So you need a new fleet Leigh?
Would appear the long term outlook for the big Q is not very rosy. Years of not spending money is starting to have an affect on daily ops.
Will be interesting to see how the CEO and the Board handle this deteriorating position.
Will be interesting to see how the CEO and the Board handle this deteriorating position.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Canberra
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was only reviewing this article the other day. All roads lead to 2020.
Good luck to the poor bastard that inherits the mother of all **** sandwiches.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...15-p4z0gd.html
Good luck to the poor bastard that inherits the mother of all **** sandwiches.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...15-p4z0gd.html
A 330 stuck in Singapore Wednesday night returned home this morning, a battery was so drained on it they couldn’t recharge it then it turned out there wasn’t a spare available in Singapore and one had to be flown up from Sydney.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was only reviewing this article the other day. All roads lead to 2020.
Good luck to the poor bastard that inherits the mother of all **** sandwiches.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...15-p4z0gd.html
Good luck to the poor bastard that inherits the mother of all **** sandwiches.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/comp...15-p4z0gd.html
It is well known in the broader industry that the Qantas footprint and withdrawal was an indication that the business focus shifted. The growth of JQ at the expense of the parent is a dangerous knife to balance. Buoyed by surplus cash flow and cheap fuel, on first examination, which is all the MSM bother with, it appeared ok.
That the segment accounts hide the impact is one thing, but an airline of JQ's size flying the amount of ASK for such a small revenue return should concern investors.
Endless discussion of cost base aside, with the depreciation change accounted and the cheap fuel 'bonanza' buying time other airlines have taken advantage of the respite to re-equip.
That this management and board chose to to neglect long term strategic imperatives for short term personal gain is not new, but the gap is ever more obvious every day.
Even the bought and paid for ratings agencies acknowledge what this thread highlighted well before their analysts looked through the spin: Qantas fleet metrics are horrible.
Mr Goyder ought, given his experience with Bunnings UK, understand the there is perhaps a reason no airline has followed Qantas, scaling up an demand elastic model to the size that JQ is now.
With group revenues declining in real terms despite all the additional JQ capacity re-equipping Qantas is axiomatic.
Perhaps the circuit breaker is that a new set of eyes are needed, a set of eyes not focused on maintaining the hero narrative and the image in the mirror.
Qantas need a new fleet.
Qantas need a new management.
Qantas need a new fleet.
Last edited by Rated De; 11th Jan 2019 at 06:50.
RD: I have to take issue with this statement of yours as according to correspondence today it is factually incorrect.
S&P Global ratings is no longer including Qantas at Qantas’ request. So at least as far as S&P’s ratings are concerned, they are certainly no longer bought and paid for. Although, with both those 787’s to pay for as well as Napoleon’s salary, perhaps the issue was in the paying??
Even the bought and paid for ratings agencies acknowledge what this thread highlighted well before their analysts looked through the spin: Qantas fleet metrics are horrible.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RD: I have to take issue with this statement of yours as according to correspondence today it is factually incorrect.
S&P Global ratings is no longer including Qantas at Qantas’ request. So at least as far as S&P’s ratings are concerned, they are certainly no longer bought and paid for. Although, with both those 787’s to pay for as well as Napoleon’s salary, perhaps the issue was in the paying??
S&P Global ratings is no longer including Qantas at Qantas’ request. So at least as far as S&P’s ratings are concerned, they are certainly no longer bought and paid for. Although, with both those 787’s to pay for as well as Napoleon’s salary, perhaps the issue was in the paying??
That the ratings agencies are stock exchange listed entities and companies pay them to rate their equity the rating system is akin to stars on junior's drawing, sitting proudly on the family refrigerator.
That S&P are now calling the obvious and passing comment on poor and declining fleet metrics, given the 'fee for service' is suggestive that they believe that the term structure of the debt required for an eventual re-equipment puts even the current rating at risk.
Fair point though, Little Napoleon is expensive ballast.
Little Napoleon is expensive ballast.
Latest scuttle butt is that operation sunrise is not looking to flash. The only aircraft with a hope of doing it is the A350-1000, the 380 D checks are shaping up as a disaster and two will be grounded by years end. Don’t shoot the messenger please.
The only aircraft with a hope of doing it is the A350-1000
As as for the two A380s out, well there’s a problem. If only QF had a 4 engined jet that could cover for it for a little while...
Maybe the 747-800 , I think there are 5 pax versions with no home.
My source said that management are looking at grounding the first four A380’s - PERMANENTLY.
Last edited by Going Boeing; 17th Jan 2019 at 08:15.
