Gregg, Dixon, Carnegie, Singo make a play on QF
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nobody Cares For Me? Qantas 2012
Who would have thought... Qantas - Joyce & Dixon Fall Out Over Strategy - 7.30 Report December 2012 - YouTube
dedicated to all who have to endure.
so much going on this week I posted the wrong version video, sorry about that ejectx3 for getting the posts out of order,
Merry Christmas and a happy new year to all on here. Keep the faith!
tima9x
dedicated to all who have to endure.
so much going on this week I posted the wrong version video, sorry about that ejectx3 for getting the posts out of order,
Merry Christmas and a happy new year to all on here. Keep the faith!
tima9x
Last edited by TIMA9X; 7th Dec 2012 at 02:42.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Power plays in the tussle for Qantas - The Drum - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Probably the best summary of the situation from ABC's Ticky Fullerton .... I found the comments very interesting as well.
Jingle bells,
Unwinding the deal with Emirates would be like unscrambling an egg. It might as well be a shareholding that Emirates would have in Qantas, given the level of commitment on both sides.
Jingle bells,
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Pants on fire
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thought this comment in the above article by 'Ex QF Management' was an interesting read:
Ex QF Management:
12 Dec 2012 12:00:26am
It amazes me how poorly researched "investigative journalists" in this country really are. They generally regurgitate company spin and never really look at the numbers in any great detail.
Jetstar was never a good idea; no full service carrier in the world has successfully managed to do what Qantas management have attempted to do.
Jetstar Asia has never made a true operating profit. It has bled Qantas to the tune of $70M + per annum since its inception in 2004. Loss to the group $500-700M.
Jetstar Pacific prior to its nationalisation by the Vietnamese government in 2012 cost its parent $50-60M per annum just to keep the doors open, stated by the CEO of that airline himself in the Vietnamese Post. Do a simple google Ticky. Founded in 2007 thats at least $200M blown.
Jetstar HK. $100M and they haven't even got approval yet.
Jetstar Japan another $100M.
Jetstar international ex Australia, $500M loss, its inception in 2008 dovetails neatly with QF international's sliding "profitability". QF international is not haemorrhaging money of its own accord, it is paying for all these disasters out of its operating profit. Where else do you think the money is coming from??
John Borghetti himself stated privately that Jetstar has never made a cent in any of its incarnations. A simple close look at load factors vs revenue of each operating segment shows that. Yet the mainstream media just regurgitates the tripe QF management has been spinning for years.
The only reason these airlines where created was to park 110 Airbus A320's. Aircraft whose leases were going to GAAM amongst others, routed through Ireland and onto the Caymans and The British Virgin Islands. Guess who was profiting from those?
That's the primary reason why Joyce was placed by Dixon in the top job and why Borghetti was sidelined. Because he wouldn't play ball. Buchanan was fired because he wrote a paper outlining the fact that the low cost carrier model does not work beyond 5 hours flight time. In house legal resigned, company secretary resigned, company auditor, resigned. All left the sinking ship fearing the mother of all corporate collapses.
Joyce took it too far due to his ego being completely bound by the folly that is Jetstar and was facing a corporate collapse soon enough due to his utter ineptitude and inability to run an airline. Any airline.
They were trying desperately to do a deal with Temasek in Singapore until the 11th hour but couldn't get it over the line for the simple reason that SQ management detest Qantas management, as do Cathay. Joyce was a dead man walking and in desperate need of any deal to save his skin.
Emirates saw a bleeding man and took full advantage. Qantas is doomed with this man at the helm and frankly it is a sad state of affairs where a Dixon alternative is the preferred option.
Simple maths, the year Joyce became CEO in 2008 Jetstar international ex Australia was launched. The Qantas group made a $1.6BN profit in 2008 of which Jetstar's domestic reported contribution was a negligible amount, less that 10% of the total. A figure which in itself is questionable seeing as Jetstar's costs have always been subsidized by QF international. This was on the back of multiple record profits over many years.
Every year Joyce has been CEO has seen a substantial drop in operating profit, share price, no dividend etc, culminating in a disastrous grounding which cost over $200M, a massive figure allocated of course to the international division and pre-planned long in advance of it actually taking place.
The often quoted drop in passenger numbers to 18% of the total Australian traffic is again, a furphy faithfully regurgitated by the Chairman's lounged mainstream financial media.
The Qantas group still holds 28% of the total, 10% of Qantas International's traffic having been gifted to Jetstar International and Jetconnect since 2008, neither entity having made a profit since inception. This "gifting" dovetails precisely with Qantas International's supposed demise. The gifting of that 10% not only cost mainline 100's of millions in set up and operating costs it also robbed mainline of the revenue it would have earned throughout this time. A double whammy. The Qantas group incidentally held 34% at the time of privatisation in 1992.
All for a series of Jetstar airlines that no one aside from those who work there, the hapless CEO who "created" it , and the bankers at GAAM and Investec who profited from the aircraft leases generated by their expansion, would mourn its passing if they were made to stand on their own two feet.
A shareholder activist take over of control at QF would be the best thing that could happen at this time. This is a completely different proposition to the APA bid, a bid incidentally that Joyce was a great cheerleader for and which would have netted him in excess of $20M had it gone through, something he has conveniently forgotten now. One wonders how much he will be making out of the Emirates deal if it goes ahead. A question nobody seems to be asking, if Qantas is such a basket case, why are the ex managers of the business so keen to buy it? What do they know that the market hasn't been told?
Qantas should not be in this position, however now that it is, it is a matter of national security if nothing else that the Emirates deal is stopped and the senior management and Board are replaced with people who have full service airline experience, many of whom (me included) jumped ship and are now happily at Virgin under Borghetti, the man who should have gotten the nod in the first place.
In his own words to a management conference call not so long ago, "We have nothing to worry about whilst Joyce is running Qantas."
12 Dec 2012 12:00:26am
It amazes me how poorly researched "investigative journalists" in this country really are. They generally regurgitate company spin and never really look at the numbers in any great detail.
Jetstar was never a good idea; no full service carrier in the world has successfully managed to do what Qantas management have attempted to do.
Jetstar Asia has never made a true operating profit. It has bled Qantas to the tune of $70M + per annum since its inception in 2004. Loss to the group $500-700M.
Jetstar Pacific prior to its nationalisation by the Vietnamese government in 2012 cost its parent $50-60M per annum just to keep the doors open, stated by the CEO of that airline himself in the Vietnamese Post. Do a simple google Ticky. Founded in 2007 thats at least $200M blown.
Jetstar HK. $100M and they haven't even got approval yet.
Jetstar Japan another $100M.
Jetstar international ex Australia, $500M loss, its inception in 2008 dovetails neatly with QF international's sliding "profitability". QF international is not haemorrhaging money of its own accord, it is paying for all these disasters out of its operating profit. Where else do you think the money is coming from??
John Borghetti himself stated privately that Jetstar has never made a cent in any of its incarnations. A simple close look at load factors vs revenue of each operating segment shows that. Yet the mainstream media just regurgitates the tripe QF management has been spinning for years.
The only reason these airlines where created was to park 110 Airbus A320's. Aircraft whose leases were going to GAAM amongst others, routed through Ireland and onto the Caymans and The British Virgin Islands. Guess who was profiting from those?
That's the primary reason why Joyce was placed by Dixon in the top job and why Borghetti was sidelined. Because he wouldn't play ball. Buchanan was fired because he wrote a paper outlining the fact that the low cost carrier model does not work beyond 5 hours flight time. In house legal resigned, company secretary resigned, company auditor, resigned. All left the sinking ship fearing the mother of all corporate collapses.
Joyce took it too far due to his ego being completely bound by the folly that is Jetstar and was facing a corporate collapse soon enough due to his utter ineptitude and inability to run an airline. Any airline.
They were trying desperately to do a deal with Temasek in Singapore until the 11th hour but couldn't get it over the line for the simple reason that SQ management detest Qantas management, as do Cathay. Joyce was a dead man walking and in desperate need of any deal to save his skin.
Emirates saw a bleeding man and took full advantage. Qantas is doomed with this man at the helm and frankly it is a sad state of affairs where a Dixon alternative is the preferred option.
Simple maths, the year Joyce became CEO in 2008 Jetstar international ex Australia was launched. The Qantas group made a $1.6BN profit in 2008 of which Jetstar's domestic reported contribution was a negligible amount, less that 10% of the total. A figure which in itself is questionable seeing as Jetstar's costs have always been subsidized by QF international. This was on the back of multiple record profits over many years.
Every year Joyce has been CEO has seen a substantial drop in operating profit, share price, no dividend etc, culminating in a disastrous grounding which cost over $200M, a massive figure allocated of course to the international division and pre-planned long in advance of it actually taking place.
The often quoted drop in passenger numbers to 18% of the total Australian traffic is again, a furphy faithfully regurgitated by the Chairman's lounged mainstream financial media.
The Qantas group still holds 28% of the total, 10% of Qantas International's traffic having been gifted to Jetstar International and Jetconnect since 2008, neither entity having made a profit since inception. This "gifting" dovetails precisely with Qantas International's supposed demise. The gifting of that 10% not only cost mainline 100's of millions in set up and operating costs it also robbed mainline of the revenue it would have earned throughout this time. A double whammy. The Qantas group incidentally held 34% at the time of privatisation in 1992.
All for a series of Jetstar airlines that no one aside from those who work there, the hapless CEO who "created" it , and the bankers at GAAM and Investec who profited from the aircraft leases generated by their expansion, would mourn its passing if they were made to stand on their own two feet.
A shareholder activist take over of control at QF would be the best thing that could happen at this time. This is a completely different proposition to the APA bid, a bid incidentally that Joyce was a great cheerleader for and which would have netted him in excess of $20M had it gone through, something he has conveniently forgotten now. One wonders how much he will be making out of the Emirates deal if it goes ahead. A question nobody seems to be asking, if Qantas is such a basket case, why are the ex managers of the business so keen to buy it? What do they know that the market hasn't been told?
Qantas should not be in this position, however now that it is, it is a matter of national security if nothing else that the Emirates deal is stopped and the senior management and Board are replaced with people who have full service airline experience, many of whom (me included) jumped ship and are now happily at Virgin under Borghetti, the man who should have gotten the nod in the first place.
In his own words to a management conference call not so long ago, "We have nothing to worry about whilst Joyce is running Qantas."
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Exiled in the Ukraine
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can understand why Dixon and co are getting upset at the moment. Joyce is making them pay $1++ a share for a take over where as he is giving it to Emirates for free! 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Geoff Dixon comes out of retirement, it will be the end of Qantas.
Kiss goodbye to the accumulated reserves, any possibility of engagement of employees and staff morale superglued to the bottom of the "give a damn" gauge.
Kiss goodbye to the accumulated reserves, any possibility of engagement of employees and staff morale superglued to the bottom of the "give a damn" gauge.
Livs hairdressers post quoting "Ex Qantas manager", if true, is the most explosive thing I've ever seen on PPrune.
What he appears to be alleging is that Jetstar is terminally unprofiitable and a scam to channel lease funds out of Qantas.
If this doesn't shake the board to its foundations then it's time for ASIC and the ACCC to act.
My guess is that the Board will act and that Alan Joyces resignation will be announced Christmas or Boxing day.
For a start we need to rule out the possibility that the major shareholders hiding behind the nominee companies are not one and the same as the leasing company
What he appears to be alleging is that Jetstar is terminally unprofiitable and a scam to channel lease funds out of Qantas.
If this doesn't shake the board to its foundations then it's time for ASIC and the ACCC to act.
My guess is that the Board will act and that Alan Joyces resignation will be announced Christmas or Boxing day.
For a start we need to rule out the possibility that the major shareholders hiding behind the nominee companies are not one and the same as the leasing company
Last edited by Sunfish; 13th Dec 2012 at 17:31.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What he appears to be alleging is that Jetstar is terminally unprofiitable and a scam to channel lease funds out of Qantas.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So Fed Sec - looking at other premium airlines in the Asia Pac region
Cathay makes a whoppin great loss for 1H
Cathay Pacific reports HK$935m net loss for H1 2012
And Singapore barely makes a profit last quarter
Singapore Airlines Profit Falls 54% as Cargo Loss Triples - Bloomberg
What makes you think Qantas International is making a profit with
- older, more expensive planes
- uncompetitive depreciation rates
- high terminal charges and gate fees at home hiubs
- chunk of costs in AUD which has appreciated
And that's without talking about labour costs.
Cathay makes a whoppin great loss for 1H
Cathay Pacific reports HK$935m net loss for H1 2012
And Singapore barely makes a profit last quarter
Singapore Airlines Profit Falls 54% as Cargo Loss Triples - Bloomberg
What makes you think Qantas International is making a profit with
- older, more expensive planes
- uncompetitive depreciation rates
- high terminal charges and gate fees at home hiubs
- chunk of costs in AUD which has appreciated
And that's without talking about labour costs.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Pants on fire
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kiss goodbye to the accumulated reserves
Look, I think Dixon was an absolute disaster for Qantas. APA, wrong aircraft, Jetstar ... the list is endless. But the damage Dixon did has been totally eclipsed by Joyce. Believe me when I tell you, I thought long and hard before typing the next sentence. I think we should sit down and listen to what the consortium have to say.
Firstly, as minority shareholders without any significant support they will be negotiating from a position of weakness at the moment.
Secondly, they are making all the right noises and in a public arena.
Stop the Emirates deal ... tick
Sell Jetstar ... tick
Get rid of Joyce ... big TICK
If they can convince us that they genuinely intend to do this we need to make a bullet proof, legally binding and very public agreement with them detailing the future direction of the company and the place of Australian employees in this brave new world, in exchange for union support.
Otherwise we can always walk away ..... straight back into Alan's lovin' arms.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Sector 7G
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Singo can't stop talking about getting 3 for 1, that is $3 Billion for $1 Billion. He & his cronies have an interest that extends no further than their own bank accounts.
Once they have their hands on the cash, Singo will perform emotional CPR and resuscitate & rehabilitate in the public's mind the QANTAS BRAND IMAGE of old, IPO it to the greater fools, and then it will collapse under its own weight of accounting trickery and fraud. That is one you can take to the bank.
Banker's like Carnigie will have already established an exit strategy prior to even contemplating an entry.
The fact that apparently rational people will consider this group to be viable in the long term as an alternative validates the Stockholm Syndrome.
Once they have their hands on the cash, Singo will perform emotional CPR and resuscitate & rehabilitate in the public's mind the QANTAS BRAND IMAGE of old, IPO it to the greater fools, and then it will collapse under its own weight of accounting trickery and fraud. That is one you can take to the bank.
Banker's like Carnigie will have already established an exit strategy prior to even contemplating an entry.
The fact that apparently rational people will consider this group to be viable in the long term as an alternative validates the Stockholm Syndrome.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What makes you think Qantas International is making a profit with
- older, more expensive planes
- uncompetitive depreciation rates
- high terminal charges and gate fees at home hiubs
- chunk of costs in AUD which has appreciated
- older, more expensive planes
- uncompetitive depreciation rates
- high terminal charges and gate fees at home hiubs
- chunk of costs in AUD which has appreciated
You are off the mark listing the AUD as a problem. They buy fuel and aircraft in the now cheaper US dollar whilst still colecting fares in AUD. Paying wages has not fluctuated in relation to the dollar but the other two are now far cheaper than 10 years ago.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little bird told me the 7:30 report was going to do a big report on Jetstar Asia losses and the internal company financial support for Joke*. It was pulled at the last minute for more politically relevant segments. Perhaps they are saving it for when things get quieter. From the Annual report.
ASIC GUIDANCE
In December 2011 ASIC issued Regulatory Guide 230. To comply with this Guide, Qantas is required to make a clear statement about
whether information disclosed in documents other than the financial report has been audited or reviewed in accordance with
Australian Auditing Standards.
In line with previous years and in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001, the Review of Operations is unaudited. Notwithstanding
the Review of Operations contains disclosures which are extracted or derived from the Financial Report for the year ended
30 June 2012, which has been audited by the Group’s Independent Auditor.
ASIC GUIDANCE
In December 2011 ASIC issued Regulatory Guide 230. To comply with this Guide, Qantas is required to make a clear statement about
whether information disclosed in documents other than the financial report has been audited or reviewed in accordance with
Australian Auditing Standards.
In line with previous years and in accordance with the Corporations Act 2001, the Review of Operations is unaudited. Notwithstanding
the Review of Operations contains disclosures which are extracted or derived from the Financial Report for the year ended
30 June 2012, which has been audited by the Group’s Independent Auditor.
UNRECOGNISED DEFERRED TAX ASSETS
Deferred tax assets have not been recognised with respect to the following items because it is not probable that future taxable profit
will be available against which the Qantas Group can utilise these benefits:
Tax losses – New Zealand operations $13million
Tax losses – Singapore operations $8million
Tax losses – Hong Kong operations $5million
Deferred tax assets have not been recognised with respect to the following items because it is not probable that future taxable profit
will be available against which the Qantas Group can utilise these benefits:
Tax losses – New Zealand operations $13million
Tax losses – Singapore operations $8million
Tax losses – Hong Kong operations $5million
Livy, the syndicate will do the following:
1. Pay itself 3 billion in Qantas cash via management fees and a whole raft of other devices.
2. Come up with a great story about the "new" Qantas.
3. Replace the 3 billion by borrowing it from banks and super funds. a high yielding unsecured notes issue to the public would be another way.
4. Walk away with a Two billion profit. They don't need to give a flying fcuk about the airline once they have borrowed the cash.
This is the Bain Capital model beloved by mitt Romney.
1. Pay itself 3 billion in Qantas cash via management fees and a whole raft of other devices.
2. Come up with a great story about the "new" Qantas.
3. Replace the 3 billion by borrowing it from banks and super funds. a high yielding unsecured notes issue to the public would be another way.
4. Walk away with a Two billion profit. They don't need to give a flying fcuk about the airline once they have borrowed the cash.
This is the Bain Capital model beloved by mitt Romney.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Pants on fire
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G'day Sunfish,
Yep, that's a real possibility. I just don't understand why if that was their intent, Singo would be blabbing to the media about it at the same time that the consortium is trying to get support from the unions. He's a smarter man than that. Also, if the cash was their main objective, wouldn't it be fairly easy for the current QF management to counter that threat? Hostile takeovers take time and if it ever looked as though it had the remotest chance of succeeding the current management could take that $3B and, say, retire some debt with it. Problem solved.
But let's say I'm wrong. That's why I suggested we need to get a legally binding agreement with them. They won't agree to invest the $3B in mainline, walk away. They won't agree to keep Qantas onshore, walk away. At the moment, they probably need us more than we need them, which is probably the only reason they want to talk to us.
At the very least, entering discussions with them will not be a good look for QF management and will further draw media attention to their incompetence.
How would that be any different to now?
Dunno about Stockholm Syndrome but I would say that we are getting desperate. Unfortunately it looks like this consortium is realistically the only other option at the moment, and the company is rapidly approaching PNR. Dixon might kill Qantas, but Joyce definitely will kill Qantas.
Yep, that's a real possibility. I just don't understand why if that was their intent, Singo would be blabbing to the media about it at the same time that the consortium is trying to get support from the unions. He's a smarter man than that. Also, if the cash was their main objective, wouldn't it be fairly easy for the current QF management to counter that threat? Hostile takeovers take time and if it ever looked as though it had the remotest chance of succeeding the current management could take that $3B and, say, retire some debt with it. Problem solved.
But let's say I'm wrong. That's why I suggested we need to get a legally binding agreement with them. They won't agree to invest the $3B in mainline, walk away. They won't agree to keep Qantas onshore, walk away. At the moment, they probably need us more than we need them, which is probably the only reason they want to talk to us.
At the very least, entering discussions with them will not be a good look for QF management and will further draw media attention to their incompetence.
and then it will collapse under its own weight of accounting trickery and fraud.
The fact that apparently rational people will consider this group to be viable in the long term as an alternative validates the Stockholm Syndrome.