MERGED: Alan's still not happy......
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joyce’s mangy kangaroo
as we approach 2,000,000 views for this thread,I'm looking forward to the day when we can start a new thread titled "ALAN'S GONE".
Joyce’s mangy kangaroo must look to Asia for help
Alan Joyce hopes Asian carriers to save Qantas, Jetstar | Crikey
In 2011, Qantas CEO Alan Joyce claimed Jetstar was the region’s “leading low cost carrier”. Clearly, this is no longer the case. It’s time for Joyce to eat humble pie, and accept an economic rescue from his south-east Asian counterparts.
When Qantas unveiled its stonking $2.8 million loss last month and revealed that it was spinning off its Qantas International business, it looked awfully like it was setting itself up for a partial sale to one of China’s ever-growing state-owned airlines.
The big four in China — Guangzhou-based China Southern, Shanghai-based China Eastern, Beijing’s Air China, and the upstart Hainan Airlines (the best of the lot as far as the in-flight experience goes) — are now the main conduits for the 709,000 Chinese tourists who piled into Australia last year. Qantas has egregiously missed the Chinese market.
It has tried to rectify this with half-baked code share agreements with Southern and Eastern. Last year, Qantas had investment talks with Southern, along with Eastern and Hong Kong gambling magnate Stanley Ho’s Shun Tak Holdings, the frustrated owner of a third share in Jetstar Hong Kong, still waiting for a licence, two-and-a-half years after applying.
Qantas International’s business — at both the full service and low-cost carrier (LCC) level — is looking much more like a mangy old kangaroo than a flying one, losing $497 million in underlying earnings before interest and tax last year. About half of this — more than $200 million a year or so in amortisation annually — was removed care of its overdue fleet write-downs, but there’s lots of work to be done on further cost-cutting. Qantas’ last remaining branded flight to Asia’s most popular city (the Sydney-Bangkok route) is about to face off against direct flights from the formidable Air Asia and NokScoot — a Thailand/Singapore cost venture — as early as the fourth quarter.
Jetstar’s offshore forays have also failed to convince. None of its other three Jetstar ventures — Jetstar Asia out of Singapore, Jetstar Japan and Jetstar Vietnam — now make any money. Vietnam is breaking even; Singapore just posted its first loss and is being pummeled from all sides by overcapacity and competition. In 2011, Qantas CEO Alan Joyce prematurely said that Jetstar was the region’s “leading low-cost carrier” — not any more it ain’t.
Clearly something needs to give. Without substantial investment, Qantas and most of Jetstar’s international business will have to be put down.
There is now bipartisan political support to increase the percentage that foreigners can own in Qantas to 49%, plus a further 49% of the soon-to-be-separately listed Qantas International.
Qantas and its odd bedfellow, Dubai-based Emirates, have made it clear time and time again that the Dubai-based airline is not interested in a financial stake in Qantas. Why would it be? As a state-owned operation, Emirates has a seemingly endless well of funding to draw upon; ditto its Gulf competitors Qatar and Etihad. They do not need Qantas.
It’s now been 10 years since British Airways sold out its 18.5% share in Qantas, the last we are likely to see of a European airline on the share register.
A slice of Qantas International, as well as potentially what will be the headstock, would also give a Chinese airline access to Qantas’ deep experience in providing top-of-the-range first and business class services; in this respect, the Chinese airlines are still neophytes. And they would get ready-made LCC Jetstar businesses to feed into and maybe move into the black.
Backing from Beijing would provide some desperately needed oomph to the company’s stumbling regional strategy. And Clive Palmer would doubtless back it to the hilt. As part of its so-called “transformation review”, the company promised no new Jetstar ventures. In many ways this is a no-brainer, as the low-cost carrier’s forays offshore have been pretty much a disaster.
With its proposed full-service Asian venture with Malaysia Airlines nixed by state-owned Singapore Airlines, which would not brook such completion on its doorstep, Qantas was left with a shotgun marriage to Emirates. The company is now getting similar treatment for its Jetstar Hong Kong venture, with no licence in sight. The addition of Shun Tak and the move to hand the group the majority of board seats — a decision made earlier in the year but only announced publicly two weeks ago — as well as Ho’s decision to install his daughter, Pansy Ho, as chairman does not seemed to have helped.
Cathay Pacific is pushing back with all its firepower; the relationship between the two one world partners is poisonous. Cathay is pushing Qantas Frequent Flyers to the head of its upgrade queues in the hope of winning them over to its newly configured business and premium economy services — Cathay was recently voted the world’s best airline.
Qantas is on the verge of pulling its double-decker A380 off the Hong Kong route (and onto the Sydney-Dallas run). This would be replaced with reconfigured 747s with roomier business class — a sign Cathay is eating into its market share. The latest signal that Jetstar Hong Kong may be hanging by a thread was China Eastern recently announcing its own Shanghai-based LCC. Jetstar Asia has sold off six of its nine planes, with the other three gathering dust in the hangar at Airbus Industrie headquarters in Toulouse. Yet Qantas/Jetstar is stubbornly hanging on for what is potentially a big prize.
“There is no doubt that the approval process is taking longer than expected for Jetstar Hong Kong. However, all three shareholders — Shun Tak, China Eastern and Qantas — remain committed to the airline, which will provide low-fare travel for the people of Hong Kong,” a Jetstar spokesperson said. Even Trade and Investment Minister Andrew Robb has weighed in with a behind the scenes lobbying effort, Crikey understands.
Joyce has consistently railed against government-funded carriers pumping money into rival Virgin, which is now bleeding cold, hard cash; could he, in all good conscience, stomach such a rescue? Of course he would. It may be his last roll of the dice. my bold
Alan Joyce hopes Asian carriers to save Qantas, Jetstar | Crikey
In 2011, Qantas CEO Alan Joyce claimed Jetstar was the region’s “leading low cost carrier”. Clearly, this is no longer the case. It’s time for Joyce to eat humble pie, and accept an economic rescue from his south-east Asian counterparts.
When Qantas unveiled its stonking $2.8 million loss last month and revealed that it was spinning off its Qantas International business, it looked awfully like it was setting itself up for a partial sale to one of China’s ever-growing state-owned airlines.
The big four in China — Guangzhou-based China Southern, Shanghai-based China Eastern, Beijing’s Air China, and the upstart Hainan Airlines (the best of the lot as far as the in-flight experience goes) — are now the main conduits for the 709,000 Chinese tourists who piled into Australia last year. Qantas has egregiously missed the Chinese market.
It has tried to rectify this with half-baked code share agreements with Southern and Eastern. Last year, Qantas had investment talks with Southern, along with Eastern and Hong Kong gambling magnate Stanley Ho’s Shun Tak Holdings, the frustrated owner of a third share in Jetstar Hong Kong, still waiting for a licence, two-and-a-half years after applying.
Qantas International’s business — at both the full service and low-cost carrier (LCC) level — is looking much more like a mangy old kangaroo than a flying one, losing $497 million in underlying earnings before interest and tax last year. About half of this — more than $200 million a year or so in amortisation annually — was removed care of its overdue fleet write-downs, but there’s lots of work to be done on further cost-cutting. Qantas’ last remaining branded flight to Asia’s most popular city (the Sydney-Bangkok route) is about to face off against direct flights from the formidable Air Asia and NokScoot — a Thailand/Singapore cost venture — as early as the fourth quarter.
Jetstar’s offshore forays have also failed to convince. None of its other three Jetstar ventures — Jetstar Asia out of Singapore, Jetstar Japan and Jetstar Vietnam — now make any money. Vietnam is breaking even; Singapore just posted its first loss and is being pummeled from all sides by overcapacity and competition. In 2011, Qantas CEO Alan Joyce prematurely said that Jetstar was the region’s “leading low-cost carrier” — not any more it ain’t.
Clearly something needs to give. Without substantial investment, Qantas and most of Jetstar’s international business will have to be put down.
There is now bipartisan political support to increase the percentage that foreigners can own in Qantas to 49%, plus a further 49% of the soon-to-be-separately listed Qantas International.
Qantas and its odd bedfellow, Dubai-based Emirates, have made it clear time and time again that the Dubai-based airline is not interested in a financial stake in Qantas. Why would it be? As a state-owned operation, Emirates has a seemingly endless well of funding to draw upon; ditto its Gulf competitors Qatar and Etihad. They do not need Qantas.
It’s now been 10 years since British Airways sold out its 18.5% share in Qantas, the last we are likely to see of a European airline on the share register.
A slice of Qantas International, as well as potentially what will be the headstock, would also give a Chinese airline access to Qantas’ deep experience in providing top-of-the-range first and business class services; in this respect, the Chinese airlines are still neophytes. And they would get ready-made LCC Jetstar businesses to feed into and maybe move into the black.
Backing from Beijing would provide some desperately needed oomph to the company’s stumbling regional strategy. And Clive Palmer would doubtless back it to the hilt. As part of its so-called “transformation review”, the company promised no new Jetstar ventures. In many ways this is a no-brainer, as the low-cost carrier’s forays offshore have been pretty much a disaster.
With its proposed full-service Asian venture with Malaysia Airlines nixed by state-owned Singapore Airlines, which would not brook such completion on its doorstep, Qantas was left with a shotgun marriage to Emirates. The company is now getting similar treatment for its Jetstar Hong Kong venture, with no licence in sight. The addition of Shun Tak and the move to hand the group the majority of board seats — a decision made earlier in the year but only announced publicly two weeks ago — as well as Ho’s decision to install his daughter, Pansy Ho, as chairman does not seemed to have helped.
Cathay Pacific is pushing back with all its firepower; the relationship between the two one world partners is poisonous. Cathay is pushing Qantas Frequent Flyers to the head of its upgrade queues in the hope of winning them over to its newly configured business and premium economy services — Cathay was recently voted the world’s best airline.
Qantas is on the verge of pulling its double-decker A380 off the Hong Kong route (and onto the Sydney-Dallas run). This would be replaced with reconfigured 747s with roomier business class — a sign Cathay is eating into its market share. The latest signal that Jetstar Hong Kong may be hanging by a thread was China Eastern recently announcing its own Shanghai-based LCC. Jetstar Asia has sold off six of its nine planes, with the other three gathering dust in the hangar at Airbus Industrie headquarters in Toulouse. Yet Qantas/Jetstar is stubbornly hanging on for what is potentially a big prize.
“There is no doubt that the approval process is taking longer than expected for Jetstar Hong Kong. However, all three shareholders — Shun Tak, China Eastern and Qantas — remain committed to the airline, which will provide low-fare travel for the people of Hong Kong,” a Jetstar spokesperson said. Even Trade and Investment Minister Andrew Robb has weighed in with a behind the scenes lobbying effort, Crikey understands.
Joyce has consistently railed against government-funded carriers pumping money into rival Virgin, which is now bleeding cold, hard cash; could he, in all good conscience, stomach such a rescue? Of course he would. It may be his last roll of the dice. my bold
The Q operational staff do a great job considering all of the above... the service was world class again on my recent sortie,
(just back from BKK)
Just watched another Qf marketing extravaganza on Ch9's 'Today' show based around the 380 going to DFW.
If the idiots only put a quarter as much effort into getting even just one aircraft choice right as they do pandering to journo-trash QF might have some chance.
They prove over and over again they have not the slightest clue about what it is an airline actually does.
If the idiots only put a quarter as much effort into getting even just one aircraft choice right as they do pandering to journo-trash QF might have some chance.
They prove over and over again they have not the slightest clue about what it is an airline actually does.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Bankstown, Australia
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're thinking logically, you must think like the Qantas CEO.
What is the actual demand for a flight to DFW anyway? Does it justify an A380? I thought most people would go LAX and US domestic from there
What is the actual demand for a flight to DFW anyway? Does it justify an A380? I thought most people would go LAX and US domestic from there
DFW has much better connections. The weather can be horrible in the spring...think tornadoes. I too prefer QF all the way to JFK to limit my exposure to any US domestic carrier.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is the actual demand for a flight to DFW anyway? Does it justify an A380? I thought most people would go LAX and US domestic from there
DFW is much easier to transit and a bigger hub for AA domestic flights.
Also suspect a decent amount of point-point traffic from the Texas oil execs with operations in Australia.
-
Today's annoucnement of codeshares with WestJet also positive for those wanting to go to Canada
Qantas to partner with WestJet on Canadian flights - Flights | hotels | frequent flyer | business class - Australian Business Traveller
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Bankstown, Australia
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, with taking US Domestic out of the equation, is there a high enough amount of travellers from AUS looking to get from AUS East Coast to DFW?
I believe most always look to either LAX or JFK as their destinations for holidays etc, not even thinking about mid-US..
I may be wrong so please correct me if so
I believe most always look to either LAX or JFK as their destinations for holidays etc, not even thinking about mid-US..
I may be wrong so please correct me if so
I think there is sufficient demand Mark. DFW is a very large AA hub so many QF code share connections are available. There are probably very few routes that the A380 would be justified on over a 15hr sector, but this is one of them.
Air NZ makes a lot of money due to their monopoly, non stop routes. This is one of those for QF. SYD - DXB - LHR, sadly, is not.
Air NZ makes a lot of money due to their monopoly, non stop routes. This is one of those for QF. SYD - DXB - LHR, sadly, is not.
Agree, 380 to DFW is one of the few positive moves Qantas have made,DFW is a massive American Hub, and a much better airport than LAX!
It also enables Qantas to eliminate the costly Brisbane stopover on the way back, and whilst seats may well be blocked on the 380 on the return, i believe that this occurs on the 747 as well?
The bottom line is Qantas, for better or worse have 12 A380s,so they need to maximise their utilisation and, given the 380s massive passenger appeal, were possible put them on routes, were the opposition dont have them!
And the Pacific is just that market!
It also enables Qantas to eliminate the costly Brisbane stopover on the way back, and whilst seats may well be blocked on the 380 on the return, i believe that this occurs on the 747 as well?
The bottom line is Qantas, for better or worse have 12 A380s,so they need to maximise their utilisation and, given the 380s massive passenger appeal, were possible put them on routes, were the opposition dont have them!
And the Pacific is just that market!
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Bankstown, Australia
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@moa999 Yes I have, last time admittedly about 2 years ago. Haven't caught a US domestic out from there though, ended up with a big road trip driving across the US then flying out of JFK.
@OneDotLow If it makes sense then yes. Just in my thought process I don't see Qantas filling an A380 with 450 passengers who wouldn't understand the benefits of DFW with it being an under 4hrs flight from every other city versus going LAX where most will end up anyway..
But thanks to previous posters for explaining the benefits etc. clears things up
@OneDotLow If it makes sense then yes. Just in my thought process I don't see Qantas filling an A380 with 450 passengers who wouldn't understand the benefits of DFW with it being an under 4hrs flight from every other city versus going LAX where most will end up anyway..
But thanks to previous posters for explaining the benefits etc. clears things up
Last edited by MarkZ; 11th Sep 2014 at 06:01. Reason: spelling
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
744 ER
58J 36W 270Y = 364
A388
14P 64J 35W 371Y = 484
With 19 extra premium cabin seats and 101 extra economy there is a good chance that each flight may carry 100 extra passengers with 19 at a much better yield.
The aircraft will probably need 220-230 tonnes of fuel to do the mission.
At a MTOW of 569t that leaves 349-339t.
BEW is approximately 288t so useable load is 61-51t less water 1800kg and catering 7000kg.
42.2 - 52.2 tonnes available for pax @ 100kg per pax is 422 - 522 pax. However you look at it when you take out the Brisbane transit and add the extra seats it makes sense to run the 380 even with the extra fuel burn.
58J 36W 270Y = 364
A388
14P 64J 35W 371Y = 484
With 19 extra premium cabin seats and 101 extra economy there is a good chance that each flight may carry 100 extra passengers with 19 at a much better yield.
The aircraft will probably need 220-230 tonnes of fuel to do the mission.
At a MTOW of 569t that leaves 349-339t.
BEW is approximately 288t so useable load is 61-51t less water 1800kg and catering 7000kg.
42.2 - 52.2 tonnes available for pax @ 100kg per pax is 422 - 522 pax. However you look at it when you take out the Brisbane transit and add the extra seats it makes sense to run the 380 even with the extra fuel burn.
DFW is a world away from LAX. Far nicer people and Waaay less queue's.
Just sooo pissed off the idiots are finally realising they need to treasure income streams rather than throwing them away because 'it only makes $x'.
They wasted so many little income streams because they had so much available to waste - so easy when you have so many little (seemingly insignificant) income streams pouring in - why sweat the small stuff (like triplers vs 744/380) etc...
Give them another 5-10years of this type of experience and I would consider them good enough to run a school tuck shop.
Just sooo pissed off the idiots are finally realising they need to treasure income streams rather than throwing them away because 'it only makes $x'.
They wasted so many little income streams because they had so much available to waste - so easy when you have so many little (seemingly insignificant) income streams pouring in - why sweat the small stuff (like triplers vs 744/380) etc...
Give them another 5-10years of this type of experience and I would consider them good enough to run a school tuck shop.
Regarding US holidays...
...or North American holidays in general:
The east coast is home to all that is American...its heritage, its architecture, its informing landscape and, not surprisingly, its climate. JFK isn't the best portal to all of that, but its all we've got. To get to the North East I recommend QF all the way to Kennedy, then either ground + feeder to your destination or hire car. Distances are manageable easily.
I have ventured everywhere from the Arctic to Tiera Del Fuego ex New York with happy memories. Not so much out of LAX. I actually lived in the LAX neighbourhood for over a year, and retain industry contacts there still, so let that be your guide.
For me, the middle of North America is fly-over country, the east and the west sections are driving zones out of your gateway of choice. Kennedy is about as good as you can get from OZ. Dallas, and its sister hub at Chicago is as good as you can get for the middle, and LAX, sorry to say, rules the west coast.
The east coast is home to all that is American...its heritage, its architecture, its informing landscape and, not surprisingly, its climate. JFK isn't the best portal to all of that, but its all we've got. To get to the North East I recommend QF all the way to Kennedy, then either ground + feeder to your destination or hire car. Distances are manageable easily.
I have ventured everywhere from the Arctic to Tiera Del Fuego ex New York with happy memories. Not so much out of LAX. I actually lived in the LAX neighbourhood for over a year, and retain industry contacts there still, so let that be your guide.
For me, the middle of North America is fly-over country, the east and the west sections are driving zones out of your gateway of choice. Kennedy is about as good as you can get from OZ. Dallas, and its sister hub at Chicago is as good as you can get for the middle, and LAX, sorry to say, rules the west coast.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does the 787 have the legs to do MEL- DFW? Or more importantly, the other way!
this one only has the legs to to get to the end of R34 MEL, (Hangar Queen?) apparently been there a while now flapping in the breeze...
