QANTAS - WHERE TO NOW?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: gold coast QLD australia
Age: 86
Posts: 1,345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheer up fella's, just imagine what would have happened if Dixon and Jackson had pocketed their 100 mill? One mob who wanted to buy QF has gone broke, Mac Bank are in deep ****e, and shedding staff, and poor old QF? Swannie would be wringing his hands, as Elaine begs for money to save 35, 000 jobs, (and his own) Swannie screaming what about my surplus, ahhhhg, Gillard prattling on about going forward, working families, and it the right thing to do, (not saving QF), meanwhile Slipper would be running up bills in A1 with plenty of trips to BKK and MNL, and we would have even a bigger mess than we have now. Great call Dixon, great call, and you almost got your way, so very close. Be grateful fella's, be grateful.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what have we got, Qantas pilots and their agent, AIPA, a union that up until now has not called for industrial action for what ,close on 45 years, a union that an Industrial Judge, I believe, once described as "the quintessential union", are being crucified for being tardy and inefficient.
Now let me get this straight ,before an EBA can be voted on, both the Company, Qantas, and the Union, AIPA negotiators, have to agree to a position and then the Union Commitee of Management then vote upon the negotiated position prior to presenting the new EBA for voting by the rank and file members. So what is the company, Qantas, really saying, has AIPA have been far too successful at EBA negotiations than the company Management sent in to bargain with? After all it's been 45 years since the last industrial action, It's not as if Qantas has had a loaded gun pointed at their head all these years! I hardly call red ties and a PA as high stakes industrial argy bargy.
Now let me get this straight ,before an EBA can be voted on, both the Company, Qantas, and the Union, AIPA negotiators, have to agree to a position and then the Union Commitee of Management then vote upon the negotiated position prior to presenting the new EBA for voting by the rank and file members. So what is the company, Qantas, really saying, has AIPA have been far too successful at EBA negotiations than the company Management sent in to bargain with? After all it's been 45 years since the last industrial action, It's not as if Qantas has had a loaded gun pointed at their head all these years! I hardly call red ties and a PA as high stakes industrial argy bargy.
I am not of QANTAS but I have followed what is going on, (on this forum and the newspapers). Maybe its time to let Qf go, and infact assist in its demise. Why would I say that I hear you say. Well, it is clear that this is what the current management want. Well, let them have it, and then embrace the new airline which takes its place, which is what happened when Annset failed, Virgin took its place and is growing. If Q failed I would imagine that Jetstar would go the same way, so Joyce an cronies would end up with nothing. Would I realy like to see QANTAS fail, ofcourse not, but I really dont see any other alternative, Joyce and cronies are NOT going to resign, they will bleed the last cent out and then move on. Why not restrict the cents that they can get. At the end of the day, there are so many people that need moving around Oz and if Q aint there someone will have to fill the void. To continue to fight Joyce and cronies is to be a loser, but to push for failure of his (wet) dream is to beat the B*****D
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem with what your suggesting Arnold is that a significant number of QFs senior management, including Joyce and Stranbi and a whole host of others, including a large percentage of the board, WERE PART OF ANSETT'S MANAGEMENT TEAM LEADING UP TO ANSETT'S DEMISE.
These pr!cks make a living, a very good one, out of destroying companies and then moving on to another victim. If QF were to fail in the near future, as it almost certainly will, management couldn't give a hoot. They'll just move on and destroy another company.the only victims are the employees. I was unemployed once thanks to these oxygen thieves. I don't wish to go through that again with QF.
These pr!cks make a living, a very good one, out of destroying companies and then moving on to another victim. If QF were to fail in the near future, as it almost certainly will, management couldn't give a hoot. They'll just move on and destroy another company.the only victims are the employees. I was unemployed once thanks to these oxygen thieves. I don't wish to go through that again with QF.
Gobbledock:
WRONG!
Qantas is an excellent investment if I can get it for a song.
Say $1.00 or less per share.
Remember that Management and the Board under Jackson/Dixon tried to take it private. There are always buyers - if the price is right.
That is why the current business strategy is so perplexing, one could be forgiven for thinking that they are destroying shareholder value and sending the share price South.
He should hang his head in shame claiming aviation is still a good investment platform! Give me a break. It would be one of the highest risk investment platforms going.
Qantas is an excellent investment if I can get it for a song.
Say $1.00 or less per share.
Remember that Management and the Board under Jackson/Dixon tried to take it private. There are always buyers - if the price is right.
That is why the current business strategy is so perplexing, one could be forgiven for thinking that they are destroying shareholder value and sending the share price South.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sector 7G
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish, I've got a post on another thread:Globalization Debt & Banking post #311 that may provide another piece of the puzzle, here's a snippet
Here's a link to the Akerlof paper:Looting The Economic Underworld of Bankruptcy For Profit.
The we read:
Jetstar to invest $470m in Singapore hub
With a business model based on selling coffee and muffins as a profit centre. Is this a Ponzi scheme in the making? I simply ask why this whole scheme is being undertaken for such a small economic return for the shareholder?. There must be another reason.
But what my work focuses on is: what kind of frauds are the most devastating? And it turns out that the most kind of problems that we’re seeing, systemic problems and such, arise when we have, what we call in criminology, control fraud. And control fraud simply means when you have a seemingly legitimate entity and the person who controls it uses it as a weapon to defraud others. And so in the financial sphere the weapon of choice is accounting and the losses from these kinds of control frauds exceed the financial losses from all other forms of property crime combined....
The big thing about the seemingly legitimate entity when the CEO is the crook is, first, everybody reports to the CEO ultimately, right? So the CEO is the point failure mechanism where if he or she goes bad, almost everything may go bad as well. So all those things that we call internal and external controls, all report to the CEO and the CEO therefore can, as I’ll describe, use compensation, hiring, firing, praise, and such to produce the environment that will commit, create allies for his fraud. Now, note that what I’m saying. The CEO, the art of this is not to defeat your controls. The elegant solution as in mathematics is to suborn the controls and turn them into your most valuable allies. And therefore, for example, when you’re running accounting control fraud where your weapon of fraud is accounting and that weapon of choice in finance is accounting. You’re going to want to hire the most prestigious accountants as your outside auditors because it is precisely their reputation that is most valuable when you can suborn them. And, they give you that clean opinion that you just described that will help you deceive other shareholders. So one enormous advantage is internal and external controls come to the CEO level.
The big thing about the seemingly legitimate entity when the CEO is the crook is, first, everybody reports to the CEO ultimately, right? So the CEO is the point failure mechanism where if he or she goes bad, almost everything may go bad as well. So all those things that we call internal and external controls, all report to the CEO and the CEO therefore can, as I’ll describe, use compensation, hiring, firing, praise, and such to produce the environment that will commit, create allies for his fraud. Now, note that what I’m saying. The CEO, the art of this is not to defeat your controls. The elegant solution as in mathematics is to suborn the controls and turn them into your most valuable allies. And therefore, for example, when you’re running accounting control fraud where your weapon of fraud is accounting and that weapon of choice in finance is accounting. You’re going to want to hire the most prestigious accountants as your outside auditors because it is precisely their reputation that is most valuable when you can suborn them. And, they give you that clean opinion that you just described that will help you deceive other shareholders. So one enormous advantage is internal and external controls come to the CEO level.
The we read:
"To maintain 20 per cent market share by 2020, we need about 400 aircraft," Buchanan added without elaborating when the carrier will start making orders of those aircraft.
With a business model based on selling coffee and muffins as a profit centre. Is this a Ponzi scheme in the making? I simply ask why this whole scheme is being undertaken for such a small economic return for the shareholder?. There must be another reason.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sunshine Coast
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where to for QEA? Where to indeed.
It has been apparent for some time that QEA is shedding its planes (747, 767), as well as its more expensive pilots, cabin crew, engineers, etc. What it wants to be is a centrally controlling admin for the eight or so airlines in its assets list, without having expensive attachments such as those just mentioned.
The new Chinese/QEA airline will fly between Oz and Europe/UK. The QEA NZ operation will fly Oz/US. Both will have much cheaper crews, etc.
Where to for Qantas? Guess.
It has been apparent for some time that QEA is shedding its planes (747, 767), as well as its more expensive pilots, cabin crew, engineers, etc. What it wants to be is a centrally controlling admin for the eight or so airlines in its assets list, without having expensive attachments such as those just mentioned.
The new Chinese/QEA airline will fly between Oz and Europe/UK. The QEA NZ operation will fly Oz/US. Both will have much cheaper crews, etc.
Where to for Qantas? Guess.
Where to for Qantas?
ANNUAL CORPORATE REPUTATION INDEX
Not surprisingly Qantas dropped 18 places (from 7th in 2011 to 25th) for Reputation following the airline’s controversial and highly publicised shutdown last year.
“Based on data we collected in November, Qantas’ reputation has recovered substantially from the initial impact of the shutdown, but clearly there is substantial distance still to travel to return to the levels of February 2011,” said Oliver Freedman, Reputation Practice Director and General Manager, AMR Sydney. “The brand has clearly regained some ground and the results indicate Australians still have a relatively strong emotional connection with the Qantas brand.”
Further commenting on the aviation industry’s performance, Freedman said: “Virgin Australia showed positive climbs in the reputation stakes increasing its ranking from 13th to 6th. Furthermore, Virgin ranks in the top 3 for Governance.”
“Based on data we collected in November, Qantas’ reputation has recovered substantially from the initial impact of the shutdown, but clearly there is substantial distance still to travel to return to the levels of February 2011,” said Oliver Freedman, Reputation Practice Director and General Manager, AMR Sydney. “The brand has clearly regained some ground and the results indicate Australians still have a relatively strong emotional connection with the Qantas brand.”
Further commenting on the aviation industry’s performance, Freedman said: “Virgin Australia showed positive climbs in the reputation stakes increasing its ranking from 13th to 6th. Furthermore, Virgin ranks in the top 3 for Governance.”
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Christmas Island
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many more f@$&(ing big black X 's on a managements performance report card will force some retaliation by the major shareholders .
They have the grogan touch... Everything they touch turns to complete Shyte!
They have the grogan touch... Everything they touch turns to complete Shyte!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not of QANTAS but I have followed what is going on, (on this forum and the newspapers). Maybe its time to let Qf go, and infact assist in its demise.
Why would I say that I hear you say. Well, it is clear that this is what the current management want. Well, let them have it, and then embrace the new airline which takes its place, which is what happened when Annset failed, Virgin took its place and is growing.
We all saw what happened to Ansett, and who ran the company then. We are seeing an Ansett II with some of the same people it this time round. QANTAS is being white-anted from within and no one gives a stuff now as they didn't with Ansett then.
If Q failed I would imagine that Jetstar would go the same way, so Joyce an cronies would end up with nothing.
Would I realy like to see QANTAS fail, ofcourse not, but I really dont see any other alternative, Joyce and cronies are NOT going to resign, they will bleed the last cent out and then move on. Why not restrict the cents that they can get. At the end of the day, there are so many people that need moving around Oz and if Q aint there someone will have to fill the void. To continue to fight Joyce and cronies is to be a loser, but to push for failure of his (wet) dream is to beat the B*****D
Is QANTAS perfect? Far from it. QANTAS is QANTAS, but it is an ingrained part of Australian history that has served this country well. Not only as a carrier of passengers, but in war time, disaster relief and evacuation of Australians from around the world in times of civil unrest to bring them back home.
Arnold, your talk for a push for failure is a cop out. Why not just let yourself be beat up by a mugger. Let a paedophile have their way with your child. Let a rapist have your wife. Just as you wouldn't let the above happen, I would fight to keep QANTAS going. Not for the benefit of the board, but for the benefit of the integrity and dignity of the employees, its historical place in Australia and the work it provides both in and out of Australia.
If something is worth fighting for, you fight the fight. Win, lose or draw.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Hicks House
Age: 77
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Jetstar's MFO is off to Qlink... Is this the first of the big moves for the 787 to be painted, named and operate as a Qantas flight, outside of Qantas mainline????
Guest
Posts: n/a
Guys, how many years have we been posting on here about the problems with Qantas?? NOTHING will come out of this discussion. I'm not saying don't talk about it, but of you feel passionate enough (eg. QF94), DO something. Write to the paper, write to the big shareholders, write to the government, whatever. If it bugs you enough, get into it
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bdcer,
I have written to all of the above. The only one to acknowledge and act on it was one Nick Xenophon. Unfortunately, the senate committee hearing was a joke and AJ basically ran the show and told them he had a plane to catch.
I alone can't do anything. QF employees alone can't do anything. It appears that not enough Australians care about it either. I'm not just talking about the plight of QANTAS, but the workforce in general. I've lost count of the number of jobs being lost in this country (this year alone) to employ outsiders offshore. Optus this morning has just announced it's laying off about 750 employees.
Where, when and how will this end? If people are unemployed, people won't be spending. If people aren't spending, corporates bottom line diminishes, leading to more layoffs.
We can't all go work in the mines as suggested by QF yesterday. Maybe Clifford has a transfer of business plan to the mining sector in mind. When that sector goes belly-up, watch out Australian economy that is heavily reliant on it.
Guys, how many years have we been posting on here about the problems with Qantas?? NOTHING will come out of this discussion. I'm not saying don't talk about it, but of you feel passionate enough (eg. QF94), DO something. Write to the paper, write to the big shareholders, write to the government, whatever. If it bugs you enough, get into it
I alone can't do anything. QF employees alone can't do anything. It appears that not enough Australians care about it either. I'm not just talking about the plight of QANTAS, but the workforce in general. I've lost count of the number of jobs being lost in this country (this year alone) to employ outsiders offshore. Optus this morning has just announced it's laying off about 750 employees.
Where, when and how will this end? If people are unemployed, people won't be spending. If people aren't spending, corporates bottom line diminishes, leading to more layoffs.
We can't all go work in the mines as suggested by QF yesterday. Maybe Clifford has a transfer of business plan to the mining sector in mind. When that sector goes belly-up, watch out Australian economy that is heavily reliant on it.
The age old argument of cost.
Interesting piece by CAPA.
Qantas and Virgin Australia pursue different, but equally logical, strategies to grow domestically | CAPA
Of note
A real shame Alan and Leigh have been unable to answer the 60+ questions asked of them regarding jetstars cost base.
Interesting piece by CAPA.
Qantas and Virgin Australia pursue different, but equally logical, strategies to grow domestically | CAPA
Of note
In the same period, Jetstar Group achieved a 9.4% margin. In Qantas' sample explaining its 65% strategy, Jetstar-only routes (red square) typically had a disproportionately lower return on revenue than routes (red circle) served by Qantas and Jetstar. (Curiously, there was no information on Qantas-only routes.) While Jetstar brings in less revenue than Qantas, its lower cost base can potentially see it post a disproportionately higher profit, which is why some services (such as those to and from the Gold Coast) have shifted from Qantas mainline to Jetstar. Market share is not reflective of profit or margin.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 498
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this hype about profit margins, cost base and low cost carriers is a load of bunkum.
Virgin is a one-brand carrier with no LCC off-shoot and is doing very well in both tourist and business parts of the business. QANTAS has JQ which is gutting it. JQ is made to be the saviour of QANTAS, when in fact it is white-anting it from within. If JQ is taken out of the equation, QANTAS domestic will have all the JQ passengers. Who else are the punters going to fly with? Tiger? Virgin? QANTAS domestic (if you were to include JQ) would have a virtual monopoly on the domestic market. Virgin could not pick up the slack that quick and Tiger has no hope of gaining a real market share within the Australian domestic market as it currently stands.
From the beginning is was slated that JQ would not compete directly with a QF domestic flight. Guess what? They are. SYD-MEL, SYD-BNE, etc. Where they're not competing, QF have surrendered the sector to JQ and they are now doing the "tourist" destinations such as Coolangatta, Mackay, Maroochydore etc.
Virgin is a one-brand carrier with no LCC off-shoot and is doing very well in both tourist and business parts of the business. QANTAS has JQ which is gutting it. JQ is made to be the saviour of QANTAS, when in fact it is white-anting it from within. If JQ is taken out of the equation, QANTAS domestic will have all the JQ passengers. Who else are the punters going to fly with? Tiger? Virgin? QANTAS domestic (if you were to include JQ) would have a virtual monopoly on the domestic market. Virgin could not pick up the slack that quick and Tiger has no hope of gaining a real market share within the Australian domestic market as it currently stands.
From the beginning is was slated that JQ would not compete directly with a QF domestic flight. Guess what? They are. SYD-MEL, SYD-BNE, etc. Where they're not competing, QF have surrendered the sector to JQ and they are now doing the "tourist" destinations such as Coolangatta, Mackay, Maroochydore etc.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and another thing - Jetstar, The Not So Low Cost Carrier
Jetstar, The Not So Low Cost Carrier
Jetstar, The Not So Low Cost Carrier | Travel Trends
It's becoming clear that Jetstar, on many levels, can no longer be strictly considered a budget or low cost carrier on any other basis than its 'would you like fries with that?' fare structure.
Further confirmation came with news Jetstar has signed with TravelSky, the Chinese Global Distribution System. It already has GDS agreements with Amadeus, Galileo, Sabre, Abacus etc.
Low Cost Carriers aren't supposed to do that. GDS distribution costs extra. Nor should budget carriers, in theory at least, charge higher fares than the so-called legacy airlines. But Jetstar does.
For example, I've just bought a return fare to Bangkok through Jetabroad.com.au on Thai Airways for A$878*.
If I had booked the same itinerary on identical dates through Jetstar I would have paid $1152 for the basic fare, not including food, inflight entertainment or a comfort pack (blanket and pillow), for which you pay extra.
Sydney-Phuket on Jetstar was $985 plus, plus for the same dates.
Now many will say one example is not good enough, and they would be right.
But this is not the first, and certainly won't be the last, time Jetstar is pricing above competitors, especially on the long haul routes.
Jetstar, The Not So Low Cost Carrier | Travel Trends
It's becoming clear that Jetstar, on many levels, can no longer be strictly considered a budget or low cost carrier on any other basis than its 'would you like fries with that?' fare structure.
Further confirmation came with news Jetstar has signed with TravelSky, the Chinese Global Distribution System. It already has GDS agreements with Amadeus, Galileo, Sabre, Abacus etc.
Low Cost Carriers aren't supposed to do that. GDS distribution costs extra. Nor should budget carriers, in theory at least, charge higher fares than the so-called legacy airlines. But Jetstar does.
For example, I've just bought a return fare to Bangkok through Jetabroad.com.au on Thai Airways for A$878*.
If I had booked the same itinerary on identical dates through Jetstar I would have paid $1152 for the basic fare, not including food, inflight entertainment or a comfort pack (blanket and pillow), for which you pay extra.
Sydney-Phuket on Jetstar was $985 plus, plus for the same dates.
Now many will say one example is not good enough, and they would be right.
But this is not the first, and certainly won't be the last, time Jetstar is pricing above competitors, especially on the long haul routes.
Qantas Airways Group pax up 7.0% in Mar-2012, load factor up, year-to-date yield higher | CAPA
Group reports (01-May-2012) passenger numbers up 7.0% – traffic highlights for Mar-2012:
Group reports (01-May-2012) passenger numbers up 7.0% – traffic highlights for Mar-2012:
- Passenger numbers: 4.0 million, +7.0% year-on-year;
- Qantas Domestic: 1.5 million, +0.1%;
- Qantas International: 511,000, +5.4%;
- Jetstar Domestic: 879,000, +10.6%;
- Jetstar International: 400,000, +12.4%;
- QantasLink: 460,000, +8.3%;
- Jetstar Asia: 297,000, +31.2%;
- Passenger load factor: 79.8%, +3.3 ppts;
- Qantas Domestic: 78.5%, +0.1 ppts;
- Qantas International: 82.3%, +5.2 ppts;
- Jetstar Domestic: 82.9%, +4.9 ppts;
- Jetstar International: 74.4%, +3.1 ppts;
- QantasLink: 67%, +0.1 ppt;
- Jetstar Asia: 80.8%, +1.9 ppts. [more – original PR]
While Jetstar brings in less revenue than Qantas, its lower cost base can potentially see it post a disproportionately higher profit, which is why some services (such as those to and from the Gold Coast) have shifted from Qantas mainline to Jetstar. Market share is not reflective of profit or margin.
My post from last year:
If QF international lost $200m, the EBIT for QF Domestic and Qlink would be $428m.
Total QF Domestic (including Qlink) passengers is 21,930,000. So each passenger earns QF $19.50 profit.
Total Jetstar passengers is 15,315,000, with an EBIT of $169m So each passenger earns Jetstar $11.03 profit.
When you look at the ASK's, QF Domestic makes a profit of $0.012 per ASK. Jetstar makes $0.0049 per ASK.
So QF Domestic is 2.5 times more profitable than Jetstar per ASK and makes 77% more profit per passenger.
Jetstar Asia made $A14.25m. That gives it a profit of $5.28 per passenger or $0.0024 per ASK. QF domestic is thus about 3.7 times more profitable per passenger or 5 times more profitable per ASK than J* Asia.
Jetstar Pacific is obviously such a complete basket case, they provide 2 lines on it with not a single financial detail.
If you take Jetstar Asia out of the Jetstar numbers, then the Jetstar profit per pax increases slightly to $12.27 and the ASK profit rises to $0.0054. Still a long way off QF domestic!!!
All these numbers are based on the financials provided by QF in the annual results including the $200m international losses, I have made NO assumptions, just broken down the numbers. Even if we did say QF had exaggerated the international losses and say said that QF international lost only $50m and so QF domestic made $278m, the QF domestic business still far outperforms the Jetstar business in profit per ASK and profit per passenger.
Total QF Domestic (including Qlink) passengers is 21,930,000. So each passenger earns QF $19.50 profit.
Total Jetstar passengers is 15,315,000, with an EBIT of $169m So each passenger earns Jetstar $11.03 profit.
When you look at the ASK's, QF Domestic makes a profit of $0.012 per ASK. Jetstar makes $0.0049 per ASK.
So QF Domestic is 2.5 times more profitable than Jetstar per ASK and makes 77% more profit per passenger.
Jetstar Asia made $A14.25m. That gives it a profit of $5.28 per passenger or $0.0024 per ASK. QF domestic is thus about 3.7 times more profitable per passenger or 5 times more profitable per ASK than J* Asia.
Jetstar Pacific is obviously such a complete basket case, they provide 2 lines on it with not a single financial detail.
If you take Jetstar Asia out of the Jetstar numbers, then the Jetstar profit per pax increases slightly to $12.27 and the ASK profit rises to $0.0054. Still a long way off QF domestic!!!
All these numbers are based on the financials provided by QF in the annual results including the $200m international losses, I have made NO assumptions, just broken down the numbers. Even if we did say QF had exaggerated the international losses and say said that QF international lost only $50m and so QF domestic made $278m, the QF domestic business still far outperforms the Jetstar business in profit per ASK and profit per passenger.