MERGED: Alan's still not happy......
Virgin Atlantic pulled out of Sydney - Hong Kong because they aren't a hub airline like Cathay and the Gulf Airlines. They have the same problem as Qantas. Cathay can fly you all over their network from Sydney via a stop in Hong Kong where as Virgin Atlantic could only offer London.
Europe - Australia is high cost, low yield, the airlines based at either end can't compete with the enroute hubs offering one stop multiple destination options. Middle Eastern and Asian Airlines enjoy significant cost advantages with aviation friendly governments and employer favorable employment laws.
A business class return ticket London - New York is the same price as London -Sydney but is one third of the distance with no enroute stop.
Aviation is seeing a transformation in the way people fly long haul, only a few routes such as Sydney - Los Angeles and Europe - US East coast are safe from enroute hub operators for the moment. EK and SQ would love to get SYD - LAX and it could happen if the government decided more competition was needed.
Europe - Australia is high cost, low yield, the airlines based at either end can't compete with the enroute hubs offering one stop multiple destination options. Middle Eastern and Asian Airlines enjoy significant cost advantages with aviation friendly governments and employer favorable employment laws.
A business class return ticket London - New York is the same price as London -Sydney but is one third of the distance with no enroute stop.
Aviation is seeing a transformation in the way people fly long haul, only a few routes such as Sydney - Los Angeles and Europe - US East coast are safe from enroute hub operators for the moment. EK and SQ would love to get SYD - LAX and it could happen if the government decided more competition was needed.
it'd be really nice if we could get back to discussing the issues affecting Qantas than the quasi new world order conspiracy theory BS that this thread has become recently
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An interesting article on Virgin Atlantic, that has relevance to QF performance
Virgin on the final retreat from our skies
Virgin on the final retreat from our skies
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"it'd be really nice if we could get back to discussing the issues affecting Qantas than the quasi new world order conspiracy theory BS that this thread has become recently"
These are the issues that effect QF. Like it or not, there are plenty of astute economic analysts warning of impending financial calamity. Was the GFC a conspiracy? The first person to predict the GFC is now saying the GFC was nothing compared to whats coming next.
Lets revisit this debate in 18 months and see where the world is then.
These are the issues that effect QF. Like it or not, there are plenty of astute economic analysts warning of impending financial calamity. Was the GFC a conspiracy? The first person to predict the GFC is now saying the GFC was nothing compared to whats coming next.
Lets revisit this debate in 18 months and see where the world is then.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Adrift upon the tides of fate
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CCA and Qantas: Authors of their own misfortune
The idea that Joyce and co have stuffed it up is gaining traction.
The idea that Joyce and co have stuffed it up is gaining traction.
Nunc est bibendum
I agree. Times are tough and they may be about to get tougher but to attribute these things to a PM who is only interested in class warfare or to a cabal of faceless NWO super capitalists as some on here have tried to do over the last couple of pages is the thing that irritates me.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Keg, read The Network of Global Corporate Control , there is a pdf copy of the paper on that page.
You have set up a classic false dilemma (simplistic two choices, conspiracy or no conspiracy). The situation is much more subtle & nuanced.
Each and everyone of us is in a conspiracy to manipulate our environment to some end- you as the Captain manipulate & conspired with your fellow pilot, ATC, groundstaff, passengers to some end, usually the safe & efficient conduct of a flight to a schedule.
What would human existence look like if we did not conspire to manipulate our environment? Even the stone age technologies (group hunting & tool manufacture) required individuals to conspire to manipulate their environment.
But I would have to ask the obvious philosophical question as to why there would not be a motivation to exert increasing control of the resources (human and non-human) & environment around oneself? Is this not a basic human trait, to manipulate our environment in an effort to gain mastery & control of it?
Is this desire to manipulate & control the world around us ever satisfied at some wealth or power level? Is there ever some target end point to the acquisition of wealth & power? You personally may be satisfied at certain levels, but can you speak for every other human?
Paraphrasing, you ask the question why, I ask the question why not?
From the linked article:
You have set up a classic false dilemma (simplistic two choices, conspiracy or no conspiracy). The situation is much more subtle & nuanced.
Each and everyone of us is in a conspiracy to manipulate our environment to some end- you as the Captain manipulate & conspired with your fellow pilot, ATC, groundstaff, passengers to some end, usually the safe & efficient conduct of a flight to a schedule.
What would human existence look like if we did not conspire to manipulate our environment? Even the stone age technologies (group hunting & tool manufacture) required individuals to conspire to manipulate their environment.
But I would have to ask the obvious philosophical question as to why there would not be a motivation to exert increasing control of the resources (human and non-human) & environment around oneself? Is this not a basic human trait, to manipulate our environment in an effort to gain mastery & control of it?
Is this desire to manipulate & control the world around us ever satisfied at some wealth or power level? Is there ever some target end point to the acquisition of wealth & power? You personally may be satisfied at certain levels, but can you speak for every other human?
Paraphrasing, you ask the question why, I ask the question why not?
From the linked article:
Abstract
The structure of the control network of transnational corporations affects global market competition and financial stability. So far, only small national samples were studied and there was no appropriate methodology to assess control globally. We present the first investigation of the architecture of the international ownership network, along with the computation of the control held by each global player. We find that transnational corporations form a giant bow-tie structure and that a large portion of control flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions. This core can be seen as an economic “super-entity” that raises new important issues both for researchers and policy makers.
The structure of the control network of transnational corporations affects global market competition and financial stability. So far, only small national samples were studied and there was no appropriate methodology to assess control globally. We present the first investigation of the architecture of the international ownership network, along with the computation of the control held by each global player. We find that transnational corporations form a giant bow-tie structure and that a large portion of control flows to a small tightly-knit core of financial institutions. This core can be seen as an economic “super-entity” that raises new important issues both for researchers and policy makers.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CONSPIRACY
1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
3. Law An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
To call the act of two pilots working together, using clearly defined SOPS to achieve an also clearly defined outcome, namely the safe transport of people and cargo from A to B an act of conspiracy is absurd.
Of course, there were multiple shooters on that grassy knoll and Sept 11 was orchestrated by the US government.
The **** some people believe is worthy of a scientific study in its own right!
Lets get real people.
1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
3. Law An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
To call the act of two pilots working together, using clearly defined SOPS to achieve an also clearly defined outcome, namely the safe transport of people and cargo from A to B an act of conspiracy is absurd.
Of course, there were multiple shooters on that grassy knoll and Sept 11 was orchestrated by the US government.
The **** some people believe is worthy of a scientific study in its own right!
Lets get real people.
"Act in concert" then. The word conspire has evolved lately to include broad non-criminal agreement. The doctrine of common usage allows for the benign definition. Hence the phrase "criminal conspiracy" to distinguish the two.
Are you always so literal?
Are you always so literal?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you redefine the word CONSPIRACY, to mean acting in concert, then everything and anything we do with other people in this world can be termed an act of conspiracy.
Performing ones legal duty would no longer be an act within a duty of care but an act of conspiracy...... so what?
Having sex would no longer be an act of natural biological instinct but an act of conspiracy........ so what?
In its current definition when one talks of a conspiracy it raises eyebrows.
The way you choose to use it,the word conspiracy within any meaningful context, becomes impotent and obsolete.
Am i always so literal?
No mate just sensible........ unless of course you choose to redefine sensible.
In any event, what has all of this to do with Qantas?
Performing ones legal duty would no longer be an act within a duty of care but an act of conspiracy...... so what?
Having sex would no longer be an act of natural biological instinct but an act of conspiracy........ so what?
In its current definition when one talks of a conspiracy it raises eyebrows.
The way you choose to use it,the word conspiracy within any meaningful context, becomes impotent and obsolete.
Am i always so literal?
No mate just sensible........ unless of course you choose to redefine sensible.
In any event, what has all of this to do with Qantas?
Last edited by tenretni; 8th Feb 2014 at 23:54.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you redefine the word CONSPIRACY, to mean acting in concert, then everything and anything we do with other people in this world can be termed an act of conspiracy.
No redefinition of the word is required. It is from the Latin to 'breathe together', in English it has always meant to "work together" for a purpose. My definition of the word conspire is based on the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), 1888 - online copy available at archive.org - and the actual file is HERE (large file 250+M).
But if you want to go on trust, page 871:
Originally Posted by Oxford English Dictionary
Conspire
ad. L. conspirare lit 'to breathe together', whence, 'to accord, harmonize, agree, combine or unite in a purpose, plot mischief together secretly'.]
... There are numerous other definitions that include both mischief and non-mischief ends.
ad. L. conspirare lit 'to breathe together', whence, 'to accord, harmonize, agree, combine or unite in a purpose, plot mischief together secretly'.]
... There are numerous other definitions that include both mischief and non-mischief ends.
But that is the word definition game, my point still stands, to simply label the world in the binary view that things are a either a conspiracy or a non-conspiracy is totally meaningless - impotent exactly as you state. All of us are working to pursue our own ends & happiness, and that usually means working in concert with others.
As to the morality, ethics, nobility or legality of the deeds and ends such working produces is a different argument. It may be perfectly legal to conspire ('breathe together') with others to cut a workers pay , and pass those saving directly to a manager or owner. Is that evil, ethical or noble? Does it not depend upon which point it is viewed & by whom?
Of course people work together to maximise benefit to themselves, quite often at the expense of someone else [zero sum game]. Labelling that process as some crackpot "conspiracy theory" is the error that I am pointing out. It is totally redundant & meaningless as you state, that is exactly my point. Because it is so self evident, we all do it most of the time. It is the essence of being human, to work with others, both for good & evil.
The term "conspiracy theory" has been co-opted to be used as a term to denigrate others by the modern media to shut opposing views. Remember, the NSA/Britain/Australia/Canada/NZ spying on virtually every electronic communication the entire planet generated, was, until 6 months ago another theory that should be dismissed as it was another crank "conspiracy theory". People who pointed out the obvious clues where howled down as nutters. The term "conspiracy theory" has become a very power piece of propaganda conditioning that has be used to suppress the flow of information that the wealthy and powerful deem dangerous to their pursuit of their ends.
To the posters out there trying to impress everybody with their vast knowledge of the English language. Here's a piece of mine in plain everyday English ...... Please get the f
k back on topic !!!
McHale.
k back on topic !!!McHale.
TOPIC PLEASE !
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: On the chopping board.
Posts: 929
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
FERRIS, Interesting read, claiming $120mill pumped into Jet* asia along with the share buyback shortly followed by a big profit warning.
To me it looks like either the board were not paying attention to the cashflow, or something else was going on.
It's the year of expiring EBA's and the Libs in power so anything is possible I guess (IMHO).
To me it looks like either the board were not paying attention to the cashflow, or something else was going on.
It's the year of expiring EBA's and the Libs in power so anything is possible I guess (IMHO).