
Qantas Group Tax bill for FY2010 was $62million
I think Qantas already does VERY well as a corporation paying 2.8% tax on its earnings.
You could get the protection for the airline, or the airline could start to compete. Rather than contracting and cutting service, it needs to grow. Blaming foreign carriers for QFs problems is wrong. IF QF managers concentrated on growing the company, rather than cutting costs things would be different.
Why charge extra taxes on foreign carriers that carry pax to places where QF doesn't offer services, which is at the moment almost everywhere. If you want to go to anywhere expect London or LA you can't go QF, its as simple as that.
Tourism is a big earner for Australia. The the high AUD, and the limited services offered by the national carrier, means the tourism industry relies the foreign carriers.
Taxing travelers to help compensate for cr@p management is not the way forward. Look at how many seats EK carries out of Australia every day. QF needs better equipment (772LR?) and start taking these seats back by offering services to where people want to travel.
Why charge extra taxes on foreign carriers that carry pax to places where QF doesn't offer services, which is at the moment almost everywhere. If you want to go to anywhere expect London or LA you can't go QF, its as simple as that.
Tourism is a big earner for Australia. The the high AUD, and the limited services offered by the national carrier, means the tourism industry relies the foreign carriers.
Taxing travelers to help compensate for cr@p management is not the way forward. Look at how many seats EK carries out of Australia every day. QF needs better equipment (772LR?) and start taking these seats back by offering services to where people want to travel.
Thread Starter
I re summarise my point
The motor industry is a protected species by the way of special levies. The airline industry is not.
The motor industry is handed millions of dollars to remain competitive. The airline industry is not.
Implement a form of levy on all airline passengers and hand it back by way of incentives and subsidies to Australian airlines.
You may well call the tooth fairy but I am telling there will be no Australian based International Airline unless the Government steps in. The support of the Government is needed, other wise Qantas will just end up another Ansett
The motor industry is a protected species by the way of special levies. The airline industry is not.
The motor industry is handed millions of dollars to remain competitive. The airline industry is not.
Implement a form of levy on all airline passengers and hand it back by way of incentives and subsidies to Australian airlines.
You may well call the tooth fairy but I am telling there will be no Australian based International Airline unless the Government steps in. The support of the Government is needed, other wise Qantas will just end up another Ansett
Great idea 1a. Reward lackluster Australian airline management. Watch the airline cut costs even more. If they can get that subsidy and then only have to fly to Singapore in a 767 (maintained in china) imagine how their bonuses would grow then.
If the airline is not going to at least try and compete why should it be supported?
If the airline is not going to at least try and compete why should it be supported?
Yawwwwwnnnn!
Protectionist formulas protect managers and lazy employees.
How do I know this?
I grew up here from age 5 in 1955 to age 15 in 1965 and watched how we were systematically denied access to American ( and European) consumer goods on the basis of "protection".
To put it another way, I rooted a very nice girl whose father was a Knight (read Liberal party donor) whose only claim to fame was that his company made substandard consumer goods for sale to dumb Australians for inflated prices.
(She was a nice girl).
To put it yet another way: There is an Australian company not far from me that is making very schmick high tech export goods, and they don't care about the exchange rate.
To put it yet another way:: as a former industry adviser to the State Government, "I admire your sentiments, but you are misinformed".
Protectionist formulas protect managers and lazy employees.
How do I know this?
I grew up here from age 5 in 1955 to age 15 in 1965 and watched how we were systematically denied access to American ( and European) consumer goods on the basis of "protection".
To put it another way, I rooted a very nice girl whose father was a Knight (read Liberal party donor) whose only claim to fame was that his company made substandard consumer goods for sale to dumb Australians for inflated prices.
(She was a nice girl).
To put it yet another way: There is an Australian company not far from me that is making very schmick high tech export goods, and they don't care about the exchange rate.
To put it yet another way:: as a former industry adviser to the State Government, "I admire your sentiments, but you are misinformed".
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 73
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Protection costs jobs. It does not create them.
Lack of a second Sydney airport costs jobs. By artificially protecting the QF operation it costs more jobs by insulating the airline from the real effects of sub-optimal decisions.
donpizmeov is right. The best form of protection is to build a competitive company and grow it. An inconvenient truth for many is the fact that in starting Jetstar domestic in Australia management actually took a bold pro-active step to protect mainline yields and have a value focused cost-effective product to serve a growing segment. They have done the same with QF Link. The fact that the way they did things with JQ is hard to swallow is another point. The concept is excellent "a value focused cost-effective product to serve a growing segment"
Now imagine had they done that with each of the CitiFlyer and Long-Haul businesses too....."a value focused cost-effective product to serve a growing segment". And with Qantas Services (IT, Catering, Handling) Engineering and Qantas Training too.
All this could lie ahead. And should. And eventually will. But protection will slow growth, protect poor managers and send jobs off-shore. That is a reality. Another inconvenient truth maybe. We all need to face the opportunities presented by paradigm shifts, not hide from them.
Lack of a second Sydney airport costs jobs. By artificially protecting the QF operation it costs more jobs by insulating the airline from the real effects of sub-optimal decisions.
donpizmeov is right. The best form of protection is to build a competitive company and grow it. An inconvenient truth for many is the fact that in starting Jetstar domestic in Australia management actually took a bold pro-active step to protect mainline yields and have a value focused cost-effective product to serve a growing segment. They have done the same with QF Link. The fact that the way they did things with JQ is hard to swallow is another point. The concept is excellent "a value focused cost-effective product to serve a growing segment"
Now imagine had they done that with each of the CitiFlyer and Long-Haul businesses too....."a value focused cost-effective product to serve a growing segment". And with Qantas Services (IT, Catering, Handling) Engineering and Qantas Training too.
All this could lie ahead. And should. And eventually will. But protection will slow growth, protect poor managers and send jobs off-shore. That is a reality. Another inconvenient truth maybe. We all need to face the opportunities presented by paradigm shifts, not hide from them.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Always changing
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Australian airlines had a convenient route structure and service that was good I would make a huge effort to fly Australian every single time.
But I'm buggered if I am going to pay extra for crap service, crap routes, old planes. Forget it. I am never going to fly Jetstar - ever. Run a decent full service airline and they wouldn't need subsidies because you would have customers. When Managers seem to not care about service, pilots, staff and maintenance - I'm gone - you have nothing left. I don't care one bit about your profits and I don't care about frequent flyer miles - profits will come naturally when you do a good job.
Welcome to the crap world of globalization. (I do admit that VA are getting there with the Etihad connections.)
But I'm buggered if I am going to pay extra for crap service, crap routes, old planes. Forget it. I am never going to fly Jetstar - ever. Run a decent full service airline and they wouldn't need subsidies because you would have customers. When Managers seem to not care about service, pilots, staff and maintenance - I'm gone - you have nothing left. I don't care one bit about your profits and I don't care about frequent flyer miles - profits will come naturally when you do a good job.
Welcome to the crap world of globalization. (I do admit that VA are getting there with the Etihad connections.)
Tax on earnings?
I thought all companies were levied tax on profit?
I thought all companies were levied tax on profit?
Amazing in the sense that in $2billion cash EBITDAR only $60million is paid in tax. Thats great, I wish my after deductions bill was only 2% of my earnings. They have a very active balance sheet that maximizes cash income and reduces tax payable. Good on them, the accountants they have employed have set the business up to save most of their EBIT as cashflow to invest in the business.
It's just a shame that the cash they are making on the Qantas brand is being reinvested into a low cost carrier employing people on 3rd world conditions.
To see the extent of the so called losses by the Qantas segment and the profits of the Jetstar segment, Qantas leases quite a number of aircraft to Jetstar. The depreciation on those aircraft is realized on the Qantas side of the balance sheet. The cost associated with the leasing is eliminated at the end of the day because its an internal money transfer.
So whose balance sheet looks good ? Who is left holding the depreciating asset impacting 'profit' and who is left with a rosy balance sheet ?
9 x A330's at a minimum. Who pays depreciation ?
How many A320's are owned by Qantas subleased to Jetstar ? Who pays depreciation ?
How many A320's are leased from Jetstar Asia to Jetstar ?
As others have pointed out how much money did Jetstar Asia make in profit by leasing aircraft to Jetstar (oz) ?
It must be really good fun being an accountant being able to make the balance sheet look the way you're told to make it look like.
All we need now is a 'muffins' column as they are the highest yielding product in the group apparently.
Thread Starter
Protection costs jobs. It does not create them.
We should just let the Chinese into farm our lands for themselves? Maybe we should just let them in and do the mining jobs as well?
Australia with no protection is an Australia where Australians are unemployed and that is exactly where long haul Qantas crew is heading. Fine to keep blaming QF management but it's not ALL their doing, the same way the QLD banana growers didnt cause the cyclone.
The difference is the Government wont let in cheap import bananas but they will let in cheap imported airlines.
If you keep down this pathway of a blame war with QF management and a failure to see the wider picture and a game of blame this is all going to end horrifically.
Let's return to the days of two airlines flying the same aircraft type for the same fare at the same times on Australian domestic routes while we're at it.
BNE - SYD $350 one way, no thanks.
If QANTAS had it's act together it could market itself on quality and safety, charge more than the competition and still be profitable. Sadly it's been run into the ground and its reputation and brand trashed.
Tell me why I should get on a geriatric B747 with a known engine problem (Rolls Royce) and accept a product well below the standard of the competition at a higher price ?
In a free market customers turn away from inferior products and services, those supplying said products and services either lift their game or go under.
Hyundai are an excellent example of this, twenty years ago their cars were a joke, unreliable and poor quality. Now they are beating Toyota and top European brands.
BNE - SYD $350 one way, no thanks.
If QANTAS had it's act together it could market itself on quality and safety, charge more than the competition and still be profitable. Sadly it's been run into the ground and its reputation and brand trashed.
Tell me why I should get on a geriatric B747 with a known engine problem (Rolls Royce) and accept a product well below the standard of the competition at a higher price ?
In a free market customers turn away from inferior products and services, those supplying said products and services either lift their game or go under.
Hyundai are an excellent example of this, twenty years ago their cars were a joke, unreliable and poor quality. Now they are beating Toyota and top European brands.
1A, when something is on its death bed, you either make it better or put it out of its misery. To prolong the pain just makes things harder on all involved. In the QF case I suggest the way forward is to re-equip and compete. If management and directors think its better to kill it off then your gripe should be with them.
Well here you go. A system that not everybody has worked in, but I have.
So you think you are getting better cars cheaper now? Wow are you mssinformed.
Ok, give me a direct comparison.
The Austrailian car industry was killed for what purpose? and please dont tell me there is an Austrailian car industry left. There was once apon a time where Aust had the capability to build a car from go to whoa, but this no longer exists, we assemble cars only.
If we are using the car industry as an example, then Qantas should be shut down tomorrow with no regrets. Tell me what protection there was for Aussie cars going into, for instance.Malaysia, where the Proton can come into Oz with 10% tariff, yet try an export an Ozzie car to Malaysia, and please, all you experts, tell me what the tarriff is into Malaysia.
Now you have really wound me up, please tell me what, for instance, was the difference in price and features of say, a 1970 BMW here in Oz. If it comes to that, tell me how good a 5 series beemer is compared with a statesman now days.
So you think you are getting better cars cheaper now? Wow are you mssinformed.
Ok, give me a direct comparison.
The Austrailian car industry was killed for what purpose? and please dont tell me there is an Austrailian car industry left. There was once apon a time where Aust had the capability to build a car from go to whoa, but this no longer exists, we assemble cars only.
If we are using the car industry as an example, then Qantas should be shut down tomorrow with no regrets. Tell me what protection there was for Aussie cars going into, for instance.Malaysia, where the Proton can come into Oz with 10% tariff, yet try an export an Ozzie car to Malaysia, and please, all you experts, tell me what the tarriff is into Malaysia.
Now you have really wound me up, please tell me what, for instance, was the difference in price and features of say, a 1970 BMW here in Oz. If it comes to that, tell me how good a 5 series beemer is compared with a statesman now days.
Last edited by Arnold E; 7th Aug 2011 at 13:33.
The Australian car industry died because just like the British car industry, it couldn't compete with the better and cheaper Japanese alternatives.
Should I be forced to support the domestic industry's inferior products when I can get a better quality import at a lower price ? A small domestic market couldn't support the local industry by itself and the cars weren't good enough to compete abroad.
US car industry is also on it's knees despite the massive home market, it couldn't succeed on it's own turf because it didn't make the cars people wanted.
There may be a case for protecting fledgling industries early on but ultimately they must stand on their own feet.
Who wants to drive an XF Falcon and watch a CRT TV with VHS video when better is available.
Should I be forced to support the domestic industry's inferior products when I can get a better quality import at a lower price ? A small domestic market couldn't support the local industry by itself and the cars weren't good enough to compete abroad.
US car industry is also on it's knees despite the massive home market, it couldn't succeed on it's own turf because it didn't make the cars people wanted.
There may be a case for protecting fledgling industries early on but ultimately they must stand on their own feet.
Who wants to drive an XF Falcon and watch a CRT TV with VHS video when better is available.
