Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific
Reload this Page >

MERGED: Alan's still not happy......

Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

MERGED: Alan's still not happy......

Old 13th Aug 2014, 07:12
  #4681 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the US, investors such as Carl Icahn and Kirk Kerkorian have used minority shareholdings to push for changes at companies including Apple and General Motors. The dearth of such activism in Australia had led to a lack of board accountability, contributing to investment capital being misspent, Carnegie said, pointing to wasteful spending in the country's natural gas export projects.
Australian companies would be more likely to spend wisely with shareholder activists on their case, said the managing director of private equity firm MH Carnegie & Co.

Carnegie sought to change Qantas's strategic direction in 2012 alongside former airline executives. That year, he also teamed up with Australia's richest woman Gina Rinehart in an attempt to influence Fairfax Media, publisher of BusinessDay.
my bold
It's all coming to the surface.... and not before time...
TIMA9X is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 08:49
  #4682 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 351
Received 111 Likes on 45 Posts
Special Board Meeting

Anyone else heard the rumour of a Special meeting of the board in the near future; certainly before the results are announced?

Rumour suggests that the primary topic of conversation will centre on the future of certain senior execs.

Alan & Ms Jayne may be particularly unhappy........

....but it is only a whisper.....
C441 is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 09:28
  #4683 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Another excuse for a very expensive luncheon, methinks.

This Board of F@@ls have presided over this plane wreck for years. What has changed now?
Clipped is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 09:43
  #4684 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Australia
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And this was in 2011!

Spey is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 12:21
  #4685 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Another excuse for a very expensive luncheon, methinks
Yeah, they seem so happy together...



for those who haven't seen it
TIMA9X is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 22:04
  #4686 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TIM

It's such a mix of emotions watching your clips, mostly funny, sometimes sad as we watch these cl@wns mismanage this whole sorry saga.

And a government, regulator and major shareholders sitting eerily quiet whilst the business sinks.

Disappointing.
Clipped is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 22:10
  #4687 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
Received 23 Likes on 14 Posts
Anyone else heard the rumour of a Special meeting of the board in the near future; certainly before the results are announced?

Rumour suggests that the primary topic of conversation will centre on the future of certain senior execs.

Alan & Ms Jayne may be particularly unhappy.....
It is fairly normal that an ASX listed board meet a couple of times before results are announced. There is the formal side including a meeting with the audit partner as well as getting the comms sorted and this year the comms at QAN will be interesting to say the least.

I doubt that AJ will be dumped as part of the results announcement though I wouldn't be surprised if his departure date is announced for some point in the future....which he would be unlikely to make. I further doubt that JH is in the frame for the next CEO unless LC just wants another puppet and a continuation of the past few years. Realistically QAN needs a "trophy" external candidate as the next CEO to indicate to the market that the disaster of the past few years are behind the business.
1A_Please is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 22:35
  #4688 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Weltschmerz-By-The-Sea, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 1,362
Received 77 Likes on 34 Posts
I am not so sure. While a hard-bitten cynic most of the time I believe that now its crunch time for both the board and the executive, and that we shall soon be rid of these damned pretenders.

I cannot imagine any new board being willing to double down on the Jetstar experiment, nor any serious CEO advocating it. There is much hard work to be done, for sure, and perhaps soon we will have a team willing to undertake it.

No one sees a future on the current trajectory...its not possible. Since our current malaise is the result of ten years of neglect it follows that it will take some years of redress to correct that. I am (foolishly?) optimistic that the correction may start before year's end.
Australopithecus is offline  
Old 13th Aug 2014, 23:49
  #4689 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 421
Likes: 0
Received 23 Likes on 14 Posts
In the lead up to the release of QF's results in the next couple of weeks, I thought it'd be interesting to put forward a few stats of QF's performance during AJ's reign

Profit before Tax (Underlying profit is a w@nk used to hide management stuff-ups)

FY09 $181M
FY10 $178M
FY11 $323M
FY12 -$349M
FY13 $17M

If he manages to lose the rumoured $800M this year, this will mean he has managed to earn negative $450M for shareholders throughout his reign... a dubious achievement for a CEO who has somehow managed to survive for 6 years.

On the plus side, his personal earnings over the 5 years to 30/6/13 were $22.3M on top of the $6.9M he earned in his 4 years heading up JQ. In addition to this, if he is terminated he received 6 months salary as well as keeping his entitlement of 4 int'l trips and 12 domestic trips FOC for the next 11 years.

It will also be interesting to check out how hard the Board are on him in relation to his short -term bonus. The key components are
1. "normalised" profit which as I said before is an accounting w@nk that wasn't even mentioned in Qantas' accounts prior to AJ becoming CEO,
2. achievement of safety standards (rewarding him for the hard work of other people)
3. building a strong domestic base (he started with a strong domestic base; he is just managing how it becomes smaller)
4. transforning the int'l business (who could argue that it hasn't changed??? Pity it got smaller not bigger though), and
5. growing Jetstar in Asia (LOL)

Last year he got a Poor on 1, Excellent on 2 & 4, Good on 3 and Satisfactory on 5. This year it is hard to see him earning anything above Poor except for safety which is someone else's job anyway.

Last edited by 1A_Please; 13th Aug 2014 at 23:51. Reason: Typo
1A_Please is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 02:52
  #4690 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
sad as we watch these cl@wns mismanage this whole sorry saga.

And a government, regulator and major shareholders sitting eerily quiet whilst the business sinks.
Clipped,

Also very sad for me to watch as I have spent near 40 years flying Q as my preferred airline.. still do and it's a good product even by today's standards.

Clifford & Joyce have simply added unnecessary pressure on the staff by following the wrong strategy and then refusing to admit it, the two brand thing has damaged the business, for me, no doubt about that, they have spent far too much time chasing dreams taking their eye off the ball with the progress of the core business.

“The very fact that Jetstar Hong Kong and Jetstar Australia have linked their two businesses by leveraging the setting up of Jetstar Hong Kong with traffic rights in Australia seems to make it pretty clear that Jetstar’s principal place of business is not Hong Kong, but Australia,” Mr Slosar told analysts on Wednesday.


“By default I think they have made the case that we would make that it doesn’t comply with the Basic Law.”
Comment is being sought from Jetstar.
Again I post this graph as backup to my argument...



In 2008:
Aircraft
Qantas 174 (excluding Cobham)
Jetstar 36
By 2013:
Qantas 189 (excluding Cobham)
Jetstar 86
Now:
Qantas 157 121 (plus 36 ish from Qantas link)
Jetstar 115
It appears the more aircraft added to Jetstar the harder it has been to support and the profit fell away for all of the Qantas group over time.

It's obvious that all Clifford knew was to apply his out dated "thuggish" mining industry know how, a leftover from the 1990s IR war on staff costs, as if it's all their fault, never a good strategy with a "service orientated industry," it demoralises the front-line workers, simple as that, the evidence for all to see since he commenced his tenure. AJ is only a puppet to the board in my view, and to his credit, did well setting up Jetstar domestic. He was never the "right face" for the Qantas group, it simply just didn't fit, but we are stuck with it! Once he pulled off the "grounding stunt" enter the government at the time (Gillard's lot) who "huffed and puffed" but did nothing for the Qantas workers except stitch them up with their FWA lawyer mates, Labor's own legislation reform, the answer to the Liberals big bad idea "work choices" a scare campaign that helped Labor into power.



Albo shifty as usual...



in this one about 1.50 in, Abbott says we have a problem, also shifty...(hmm lip service)

In hindsight, what's the difference?

The problem today, is we have the Liberal Government who accepted donations from the likes of Mr Clifford and other people of this type, so we just carry on. It's as if both parties don't give a damn about Aussie jobs..

Lachlan Murdoch, media buyer Harold Mitchell, and Qantas chairman Leigh Clifford donated to the Liberals. Prime Media chairman Paul Ramsay donated individually and through Ramsay Health Care.
Both major political parties appear to always prefer upgrades or nice lounges etc for themselves and family rather than worry about job security for Australian workers, the people they are supposed to represent, and the major reason why I fight on, you have done nothing wrong.... I am disgusted with both major political parties, they are both the same.... easily bribed by big business, this is Australia now.. no pride in anything Australian, with the exception of Nick X who has gone out of his way to support Qantas workers all along the way... Kudos to him!



As far as I know, Joyce never answered the questions properly put on notice, fobbed off... more on that later...



Just look at the last couple of weeks... DJs goes to the South Africans
DJ's duds to be junked: Woolworths

And another Aussie icon will go in due course as well.. all in the name of "free trade" of course.... code for selling the farm to line the pockets of a few!

Wolf Blass and Penfolds wine maker targeted by second private equity buyer

Wolf Blass and Penfolds wine maker targeted by second private equity buyer | Business | The Guardian
All the way down to street level today, it's hard to find a positive comment regarding the management of Qantas (I guess why Livi is trying to change that with her social angels) they have done so much damage to the brand, to a point where this damage will only recover with a change of management from the board down in my view. As I have said before "Corporate Australia Is Sick," but allowed to bumble along provided Canberra is well looked after come donation time... that's what is really sad...

remember this back in 2011, it was all said then in a song...



I guess I am just a cry in the corporate/political wilderness..

Last edited by TIMA9X; 14th Aug 2014 at 03:17.
TIMA9X is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 03:52
  #4691 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of egos
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yet another own goal by JQ with regard to Jet Star HK - report in todays media:

Quote: 'The secretary of the Australian Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development, last week said the government did not want to give Cathay Pacific and other Hong Kong carriers increased traffic rights into Australia unless Australian carriers were able to use Hong Kong as a hub and Jetstar Hong Kong was approved.
“The very fact that Jetstar Hong Kong and Jetstar Australia have linked their two businesses by leveraging the setting up of Jetstar Hong Kong with traffic rights in Australia seems to make it pretty clear that Jetstar’s principal place of business is not Hong Kong, but Australia,” Mr Slosar (Cathay Chairman) told analysts on Wednesday.
“By default I think they have made the case that we would make that it doesn’t comply with the Basic Law.”

and today Cathay report massive increase 1H profit.
dch63 is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 04:57
  #4692 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 1,425
Received 205 Likes on 68 Posts
I think this ^^^^ is fair enough. Part of Australia's problem over the past couple of decades is its willingness to allow foreign carriers such generous access to OZ. Why should it not be reciprocated, to me it seems perfectly logical to withhold further access to OZ whilst the very same carrier is blocking the setup of an airline on its own turf that has an Australian interest.
Ollie Onion is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 05:23
  #4693 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Bubble
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Yet a wholly foreign owned entity can set up shop in Australia's domestic aviation market tomorrow with no restrictions whatsoever.
600ft-lb is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 05:57
  #4694 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever I can log on.
Posts: 1,864
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Cathay & Air NZ can post good profits but Clifford/Joyce can't

Cathay Pacific Profits Soar But Competition Hurts Yields

Cathay Pacific Profits Soar But Competition Hurts Yields

Cathay Pacific said Wednesday its first-half net profit soared to HK$347 million ($44.77 million) on higher passenger demand, but the Hong Kong flag carrier warned of a "challenging" outlook as surging competition held down fares.

The figure for the six months ending June 30 compared with a net profit of HK$24 million in the same period last year. Its first half revenue rose 4.6 percent to HK$50.84 billion.

But despite its upbeat performance, the blue-chip airline faces several challenges including persistently high jet fuel prices.

"The operating environment for the Cathay Pacific Group -- and the aviation industry as a whole -- remains challenging," group chairman John Slosar said in a filing to the Hong Kong stock exchange.

"On the plus side, we continue to strengthen our passenger network and the connections available through Hong Kong," he said.

Aviation analyst Daniel Tsang told AFP the huge increase in net profits was on account of the airline's improving passenger operations, which contributed to a sharp jump in revenues.

The airline's passenger revenue in the reported period was up 4.4 percent to HK$36.52 billion compared to the previous year, helped by the introduction of new long-haul routes to destinations such as Doha and Newark.

- Falling passenger yields -

However, Tsang said the airline will need to improve its passenger yields, a key measure of airlines' profitability, to maintain this earnings trend.

Passenger yield, the measure of the average fare paid by a passenger per mile, fell 3.5 percent to HK66.6 cents, reflecting weaker ticket prices in the face of surging competition.

"For this upward trend to be sustained, arresting this yield decline is paramount and a prerequisite," he said.

Revenue for its air cargo business, which took a toll for more than two years due to the weak economy and demand for shipments, rose 3.4 percent compared to the first half of last year, at HK$11.66 billion.

But over-capacity in the air cargo market created downward pressure on rates, with the airline seeing cargo yield falling by 6.9 percent.

"We expect our cargo business to be better in the second half of 2014 than it was in the first half. We are well placed to take advantage of any increase in demand," the airline said.

Cathay also indicated that high fuel prices were partly mitigated by operating more fuel-efficient aircraft.

Five new aircraft, including two Boeing 777-300ERs, were delivered to Cathay during the reported period, as it retired two Boeing 747-400 passenger aircraft.

Eleven new aircraft will be delivered in the second half of 2014, as it continues to modernise its fleet.

"Cathay is pretty aggressive in renewing its fleet. By end of 2014, it will only have seven gas-guzzling 747-400s," analyst Tsang said.

The International Air Transport Association in June said airline profits are improving and that it expects airline companies to record combined net profits of $18 billion for 2014, down from its earlier forecast of $18.7 billion made in March.

by W.G. Dunlop © 2014 AFP

Last edited by Going Boeing; 14th Aug 2014 at 08:36.
Going Boeing is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 06:11
  #4695 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Cesspit
Posts: 399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No restrictions domestically.

But can't do any international ops without government approval. Same as Hong Kong.

Can't speak for other routes but the Hkg-Aus routes are granted on a purely one for one basis as negotiated by their respective governments. The traveling public/tourism industry shouldn't have to suffer because the current Aus based incumbent hasn't the ability to use their current slots, let alone an increase in bilateral flights.
Progress Wanchai is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 09:34
  #4696 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Joyce gone by November. Cross your fingers.
lamem is offline  
Old 14th Aug 2014, 13:26
  #4697 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Bubble
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
But can't do any international ops without government approval. Same as Hong Kong.
Correct, being that HKG doesn't have a domestic market. There is nothing stopping CX starting up their own domestic feeder network inside Australia calling it 'Cathay Australia' or something.

The traveling public/tourism industry shouldn't have to suffer because the current Aus based incumbent hasn't the ability to use their current slots, let alone an increase in bilateral flights.
So why can't VA fill those slots ? Why single out Qantas ? Australian passengers have more then 1 option to go west or north and its not an open skies policy. CX have the basic monopoly out of Australia for those who want to go to via HKG to anywhere they fly, isn't that enough ? Not that I tend to agree with joyce and co but really whats the point of fighting over scraps on the over saturated Australia-Europe market when their current policy is to not replace retired aircraft with anything at all.

Besides

AVAILABLE CAPACITY:
Passenger services between Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth and Hong Kong*
45 frequencies per week
Isn't that enough ?

Last edited by 600ft-lb; 14th Aug 2014 at 13:37.
600ft-lb is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2014, 02:32
  #4698 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: All over
Posts: 635
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
600,

I would say 'No' to your question as CX are upgrading 1 of their SYD services to a 777 by replacing an A330 very soon. PER-HKG is served by CX only, and they want more services asap but are not allowed. Word on the street is those flights will be upgraded to 777's as well.

b.
boocs is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2014, 04:24
  #4699 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Bubble
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
So here in lies a point of contention. Australia is already more then adequately served by foreign airlines at the moment. So much so that they're all complaining about yield pressures lowering profits in the Australian market.

That being the case, in what interest would it be to the government of today to allow more capacity dumping which will in turn further erode the ability of an Australian owned and Australian Employer's ability to make profits, pay tax, support the country ? We already have cheaper then taxi fare flights available. We already have extreme lcc's operating internationally. It's not going to get any cheaper in relative terms.

Cathay lobbied their government extremely well to make it all but impossible to set up shop in Hong Kong unless you're a local which is fair enough. Why shouldn't Qantas lobby the Australian government to limit the amount of capacity dumping until they get something they want ? At the same time why would CX get upset about it ? International air transport rights are an economic tool that should be mutually beneficial to everyone, there's not much point benefiting foreigners exclusively at the expense of locals. The Hong Kong/Chinese government understands this point, CX can't have their cake and eat it too.
600ft-lb is offline  
Old 16th Aug 2014, 11:14
  #4700 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Sydney
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Answer...

Everyone knows the Answer to Qantas the airlines problems....get rid of Joyce & the board & sell Jetstar and watch it implode...without Qantas, Jetstar will fail in a number of months....
Time to sell the Orange Cancer!
Goddamnslacker is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.