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

JT leaving Virgin this week

Old 12th Jul 2017, 10:31
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Brisvegas
Posts: 2,723
Hilarious that the E-jets haven't even left yet and the company know they have committed one hell of a balls up getting rid of them.
How or who has determined it is a "balls up"?
Icarus2001 is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2017, 11:02
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 298
How or who has determined it is a "balls up"?
Well for a start VA assumed Alliance were going to be able to take up the slack, but Alliance have limited capacity as well. Having old airframes may save dollars on charter, but getting them to do RPT and stay serviceable is another proposition.

Secondly, the exodus of crew from the ATR has had a bigger impact then VA's decision to reduce the fleet to 6 frames. So what aircraft could have filled the gap and saved the day....oh yeah, right....the one were getting rid of...paying tens of millions to pay of leases that didn't expire for years.
Falling Leaf is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2017, 11:15
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: deepest darkest recess of your mind
Posts: 997
No, the original assumption was that Alliance could do some, and the 737 would pick up the rest. That fell in the shit when "someone" pointed out that there wasn't nearly enough crew on the 737 to do that, and what crew they had was almost out of hours in any case. Then there was simply too much for Alliance to cover anyway. Lack of planning/appreciation of reality amongst many other things.
porch monkey is offline  
Old 12th Jul 2017, 13:10
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 216
Amateur hour...
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2017, 00:08
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 558
Queensland didn't need JT, maybe Virgin don't either!
C441 is offline  
Old 13th Jul 2017, 02:21
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 568
Originally Posted by C441 View Post
Queensland didn't need JT, maybe Virgin don't either!
No. They need a bloody miracle!
The Bullwinkle is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2017, 00:44
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 138
The delicious irony of a company who's main recruitment focus is cadets sacking a manager due lack of experience is so delightful!
206greaser is offline  
Old 15th Jul 2017, 02:59
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 298
Not to mention the recruitment process for senior managers. I mean the CEO must have interviewed and approved JT as it was such a senior appointment. Just more evidence of either egomaniacal behaviour or a stunning lack of judgement.
Falling Leaf is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2017, 04:52
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 566
Originally Posted by Falling Leaf View Post
Not to mention the recruitment process for senior managers. I mean the CEO must have interviewed and approved JT as it was such a senior appointment. Just more evidence of either egomaniacal behaviour or a stunning lack of judgement.
The word from within has and always has been that anybody who manages to get employed with very few exceptions who know what they're doing or have any experience are quickly gotten rid of - from the stories that go around, it's not just apocryphal it happens continuously and those that survive are, many of them, stunningly incompetent. It's the very definition of a dysfunctional organisation that continually promotes and keeps stupid people but gets rid of those with any talent. You just have to look at the good people that have been brought in (by a miracle) and then gotten rid of fairly quickly. It's a complete joke and not something as an investor that I'd ever put money into.
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2017, 06:37
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Bran Castle
Posts: 183
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective View Post
The word from within has and always has been that anybody who manages to get employed with very few exceptions who know what they're doing or have any experience are quickly gotten rid of - from the stories that go around, it's not just apocryphal it happens continuously and those that survive are, many of them, stunningly incompetent. It's the very definition of a dysfunctional organisation that continually promotes and keeps stupid people but gets rid of those with any talent. You just have to look at the good people that have been brought in (by a miracle) and then gotten rid of fairly quickly. It's a complete joke and not something as an investor that I'd ever put money into.
It's just a shame for the investors that already have.... about 40c a share ago.
romeocharlie is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2017, 07:12
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 576
It's the very definition of a dysfunctional organisation that continually promotes and keeps stupid people but gets rid of those with any talent.
Actually, a very famous author, Cyril Northcote Parkinson would disagree. You should track down his book Parkinson's Law. A highly abridge version HERE, detailing precisely why you always want incompetent subordinate(s).

He has studied the history of boards and cabinets back to the 12 century and this short book is a real treat,In short, a study in organisational dysfunction although no longer politically correct, with the final chapter containing such quotes as:
To this the inscrutable Chinese replied, “Only coolie can become millionaire. Only coolie can look like coolie. Only velly lich man can afford to look lich.”
CurtainTwitcher is online now  
Old 17th Jul 2017, 09:39
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 216
CT....perfect explanation of 21st Century government..
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 17th Jul 2017, 11:05
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Sydney
Posts: 10
Move to rex on the cards????
Airlinelover is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2017, 06:23
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 566
Originally Posted by porch monkey View Post
No, the original assumption was that Alliance could do some, and the 737 would pick up the rest. That fell in the shit when "someone" pointed out that there wasn't nearly enough crew on the 737 to do that, and what crew they had was almost out of hours in any case. Then there was simply too much for Alliance to cover anyway. Lack of planning/appreciation of reality amongst many other things.
I think the point is, how does an organisation make these decisions THEN discover they don't have enough pilots/crew???

This is why it's one balls up after another because no one appears to make any attempt to dot their 'i's or cross their 't's... it's an 'end of your nose' and 'thought bubble' planning process... it reminds me of planning in a similar way to the way the drivers of dodgem cars at a circus plan their trip ahead... set off in a random direction then navigate by changing direction when they hit something.

There is simply too much evidence of this being the case at this point... Bali, 737, E190, VARA purchase/rebrand then sell half the fleet, end up paying good money to another operator to operate services when you had the aircraft to do it in the first place.

Been around the industry for 30+ years and I've never seen this level of ineptitude.

It's just very sad for the employees mostly who will maybe (hopefully not) end up at Centrelink and pay the price for this stupidity while those who were it's architects will jump out with a golden parachute and turn up elsewhere shortly afterward.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect seems to apply.

Last edited by AerialPerspective; 18th Jul 2017 at 06:26. Reason: add
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2017, 06:42
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 566
Originally Posted by CurtainTwitcher View Post
Actually, a very famous author, Cyril Northcote Parkinson would disagree. You should track down his book Parkinson's Law. A highly abridge version HERE, detailing precisely why you always want incompetent subordinate(s).

He has studied the history of boards and cabinets back to the 12 century and this short book is a real treat,In short, a study in organisational dysfunction although no longer politically correct, with the final chapter containing such quotes as:
I haven't read the whole thing but I'm not sure I totally agree with him.

I do however see parallels in the current political climate... ballooning expenditure on surveillance, turning the country potentially into a police state (and frighteningly with that idiot from QLD in charge who obviously considers due process simply a nuisance) in inverse proportion to the threat.

Spending billions on agencies and super ministries for a problem that has been responsible for barely 5 deaths in the last 5 years in Australia, compared with thousands due to domestic violence. Where are the 70 pieces of legislation to combat that deadly threat... doesn't play well on the six o'clock news nor is it as good for manipulating people's fears.

So, I accept he had some good points. Not sure it applies here though in an airline environment where expertise is required to make sure the big metal objects stay in the air and don't make unscheduled return to the ground.
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2017, 06:45
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: deepest darkest recess of your mind
Posts: 997
Actually, it's pretty simple. HR and Commercial run the place. And most of them don't actually realise that they are working for an AIRLINE. Flight Ops finds out later wtf is going on. Despite the best efforts of some, who really are trying to fix the situation.
porch monkey is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2017, 08:10
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 566
Originally Posted by porch monkey View Post
Actually, it's pretty simple. HR and Commercial run the place. And most of them don't actually realise that they are working for an AIRLINE. Flight Ops finds out later wtf is going on. Despite the best efforts of some, who really are trying to fix the situation.
True... and it's an HR lot that won't sack anyone ever... you'd practically have to deal drugs or kill someone and be bodily dragged off by the Police and charged before they'd sack anyone... and things of this nature are dragged on for months and months and months with no regard for the affect on the people caught in the middle.

I doubt if you polled HR they would struggle to articulate what business the company is actually in... it's just a constant dribble of weasel words and putting off hard decisions by telling people to reach out to this person or that or that it will be dealt with 'moving forward'.
AerialPerspective is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2017, 08:17
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: deepest darkest recess of your mind
Posts: 997
Except if you belong to flight ops..........
porch monkey is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2017, 08:46
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 568
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective View Post
True... and it's an HR lot that won't sack anyone ever... you'd practically have to deal drugs or kill someone and be bodily dragged off by the Police and charged before they'd sack anyone... and things of this nature are dragged on for months and months and months with no regard for the affect on the people caught in the middle.

I doubt if you polled HR they would struggle to articulate what business the company is actually in... it's just a constant dribble of weasel words and putting off hard decisions by telling people to reach out to this person or that or that it will be dealt with 'moving forward'.
Unless you're a Pilot, then it's shoot first and ask questions later!
The Bullwinkle is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2017, 13:05
  #100 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: asdfgh
Posts: 50
So, some context;

JT and JB have been life long friends; even when JB was at QF, he would use JT's consulting firm for many a large project.

When JB was 'overlooked' for the CEO gig at QF (& the chip on the shoulder started) he asked JT for work. JT found him a job on the board of a thai airline (sorry forgot the name).

JT had done much work with Virgin Atlantic and knew Branson.

When the Virgin CEO head-hunt was on, JT's firm was involved in the process; naturally with his connections, JT recommended his friend JB.

Fast-forward a few years to a point where Virgin was needing success planning for a new CEO. JB tapped JT again for some help in finding a new COO etc. And the end of the search it became clear that no standout candidate existed that would appease the multitude of investors. After JT presented this information to the board, they and JB pleaded with JT to take the job.

JT was very reluctant, it was a significant pay cut to come back to OZ plus his wife and children were all with him in Boston. JT saw the potential in Virgin as an industry turn-around icon (also merger king [united/continental, delta/north-west & american/us-airways - all having been run out of LEK's offices in Boston]). He also had the respect of Air NZ, Etihad, Singapore airlines etc.

On the "going away" party from LEK - his old team was surprised to find out that JT's wife was only told the night of. So off JT came, alone, to setup shop in Sydney for the past 6 months. All crew will attest that he was committed to bring back the work-life balance in rostering and to improve the operational bottom line of the airline. He was shocked at how poorly it was being run. So began the process of data analytics to track and measure this poor performance. This started to reflect poorly on JB as the pattern showed that under his leadership the airline was operating at it's worst since inception (fiscally, staff engagement and also operational complexity [i.e. Ansett]).

Things were afoot - Virgin's order for the A330NEO; potential A330 ops to LAX to supplement the 777 until more 777s could be financed; the introduction of economy x; the removal of the proposed A330 flights to AUH; the removal of the E-Jets due to extraordinary high lease prices (think more than a B738 - talking about lease prices, Virgin got the A330s when the 787s were delayed from boeing (worldwide) and as a consequence the leases on these machines are just insanely high.); the move in to Hong Kong & his project to introduce a lay-flat business class product on the 737 for perth flights. There was much more coming including a totally new rostering and bidding system for crew as he discovered just how poorly the over-priced current system does the job.

Now- I don't exactly what was said and what was the trigger but I do know that after all of this history, JB "the narcissist" snapped and fired JT on the spot. This was a week after JT bought a place in Sydney and his family had started the move to SYD (university's etc).

My take; this is terrible for my friends and colleagues at Virgin.

If you didn't respect JB before this, there is no way you will after this information.

I think we all miss the days of the hanger parties and bomber jackets.
rexxxxxy 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.