MERGED: Alan's still not happy......
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: australia
Age: 59
Posts: 425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a regular hostie on both Dallas and JFK the 380 won't be able to take all the JFK punters that currently go to LAX. With up to 100 seats blocked out very few will get a guernsey on the 'bus. The only advantage with the 'bus is that it has 1st class and a bigger j/c and w/c zones so no need to carry as many y/c. Premium classes are where the money is. Why anyone in y/c would buy a comfort seat ex DFW is a complete mystery when there are so many empty seats.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
indamiddle
Your wrong about the A380 of course, but as you are losing some of your flying I see you have adopted the normal course of action of QF mainline FAs in slagging off and lying about anything that doesnt meet your self interest.
Reminds me of the lies about the BKK FA basing (when it was running) and the ongoing slander you and your boiler mates indulge in with respect to the London Base Cabin Crew.
Your wrong about the A380 of course, but as you are losing some of your flying I see you have adopted the normal course of action of QF mainline FAs in slagging off and lying about anything that doesnt meet your self interest.
Reminds me of the lies about the BKK FA basing (when it was running) and the ongoing slander you and your boiler mates indulge in with respect to the London Base Cabin Crew.
Nice bitch slapping, girls.
But it does bring up the point:
For a service that pretty much depends on premium passengers to make a profit, how is the A380 going to cover its much higher operating costs on this route? Virtually the only difference in premium seat numbers in the configurations are the 14 P seats, and we all know who will be sitting in those.
As for "The New York Ending Rumour", if the 747 does not go to JFK from LAX, it would just sit on the ground in LAX all day. It's still a hull, whether it is sitting in LAX or going to JFK and back.
Actually, putting the A380 into Dallas has pretty much guaranteed that LAX-JFK will continue for the 747. If it wasn't tasked for DFW, that A380 would be used for the 107/108 SYD-LAX-SYD . This, in turn, would mean that the 15/16 Brisbane 747 would be the only 747 in LAX each morning potentially available to go to JFK.
By flying the A380 to DFW, there are as a consequence still two 747s every day in LAX. The 15/16 and the 107/108. One can go to JFK during the day [either one] and the other can go to maintenance in LAX as required. If not required in maintenance it just sits in the sun soaking up the Southern California rays.
The 747s are rotated through LAX for this very reason, to go into the hangar there. There aren't too many other places they can go for maintenance these days, sadly.
So, in my opinion, you can retire the "JFK is ending" rumour. As for the "back to SFO again rumour" - no chance.
But it does bring up the point:
For a service that pretty much depends on premium passengers to make a profit, how is the A380 going to cover its much higher operating costs on this route? Virtually the only difference in premium seat numbers in the configurations are the 14 P seats, and we all know who will be sitting in those.
As for "The New York Ending Rumour", if the 747 does not go to JFK from LAX, it would just sit on the ground in LAX all day. It's still a hull, whether it is sitting in LAX or going to JFK and back.
Actually, putting the A380 into Dallas has pretty much guaranteed that LAX-JFK will continue for the 747. If it wasn't tasked for DFW, that A380 would be used for the 107/108 SYD-LAX-SYD . This, in turn, would mean that the 15/16 Brisbane 747 would be the only 747 in LAX each morning potentially available to go to JFK.
By flying the A380 to DFW, there are as a consequence still two 747s every day in LAX. The 15/16 and the 107/108. One can go to JFK during the day [either one] and the other can go to maintenance in LAX as required. If not required in maintenance it just sits in the sun soaking up the Southern California rays.
The 747s are rotated through LAX for this very reason, to go into the hangar there. There aren't too many other places they can go for maintenance these days, sadly.
So, in my opinion, you can retire the "JFK is ending" rumour. As for the "back to SFO again rumour" - no chance.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction - Isaac Newton
Last edited by Captain Gidday; 12th Jun 2014 at 02:48.
Eureka! The answer to the A380 economics question just came to me, in the shower. [Don't try to visualize that, it's not pretty]
It's not premium pax that save the day for the A380 on the Dallas route. The A380 covers it's higher costs by carrying an extra 100 or so 'tourist class' pax TO Dallas. It just can't bring them back.
So girls, be nice to those folks down the back on the way to DFW. They're paying somebody's bonus.
I even nutted out a little country song. It was a long shower:
It's not premium pax that save the day for the A380 on the Dallas route. The A380 covers it's higher costs by carrying an extra 100 or so 'tourist class' pax TO Dallas. It just can't bring them back.
So girls, be nice to those folks down the back on the way to DFW. They're paying somebody's bonus.
I even nutted out a little country song. It was a long shower:
'One Way Ticket To Dallas' - by Captain Gidday.
"We can take you any day to Dallas,
But you'll have to come back
Through LAX"
"We can take you any day to Dallas,
But you'll have to come back
Through LAX"
Last edited by Captain Gidday; 12th Jun 2014 at 02:59.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could be a positive or a negative for Jetstar HK if you read between the lines.
Warnings as China changes tune on Hong Kong
Warnings as China changes tune on Hong Kong
How could you interpret that as potentialy positive for any foreign venture in. Hong Kong? That reads more like an explicit warning. Jetstar HK would be exactly the kind of thing the Chinese would close the door on. Which comes as a surprise to no one with more brains than bluster.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Aus
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Sydney
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australopithecus, remember that the first partner in Jetatar HK was a Chinese company, and a very well connected one at that.
The application was seemingly objected by a HK based company, and another HK company was introduced as a shareholder to try and smooth things, but this does not appear to have worked to date.
This is as much HK slapping China in the face as it is Australia
The application was seemingly objected by a HK based company, and another HK company was introduced as a shareholder to try and smooth things, but this does not appear to have worked to date.
This is as much HK slapping China in the face as it is Australia
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It all sounded so positive back March 2012, just taking a bit longer than first thought, going by this rather optimistic press release. Hindsight is a wonderful thing...
Jetstar Hong Kong will combine the partners’ local
knowledge, networks and successful low
cost carrier model to service short haul routes in
Asia, including Greater China, Japan, South
Korea and South East Asia. It will be the first low
fares airline based in Hong Kong.
Subject to regulatory approval Jetstar Hong Kong
services will start in 2013 with a fleet of
three Airbus A320s, growing to 18 A320s by 2015.
Jetstar Hong Kong is underpinned by a total maximum
capitalisation of up to US$198 million.
The shareholding percentage in Jetstar Hong Kong
will be equally held by China Eastern
Airlines and Qantas Group, which will be equal part
ners in the Joint Venture. The maximum
exposure for each partner is US$99 million over a
three year period.
http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/2012032...gblzv2ryz8.pdf
knowledge, networks and successful low
cost carrier model to service short haul routes in
Asia, including Greater China, Japan, South
Korea and South East Asia. It will be the first low
fares airline based in Hong Kong.
Subject to regulatory approval Jetstar Hong Kong
services will start in 2013 with a fleet of
three Airbus A320s, growing to 18 A320s by 2015.
Jetstar Hong Kong is underpinned by a total maximum
capitalisation of up to US$198 million.
The shareholding percentage in Jetstar Hong Kong
will be equally held by China Eastern
Airlines and Qantas Group, which will be equal part
ners in the Joint Venture. The maximum
exposure for each partner is US$99 million over a
three year period.
http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/2012032...gblzv2ryz8.pdf
My take is that the funds invested by Qantas were more than the mooted 99 million each. There was no disclosure from the Chinese partners about their funding sources, for example. I have heard it whispered that Qantas issued non-recourse loans to their Chinese partners to fund their share.
This latest revelation about China Southern loaning more cash to JQ HK leads me to cynically expect that that debt will be the senior secured debt. If Qantas escapes only losing its initial cash injection I will be amaaaaaaaazed.
This latest revelation about China Southern loaning more cash to JQ HK leads me to cynically expect that that debt will be the senior secured debt. If Qantas escapes only losing its initial cash injection I will be amaaaaaaaazed.
My take is that the funds invested by Qantas were more than the mooted 99 million each. There was no disclosure from the Chinese partners about their funding sources, for example. I have heard it whispered that Qantas issued non-recourse loans to their Chinese partners to fund their share.
No doubt it was not these actual A320's, after all it's a three way partnership, but perhaps a "different" set of 7 were fully paid for by QF. Problem solved!
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London-Thailand-Australia
Age: 15
Posts: 1,057
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst we are figuring out the birthing difficulties with J* Hong Kong, Twitter has gone off regarding mum's birthplace all those years ago.. was it in Winton or Longreach? Away we go now.. 
#Awkward. Qantas and Virgin Australia in odd Twitter encounter
LADIES and gentlemen, it’s time to buckle up and prepare for a mile-high Twitter fight.
The claws are well and truly out between Qantas and Virgin Australia after the rivals did the unthinkable on Tuesday night; they actually acknowledged each other's presence on Twitter.
#Awkward. Qantas and Virgin Australia in odd Twitter encounter | News.com.au
LADIES and gentlemen, it’s time to buckle up and prepare for a mile-high Twitter fight.
The claws are well and truly out between Qantas and Virgin Australia after the rivals did the unthinkable on Tuesday night; they actually acknowledged each other's presence on Twitter.
#Awkward. Qantas and Virgin Australia in odd Twitter encounter | News.com.au
Australopithicus:
Indeed, senior secured debt. China Southern is buying Jetstar HK assets for pennies in the dollar. Make no mistake, Qantas will shortly have to write off its entire investment in Asia.
What really annoys me is the amount of wasted Board and management time and energy on a project that anyone with any experience of Asian trade knew was always a fools errand.
My take is that the funds invested by Qantas were more than the mooted 99 million each. There was no disclosure from the Chinese partners about their funding sources, for example. I have heard it whispered that Qantas issued non-recourse loans to their Chinese partners to fund their share.
This latest revelation about China Southern loaning more cash to JQ HK leads me to cynically expect that that debt will be the senior secured debt. If Qantas escapes only losing its initial cash injection I will be amaaaaaaaazed.
This latest revelation about China Southern loaning more cash to JQ HK leads me to cynically expect that that debt will be the senior secured debt. If Qantas escapes only losing its initial cash injection I will be amaaaaaaaazed.
What really annoys me is the amount of wasted Board and management time and energy on a project that anyone with any experience of Asian trade knew was always a fools errand.
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Inside their OODA loop
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe you are correct Sunfish, however, they will never let a crisis go to waste. Before the write-off, the financial high wire "crisis" act will be used to as a battering ram against the employees, as they have already begun to do.
Joyce will fall on his sword when it is announced, blame the previous management's flawed strategy & retire into the sunset to count his mere millions.
Joyce will fall on his sword when it is announced, blame the previous management's flawed strategy & retire into the sunset to count his mere millions.
I refuse to do Twatter or Bookface, so I can't/won't follow the story as it develops. But the documents that brought Qantas into existence were signed in the Gresham Hotel, Brisbane, on the 16th November 1920. So Brisbane has the most logical claim to be the birthplace of Qantas.
Sad that the modern Qantas media team don't know their own company's history, but not surprising.
Methinks you'd better start a separate thread. This could get ugly.
Sad that the modern Qantas media team don't know their own company's history, but not surprising.
Methinks you'd better start a separate thread. This could get ugly.
True. According to Wikipedia's page on Harry Houdini:
Who knows which claim is true? Either way, it doesn't seem like it was anywhere in the Sunshine State.
Wing Commander Harry Cobby wrote in Aircraft in March 1938 that "the first aeroplane flight in the Southern Hemisphere was made on December 9, 1909 by Mr Colin Defries, a Londoner, at Victoria Park Racecourse, Sydney, in a Wilbur Wright aeroplane". Colin Defries was a trained pilot, having learnt to fly in Cannes, France. By modern standards his flight time was minimal, but in 1909 he had accumulated enough to become an instructor. On his first flight he took off, maintained straight and level flight, albeit briefly, and landed safely. His crash landing on his second flight, when he tried to retrieve his hat which was blown off, demonstrated what a momentary lack of attention could cause while flying a Wright Model A.
It is acknowledged by Australian historians[46] and the Aviation Historical Society of Australia that the definition of flight established by the Gorell Committee on behalf of the Aero Club of Great Britain dictates the acceptance of a flight or its rejection, giving Colin Defries credit as the first to make an aeroplane flight in Australia, and the Southern Hemisphere.
In 1965 aviation journalist Stanley Brogden formed the view that the first powered flight in Australia took place at Bolivar in South Australia; the aircraft was a Bleriot monoplane with Fred Custance as the pilot. The flight took place on March 17, 1910. The next day when Houdini took to the air, the Herald newspaper reported Custance's flight, stating it had lasted 5 minutes 25 seconds at a height of between 12 and 15 feet.
It is acknowledged by Australian historians[46] and the Aviation Historical Society of Australia that the definition of flight established by the Gorell Committee on behalf of the Aero Club of Great Britain dictates the acceptance of a flight or its rejection, giving Colin Defries credit as the first to make an aeroplane flight in Australia, and the Southern Hemisphere.
In 1965 aviation journalist Stanley Brogden formed the view that the first powered flight in Australia took place at Bolivar in South Australia; the aircraft was a Bleriot monoplane with Fred Custance as the pilot. The flight took place on March 17, 1910. The next day when Houdini took to the air, the Herald newspaper reported Custance's flight, stating it had lasted 5 minutes 25 seconds at a height of between 12 and 15 feet.