Court Action Against Qantas
NZ Herald business section Today
Jetstar, the discount unit of Australian airline Qantas Airways, lost ground on trans-Tasman routes last year, though still managed to send some $156.2 million back to its parent.
The airline's subsidiary Jetconnect, which manages the group's trans-Tasman passenger schedule, reported a 17 per cent drop in profit to $8.8 million in the 12 months ended June 30, on an 11 per cent drop in sales to $67 million, according to statements filed with the Companies Office.
During that period, rival Air New Zealand increased its passenger numbers on Tasman/Pacific routes 3.5 per cent to 3.18 million. In the five months to Nov. 30, Air NZ lifted passenger numbers on those routes 2.9 per cent to 1.36 million.
The local Jetstar unit had $147.9 million of cash at the end of its 2012 financial year, and returned capital of $98.2 million to Qantas on March 22 last year, on top of a $58 million dividend payment to its parent the same day.
Jetstar made inroads into Air New Zealand's grip on the domestic market, reporting market share of 22.4 per cent as at June 30 from 20.6 per cent a year earlier, when it published the group's annual result in August.
Sister New Zealand unit, Jetstar Airways, which employs and hires cabin and technical crew for budget brand Jetstar Airways Pty Ltd, made a profit of $2.4 million in the June year, from $1.9 million a year earlier, according to separate financial statements.
Operating income, which is derived from the wider Jetstar unit, climbed 26 per cent to $26.8 million, outpacing the 25 per cent increase in spending on manpower and staff of $23.4 million.
Since then, Qantas's credit rating was cut to a sub-investment grade BB+ after warning of a first half loss of up to A$300 million, blaming a deterioration in trading conditions and a weaker return on fares.
Shares in Qantas fell 0.9 per cent to A$1.09 in trading today, having plunged 27 per cent in 2013. The stock is rated an average 'hold' based on 12 analysts compiled by Reuters, with a median target price of A$1.16.
Jetconnect recognised the Inland Revenue Department's tax investigation into optional convertible notes case as a contingent liability, even though it used $10.3 million of tax losses against the tax department's shortfall penalties assessment. If it wins the dispute it will reinstate the tax losses.
New Zealand's tax department is seeking to deny interest deductions claimed on the notes which were used to fund Qantas's former interest in rival carrier Air New Zealand.
The IRD contends the hybrid securities, which let companies juggle equity and debt to provide a tax advantage, were structured purely to minimise tax. The tax department has previously won in the High Court and Court of Appeal in favour of its assessment of the notes against Western Australia's Alesco Corp, and the Supreme Court will hear the case next month.
The airline's subsidiary Jetconnect, which manages the group's trans-Tasman passenger schedule, reported a 17 per cent drop in profit to $8.8 million in the 12 months ended June 30, on an 11 per cent drop in sales to $67 million, according to statements filed with the Companies Office.
During that period, rival Air New Zealand increased its passenger numbers on Tasman/Pacific routes 3.5 per cent to 3.18 million. In the five months to Nov. 30, Air NZ lifted passenger numbers on those routes 2.9 per cent to 1.36 million.
The local Jetstar unit had $147.9 million of cash at the end of its 2012 financial year, and returned capital of $98.2 million to Qantas on March 22 last year, on top of a $58 million dividend payment to its parent the same day.
Jetstar made inroads into Air New Zealand's grip on the domestic market, reporting market share of 22.4 per cent as at June 30 from 20.6 per cent a year earlier, when it published the group's annual result in August.
Sister New Zealand unit, Jetstar Airways, which employs and hires cabin and technical crew for budget brand Jetstar Airways Pty Ltd, made a profit of $2.4 million in the June year, from $1.9 million a year earlier, according to separate financial statements.
Operating income, which is derived from the wider Jetstar unit, climbed 26 per cent to $26.8 million, outpacing the 25 per cent increase in spending on manpower and staff of $23.4 million.
Since then, Qantas's credit rating was cut to a sub-investment grade BB+ after warning of a first half loss of up to A$300 million, blaming a deterioration in trading conditions and a weaker return on fares.
Shares in Qantas fell 0.9 per cent to A$1.09 in trading today, having plunged 27 per cent in 2013. The stock is rated an average 'hold' based on 12 analysts compiled by Reuters, with a median target price of A$1.16.
Jetconnect recognised the Inland Revenue Department's tax investigation into optional convertible notes case as a contingent liability, even though it used $10.3 million of tax losses against the tax department's shortfall penalties assessment. If it wins the dispute it will reinstate the tax losses.
New Zealand's tax department is seeking to deny interest deductions claimed on the notes which were used to fund Qantas's former interest in rival carrier Air New Zealand.
The IRD contends the hybrid securities, which let companies juggle equity and debt to provide a tax advantage, were structured purely to minimise tax. The tax department has previously won in the High Court and Court of Appeal in favour of its assessment of the notes against Western Australia's Alesco Corp, and the Supreme Court will hear the case next month.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Za farzer land
Age: 53
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The local Jetstar unit had $147.9 million of cash at the end of its 2012 financial year, and returned capital of $98.2 million to Qantas on March 22 last year, on top of a $58 million dividend payment to its parent the same day.
Jetstar NZ is not registered with the NZ companies office.
Documents
a 17 per cent drop in profit to $8.8 million in the 12 months ended June 30, on an 11 per cent drop in sales to $67 million, according to statements filed with the Companies Office.
8.8 mil profit on sales of 67 mil. A 13% PROFIT on turnover.
Wow what a truly an amazing business!!!!!
M
8.8 mil profit on sales of 67 mil. A 13% PROFIT on turnover.
Wow what a truly an amazing business!!!!!
M
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sunfish said "Camelsquadron, please don't come up with this "who moved my cheese" crap. That only applies if you are operating in a good faith environment and Qantas has conclusively proved by its own management actions that it operates in Bad Faith mode which it demonstrated by prolonging EBA negotiations for over 12(?) months, then kicking over the chess board by grounding the airline".
I can only suggest you do some reading because you have just slam dunked "who moved my cheese". You need to wake up, look forward and put your collective intellect and resources into how you can contribute towards making Qantas more competitive if you want to really want to save jobs.
You need to get on the front foot, see what is coming and try to pull together solutions now. From these posts in these forums, you can all see what is coming - maybe the exact detail varies a little - but you all can see it. You cant stop it by trying to stand still or by looking backwards. Put your heads together and try to come up with solutions that work for both you and your employer.
I will leave it here. You can pursue your legal argument if you like but your wasting your time and money. I dont expect you to listen as you have a previous track record for not doing with disastrous consequences for your members.
In the end if you happen to the be the last person leaving one of the "engineering buildings" for the final time who has to turn off the lights - dont look back and blame Qantas for your demise - you can blame yourselves because you wasted the opportunity to be pro-active and chose to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
I can only suggest you do some reading because you have just slam dunked "who moved my cheese". You need to wake up, look forward and put your collective intellect and resources into how you can contribute towards making Qantas more competitive if you want to really want to save jobs.
You need to get on the front foot, see what is coming and try to pull together solutions now. From these posts in these forums, you can all see what is coming - maybe the exact detail varies a little - but you all can see it. You cant stop it by trying to stand still or by looking backwards. Put your heads together and try to come up with solutions that work for both you and your employer.
I will leave it here. You can pursue your legal argument if you like but your wasting your time and money. I dont expect you to listen as you have a previous track record for not doing with disastrous consequences for your members.
In the end if you happen to the be the last person leaving one of the "engineering buildings" for the final time who has to turn off the lights - dont look back and blame Qantas for your demise - you can blame yourselves because you wasted the opportunity to be pro-active and chose to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.
short flights long nights
Just Watching....I just look at things like not investing in 777s, not giving any 787s to International, closing down routes and/or gifting them to Jetstar, completely walking away from main land Europe...I could be wrong, but it seems like a slow close down or at least a hell of a big shrink to me.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: tarmac
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fed Sec
Not sure if you can use this?
Qantaslink (Sunstate) VR and CR in Brisbane total number 13, then after 12 months later double that number put on in hangar and AME contractors.
Just told a contractor went crying to DD and will not sign for two AME (LAME but not on type). (Something to do with engine rigging and is the second time with the same contractor). Good work safety department.
So good to be out and free.
Not sure if you can use this?
Qantaslink (Sunstate) VR and CR in Brisbane total number 13, then after 12 months later double that number put on in hangar and AME contractors.
Just told a contractor went crying to DD and will not sign for two AME (LAME but not on type). (Something to do with engine rigging and is the second time with the same contractor). Good work safety department.
So good to be out and free.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ SUNFISH....How would you know if we are out of our depth?? What do you know about me that gives you the right to make this judgement?
I don't or haven't presumed anything about you
(1) If you knew anything about transport aircraft, you would know that there are an almost infinite number of configurations of engines, supporting structures and systems, avionics, cabin layout and equipment that makes aircraft unique hence SP's statement is entirely correct - to put it another way it is totally unlikely that a Lufthansa configured A380 would be the same as a QF configured A380.
The why say anything then. No A 380 will be the same especially OQA,B & C. LH Technic by this reasoning shouldn't be doing any checks on anything other than their own planes. And to follow on this line of thought, good thing Air Vanuatu isn't getting any maintenance checks done by Qantas because who knows about spec differences in these planes!
"2) A perusal of any number of threads on PPRuNe will demonstrate that employees wish the company to be profitable and have made numerous suggestions and contributions to improve profitability over many years - all of which have been studiously ignored by management."
Ah the "if its said on PPRuNe then its true". How do you know that I haven't been reading for a good many years. I haven't been rude to you and I haven't presumed anything about you, so as asked before please tell me what you know about me that gives you knowledge to make these factual judgments
Could someone tell me if it was an Australian LAME who recently in making a seal repair, removed an upper door instead of making repair insitu, in spite of being against Airbus methodology to remove the door. So then said 380 was AOG until Airbus could send the actual guy and his specific tool who fitted this door in Toulouse. Yup best in world....
I don't or haven't presumed anything about you
(1) If you knew anything about transport aircraft, you would know that there are an almost infinite number of configurations of engines, supporting structures and systems, avionics, cabin layout and equipment that makes aircraft unique hence SP's statement is entirely correct - to put it another way it is totally unlikely that a Lufthansa configured A380 would be the same as a QF configured A380.
The why say anything then. No A 380 will be the same especially OQA,B & C. LH Technic by this reasoning shouldn't be doing any checks on anything other than their own planes. And to follow on this line of thought, good thing Air Vanuatu isn't getting any maintenance checks done by Qantas because who knows about spec differences in these planes!
"2) A perusal of any number of threads on PPRuNe will demonstrate that employees wish the company to be profitable and have made numerous suggestions and contributions to improve profitability over many years - all of which have been studiously ignored by management."
Ah the "if its said on PPRuNe then its true". How do you know that I haven't been reading for a good many years. I haven't been rude to you and I haven't presumed anything about you, so as asked before please tell me what you know about me that gives you knowledge to make these factual judgments
Could someone tell me if it was an Australian LAME who recently in making a seal repair, removed an upper door instead of making repair insitu, in spite of being against Airbus methodology to remove the door. So then said 380 was AOG until Airbus could send the actual guy and his specific tool who fitted this door in Toulouse. Yup best in world....
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: H271/3
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe the QF Board should consider this. 
Why attractive CEOs boost share prices
A university study has found that companies can boost their share prices by hiring good-looking chief executives.
Economists at the University of Wisconsin, Joseph Halford and Hung-Chia Hsu, found a positive correlation between a company's stock performance and their chief executive's "facial geometry".
The study, Beauty is Wealth: CEO Appearance and Shareholder Value, used a "facial attractiveness index" to value the appearance of 677 chief executives from the S&P 500.
It found that "attractive" bosses receive better total compensation and can improve share prices on their first day by creating a good first impression. The research also suggested that they perform better on the negotiating table, and are more likely to land good deals.
Regular media appearances can also improve shares if the chief executive is attractive, the study found.
"CEO attractiveness may also affect shareholder value through the visibility channel, in which media attention may affect a firm’s investor base and stock prices," it said.
"We find that more attractive CEOs are associated with better stock returns on CEO-related television news days."
Speaking to CNBC, the researchers said that Marissa Mayer, the 38-year-old chief executive of Yahoo, was a good example, while being quick to stress that CEO attractiveness is only a small part of share performance.
Since Ms Mayer charge of Yahoo!, the company's shares have risen by more than 150 per cent.
"She scored 8.45 (out of 10) in our facial attractiveness index and is among the top 5 per cent in our sample," they said. "Of course, we don't mean that all the increase in stock price is from her appearance. We just find that there might be some positive correlation between the two."
Why attractive CEOs boost share prices
A university study has found that companies can boost their share prices by hiring good-looking chief executives.
Economists at the University of Wisconsin, Joseph Halford and Hung-Chia Hsu, found a positive correlation between a company's stock performance and their chief executive's "facial geometry".
The study, Beauty is Wealth: CEO Appearance and Shareholder Value, used a "facial attractiveness index" to value the appearance of 677 chief executives from the S&P 500.
It found that "attractive" bosses receive better total compensation and can improve share prices on their first day by creating a good first impression. The research also suggested that they perform better on the negotiating table, and are more likely to land good deals.
Regular media appearances can also improve shares if the chief executive is attractive, the study found.
"CEO attractiveness may also affect shareholder value through the visibility channel, in which media attention may affect a firm’s investor base and stock prices," it said.
"We find that more attractive CEOs are associated with better stock returns on CEO-related television news days."
Speaking to CNBC, the researchers said that Marissa Mayer, the 38-year-old chief executive of Yahoo, was a good example, while being quick to stress that CEO attractiveness is only a small part of share performance.
Since Ms Mayer charge of Yahoo!, the company's shares have risen by more than 150 per cent.
"She scored 8.45 (out of 10) in our facial attractiveness index and is among the top 5 per cent in our sample," they said. "Of course, we don't mean that all the increase in stock price is from her appearance. We just find that there might be some positive correlation between the two."
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could someone tell me if it was an Australian LAME who recently
Qantaslink (Sunstate) VR and CR in Brisbane total number 13, then after 12 months later double that number put on in hangar and AME contractors.
Keep adding ideas guys. I will collate them all before long.
Despite your complaints about Jetstar, it remains an asset that has significant value
How on earth can it survive without QF propping it up? It would be impossible.
As said before you're out of your league here....
Could someone tell me if it was an Australian LAME ... Yup best in world....
We could all go off on a slagging off contest like mentioning staples, upside engine mount washers, checks requiring a/c power signed of during a poweroff phase of a check, leak checks c/o without panels fitted etc, but that would be setting people off on a tangent which has NOTHING to do with this thread.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Past the rabbit proof fence
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You need to get on the front foot, see what is coming and try to pull together solutions now. From these posts in these forums, you can all see what is coming - maybe the exact detail varies a little - but you all can see it. You cant stop it by trying to stand still or by looking backwards. Put your heads together and try to come up with solutions that work for both you and your employer.
Camelsqadron
You either ARE a QF manager or a naive bystander - because, if you did try talking to QF managers you'd know its like talking to a brick wall. Everyone I know who has sent emails suggesting cost cutting (as requested by LS) has been shot down.
Camelsquadron you are out of the loop. The entire "who moved my cheese", "Bridge of trust", "Pity city", "engagement surveys" and a host of other very expensive HR related motivational and change management strategies have been inflicted on the Qantas workforce over the last Ten years.
The only problem is that the management operates in Bad Faith mode all the time and any employees who actually try to internalise all the right stuff end up getting screwed.
The best (worst) example of Qantas management behaviour is their habit of announcing long running "reviews" of various parts of their business which always end with the closure of the affected part and the firing of the employees. This is just plain cruel as it is designed to maximise fear, uncertainty and doubt in the workforce. The correct way to do this stuff is either clean and slow, with a timetable and lots of consultation and support for the workforce or quick and dirty where its done very fast and one then spends time supporting the remaining workforce.
I speak as someone who has managed both types of process and participated in any amount of team building and motivational exercises including Seven day live in sessions etc. over Thirty years.
The only problem is that the management operates in Bad Faith mode all the time and any employees who actually try to internalise all the right stuff end up getting screwed.
The best (worst) example of Qantas management behaviour is their habit of announcing long running "reviews" of various parts of their business which always end with the closure of the affected part and the firing of the employees. This is just plain cruel as it is designed to maximise fear, uncertainty and doubt in the workforce. The correct way to do this stuff is either clean and slow, with a timetable and lots of consultation and support for the workforce or quick and dirty where its done very fast and one then spends time supporting the remaining workforce.
I speak as someone who has managed both types of process and participated in any amount of team building and motivational exercises including Seven day live in sessions etc. over Thirty years.
short flights long nights
I have never read the book, but it would seem to me a hell of a lot of cheese was moved when BKK-LHR, HKG-LHR, SIN-FRA just to name a few were given up.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Bexley
Posts: 1,792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am getting a few pms that are adding to the list of options. This one is interesting. Wondering if any of our other Perth friends have witnessed the same.
Apparently there have been quite a few Qantas ads offering $600 return trips to Sin. When you go to search for the fares on the net, the Qantas website redirects to the Jetstar-Asia as the only option for $600 fares.
I would imagine Qantas are paying for the ads. It is certainly using the goodwill of a great airline. Any profit however would be returned to an outfit only 49% owned by Qantas. Shame.
Apparently there have been quite a few Qantas ads offering $600 return trips to Sin. When you go to search for the fares on the net, the Qantas website redirects to the Jetstar-Asia as the only option for $600 fares.
I would imagine Qantas are paying for the ads. It is certainly using the goodwill of a great airline. Any profit however would be returned to an outfit only 49% owned by Qantas. Shame.
As I've said in the other thread, I have a feeling Qantas is going to go into administration. Nothing chews up money like an airline, and having jets sitting idle for any reason is disastrously expensive.