Court Action Against Qantas
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The REAL Elephant ..........
When will the BIG shareholders start some action ?
.... Disclosure
... Keeping the market informed
Etc. ,
Etc. ,
....perhaps even an action jointly with unions / employees, most of whom have an involvement via employee share holdings or superfund share holdings ?
Eventually gravity has to pull a lot of the balls/ ducks / pigs out of the air, one would think ?
......but what am I to know ?
And what recent announcements to the market and authorities
have been made ?
Is SOMEONE on that ship of fools in the Antarctic ?
.... Disclosure
... Keeping the market informed
Etc. ,
Etc. ,
....perhaps even an action jointly with unions / employees, most of whom have an involvement via employee share holdings or superfund share holdings ?
Eventually gravity has to pull a lot of the balls/ ducks / pigs out of the air, one would think ?
......but what am I to know ?
And what recent announcements to the market and authorities
have been made ?
Is SOMEONE on that ship of fools in the Antarctic ?
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A few things to add...
Longtime stalker, first time member/poster.
Excuse my stupidity, but what about closing the airline down? That cost the business a reported $60 million, not including the cost to the brand...?
I can see how one could quite easily argue it was because of the potential for strikes, safety and uncertainty...
Also, can someone explain how the duplication of ground handling businesses is good for QANTAS? e.g. Express Ground Handling & Qantas Ground Services?
Further, How can the number of FTE's only decreased by 405 people in 5 years (data from prelim report 2009 & 2013) but we have had a large number of redundancies taken in previous years?
Surely natural attrition %'s would be greater than 1.2%?
Excuse my stupidity, but what about closing the airline down? That cost the business a reported $60 million, not including the cost to the brand...?
I can see how one could quite easily argue it was because of the potential for strikes, safety and uncertainty...
Also, can someone explain how the duplication of ground handling businesses is good for QANTAS? e.g. Express Ground Handling & Qantas Ground Services?
Further, How can the number of FTE's only decreased by 405 people in 5 years (data from prelim report 2009 & 2013) but we have had a large number of redundancies taken in previous years?
Surely natural attrition %'s would be greater than 1.2%?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Under Class C
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As interesting an idea as this is, I have to ask, do you want to help save the airline, or help run it into the ground.
Whilst admirable, can you imagine:
Don't get me wrong, I completely agree that the current *mis*management seem to have done their dandiest to trash the airline, but is it prudent to add further hurt. Are you trying to help your members, or put more financial pressure on their job security?
Surely there is a more prudent public campaign that could be waged, without going down the costly court path. Can you imagine what this would cost in the long run, and if you lose, you will be expected to pay QF costs for brining the case against them.
Whilst admirable, can you imagine:
- The additional cost imposed defending this, given the already >$300M loss in first six months
- Reputation damage the court case will cause (yes I know AJ has already trashed it)
- Concern the flying public may have with flying on QF due to what gets dredged up
Don't get me wrong, I completely agree that the current *mis*management seem to have done their dandiest to trash the airline, but is it prudent to add further hurt. Are you trying to help your members, or put more financial pressure on their job security?
Surely there is a more prudent public campaign that could be waged, without going down the costly court path. Can you imagine what this would cost in the long run, and if you lose, you will be expected to pay QF costs for brining the case against them.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Florence
Age: 74
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
value for money
I believe that the management of Qantas has been deplorable and that the Board and EXCO should step up to the gibbet en masse. Nonetheless, I question the product of your campfire chat:
Given that the clauses that so offend you are almost impossible to litigate to establish a legal breach, what is your intended outcome?
Does that outcome, if achieved, actually benefit the members in either the short or longer term?
Is the cost in terms of members' funds even vaguely defensible in terms of the expected value of that outcome?
Given that the clauses that so offend you are almost impossible to litigate to establish a legal breach, what is your intended outcome?
Does that outcome, if achieved, actually benefit the members in either the short or longer term?
Is the cost in terms of members' funds even vaguely defensible in terms of the expected value of that outcome?
No chance.
You'd be better off with the old Employee Buyout via Super Fund chestnut.
You'd be better off with the old Employee Buyout via Super Fund chestnut.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Christmas Island
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about a fair go for qantas campaign?
If AJ can get 20000 signatures to support their plans, we should be able to get 2 or 3 times the signatures to demand the sacking or the board , CEO and chairman .
I'm sure there would be close to 30000 staff willing to sign straight up.
That will expose the boards backers and focus media attention on their failures.
Maybe that list of cost shifting questions might appear with public pressure to provide answers with proof..
Would save a costly court battle.. But be symbolic in getting our message across.
If AJ can get 20000 signatures to support their plans, we should be able to get 2 or 3 times the signatures to demand the sacking or the board , CEO and chairman .
I'm sure there would be close to 30000 staff willing to sign straight up.
That will expose the boards backers and focus media attention on their failures.
Maybe that list of cost shifting questions might appear with public pressure to provide answers with proof..
Would save a costly court battle.. But be symbolic in getting our message across.
Last edited by hadagutfull; 3rd Jan 2014 at 05:22. Reason: Add text
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: goulburn
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why not just pay for newspapers adds with a collage of all those parked planes and a headline
What are you guys doing with our company money and our jobs????? We sure care about wasted $$$$, why don't you!!!!!
What are you guys doing with our company money and our jobs????? We sure care about wasted $$$$, why don't you!!!!!
What are you guys doing with our company money and our jobs????? We sure care about wasted $$$$, why don't you!!!!!
And another a collage of the executive car park?
I get the idea from a docco I watched on the financial failure of UK football clubs. It started with a pan across a car park of players Bentley's, Lambo's, Ferrari's and the very best Audi and BMW's. The initial VoiceOver said something like 'Britain's Premier League is on the brink of financial collapse. In the next hour we will try to show where the money is going' etc etc..
I get the idea from a docco I watched on the financial failure of UK football clubs. It started with a pan across a car park of players Bentley's, Lambo's, Ferrari's and the very best Audi and BMW's. The initial VoiceOver said something like 'Britain's Premier League is on the brink of financial collapse. In the next hour we will try to show where the money is going' etc etc..
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An Employee Buyout via a Super Fund
Any employee equity participation best achieved via salary sacrifice associated with productivity improvement supported by government backing.
If however employes won't back their company, one can't expect support from shareholders and government.
Is a good idea, but probably not one that really appeals to management and most unions. Much too democratic.
Last edited by Gingerbread; 3rd Jan 2014 at 11:01. Reason: Clarity
hadagutful and ohallen,
Methinks you are onto something here. The workers have stayed out of the press for long enough. Following Alans advice to talk QF up around the BBQ, I get some strange looks when I tell it like it is. The punters out there have only heard the "company's side of the story", and, as we all know, there's 3 sides to a story...Your's, mine and the truth.
And whilst we are at it, lets ask the BIG shareholders why they have let the shareprice slide from $5.00 plus... to NO DIVIDEND... to JUNK status and done jack****e about it!!! Do they know something that the staff and Joe Public don't know??? Is there a hidden agenda out there??? Thank f%&k they're not my financial advisor!!!!
McHale.
Methinks you are onto something here. The workers have stayed out of the press for long enough. Following Alans advice to talk QF up around the BBQ, I get some strange looks when I tell it like it is. The punters out there have only heard the "company's side of the story", and, as we all know, there's 3 sides to a story...Your's, mine and the truth.
And whilst we are at it, lets ask the BIG shareholders why they have let the shareprice slide from $5.00 plus... to NO DIVIDEND... to JUNK status and done jack****e about it!!! Do they know something that the staff and Joe Public don't know??? Is there a hidden agenda out there??? Thank f%&k they're not my financial advisor!!!!
McHale.
The big shareholders are hedge funds who want to take the company private. They don't care about a dividend. Alan and the board are trying to drive the share price down, not up.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the big shareholders are hedge funds and they are happy to see their investment tank 'ços it's all part of a grand plan to take the company private.
So Al and the board are on their side compliantly tanking the share price for an ultimate buy-out?
Is this the deal?
Are mom and pop investors aware of this plan?
What are the hedge funds being told and aware of, that the small time investors aren't ?
What are the laws governing Insider Trading?
Are there issues with continuous disclosure here?
Thinking out aloud here ,Fed Sec, instead of a costly court case as you propose, , would a "poison pill "type court case be a better option?
Have a Class Action for the mom and pop investors ready to run , the trigger of course will be when the big boys make their Private Equity grab.
Might take the polish of their plan if there is a massive costly court action pending the moment they try to get their grubby mitts on all the loot.
So Al and the board are on their side compliantly tanking the share price for an ultimate buy-out?
Is this the deal?
Are mom and pop investors aware of this plan?
What are the hedge funds being told and aware of, that the small time investors aren't ?
What are the laws governing Insider Trading?
Are there issues with continuous disclosure here?
Thinking out aloud here ,Fed Sec, instead of a costly court case as you propose, , would a "poison pill "type court case be a better option?
Have a Class Action for the mom and pop investors ready to run , the trigger of course will be when the big boys make their Private Equity grab.
Might take the polish of their plan if there is a massive costly court action pending the moment they try to get their grubby mitts on all the loot.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunny I love your succinct analysis ...if what you say is the status quo and I have no doubt it is then the direction to be heading is lodging a complaint with Takeovers Panel? ASIC? ASX? ...let them do what they are supposed to do ..although their track record is p!$$ poor. It may just force someone to make a decision earlier than the present programme ...there is a high degree of criminality involved in this on going matter ..woof! Woof!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good discussion here guys.
Could they be deliberately driving the share price down? Maybe. The clause I have talked about using here could flush all that out.
Employee share buy in Romulus? Absolutely I'd be interested in that. I would say the company would do all they can to prevent it though.
Consider not running this case because it could cost Qantas several hundred $k? That is about the same they would pay for one of their new Engineering Ops Managers they are appointing in shrinking Engineering departments. It looks like they have made up around 20 of these new positions.
Having net problems here and will be back in civilisation next week to fully answer all these ideas. Please keep them coming, particularly areas where you have seen them deliberately pi$$ing money up against the wall.
Could they be deliberately driving the share price down? Maybe. The clause I have talked about using here could flush all that out.
Employee share buy in Romulus? Absolutely I'd be interested in that. I would say the company would do all they can to prevent it though.
Consider not running this case because it could cost Qantas several hundred $k? That is about the same they would pay for one of their new Engineering Ops Managers they are appointing in shrinking Engineering departments. It looks like they have made up around 20 of these new positions.
Having net problems here and will be back in civilisation next week to fully answer all these ideas. Please keep them coming, particularly areas where you have seen them deliberately pi$$ing money up against the wall.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: herethereandeverywhere
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The volatility of the share price is no where near as profitable at $4-5 as it is at the $1-2 mark.
Almost annually over the last 5 years, coincidentally? since the sprouting of a little Irish weed, the share price has fallen by up to half, then bounced back. Whether intended or not, there are monster profits to be made (30 up to 100% some years) when the price bounces back. I'm not game enough to punt on it, but to those circling above and in managed funds it would make a pretty tasty annual feast.
Almost annually over the last 5 years, coincidentally? since the sprouting of a little Irish weed, the share price has fallen by up to half, then bounced back. Whether intended or not, there are monster profits to be made (30 up to 100% some years) when the price bounces back. I'm not game enough to punt on it, but to those circling above and in managed funds it would make a pretty tasty annual feast.