Qantas:After The Dust Has Settled
Unfortunately there is pot of gold, but only for a very precious few.
I think the culpable mismanagement at Qantas is 'proving' it can't work.
Alan et al are totally incompetent, but in their little world are not. Reinforced by midget man being voted one of the best airline managers in the world (by his peers, no less) therefore it logically follows all their decisions are the best money can buy.
If they can't make Qantas work then no one can.
As much of Qantas that can be hived off will be, with a magnificent round of bonuses all round for the right people for jobs well done.
In my perfect world all staff would simply not turn up to work at all and stop them profiting massively from such gross incompetence. The Mercy Killing scenario.
The key to understanding this is that they have tried everything and nothing else has worked, as they are so good at thier jobs they know they are doing the right thing and any means justifies the end.
I think the culpable mismanagement at Qantas is 'proving' it can't work.
Alan et al are totally incompetent, but in their little world are not. Reinforced by midget man being voted one of the best airline managers in the world (by his peers, no less) therefore it logically follows all their decisions are the best money can buy.
If they can't make Qantas work then no one can.
As much of Qantas that can be hived off will be, with a magnificent round of bonuses all round for the right people for jobs well done.
In my perfect world all staff would simply not turn up to work at all and stop them profiting massively from such gross incompetence. The Mercy Killing scenario.
The key to understanding this is that they have tried everything and nothing else has worked, as they are so good at thier jobs they know they are doing the right thing and any means justifies the end.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Change expected soon
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While Clifford, the board, Joice and senior management remain Qantas will spiral down as an airline and an investment. Aviation is a service industry, you can't have such a poor regard for your staff and expect to succeed.
They will continue with their snouts in the trough for a while yet, bribing politicians, media and others in positions of power, with chairman's club access, free upgrades, grange, ipads etc.
In the long run, they will fail. It will remain to be seen if those who are left, who care for the airline, will be able to save it.
They will continue with their snouts in the trough for a while yet, bribing politicians, media and others in positions of power, with chairman's club access, free upgrades, grange, ipads etc.
In the long run, they will fail. It will remain to be seen if those who are left, who care for the airline, will be able to save it.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: In the bone yard.
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are they incompetent?
It must be a very difficult task to keep the share price as low as possible and at the same time keep institutional investors on side.
The question for us of the 80% will be when to sell once the end game becomes clear, maybe greed will bite us too.
Edit...
After reading Nassensteins Monster's post I will amend my 80% to 99.9%.
What was it AJ said? "An overwhelming vote for yes", if it wasn't so sad you might even laugh at it, honest mum 82.5% voted yes, now can I have my money.
It must be a very difficult task to keep the share price as low as possible and at the same time keep institutional investors on side.
The question for us of the 80% will be when to sell once the end game becomes clear, maybe greed will bite us too.
Edit...
After reading Nassensteins Monster's post I will amend my 80% to 99.9%.
What was it AJ said? "An overwhelming vote for yes", if it wasn't so sad you might even laugh at it, honest mum 82.5% voted yes, now can I have my money.
Last edited by UPPERLOBE; 24th Nov 2011 at 03:08.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PIOT I believe there are those that will save it, I believe there more than enough QF staff who are prepared to put the company before themselves, to give 110% to get the company back on its feet, give them the right CEO and like TE and Virgin, they will shine, and QF will live on, as is its right, and will take up its rightful place in this nation, where it deserves to be.
Agree with TG, the executive at Qantas has to change. There is zero trust, and more importantly zero respect for upper management at the moment, and things will only get worse.
AJ, Clifford and the board need to realise that the employees don't see them or the institutional shareholders as their bosses. The people sitting in the terminal while the airline was grounded missing appointments, holidays, weddings and funerals are the bosses. They are the ones who ultimately provide us with our wages. They are what the airline is all about. To have treated the main focus of the airline like that was disgusting.
When management start treating the passengers with a little respect, maybe they will earn some from the employees.
AJ, Clifford and the board need to realise that the employees don't see them or the institutional shareholders as their bosses. The people sitting in the terminal while the airline was grounded missing appointments, holidays, weddings and funerals are the bosses. They are the ones who ultimately provide us with our wages. They are what the airline is all about. To have treated the main focus of the airline like that was disgusting.
When management start treating the passengers with a little respect, maybe they will earn some from the employees.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone is zero
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Edit: something went wrong with the post order, this should appear under Nassensteins Monster's.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nassensteins Monster, nice analysis. However there is something else to consider. The "concentrated" owners aren't the real owners - they control the shares and the voting, but they are likely to be custodians for the true owners - the vast bulk of Australian workers with a Superannuation account. Ownership and control have been separated.
That's right, workers capital is taken from them by government decree (super guarantee levy) out of their paycheck, forced into a system of compulsory savings. The money is deposited into the institutions that you mention, who then vote on the real capital owners behalf, and in many cases against the direct interests of those workers.
To make it simple, workers are forced to save through super funds, once this happens they lose all control and voting rights of those saving, they bear the risks, but without any rights & privileges.
If I were cynical, I could argue its an ingenious scam to "conscript" the capital of the workers for use of those in power to further entrench that power.
Edit: something went wrong with the post order, this should appear under Nassensteins Monster's.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nassensteins Monster, nice analysis. However there is something else to consider. The "concentrated" owners aren't the real owners - they control the shares and the voting, but they are likely to be custodians for the true owners - the vast bulk of Australian workers with a Superannuation account. Ownership and control have been separated.
That's right, workers capital is taken from them by government decree (super guarantee levy) out of their paycheck, forced into a system of compulsory savings. The money is deposited into the institutions that you mention, who then vote on the real capital owners behalf, and in many cases against the direct interests of those workers.
To make it simple, workers are forced to save through super funds, once this happens they lose all control and voting rights of those saving, they bear the risks, but without any rights & privileges.
If I were cynical, I could argue its an ingenious scam to "conscript" the capital of the workers for use of those in power to further entrench that power.
Last edited by breakfastburrito; 24th Nov 2011 at 00:26.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mars
Age: 20
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks, Mohican. That's what I thought. To add insult to injury, I believe the freeze period for those assigned a slot based on a reduction in numbers is two years? So, said senior Captains and F/Os will be stuck for awhile before they can do anything other than resign. Ughhhh
Somting wong. This should be after Mohican's post
Somting wong. This should be after Mohican's post
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Castle NastySwine
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Metroboy
Hmmm, really. Who are these people? And where is your authority for the contention that their wishes are not being accommodated? Given your statement I assume you have intimate personal knowledge, so of course you would also be able to provide a proportional comparison of satisfaction versus dissatisfaction?
JP Morgan own almost 23%. Do some reading into JP Morgan. He single-handedly triggered the Great Depression. What would you expect from an organisation with this pedigree?
HSBC own 19%. Another bank. Say no more.
NAB own 18%. Ditto.
Citicorp are the next largest shareholder. Yet another bank. And a renowned ethical corporate citizen. Google "Citicorp fined" and you get 369,000 hits.
In the last couple of years we have seen what regard bankers have for the majority of investors. Scant little. We have seen what regard they have for the world at large. None whatsoever.
60% of QAN shares are owned by three banks.
There are 2.241 billion QAN shares.
Of those, 72% or 1.614 billion are considered closely held shares, meaning they are held for the long term rather than traded.
80% of QAN shares are owned by 20 shareholders.
82.5% of QAN shares are owned by 240 shareholders. That's 0.0018% of the total number of shareholders.
That means a little over 133,000 "Mum and Dad investors" - the 99.9982% - own the remaining 17.5% of shares.
I saw a few of them at the AGM. They were Not Happy Jan. Hardly representative I know.
Do I have intimate personal knowledge of whether the 99.9982% agree with what's going on at Qantas? No. But consider these two facts: firstly, the percentage of Australia's population owning shares is the highest in the world. Secondly, every survey I saw asking Australia's population whether they agreed with the direction and actions the board and management were taking at Qantas revealed a clear majority did not.
From that I draw the conclusion that the majority of shareholders - as opposed to the very small number of institutional shareholders owning the majority of the shares - are dissatisfied with the direction management and the board are taking the company.
If I put myself in the shoes of the institutional shareholder that bought in at anything from $3 to $6, I'd be distinctly unhappy with my shareholding falling in value by anything from 50% to 75% and not receiving a dividend for three years either. But I'm in it for the long haul. I've seen the sexy Powerpoint presentations painting a the future in a rosy hue and I've been shmoozed by the Board and CEO. I'm a little reassured about the future of the company.
But then the audit principle kicks in. I see failures of judgement here and there, a failed social media strategy, a failed "teaser" advertising campaign, a hapless spokesmodel, poor fleet, route and timing decisions, an utter failure to engage and lead the workforce in the direction I've been briefed is necessary for the survival of my investment. Does this represent judgement at the highest levels of the company? Uh oh!
But I can sleep ok at night, because I haven't invested my own money. It's someone else's and they bear all the risk. Night night, sleep tight!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mars
Age: 20
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After the dust, indeed.
What happens if the company publishes an FSO announcing a reduction in numbers of 747 Captains and F/Os and the only slots available for bidding are A330 S/Os? Is that possible in the award?
What happens if the company publishes an FSO announcing a reduction in numbers of 747 Captains and F/Os and the only slots available for bidding are A330 S/Os? Is that possible in the award?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tim.
And thats exactly how the redundancy payout scenario is going to playout.
I was having lunch the other day with a very senior -400 Captain who offered he was only 'hanging around for the payout now'.
When I explained to him that what the company could do (I believe) is declare a surplus in Capt and F/O ranks on all fleets prior to the A380 / B744 crew base being moved to Singapore, this would result in the vast amount of those crew members momentarily becoming S/O's just prior to CR.
This means the CR payment, even if its the same as the FEO's (104 weeks max) would be at A330 S/O rates.
It sounds crazy, but companies like Bain & Co specialise in this sort of corporate bastardry, and the letter of the award would allow this type of movement.
Regardless, there is no way in hell the company will be paying out 104 weeks to senior captains, particularly those over 60.
And thats exactly how the redundancy payout scenario is going to playout.
I was having lunch the other day with a very senior -400 Captain who offered he was only 'hanging around for the payout now'.
When I explained to him that what the company could do (I believe) is declare a surplus in Capt and F/O ranks on all fleets prior to the A380 / B744 crew base being moved to Singapore, this would result in the vast amount of those crew members momentarily becoming S/O's just prior to CR.
This means the CR payment, even if its the same as the FEO's (104 weeks max) would be at A330 S/O rates.
It sounds crazy, but companies like Bain & Co specialise in this sort of corporate bastardry, and the letter of the award would allow this type of movement.
Regardless, there is no way in hell the company will be paying out 104 weeks to senior captains, particularly those over 60.
Tinee Tim,
No, I think not possible.
mohikan,
I do not think your doomsday scenario is possible after looking through the contract in the last few days.
I agree with you that the senior guys hanging out for redundancy are going to be disappointed, but can see why they are trying!
No, I think not possible.
mohikan,
I do not think your doomsday scenario is possible after looking through the contract in the last few days.
I agree with you that the senior guys hanging out for redundancy are going to be disappointed, but can see why they are trying!
The ATO sunk the idea of a Mainline Red Tail base in SIN 7-8 years ago. Ain't going to happen.
I think that is why they are gunning for a separate entity registered in SIN for Red Q
I think that is why they are gunning for a separate entity registered in SIN for Red Q
Nunc est bibendum
Captains reduced in numbers are permitted to 'displace' pilots in a lower category if they are senior to them. Thus, you'll see 767 F/Os only demoted to S/O A380 as long as they are senior to those S/Os on the A380. This will occur even if that creates a surplus on the A380. Then we do a reduction in numbers on the A380 and those S/Os on the bottom of the pile go to whatever aircraft they are senior enough to get to.
Thus, you can see that demotion creates as many residual training slots as does promotion. It's also way the company really isn't that keen on demoting people as it's a HUGE training cost. They may (and I stress may) decide that it's cheaper to offer a senior 744 Captain a package- certainly won't be 104 weeks- to get him to go rather than face the prospect of multiple residual vacancies as that 744 Captain displaces an A330 Captain who displaces a 767 Captain who displaces an A380 F/O, etc, etc.
That's my reading of it anyway. Happy for one of the more experienced gurus to shed some light. Kremin? Going Boeing?
Thus, you can see that demotion creates as many residual training slots as does promotion. It's also way the company really isn't that keen on demoting people as it's a HUGE training cost. They may (and I stress may) decide that it's cheaper to offer a senior 744 Captain a package- certainly won't be 104 weeks- to get him to go rather than face the prospect of multiple residual vacancies as that 744 Captain displaces an A330 Captain who displaces a 767 Captain who displaces an A380 F/O, etc, etc.
That's my reading of it anyway. Happy for one of the more experienced gurus to shed some light. Kremin? Going Boeing?
After the dust has settled there will be no
new premium airline in Asia
Qantas Airways is set to shelve plans for a new premium airline in Asia as global economic turmoil shakes management confidence in the project, the Australian Financial review reported without citing any sources.
The paper said that after spending a year putting together the plans for an up to $500 million investment in the Asian unit, Qantas now favours a code share alliance with Malaysian Airline Systems Bhd.
The Asian carrier plan was aimed at using the region's low cost workforce to turnaround Qantas' loss-making international operations but sparked an union backlash.
Qantas felt the investment in the Asian airline would not sit well with the ratings agencies and its investment grade rating, the paper said. Qantas is the only airline globally with the investment grade rating.
However, the Malaysian Plan is still going ahead
Qantas and Malaysian Airlines are working towards a letter of intent in coming weeks on a code-sharing that would allow joint pricing, marketing and scheduling to begin about six to nine months after the agreement, the paper said.
Qantas Chief Executive Alan Joyce flew to Singapore last week for talks with Tony Fernandes, chief executive of Air Asia , which owns 20 percent of Malaysian Airlines. He then flew to Kuala Lumpur to thrash out the details of the proposed alliance, the paper said citing sources.
Qantas officials could not immediately be reached for comment by telephone or email.
But the flip side of the Malaysian Plan is how well MH are tracking at present.
High fuel and uncertain economic conditions have impacted Malaysia Airlines’ profits, with the carrier reporting a net loss of RM478 million for the third quarter ending 30 September 2011.
Compared to? the corresponding period last year, the cumulative year-to-date net loss for the Group added up to RM1,247 million while its revenue increase five percent for the fourth quarter over the previous quarter 2010 to RM3.565 million from RM3.4 million.
Malaysia Airlines Group chief executive officer Ahmad Jauhari Yahya said despite the losses, management were able to address the situation and minimises the drop.
“These pro-active initiative have helped improve our operating loss substantially,” Mr Yahya said.
According to the Group, forward bookings are “weak”, with the economic in situation in Europe impacting long haul numbers.
Addressing the situation, the carrier’s Management said it would heighten dynamic revenue management activities as well as other commercial initiative to minimise future damages.
The carrier continued that it is reviews its operations and inventories for cut back while the adoption of a leaver network is already underway.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coincidence?
After watching the Senate Inquiry last week. Especially the questions & evidence to the Department of Education, Employment & Workplace Relations. I got the impression the noose was tightening around the use of foreign based crews on operations both in & thru Australia.
Does that blow the Asia Push plans out of the water?
MC
After watching the Senate Inquiry last week. Especially the questions & evidence to the Department of Education, Employment & Workplace Relations. I got the impression the noose was tightening around the use of foreign based crews on operations both in & thru Australia.
Does that blow the Asia Push plans out of the water?
MC