QF B789 delivery flight details

[C441]

I can understand why various 'mediazzi' would have been onboard, but I don't get why the uniform designer and the head chef, among others, needed a week's free all-inclusive holiday at Qantas's expense.

[ruprecht]

Originally Posted by C441

I can understand why various 'mediazzi' would have been onboard, but I don't get why the uniform designer and the head chef, among others, needed a week's free all-inclusive holiday at Qantas's expense.

Because the QF 787 is a GAME CHANGER and they are all GAME CHANGERS in their field...

[V-Jet]

Wee-man's ego. He's splashin' the cash. Shareholders cash of course, certainly not his. And of course the 51% shareholding Australian Govt and therefore tax payer, but gee - who's counting? Certainly not the analysts and journo's who should be! I actually don't blame him for this, but he's spent their money building Lounges and handing out freebies (the one thing he IS good at) to ensure no one questions him. If you are demonstrably not competent and have few choices - why wouldn't you rape the place for your own benefit and while you can still engineer a profit - let the good times roll! Worked SO well for Lehmans, Bond, Skase etc.

Lovely to see Capt Norman in the LHS of the 787 in the Oz on the weekend, but I do NOT like the company she keeps!

If the 'new' logo is so vile you need two on the one aircraft - why did you spend millions to change it? Except from the perspective of a little man's ego of course...

[Rated De]

Wee-man's ego. He's splashin' the cash. Shareholders cash of course, certainly not his.

The company with which I keep are rather amused by Mr. Joyce's antics. Kudos for him in having the audacity to claim 'record profits' were all his doing flying the same aircraft on the same contracts responsible for the 'terminal decline' of Qantas International

Because the QF 787 is a GAME CHANGER and they are all GAME CHANGERS in their field...

BTW, if it's line number 615, it's not quite 614 already in service - the first five were not delivered (the first three were gifted to museums, not sure what happened to 4 and 5). A better comparison might be that it's the 254th 787-9 delivered.

So in other words the aircraft is not new? 550 flying already is that the point? It is old enough to have displays in a museum? For the game was already changed and Qantas just noticed?

[V-Jet]

Kudos for him in having the audacity to claim 'record profits' were all his doing flying the same aircraft on the same contracts responsible for the 'terminal decline' of Qantas International

I've NEVER seen that put so succinctly. Double like with pike... And thanks!

PS: The game changed in 1994 (? I think it was?) when the 777 first flew. That was when the game changed. Long before Wee-Man even needed a step to get to the urinal in other words...

[Ken Borough]

How many of the travelling junketeers spent time in the Y class cabin which is where most of their audiences and readers will sit? How may have reported on the Y class seats?

BTW, ABC Media Watch tonight did a great job ridiculing the junketeers and the free publicity they were able to generate.

[C441]

BTW, ABC Media Watch tonight did a great job ridiculing the junketeers and the free publicity they were able to generate.

I don't think Paul Barry will be getting a Chairman's Lounge invite anytime soon!
Media Watch

[Beer Baron]

He's splashin' the cash. Shareholders cash of course, certainly not his. And of course the 51% shareholding Australian Govt and therefore tax payer.

Did I miss something? Has the government bought 51% of Qantas?

[V-Jet]

No, you didn't miss anything! 51% Australian owned.

[On eyre]

But that's not what you wrote in post 44 V-jet.

[IsDon]

Originally Posted by Clearedtoreenter

Cant wait to get sat down in one of those for 18 hours.

Then don't.

Buy a premium economy seat.

Or don't go.

Or go with someone else.

I'm sick of these precious whingers and their over-developed sense of entitlement.

Everyone wants to fly business class for nothing.

Reality check!

[Oriana]

Does it really have the legs to make it non-techstop??

[Rated De]

A quick look at the Annual Report for FY17 shows the top three shareholders to now be nominee companies..

HSBC Custody Nominees (Australia) Limited 727,130,598 40.21%
J P Morgan Nominees Australia Limited 324,168,744 17.93%
Citicorp Nominees Pty Limited 166,243,299 9.19%




Obviously this may have changed, but have not checked the changes to substantial shareholdings filed with ASX)


Not an Australian company among them, although technically a nominee company allows a foreign entity to hold assets embargoed (like control of Qantas shares as prescribed in the QSA)
Whatever happened to Andrew Sisson and BEM............

[RodH]

Worlds greatest aviation expert was on board.

What a great relief it was to see that the worlds greatest authority on Aviation, GT was on Board.
There's no doubt we will soon see an accurate and comprehensive report totally unbiased by all of the booze and food on board .
How good is it just to know he was on board and now the world will see all there is to know about the QF B787 with great accuracy and maybe a few mods suggested.
I don't know how on earth QF managed to persuade such an authority to go on the flight!!

[Turnleft080]

They should paint one of these jets in the Vjet scheme, it would look brilliant.

[CurtainTwitcher]

Rated De, my reading is the nominee holding companies can also function to hold the shares for their or other investment funds, both domestic and international. It does not necessarily mean the QSA has been breached as there are many domestic funds that will be required to hold QAN shares as part of either a passive index tracking fund or active funds that seek exposure to the transport sector thus requiring QAN as it is a large stock within that market segment. There may even be over-the-counter derivative agreements between the nominee holding Co and the funds that enable the funds to simply gain exposure to price changes without actually purchasing the shares to minimise transaction costs and taxes.

The real concern is the voting rights attached to the shares who gets to exercise those? Thus a nominee fund holding the shares may scoop up all the voting rights and thus exercise direct control without having to purchase a share on their own account. Pretty clever way to exercise large economic control over the large listed companies, and a significant portion of an economy. Just musing out aloud...

edit:
Computershare have a good document on transparency of share ownership and nominee accounts: TRANSPARENCY OF SHARE OWNERSHIP, SHAREHOLDER COMMUNICATIONS AND VOTING IN GLOBAL CAPITAL MARKETS
I'm making my way through some of the document, but this passage was interesting, Section 2.1, page 4

For shares that are held in nominee by an intermediary on behalf of one or more beneficial owners, section 672A of the Corporations Act Corporations Act 2001 entitles listed companies to request the nominee disclose the relevant interest of the underlying investor(s). The issuer can request such a disclosure at any time. A person who contravenes disclosure rules is liable to compensate a person for any loss or damage the person suffers because of the contravention, unless they can prove inadvertence, or mistake or that they were not aware of a relevant fact or occurrence4 . The issuer is required to maintain a register of the resulting disclosed interests, which is open for public inspection5

In essence, full transparency of the beneficial owner is required, and this would be used to determine foreign ownership, and the cap that you express concern with.

[morno]

Premium Economy seat review. Doesn’t look that good.

https://www.ausbt.com.au/review-qantas-boeing-787-9-dreamliner-premium-economy-seat

[V-Jet]

Originally Posted by On eyre

But that's not what you wrote in post 44 V-jet.

No - you're right. This rolling disaster of disgraceful mismanagement annoys me to the point of distraction. 51% of Qf 'owners' are AU taxpayers - likely YOU. Have a Super account domiciled in AU? Guess who you're therefore likely supporting???

Either I could say I should have a job in QF management - except there would be a few home truths spake that would likely make me inadmissible for the role, or these questions need to be asked. Of everyone.

I don't blame Qf for making the most of the 787. What pisses me off to distraction is that Wee-Man is clearly personally gloating and using YOUR money to big - note himself. And he wasn't underpaid before he started.

[V-Jet]

CT and DE - just read your latest. Makes me angrier than I was when wrote the post above.

These guys haven't been even attempting to run a serious airline, they have been into financial alchemy for their own benefit utilising a vehicle that an entire nation once held dear...

[V-Jet]

Originally Posted by Turnleft080

They should paint one of these jets in the Vjet scheme, it would look brilliant.

You mean - the way it should have been? And not have spent tens of millions (at least) in splashing one's ego around the globe?? The new logo(s) aren't Qf, they are straight Alan. He wanted his moniker on the door and around the world. Again - at what cost??