Feb 21 - Qantas due to release its first-half results today has been caught off guard
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Feb 21 - Qantas due to release its first-half results today, caught off guard
Qantas director caught up in corruption scandal
"Qantas has been caught off guard by the revelation that one of its non-executive directors, Corinne Namblard, is part of an investigation into the corruption scandal surrounding the world’s oldest surviving bank, Italy’s Monte dei Paschi di Siena."
With the national carrier preparing to release its first-half results on Thursday, the board at Qantas was only made aware of Ms Namblard’s connection to the long-running scandal in Siena on Wednesday, when The Australian Financial Review sought comment from the director. Ms Namblard, relatively unknown in the Australian market until her appointment to the Qantas board in June 2011
"The Qantas director specifically denied reports in local Italian media that she had personally been charged in relation to the investigation. “I feel very strongly about this, my personal reputation is clearly at stake here,” Ms Namblard said.
“I have to officially make a very clear statement that there are absolutely no charges. Yes, there are investigations going on. Yes, we have been caught in the process of those investigations."
“My lawyers and myself have repeatedly said things have been done by Galaxy above the board and in a very transparent manner.”
Asked why the Qantas board was not aware of the ongoing investigation in Italy, which has proceeded to a preliminary hearing, Ms Namblard said the matter had been discussed with the headhunter who recruited her to the director role and “other people” were aware of it." my bold
Qantas director caught up in corruption scandal
"Qantas has been caught off guard by the revelation that one of its non-executive directors, Corinne Namblard, is part of an investigation into the corruption scandal surrounding the world’s oldest surviving bank, Italy’s Monte dei Paschi di Siena."
With the national carrier preparing to release its first-half results on Thursday, the board at Qantas was only made aware of Ms Namblard’s connection to the long-running scandal in Siena on Wednesday, when The Australian Financial Review sought comment from the director. Ms Namblard, relatively unknown in the Australian market until her appointment to the Qantas board in June 2011
"The Qantas director specifically denied reports in local Italian media that she had personally been charged in relation to the investigation. “I feel very strongly about this, my personal reputation is clearly at stake here,” Ms Namblard said.
“I have to officially make a very clear statement that there are absolutely no charges. Yes, there are investigations going on. Yes, we have been caught in the process of those investigations."
“My lawyers and myself have repeatedly said things have been done by Galaxy above the board and in a very transparent manner.”
Asked why the Qantas board was not aware of the ongoing investigation in Italy, which has proceeded to a preliminary hearing, Ms Namblard said the matter had been discussed with the headhunter who recruited her to the director role and “other people” were aware of it." my bold
Qantas director caught up in corruption scandal
Last edited by TIMA9X; 21st Feb 2013 at 06:40.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oz
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF half year profit
Its $111m. Up 164%.
But... A Chunk of it is from canceling 35 x 787s. So the big wigs will get their bonus from making a good profit based on a terrible decision.
But... A Chunk of it is from canceling 35 x 787s. So the big wigs will get their bonus from making a good profit based on a terrible decision.
Last edited by qfguy; 20th Feb 2013 at 21:52.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas board member denies wrongdoing | News.com.au
I would suggest to allow the court proceedings to run it's natural course.
In the meantime, how about running an airline and CLEANING your aircraft the photo of the A380 flag ship is a disgrace.
MC
I would suggest to allow the court proceedings to run it's natural course.
In the meantime, how about running an airline and CLEANING your aircraft the photo of the A380 flag ship is a disgrace.
MC
Last edited by Mstr Caution; 20th Feb 2013 at 21:50.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne
Age: 57
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Exiled in the Ukraine
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a joke this profit announcement is.
Sacrafice long term growth with the 787s and the companies viability for a Short term profit just for the sake of a few bonuses.
Geniuses
Please p1$$ off Alan, and take that miserable board with you.
Sacrafice long term growth with the 787s and the companies viability for a Short term profit just for the sake of a few bonuses.
Geniuses
Please p1$$ off Alan, and take that miserable board with you.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: With The Locals !
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It included $125 million in cash from Boeing for cancelling firm orders for 35 of the long-delayed 787 Dreamliner planes.
Read more: Boeing cash papers over Qantas cracks]
Read more: Boeing cash papers over Qantas cracks]
Qantas emphasised that all of its operations including Jetstar were profitable apart from its premium international division. But it highlighted the fact that the losses of Qantas International had been reduced by 65 per cent to $91 million in the first half.
Read more: Boeing cash papers over Qantas cracks]
Read more: Boeing cash papers over Qantas cracks]
A 65% reduced loss is still a loss
But it highlighted the fact that the losses of Qantas International had been reduced by 65 per cent to $91 million in the first half.
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This just underlines the fact the management are only in it for the short term bonus. I could never understand why QF never went back to Boeing and took a tougher stance over the 787.
Instead of cancellations and write downs, why not say to Boeing that due to the delayed deliver of the 787, we require x number of brand new 767 (I assume that the new builds incorporate greater fuel saving technology, after all, we keep getting told that 787 is a replacement for A330 at J*, which are a replacement for gas guzzling 767's at QF) until such time as you can deliver the aircraft we are buying.
This allows QF to have a fuel saving product as well as a product that would keep its paying customers happy, all with little to no cost.
Could this have been achievable, or am I simply being deluded SLF?
Ps, I know logic is as much a swear word in aviation as it is in my field of rail, but one can dream, can't I?
Instead of cancellations and write downs, why not say to Boeing that due to the delayed deliver of the 787, we require x number of brand new 767 (I assume that the new builds incorporate greater fuel saving technology, after all, we keep getting told that 787 is a replacement for A330 at J*, which are a replacement for gas guzzling 767's at QF) until such time as you can deliver the aircraft we are buying.
This allows QF to have a fuel saving product as well as a product that would keep its paying customers happy, all with little to no cost.
Could this have been achievable, or am I simply being deluded SLF?
Ps, I know logic is as much a swear word in aviation as it is in my field of rail, but one can dream, can't I?
You can fly an aeroplane full and still lose plenty of dough.
The number one cost remains fuel. If you're charging the same for tickets as your competitors - which you need to do to fill the aeroplanes - but are flying aeroplanes that burn 30% more per ASK (744 vs. 77W) you're going to lose.
That's the real reason international continues to burn money...literally.
Management book the bonuses for the failures of 10 years ago and staff are left to pay the price.
The number one cost remains fuel. If you're charging the same for tickets as your competitors - which you need to do to fill the aeroplanes - but are flying aeroplanes that burn 30% more per ASK (744 vs. 77W) you're going to lose.
That's the real reason international continues to burn money...literally.
Management book the bonuses for the failures of 10 years ago and staff are left to pay the price.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm
Something wrong with my calculator. $111 mil profit less compo ($125mil) is $14 mil loss down from $40 mil profit 1 year ago so going backwards ?? , but I'm sure I must be wrong.
Need to prob use my iPhone calc app next time.
Something wrong with my calculator. $111 mil profit less compo ($125mil) is $14 mil loss down from $40 mil profit 1 year ago so going backwards ?? , but I'm sure I must be wrong.
Need to prob use my iPhone calc app next time.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Beyond The Envelope
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel and Fuel Hedging
Qantas pays for its fuel in $US.
Qantas also used to boast about its hedging strategy.
They've been quiet about that for awhile
Perhaps they stuffed it up?
Anyone surprised if they did ?
Qantas also used to boast about its hedging strategy.
They've been quiet about that for awhile
Perhaps they stuffed it up?
Anyone surprised if they did ?
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: goulburn
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Media reporting $100m reduction in domestic due to competitive activity from DJ. Can see the next lot of headlines already.
Sad but entirely predictable whilst this management team are in town.
Sad but entirely predictable whilst this management team are in town.
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Crew rest
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I generally breeze over the load factors.
I mean if you're selling:
- 20 seats and you only manage to sell 16, then you'll have an 80% load factor.
- 10 seats and you only manged to sell 8, then you'll have an 80% load factor.
So even though you've reduced the number of seats available to be sold/consumed, in both cases your load factor remains steady. ASK, RPK, unit cost etc are all far more useful in my opinion.
Yet to read the report fully.
I mean if you're selling:
- 20 seats and you only manage to sell 16, then you'll have an 80% load factor.
- 10 seats and you only manged to sell 8, then you'll have an 80% load factor.
So even though you've reduced the number of seats available to be sold/consumed, in both cases your load factor remains steady. ASK, RPK, unit cost etc are all far more useful in my opinion.
Yet to read the report fully.