MERGED: Alan's still not happy......
sadistic management who are intent on the pursuit of a (Board directed) Union busting agenda
The view at 'the top' I think is more like this - and it has taken me years to reach this conclusion. They see staff and aircraft and buildings as major costs and want to avoid any of them on their watch like the plague. In part led by bonus culture - something like engineering or catering might make (and I don't have a clue) something like 5-7% and taken decades to build up, but if we sell it, we get an instant $xx million boost to the bottom line. Likewise I am sure they think they are absolutely brilliant by passing on all our customers to anyone else and getting paid for it!! without having to maintain aircraft or fix them. Clearly the smartest guys in the room. Its just a shame they are meant to be in the airline business, and they are running out of things to sell. Someone should have told them earlier on that all those percentages add up - especially over time.
I want an answer to this one question that Joyce mentions all the time. 'Our core business'.
What does he _think_ the 'core business' actually is?
1) Virtual Airline
2) Frequent Flyer programme
3) Jetstar Dom
4) Jetstar Int
5) Placement company
6) Outsourcing specialists
8) Boardroom Outfitters (lounge renovators)
8) Qantas Dom
9) Qantas Int
10) Travel agent
11) Finance
etc etc etc
I know I don't know, I doubt any other staff know and I suspect he doesn't know. But tragically I bet the word 'Qantas' appears on the credit side of his bank statement a LOT!
Which again is why these crazy lay offs are random acts of cruelty with no central plan because he has no plan. If anyone knew what the 'core business' was you could at least see some method and know then (or at least make an educated guess) as to what was likely to be extraneous.
G I M (above)
Quote from qantas media this morn
"Our aircraft are most efficient when they're in the air...."
Oops, someone forgot to tell jetstar
"Our aircraft are most efficient when they're in the air...."
Oops, someone forgot to tell jetstar
Our aircraft are most efficient when they're in the air - or not burning any fuel
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To put things in simplistic terms, since privatisation the share price of QAN showed consistent long term growth and consistent healthy dividends until the mid 2000's. Qantas was a blue chip share.
This despite Asian finical crisis, Bird flu, Sept '11 (coinciding with Ansett demise admittedly).
What happened in the mid 2000's?
Jetstar was launched in 2004.
Qantas management are the only full service carrier that has successfully launched a LCC that has not cannibalised it's parent. Profitable every year since inception. (well that's what we are supposed to believe)
If someone were to produce a simple graph of profitability (QF Group) and share price since privatisation (ignoring the share spike due takeover bid of 2008). Plot this graph with the proliferation of Jetstar aircraft shown on the timescale.
We may well see why all other full service carriers have abandoned this strategy.
This despite Asian finical crisis, Bird flu, Sept '11 (coinciding with Ansett demise admittedly).
What happened in the mid 2000's?
Jetstar was launched in 2004.
Qantas management are the only full service carrier that has successfully launched a LCC that has not cannibalised it's parent. Profitable every year since inception. (well that's what we are supposed to believe)
If someone were to produce a simple graph of profitability (QF Group) and share price since privatisation (ignoring the share spike due takeover bid of 2008). Plot this graph with the proliferation of Jetstar aircraft shown on the timescale.
We may well see why all other full service carriers have abandoned this strategy.
The thing about JQ domestic is that it makes some kind of sense, in a limited form. At its current size it is clearly cannibalising the core business though. As a going concern i am sure that now that the start-up costs have all been swallowed it might be a saleable asset.
I don't speak to many people (any, actually) that aspire to fly on JQ a second time. Eventually they will run out of punters. You cannot gouge travellers forever with added punitive charges. But the whole business model seems to be based on that strategy. It might just be at or near its peak value now.
I don't speak to many people (any, actually) that aspire to fly on JQ a second time. Eventually they will run out of punters. You cannot gouge travellers forever with added punitive charges. But the whole business model seems to be based on that strategy. It might just be at or near its peak value now.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gaunty said:
I'm inclined to agree with Gaunty on this one, QF are heading towards dire straits, they have massive lease and interest bills to pay as well as fuel, yet the revenue clearly isn't sufficient and they need big bucks injected soon or they will default.
One airline with shed loads of cash is SQ, (and it is cash QF need, not shares in another outfit), SQ have been trying to get their hands on a large lump of QF for a long time but I doubt they will make an offer until QF are more desperate.
We'll see wont we.
I'm inclined to agree with Gaunty on this one, QF are heading towards dire straits, they have massive lease and interest bills to pay as well as fuel, yet the revenue clearly isn't sufficient and they need big bucks injected soon or they will default.
One airline with shed loads of cash is SQ, (and it is cash QF need, not shares in another outfit), SQ have been trying to get their hands on a large lump of QF for a long time but I doubt they will make an offer until QF are more desperate.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gaunty said:
I'm inclined to agree with Gaunty on this one, QF are heading towards dire straits, they have massive lease and interest bills to pay as well as fuel, yet the revenue clearly isn't sufficient and they need big bucks injected soon or they will default.
We'll see wont we.
There are some really lucrative bits in the QF business. Amputation of diseased limbs and cauterisation of slashed arteries will preserve their lucrative nature.
Thing is, if the next owners buy it off the receiver, they won't have to worry about maintaining the contracts on all the 320s parked around Asian airports and TLS, all the EBAs will be shredded, and they won't owe anyone any favours.
And I suspect the leading vulture has a name that starts with E.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas not unions' fault
I want to respond to Roger Wolfe blaming unions for the problems at Qantas ("Qantas needs to focus on fundamentals", AFR Letters, March 6).
I was until September 2013, the president of the Australian and International Pilots' Association, which represents 2500 Qantas and Jetstar pilots.
In a meeting in February 2011, I offered Alan Joyce a two-year pay freeze and a commitment to rewrite our certified agreement.
This was rejected out of hand. It is an ideological war and Mr Joyce needed the pilots to be able to lock the staff out in 2011 at a cost of over $200 million. There is nothing wrong with industrial relations in Australia but there is a lot wrong with management.
..........................
Barry Jackson
Sydney, NSW
(my bold)
I want to respond to Roger Wolfe blaming unions for the problems at Qantas ("Qantas needs to focus on fundamentals", AFR Letters, March 6).
I was until September 2013, the president of the Australian and International Pilots' Association, which represents 2500 Qantas and Jetstar pilots.
In a meeting in February 2011, I offered Alan Joyce a two-year pay freeze and a commitment to rewrite our certified agreement.
This was rejected out of hand. It is an ideological war and Mr Joyce needed the pilots to be able to lock the staff out in 2011 at a cost of over $200 million. There is nothing wrong with industrial relations in Australia but there is a lot wrong with management.
..........................
Barry Jackson
Sydney, NSW
(my bold)
A stunning revelation, but why is it just coming out now?
Last edited by FYSTI; 7th Mar 2014 at 06:19. Reason: date correction
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bolivia
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And what did they end up with, an arbitrated 3 or 4% payrise. Nice work Al.
Can't wait to see him explain that one away at the senate inquiry.
This one's going to be much more fun than the inquiry into pilot training, and BGA had better schedule a few free days to attend. I think he'll be pretty popular.
Can't wait to see him explain that one away at the senate inquiry.
This one's going to be much more fun than the inquiry into pilot training, and BGA had better schedule a few free days to attend. I think he'll be pretty popular.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It just get's worse....
The timing couldn’t be more painful. Just over a week after Qantas posted its record breaking losses, and had its group CEO try and get a $3 billion unsecured loan from taxpayers, Emirates says the partnership with Qantas has been very satisfactory.
In this interview at a trade show the Dubai based carrier’s Chief Commercial Officer Thierry Antinori says Qantas has given it more business class passengers, boosted yields, and more than offset pressure on its economy class sales.
What a triumph for Qantas, and for the previous government, that failed to ask a single question in public about the benefits the Australian carrier would get from giving away much of its network to London and Europe and even SE Asia to the giant government owned UAE carrier.
In the period covered by its first half financial disaster, the one that saw Qantas beg for favouritism from the Abbott government because of the wickedness of foreign carriers other than Emirates, the Qantas-Emirates partnership was in full swing.
For what? All Qantas achieved was to let previously loyal customers know that it was OK to fly on a foreign airline after all, and that it couldn’t be bothered offering services to London and Frankfurt via Singapore anymore from Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth. In fact it can’t be bothered with doing anything overseas from Perth, having cancelled its last international service can’t be bothered with doing anything overseas from Perth, having cancelled its last international service from Australia’s resources capital in its own metal.
Qantas didn’t negotiate any cash value from the give away. Emirates got it for free, at a time when international flight demand between Australia and the world was growing at a record rate, causing it to complain about excess capacity at a time when it was gifting its business to the biggest sovereign owned carrier on the planet.
All that nonsense that came from some captive financial analysts about the benefits of the Emirates deal for Qantas makes them look like complete fools. Qantas got nothing, it undermined its credentials as an Australian flag carrier, and Emirates is doing so well in this market that it is replacing its 777 flights with larger Airbus A380s on some routes, and will quite likely, on current indications, be an all A380 carrier to this country by 2020.
Well done Mr Joyce. What a disgraceful and inexcusable cop out. http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalk...-its-earnings/
In this interview at a trade show the Dubai based carrier’s Chief Commercial Officer Thierry Antinori says Qantas has given it more business class passengers, boosted yields, and more than offset pressure on its economy class sales.
What a triumph for Qantas, and for the previous government, that failed to ask a single question in public about the benefits the Australian carrier would get from giving away much of its network to London and Europe and even SE Asia to the giant government owned UAE carrier.
In the period covered by its first half financial disaster, the one that saw Qantas beg for favouritism from the Abbott government because of the wickedness of foreign carriers other than Emirates, the Qantas-Emirates partnership was in full swing.
For what? All Qantas achieved was to let previously loyal customers know that it was OK to fly on a foreign airline after all, and that it couldn’t be bothered offering services to London and Frankfurt via Singapore anymore from Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth. In fact it can’t be bothered with doing anything overseas from Perth, having cancelled its last international service can’t be bothered with doing anything overseas from Perth, having cancelled its last international service from Australia’s resources capital in its own metal.
Qantas didn’t negotiate any cash value from the give away. Emirates got it for free, at a time when international flight demand between Australia and the world was growing at a record rate, causing it to complain about excess capacity at a time when it was gifting its business to the biggest sovereign owned carrier on the planet.
All that nonsense that came from some captive financial analysts about the benefits of the Emirates deal for Qantas makes them look like complete fools. Qantas got nothing, it undermined its credentials as an Australian flag carrier, and Emirates is doing so well in this market that it is replacing its 777 flights with larger Airbus A380s on some routes, and will quite likely, on current indications, be an all A380 carrier to this country by 2020.
Well done Mr Joyce. What a disgraceful and inexcusable cop out. http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalk...-its-earnings/
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A reminder of how Mr Joyce explained it five days after the lockout:
Rural Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee - 04/11/2011
Senator GALLACHER: Mr Joyce, in your CEO's address to the AGM, you said:
We will protect and grow Australian jobs over the long term.
We will create sustainable value for you, our shareholders.
And we will make Australians proud.
Those were your closing remarks. Can you explain to this committee how your actions on the next day achieved those stated objectives?
Mr Joyce : I can. Let me explain to you my decision-making process on this. I felt that we had three alternatives available to us as a consequence of what was taking place with the industrial action. I could have capitulated to demands that were being asked by three of the unions. My belief—my strong belief—was that those demands were going to endanger the future of the company. This is a company I feel so passionate about. It is a company that I want to make sure is going to survive for the future. The easiest thing I could have done was probably to capitulate, but I thought those demands would have put this company at risk—severely at risk.
Secondly, I could have decided that we continue the way we were going. We had already been in dispute for months. We had already been in a dispute that cost us, as I said at that AGM, $68 million. We had already had 70,000 passengers disrupted. We had already seen hundreds of flights cancelled. We had already seen our forward bookings absolutely collapsing. In every indicator that we had, people were not travelling with us; people had decided that Qantas was not going to be reliable. We had union leaders talking about a slow bake over a year. We had union leaders say, 'Do not book with Qantas over Christmas.' We had union leaders saying this could last into the middle or end of next year. So we knew we were losing our customers rapidly, and the $15 million a week that that was costing us meant we were at the verge of a huge crisis in Qantas. We were at a crisis in Qantas and we needed to do something.
The only alternative that was left to me was to bring this to a head, to say, 'We cannot last another year.' Therefore the decision was made that we would take, as a consequence of the union action, a lockout of the employees—and it was only the employees that were taking the action and covered by those agreements. We had made it very clear to the rest of the employees that we were going to continue to pay their salaries. We felt that was the only viable way that we could get an agreement that was not going to endanger the future survival of the company.
We will protect and grow Australian jobs over the long term.
We will create sustainable value for you, our shareholders.
And we will make Australians proud.
Those were your closing remarks. Can you explain to this committee how your actions on the next day achieved those stated objectives?
Mr Joyce : I can. Let me explain to you my decision-making process on this. I felt that we had three alternatives available to us as a consequence of what was taking place with the industrial action. I could have capitulated to demands that were being asked by three of the unions. My belief—my strong belief—was that those demands were going to endanger the future of the company. This is a company I feel so passionate about. It is a company that I want to make sure is going to survive for the future. The easiest thing I could have done was probably to capitulate, but I thought those demands would have put this company at risk—severely at risk.
Secondly, I could have decided that we continue the way we were going. We had already been in dispute for months. We had already been in a dispute that cost us, as I said at that AGM, $68 million. We had already had 70,000 passengers disrupted. We had already seen hundreds of flights cancelled. We had already seen our forward bookings absolutely collapsing. In every indicator that we had, people were not travelling with us; people had decided that Qantas was not going to be reliable. We had union leaders talking about a slow bake over a year. We had union leaders say, 'Do not book with Qantas over Christmas.' We had union leaders saying this could last into the middle or end of next year. So we knew we were losing our customers rapidly, and the $15 million a week that that was costing us meant we were at the verge of a huge crisis in Qantas. We were at a crisis in Qantas and we needed to do something.
The only alternative that was left to me was to bring this to a head, to say, 'We cannot last another year.' Therefore the decision was made that we would take, as a consequence of the union action, a lockout of the employees—and it was only the employees that were taking the action and covered by those agreements. We had made it very clear to the rest of the employees that we were going to continue to pay their salaries. We felt that was the only viable way that we could get an agreement that was not going to endanger the future survival of the company.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney, NSW,Australia
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"We had already seen our forward bookings absolutely collapsing" Alan Joyce.
Was that ever verified, or did we all just take Al's word for it ?
What does Qantas get from the EK deal ??
From an operational POV, less than zero, it is costing a small fortune in additional fuel burn due to the extraordinary amount of holding required going into Dubai.
The Company is just losing all the time and it is run by a bunch of consistent losers.
Was that ever verified, or did we all just take Al's word for it ?
What does Qantas get from the EK deal ??
From an operational POV, less than zero, it is costing a small fortune in additional fuel burn due to the extraordinary amount of holding required going into Dubai.
The Company is just losing all the time and it is run by a bunch of consistent losers.
I haven't read the last posts (no tragic pun intended) but my entire afternoon BBQ has been ruined by CONSTANT Jetstar ads on TV. It took me a few hours to work out how often they were played but it is wearing very very thin.
CRETINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is no hope while this insanity continues.
PS: I've had a couple (though in hindsight a lot less than I should have).
I'm not happy if you hadn't guessed.
CRETINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is no hope while this insanity continues.
PS: I've had a couple (though in hindsight a lot less than I should have).
I'm not happy if you hadn't guessed.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which wing? Take a pick.....
VH-Cheer Up wrote, "Amputation of diseased limbs and cauterisation of slashed arteries will preserve their lucrative nature". This is the path I see it going.....
Tangan wrote some time ago, "Accute Instinct.... it is obvious that your political affiliation lies with the left however, to have your views considered on this forum, you really should look at the events unfolding with both eyes open".
Tangan, left? right? Rather than pondering which eye I see with, perhaps you should be considering which leg you stand on. Because the chain saw is screaming.......and you can bet one leg or the other is coming off to save the patients life. That's how this stage show goes......
Tangan wrote some time ago, "Accute Instinct.... it is obvious that your political affiliation lies with the left however, to have your views considered on this forum, you really should look at the events unfolding with both eyes open".
Tangan, left? right? Rather than pondering which eye I see with, perhaps you should be considering which leg you stand on. Because the chain saw is screaming.......and you can bet one leg or the other is coming off to save the patients life. That's how this stage show goes......
Last edited by Acute Instinct; 7th Mar 2014 at 21:41.
I've now read 'the last posts'.
Shakespeare was nothing but a rank amateur penning his tragedies. It took an Irishman 400 years later to prove his dramatic vision could be pushed so much further.
Shakespeare was nothing but a rank amateur penning his tragedies. It took an Irishman 400 years later to prove his dramatic vision could be pushed so much further.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Senior lobbyist Andrew Parker burnt by Qantas backfiring
.......
Qantas' high-stakes strategy to convince the government to extend financial aid has backfired spectacularly. One of its two most senior lobbyists will exit the airline this month, as part of the axing of 5000 jobs, which is already causing internal ructions because its entire top rung of executives are hanging onto their roles.
While Qantas boss Alan Joyce has led the strategy in the public arena, behind the scenes the airline has had its government lobbyists working around the clock over the past six months.
Its group of eight in government relations dwarfs Virgin's two-person team.
Qantas' chief lobbyist is Andrew Parker -a one-time adviser to former Liberal leader John Hewson - who reports directly to Mr Joyce. A former chief spin doctor for Emirates, Mr Parker assumed the reins last year from Olivia Wirth, Qantas' high-profile executive who is engaged to union powerbroker Paul Howes. Qantas has maintained that her relationship with Mr Howes, the national secretary of the Australian Workers Union, was not a factor in her moving from the role of government relations head last year.
Ms Wirth, who is one of Mr Joyce's closest confidants, now oversees branding and public relations.
Mr Howes steers clear of commenting on Qantas affairs, leaving it to the rest of the AWU leadership. The AWU has a small number of members at Qantas compared with the pilots' union or the Transport Workers Union.
Ms Wirth's shift last year left Mr Parker and his direct report, Euan Robertson, to grease the wheels of politics as part of Qantas' ill-fated campaign to convince the federal government to furnish it with a debt guarantee or $3 billion unsecured loan.
Now, in the wake of it failing to gain assistance, Qantas has confirmed Mr Robertson, who previously worked alongside Ms Wirth at an industry tourism body, will depart by the end of the month. Qantas said his departure was part of the 5000 job cuts.
While Qantas has hit a brick wall in Canberra, Virgin has achieved everything it wanted in seeing its arch rival prevented at the 11th hour from gaining a leg-up from the Abbott government.
Having spent 36 years at Qantas, Virgin chief executive John Borghetti is well known in Canberra and has a reputation for a large contact book and gaining the ear of decision-makers when it counts.
He has relied on Jane McKeon - whom he poached from Qantas soon after he took the reins at Virgin in 2010 - to press Virgin's case in the corridors of power in the capital.
Virgin can also opt for subtle help from its three major shareholders: Etihad, Air New Zealand and Singapore Airlines. Because governments play such a big part in aviation, all three airlines have lobbyists they can call on. However, Virgin is mindful of the potential problems this can cause.
Virgin's best-known shareholder, Richard Branson, weighed into the debate when Qantas attacked the airline he founded more than a decade ago. But in some people's eyes, this was more of a liability.
Meanwhile, casino mogul and former Qantas director James Packer has said long-term shareholders of the airline would have been better off accepting a controversial $11 billion takeover bid by a consortium of private equity firms eight years ago.
Mr Packer was initially reluctant to discuss Qantas, but was persuaded on breakfast radio by friend Eddie McGuire to speak on the conundrum facing the airline.
Qantas, which has had its request for a debt guarantee knocked back by the government, was in a sad state, the Crown Resorts chairman said on Friday.
Mr Packer was a Qantas director when the aviation company fielded an $11 billion bid from a private equity consortium in 2006. At the time Geoff Dixon was Qantas chief executive and Margaret Jackson was chairwoman. Mr Packer said Ms Jackson ''got a tough time'' because of her outspoken support for the bid.
''History is going to show that, from a purely economic perspective, for the shareholders at the time, Margaret was 100 per cent right,'' he said. ''With the benefit of hindsight, and hindsight is easy, I think the bid would have been good for shareholders to take back then. Qantas is clearly a company not doing as well as it once was, and it is an important company for Australia.''
Read more: Senior lobbyist Andrew Parker burnt by Qantas backfiring
While Qantas boss Alan Joyce has led the strategy in the public arena, behind the scenes the airline has had its government lobbyists working around the clock over the past six months.
Its group of eight in government relations dwarfs Virgin's two-person team.
Qantas' chief lobbyist is Andrew Parker -a one-time adviser to former Liberal leader John Hewson - who reports directly to Mr Joyce. A former chief spin doctor for Emirates, Mr Parker assumed the reins last year from Olivia Wirth, Qantas' high-profile executive who is engaged to union powerbroker Paul Howes. Qantas has maintained that her relationship with Mr Howes, the national secretary of the Australian Workers Union, was not a factor in her moving from the role of government relations head last year.
Ms Wirth, who is one of Mr Joyce's closest confidants, now oversees branding and public relations.
Mr Howes steers clear of commenting on Qantas affairs, leaving it to the rest of the AWU leadership. The AWU has a small number of members at Qantas compared with the pilots' union or the Transport Workers Union.
Ms Wirth's shift last year left Mr Parker and his direct report, Euan Robertson, to grease the wheels of politics as part of Qantas' ill-fated campaign to convince the federal government to furnish it with a debt guarantee or $3 billion unsecured loan.
Now, in the wake of it failing to gain assistance, Qantas has confirmed Mr Robertson, who previously worked alongside Ms Wirth at an industry tourism body, will depart by the end of the month. Qantas said his departure was part of the 5000 job cuts.
While Qantas has hit a brick wall in Canberra, Virgin has achieved everything it wanted in seeing its arch rival prevented at the 11th hour from gaining a leg-up from the Abbott government.
Having spent 36 years at Qantas, Virgin chief executive John Borghetti is well known in Canberra and has a reputation for a large contact book and gaining the ear of decision-makers when it counts.
He has relied on Jane McKeon - whom he poached from Qantas soon after he took the reins at Virgin in 2010 - to press Virgin's case in the corridors of power in the capital.
Virgin can also opt for subtle help from its three major shareholders: Etihad, Air New Zealand and Singapore Airlines. Because governments play such a big part in aviation, all three airlines have lobbyists they can call on. However, Virgin is mindful of the potential problems this can cause.
Virgin's best-known shareholder, Richard Branson, weighed into the debate when Qantas attacked the airline he founded more than a decade ago. But in some people's eyes, this was more of a liability.
Meanwhile, casino mogul and former Qantas director James Packer has said long-term shareholders of the airline would have been better off accepting a controversial $11 billion takeover bid by a consortium of private equity firms eight years ago.
Mr Packer was initially reluctant to discuss Qantas, but was persuaded on breakfast radio by friend Eddie McGuire to speak on the conundrum facing the airline.
Qantas, which has had its request for a debt guarantee knocked back by the government, was in a sad state, the Crown Resorts chairman said on Friday.
Mr Packer was a Qantas director when the aviation company fielded an $11 billion bid from a private equity consortium in 2006. At the time Geoff Dixon was Qantas chief executive and Margaret Jackson was chairwoman. Mr Packer said Ms Jackson ''got a tough time'' because of her outspoken support for the bid.
''History is going to show that, from a purely economic perspective, for the shareholders at the time, Margaret was 100 per cent right,'' he said. ''With the benefit of hindsight, and hindsight is easy, I think the bid would have been good for shareholders to take back then. Qantas is clearly a company not doing as well as it once was, and it is an important company for Australia.''
Read more: Senior lobbyist Andrew Parker burnt by Qantas backfiring
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That SMH article is right - most employees on Wednesday couldn't understand how the top rung was untouched but the level below we're seeing the axe. The top rung and the board are why we are in this position and yet they all kept their jobs. Laughable if it wasn't so serious
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tasmania
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"That SMH article is right - most employees on Wednesday couldn't understand how the top rung was untouched but the level below we're seeing the axe. The top rung and the board are why we are in this position and yet they all kept their jobs. Laughable if it wasn't so serious"
Simple really. Those tasked with making people redundant aren't going to look at themselves, are they?!
Simple really. Those tasked with making people redundant aren't going to look at themselves, are they?!
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Queensland
Age: 75
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many $M was Margaret going to make from the deal? And Dixon too. I remember the hugging and kissy-kissy when they thought the deal had gone through, only to be stymied at the last moment.
Of course she was right!
If that deal had gone though, imho, the result would have been asset stripping on a grand scale and no QF within 6 months. Would probably not have survived the GFC, if it had survived until then.
That consortium was not interested in buying an airline, purely an asset. At least QF has lasted until now, even very badly managed.
Of course she was right!
If that deal had gone though, imho, the result would have been asset stripping on a grand scale and no QF within 6 months. Would probably not have survived the GFC, if it had survived until then.That consortium was not interested in buying an airline, purely an asset. At least QF has lasted until now, even very badly managed.