More Jetstar International Passenger Figure Discrepancies
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
More Jetstar International Passenger Figure Discrepancies
Ok here we go again... Jetstar International figures for 2012-13
Bitre figures for JQ INT 2012-13: 2447496
(reference: https://www.bitre.gov.au/publication...ivity_FY13.pdf )
pg16
Qantas figures for same: 5146000
ref: http://www.qantas.com.au/infodetail/...alReport13.pdf
pg33
Difference: 2698504.
The thing to remember here is that the only other source of Jetstar International passengers apart from those counted by BITRE is domestic passengers carried in New Zealand. Good luck trying to find an admission of that anywhere however..
Then we have this tidbit.
Jetstar nibbles into Air NZ?s domestic dominance | The National Business Review
Difference is now: 828504 passengers unaccounted for from the Qantas official figures.
For info: JQ run 5 177 seat A320s up and down NZ every day. They do on average 41 flights a day give or take. If you work out how many seats that is per year it comes to 2648805. Is that coincidental?
My conclusion: Qantas is probably counting every seat JQ flies in NZ as a passenger actually flown, knowing that because NZ doesn't count passengers or file statistics, no-one would probably check.
Well somebody did.
Bitre figures for JQ INT 2012-13: 2447496
(reference: https://www.bitre.gov.au/publication...ivity_FY13.pdf )
pg16
Qantas figures for same: 5146000
ref: http://www.qantas.com.au/infodetail/...alReport13.pdf
pg33
Difference: 2698504.
The thing to remember here is that the only other source of Jetstar International passengers apart from those counted by BITRE is domestic passengers carried in New Zealand. Good luck trying to find an admission of that anywhere however..
Then we have this tidbit.
Jetstar nibbles into Air NZ?s domestic dominance | The National Business Review
Difference is now: 828504 passengers unaccounted for from the Qantas official figures.
For info: JQ run 5 177 seat A320s up and down NZ every day. They do on average 41 flights a day give or take. If you work out how many seats that is per year it comes to 2648805. Is that coincidental?
My conclusion: Qantas is probably counting every seat JQ flies in NZ as a passenger actually flown, knowing that because NZ doesn't count passengers or file statistics, no-one would probably check.
Well somebody did.
Nunc est bibendum
Sorry Kremin, I'm a bit out of touch today. Can you step me through the logic here a bit more? Can't quite work out the point you're making with the numbers.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
No worries..
The BITRE figures plus the 1.87 million stated for NZ domestic come to a total of some 830,000 less than what is quoted by the Qantas annual report.
By some coincidence however, the 830,000 plus the the 1.87 million is very close to the number of passengers you would have if you were running a load factor of 100% on every flight that Jetstar flies domestically in NZ.
Is that coincidental?
Either way the numbers do not add up, and it may be that one in five Jetstar International passengers is a ghost. Qantas needs to clear this up.
The BITRE figures plus the 1.87 million stated for NZ domestic come to a total of some 830,000 less than what is quoted by the Qantas annual report.
By some coincidence however, the 830,000 plus the the 1.87 million is very close to the number of passengers you would have if you were running a load factor of 100% on every flight that Jetstar flies domestically in NZ.
Is that coincidental?
Either way the numbers do not add up, and it may be that one in five Jetstar International passengers is a ghost. Qantas needs to clear this up.
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Singapore
Age: 56
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain, I can see what you're saying - However, who would you believe - BITRE that only collates information available to them (supplied by QF/JQ by the way - if QF/JQ *really* wanted to fudge the books, they might as well fudge the BITRE report as well). Or would you believe an annual report audited by an international auditing organisation (KPMG) with a lot more to loose than just covering up an apparent conspiracy about JQ international pax? The profit/loss statement for those sectors tell the full story, not some discrepancy between pax numbers. Actually, now I've typed that out - what is your conspiracy? Saying JQ are using a 100% yield? - The unaudited QF report doesn't even conform to your conspiracy - they clearly state a 76% load.
I think that you may have fudged the figures yourself a bit. Jetstar NZ has 9 aircraft, granted some are doing the Trans Tasman services but these still come under 'International'. Also those aircraft are 180 seats as opposed to 177. I also think that your 'average' sectors per day are a wee bit out.
The genius of the Qantas set-up is given the information provided it is all but impossible to work out exactly what the hell is going on.
Now if we take 9 aircraft on average doing 6 sectors a day then that would be 54 sectors per day, therefore (54 x 180) x 365 = 3,547,800 seats available per year. Now 2648805/3547800 x 100% = about a 74% load factor. That to me is believable.
The genius of the Qantas set-up is given the information provided it is all but impossible to work out exactly what the hell is going on.
Now if we take 9 aircraft on average doing 6 sectors a day then that would be 54 sectors per day, therefore (54 x 180) x 365 = 3,547,800 seats available per year. Now 2648805/3547800 x 100% = about a 74% load factor. That to me is believable.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
Ollie,
Those trans Tasman passengers are accounted for in the BITRE figures. There are only 5 aircraft that currently do the domestic sectors in NZ. It is easily checked.
CAR42ZE
Point taken regarding where the figures are collected from, however.. this question was asked of Qantas two years ago by a respected journalist. The answer never came back. Qantas also confirmed that the ONLY source of passengers for Jetstar International that is not taken into account by the BITRE figures is NZ domestic passengers.
The fact remains that there is a large unexplained hole in Jetstars figures.
Ollie's point about the 180 passengers instead of 177 makes the number of available NZ Domestic seats now approx 2690000 against the inferred claim of passengers carried in NZ of approx 2690000.
The claimed load factor means nothing. I suspect that the JQ figures are being artificially padded simply because the opaque NZ system makes it possible to do so.
Jetstar NZ has 9 aircraft, granted some are doing the Trans Tasman services but these still come under 'International'
CAR42ZE
Point taken regarding where the figures are collected from, however.. this question was asked of Qantas two years ago by a respected journalist. The answer never came back. Qantas also confirmed that the ONLY source of passengers for Jetstar International that is not taken into account by the BITRE figures is NZ domestic passengers.
The fact remains that there is a large unexplained hole in Jetstars figures.
Ollie's point about the 180 passengers instead of 177 makes the number of available NZ Domestic seats now approx 2690000 against the inferred claim of passengers carried in NZ of approx 2690000.
The claimed load factor means nothing. I suspect that the JQ figures are being artificially padded simply because the opaque NZ system makes it possible to do so.
Qantas are deliberately obtuse in their performance stats regarding Jetstar NZ as well as Jetconnect. It never clearly states where they categorise these businesses in their reporting even though they are clearly different segmented businesses in the same way that Jetstar Asia is.
I assume they do this so they can claim to be making headway against NZ in the New Zealand domestic market without ever having to refer to a repeated series to back it up. Anecdotally JQ NZ is break even, at best, attracting the bottom feeder part of the market with virtually zero impact in the business market. No wonder NZ is doing so well. It has a virtual domestic monopoly similar to what QF had back in 2002.
I assume they do this so they can claim to be making headway against NZ in the New Zealand domestic market without ever having to refer to a repeated series to back it up. Anecdotally JQ NZ is break even, at best, attracting the bottom feeder part of the market with virtually zero impact in the business market. No wonder NZ is doing so well. It has a virtual domestic monopoly similar to what QF had back in 2002.
The comment of interest to me was from Jetstar. They made the point that the CC was a casual employee, (aren't they all??) and implying that a full time employee would not have made the same comment??
