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

JT leaving Virgin this week

Old 30th Jun 2017, 08:15
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 43
Why isn't this worthy of an announcement to the stock market? (a few clicks around the ASX and VA media websites make no mention of it) Seems pretty big news to me
737pnf is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 09:15
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 20
Then QF would have a monopoly. That will be $450 MEL-SYD return thank you.
Turnleft080 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 11:20
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Sydney
Posts: 56
Originally Posted by Turnleft080 View Post
Then QF would have a monopoly. That will be $450 MEL-SYD return thank you.
Its already $450 Syd-mel return
downdata is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 12:04
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 102
Originally Posted by downdata View Post
Its already $450 Syd-mel return
And that's why we are talking about Virgin and not Qantas. Can't make money selling it for $200 return.
Merlins Magic is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 13:39
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 243
As the man said "you can't sell $10 tickets for $9 and stay in business!"
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 20:46
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: AKL
Age: 29
Posts: 182
Originally Posted by downdata View Post
Its already $450 Syd-mel return

Yet NZ can sell AKL-SYD for $299NZD return! Or AKL-WLG from $19OW, which isn't much shorter than SYD-MEL.
cavemanzk is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 21:03
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 600
Originally Posted by chuboy View Post
"It's understood Virgin management decided he was not the right fit for the role."
Perhaps he wasn't a complete incompetent imbecile. That would constitute not being the 'right fit'.
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 21:18
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 600
Sorry to be a wet blanket cavemanzk but (btw 'their' not 'there', break up the airline's not 'airlines'... "a reasonable amount..." not "an reasonable amount..." etc).

1. NZ don't need an AOC as they have an NZ AOC with ANZA Privileges.
2. Qantas wouldn't want most of VA's 738s, they don't have magic carpet and they don't have other options QF would want and it's not that easy to take over a lease, easier to get own additional aircraft.
3. NZ has no interest in operating mainline in Australia but would be more likely to switch their alliance/interlining to QF as they did post AN collapse - they did take on some AN staff but on their terms as new employees and usually in entry level roles - e.g. airports (in reality they move most of their disrupted pax to QF now anyway because getting VA to play by industry rules and accept industry standard paperwork is almost impossible - strange for a company losing money, you'd think they'd take any opportunity to take on extra income but no, they think they're so good they can dictate to the rest of the industry.
4. NZ might 'buy' the 777 at a bargain basement price but I don't think they'd rush to take the crew.
5. TT A320s not an attractive proposition for NZ nor are the A330s for QF.

Last edited by AerialPerspective; 30th Jun 2017 at 21:26. Reason: add
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 21:30
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 600
Originally Posted by cavemanzk View Post
Yet NZ can sell AKL-SYD for $299NZD return! Or AKL-WLG from $19OW, which isn't much shorter than SYD-MEL.
They don't sell every seat for that, only a selected few just as they don't sell the other end of the spectrum for the higher price only. Don't compare AKL-SYD to to MEL-SYD, there are a whole range of factors that make that price across the Tasman possible compared to a short domestic flight. It's comparing apples and oranges.
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 21:36
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 600
What does a person have to do...

My overriding question on this is that what exactly does a CEO have to do to lose his job... does he have to be indicted for murder or something???

Clearly taking what was a profitable, but not remarkably profitable, company, spending billions of $$$ that it didn't have, seeing the share price descend deeper than the Marianas Trench, operating a revolving door of senior personnel where anyone with talent doesn't last long and proving singularly incapable of making a profit isn't enough???

On top of this though, look at the buying of other airlines, then emaciating theirs and your own fleet, then paying someone else to do the flying... seriously???

Even with the most generous of allowances being made, how has this administration not been completely incompetent in every respect???
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 22:37
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: aus
Posts: 49
Like cockroaches - they'd survive a nuclear holocaust these days
titan uranus is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 23:15
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: melbourne
Posts: 242
Aerial perspective makes a very good point. There have been some absolute clangers it would seem and talking to people I know in VA (as I don't work there) they feel like there is no direction from a strategic point of view. No CEO gets it right all the time but they should get at least 70% right to be in the role in the first place.
JT was seen by the Line drivers as approachable and energetic so with him being removed they are wondering what does all this mean. I don't think that VA is in any imminent financial trouble but there does need to be some direction as a company drifting does not become profitable by itself. It will be interesting to see what the Q4 results are and whether they are cash flow positive this year or is it once again being pushed to the next financial year. Interesting times.
coaldemon is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 23:43
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Gate_15L
Age: 46
Posts: 140
Isn't that the truth. Most CEOs in Australia last about 5 years tops. They have a vision, they execute, they have their exit strategy. JB doesn't. I don't think he has a exit strategy or any strategy. He is Captain Ahab after his white whale or in this case, his red kangaroo. This isn't business, its personal.

JB was a transformational CEO, now VA need a new CEO thats managerial. Someone who can innovate incrementally and compete by creating their own new niches, not by competing on someone elses. Economy X being a good example.

JB's strategy of mini me-ing VA into a Qantas is turning into a disaster. Abu Dhabi canned before going live with the A330, Tigerair Bali debacle, ATRs going. VARAs a mess. Why buy a charter outfit only to have it implode, buy it, then hire another outfit to do the original outfits regional flying?! Who makes this $h!t up?!

Costs have ballooned. QF have reduced their costs, VA's have increased. So much so there's not much or enough in it to make a difference.

Not to mention VA's consistent attempts to pi$$ off their most loyal and frequent flyers with a patchy confusing network of international lounge access, reduced rewards and upgrades, crap snacks masquerading as a free meal, reduced earn rates and refusal to upgrade anyone to J under any circumstances. What the hell does flying J class around empty actually achieve?!

And wheres the vision from here? A patchy international network with no coherency. It's route map looks like something a 3 year old threw up on and then drew on.

Yeah my opinion only. But must be something in it because I think the market agrees, a shareprice thats gone from 30c to 16c in 6 months. Good one JB, that takes talent.
Gate_15L is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2017, 23:49
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: at home
Posts: 152
The astonishing thing about JB is his ability to blame everyone else for his problems and get away with it. Either way it doesn't cut it. Either he hasn't had an original idea of his own since he's been here and has relied on his executive team to drive the airline, or else he's consistently employed the wrong people. Either way you cut it the buck stops with him. The only answer that seems feasible is that he has enough of the board in his pocket to protect himself from the likes of Luxton and the other shareholders.
virginexcess is offline  
Old 1st Jul 2017, 00:14
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 600
Originally Posted by virginexcess View Post
The astonishing thing about JB is his ability to blame everyone else for his problems and get away with it. Either way it doesn't cut it. Either he hasn't had an original idea of his own since he's been here and has relied on his executive team to drive the airline, or else he's consistently employed the wrong people. Either way you cut it the buck stops with him. The only answer that seems feasible is that he has enough of the board in his pocket to protect himself from the likes of Luxton and the other shareholders.
I know someone who worked with him back in the 70s. Nothing remarkable to say, did not stand out as a leader or an innovator, was a typical 'sales person' good talker and even then not as good as the best. His career has been marked by getting into a niche, being in the right place at the right time and walking away taking credit for good performance at QF that was really just the rest of the airline operating around him.

This gave him a 'reputation' that appears not to be deserved. Add to this the distinct lack in the media of any substance at all these days and a bent toward sensationalism and beatifying people as 'messiahs' who are really just quietly spoken people in expensive suits that seem to 'look the part' but have zero substance.

Snake oil salesman is all he is... like so many in those upper-echelons but others at least seem to be able to produce something or least, not stuff it up.

Compare that to the high esteem and respect I hear people speak of Brett Godfrey and you wonder whether Godfrey short-sold himself by stepping aside to allow someone else to do the transformation job.

This comes down to something I've always hated, people who say "the clothes make the man" with respect to people like this bloke.

To paraphrase Robin Williams in Dead Poets Society "Excrement!!!" U.S. Grant and R.E. Lee at Appomatox Court House... Grant had overrun Lee and defeated him comprehensively and strategically overwhelmed him. The loser being Lee turns up with a gleaming sword, perfectly manicured horse, spotless uniform and not a hair out of place. By contrast, Grant turns up with mud and horse sh-t on his shoes, disheveled a with a Private's jacket on because he couldn't find his, messed hair and a half smoked cigar.

Question - who won the war... who was the better leader when it counted the most. Lee's uniforms and deportment counted for zip when the rubber hit the road. Same with people like JB... like a mudguard, all shiny on top with not much more than rubbish underneath, certainly no substance it would seem.
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 1st Jul 2017, 01:43
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 606
Excellent perspective AP. Your post reminds me very much of a recent short essay by the belligerent Nassim Taleb: Surgeons Should Not Look Like Surgeons

Unfortunately we live in the century of the "good idea", we have been trained that appearance, presentation and a convincing narrative equals future success. Reality eventually catches up with these types. The only difference is that JB's former rival appears to have recognised the errors of his convincing narrative (Asian experiment) and has backtracked out in a face saving manner. JB, unfortunately didn't have the grip on the domestic market profit, nor a much broader profit seeking shareholder base to enable the unpicking of clearly disastrous set of strategies.

The real world eventually catches up with empty suits & show pony's. However, as Taleb would say, they don't have any real skin in the game.

Originally Posted by Nassim Taleb: Surgeons Should Not Look Like Surgeons

Looking the Part

Say you had the choice between two surgeons of similar rank in the same department in some hospital. The first is highly refined in appearance; he wears silver-rimmed glasses, has a thin built, delicate hands, a measured speech, and elegant gestures. His hair is silver and well combed. He is the person you would put in a movie if you needed to impersonate a surgeon. His office prominently boasts an Ivy League diploma, both for his undergraduate and medical schools.

The second one looks like a butcher; he is overweight, with large hands, uncouth speech and an unkempt appearance. His shirt is dangling from the back. No known tailor in the East Coast of the U.S. is capable of making his shirt button at the neck. He speaks unapologetically with a strong New Yawk accent, as if he wasn’t aware of it. He even has a gold tooth showing when he opens his mouth. The absence of diploma on the wall hints at the lack of pride in his education: he perhaps went to some local college. In a movie, you would expect him to impersonate a retired bodyguard for a junior congressman, or a third-generation cook in a New Jersey cafeteria.

Now if I had to pick, I would overcome my suckerproneness and take the butcher any minute. Even more: I would seek the butcher as a third option if my choice was between two doctors who looked like doctors. Why? Simply the one who doesn’t look the part, conditional of having made a (sort of) successful career in his profession, had to have much to overcome in terms of perception. And if we are lucky enough to have people who do not look the part, it is thanks to the presence of some skin in the game, the contact with reality that filters out incompetence, as reality is blind to looks.
CurtainTwitcher is offline  
Old 1st Jul 2017, 02:01
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 600
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher View Post
Excellent perspective AP. Your post reminds me very much of a recent short essay by the belligerent Nassim Taleb: Surgeons Should Not Look Like Surgeons

Unfortunately we live in the century of the "good idea", we have been trained that appearance, presentation and a convincing narrative equals future success. Reality eventually catches up with these types. The only difference is that JB's former rival appears to have recognised the errors of his convincing narrative (Asian experiment) and has backtracked out in a face saving manner. JB, unfortunately didn't have the grip on the domestic market profit, nor a much broader profit seeking shareholder base to enable the unpicking of clearly disastrous set of strategies.

The real world eventually catches up with empty suits & show pony's. However, as Taleb would say, they don't have any real skin in the game.
Thanks CurtainTwitcher... as the person I know would refer to these types ... "time servers".

Your article excerpt is very interesting.

The bit about Butchers makes me laugh because the first thing it made me think of was the man featured in the statue mounted on a horse at the Palace of Westminster... one Oliver Cromwell.

Uncouth, rough farmer type but probably one of the most significant and effective leaders in the history of the United Kingdom and the one who's actions had the longest term effect (putting aside the obvious outdated religious and social views he held in some respects).

He was allegedly offered the Crown at one point and his response when he turned it down and they asked "What shall we do with it" was "Worthless trinket, give it to a whore for the price of her bed" (apologies for the clearly sexist and outdated reference but it shows he knew what was what and didn't need the fine clothes and silky speech).

I think it's a combination of what you say and to an extent, the Dunning-Kruger Effect where incompetents rise to high levels because they appear confident. They appear confident because the very fact of being incompetent means they are incapable of recognizing what competent is and thus have an inflated view of the abilities, hence the apparent confidence. These sort of people in my experience also spend a lot of time 'looking the part'.
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 1st Jul 2017, 04:14
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Doomagee
Age: 6
Posts: 647
Its a pretty early exit by JT. Something must have happened, something doesn't add up. I guess there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes. He presented as like a very likeable person thats for sure.

He had a percentage of the pilots listening with the promise of space available business class and business class meals. That in itself whilst nice, doesn't mean he was the man to take the reigns.

It is puzzling to say the least and the turnover of upper management is a bit destabilising and stressful for some of the staff. One minute you are tuned into a mantra from a person the next they're off. Happened now on so many occasions I've forgotten the names.

Hope it works out, about around 10,000 people depending on it! I'll keep bringing my own food in the meantime!
Berealgetreal is offline  
Old 1st Jul 2017, 06:06
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 53
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective View Post
My overriding question on this is that what exactly does a CEO have to do to lose his job... does he have to be indicted for murder or something???

Clearly taking what was a profitable, but not remarkably profitable, company, spending billions of $$$ that it didn't have, seeing the share price descend deeper than the Marianas Trench, operating a revolving door of senior personnel where anyone with talent doesn't last long and proving singularly incapable of making a profit isn't enough???

On top of this though, look at the buying of other airlines, then emaciating theirs and your own fleet, then paying someone else to do the flying... seriously???

Even with the most generous of allowances being made, how has this administration not been completely incompetent in every respect???
Couldn't agree more. It baffles me to understand how a company like Virgin is bleeding money yet the CEO hasn't been fired.

Are they simply waiting for him to bankrupt the company?
777Nine is offline  
Old 1st Jul 2017, 06:21
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bran Castle
Posts: 183
Originally Posted by 27/09 View Post
Hmmmm, I don't know about JT but I'm pretty sure Mr Luxton's apparent success is largely due to things his predecessor put in place and the drop in fuel prices. I don't think there's any way you could stretch it to say he showed anyone up or Air New Zealand's current financial returns can be directly attributed to CL.

Anyhow, back to the topic of the thread.
Actually I think you'll find Chris Luxon (note the spelling, there is no 'T') in some capacity has been responsible for the profitability and increase in share price.

"Over the past 3 years the cost per available seat kilometre has reduced by 7 per cent while most recently the available seats per kilometre and revenue per kilometre have grown 16 and 17 per cent respectively in the first half of this financial year. Despite the yield being down 4.6 per cent, the increase in capacity, passenger demand and cargo revenue up 21 percent, along with the improved yield of 1.6 per cent on freight and reduction in fuel prices have driven net profit after taxation to a record first half high of $338 million. This amount is increased 154 per cent on the previous year where full year results were $327 million after taxation.

Since Christopher Luxon was appointed Chief Executive Officer in January 2013, previously the Group General Manager International Airline May 2011, the full year results have grown from $75 million in 2011 to an expected full year result in 2016 exceeding $800 million. With an operating cash flow of $541 million, and net cash on hand of $1.4 billion up 6% from June 2015, the airline not only received an upgraded investment grade rating of Baa2 from Moody’s in FY2015, but was able to provide equitable dividends of 10 cents per share to investors, only reinforcing the stability of the airline's financial position."

At least the ANZ board along with QF and any other airline with half a brain managed to hedge fuel correctly in the last couple of years. JB's book 'Game Changer' is aptly titled - playing checkers, not chess...
romeocharlie is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.