So you need a new fleet Leigh?
So the figures are even better then?? And have been since???
I think we are missing the point.... Alternatively Joyce is a genius...
Great we have a half dozen or so 787’s to take on the world with.
BA:Just at EBA 10 negotiation, poor expression.
I think we are missing the point.... Alternatively Joyce is a genius...
Great we have a half dozen or so 787’s to take on the world with.
BA:Just at EBA 10 negotiation, poor expression.
Last edited by V-Jet; 24th Feb 2019 at 11:42. Reason: Editing issues... Missing words?? Jumping pages??
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be constantly trying to trash talk Qantas’ business metrics while they are pumping out bumper profit after bumper profit in stark contrast to their only local competitor, makes it look like you don’t understand the business as well as you pretend to.
How about a little balanced research?
If domestic market dominance is the source of the profit, does it necessarily mean the international business 'transformed'?
What precise metrics changed to deliver the transformation of Qantas International in FY15?
- Fuel
- Depreciation
Now as the company witnesses higher fuel expense again as it did, prior to 'transformation' the international business chops $416 million in higher fuel expense.
That the domestic business is market dominant domestically is one thing but the QF International segment is exposed. Wonder why.
We can agree that Qantas need to make profit, but as others have pointed out the profit ought be sustainable. Selling terminals, head office and catering businesses, deferring aircraft expenditures all increase profit, at least in the short term. Paradoxically the legislative requirement also stipulates directors act in the long term interest of the company shareholders.
There is one further point that perhaps is lost. There is profit and there is profit.
A reduction in depreciation of $326 million isn't tangible, it is a book figure. That was the 'benefit' in FY15.
That fuel prices fell in FY15, meant less Operating Cost (fuel) amounting to $597 million.
As Little Napoleon correctly stated:
"Higher oil prices were a significant headwind and we moved quickly to recover as much of the fuel cost as we could," Mr Joyce said."That's easier to achieve in the domestic market than on long international routes where fuel is a much larger factor.
He also went on to say that he hopes that lower fuel prices will mean they will 'recover' that expense (transform) in 2H19.
Is that strategy or luck?
Last edited by Rated De; 25th Feb 2019 at 10:59.
‘QF cabin crew have just been given written notice the 744 will be around until 2025’
Sorry, I’m QF cabin crew and I can tell you that’s absolute rubbish. I have the latest message from our Union and I can tell that all 744’s will be retired by end of calender year 2020 with OEB the next to go in April.
Sorry, I’m QF cabin crew and I can tell you that’s absolute rubbish. I have the latest message from our Union and I can tell that all 744’s will be retired by end of calender year 2020 with OEB the next to go in April.
Replacing B744 and older 777-200.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right now the industry takes yet another step further in front and Little Napoleon sits resplendent in his Order of Australia as the highest paid Airline CEO in the hemisphere doing nothing.
Maybe they will commission a super secret team, hidden in the bowels of Fort Fumble to decide on a competition to award naming rights for the aircraft yet to be ordered, financed and delivered, that a previous super secret team decided ought be called Project Sunrise.
Elaine has been spruiking to all and sundry that an announcement regarding Chicago will be forthcoming sometime in March. It could go either way. Such a dynamic management. It’s more exciting watching paint dry but then he doesn’t care whilst raking in an obscene remuneration package. I also note that Qantas is trying to market themselves as a green airline by recycling waste whilst operating inefficient 4 engine guzzlers. Not much credibility but then again that won’t change the spin anytime soon. We need a new fleet and a CEO with vision.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ...second left, past the lights.
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Green Airline... recycling waste?
Don't make me laugh.
Air EnZed have been doing that for a decade now, showing up other operators, recycling light weight re-usable polymer utensils, plates, newspapers etc... back in 2009 they made 5 Mill profit from it for their whole network! Many other airlines have followed in various ways since the 2000's
QF - Great "step forward" but way overdue and pretty much seems you've been "shamed" into doing it.
No point commenting on the other points above as it's comprehensively covered in many of the replies.
Happy Landings
Don't make me laugh.
Air EnZed have been doing that for a decade now, showing up other operators, recycling light weight re-usable polymer utensils, plates, newspapers etc... back in 2009 they made 5 Mill profit from it for their whole network! Many other airlines have followed in various ways since the 2000's
QF - Great "step forward" but way overdue and pretty much seems you've been "shamed" into doing it.
No point commenting on the other points above as it's comprehensively covered in many of the replies.
Happy Landings
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many readers will be aware IATA industry members agreed to reduce CO2 emisison
- Reduce by 1.5% annually from 2009 to 2020.
- Carbon neutral from 2020.
- Reduction in net total CO2 of 50% by 2050.
That airline management have nicely 'captured' not the carbon, but the financial benefit is disappointing, after all it is their pilots generating the savings.
There remains an inescapable fact, we can't burn hydrocarbons forever and some airlines do much better than others...
Obviously fleet choices make the biggest impact.
It is pleasing to see Qantas tackle the waste, however the targeted reductions are difficult to achieve when you consume 64% more fuel per RPK on a Pacific crossing than your competitors.
Qantas need a new fleet
Last edited by Rated De; 4th Mar 2019 at 21:19.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ...second left, past the lights.
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Quite a basic look at it but "Nicholas" is on the right track.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite a basic look at it but "Nicholas" is on the right track.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Harbour Master Place
Posts: 662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I disagree. One of the overwhelming needs from my perspective is more seats SYD-MEL-BNE. It is where most of the "Groups"- I hate that word- profit comes from. Even at 15 minute intervals during peak, most of the B738's on SYD-MEL-BNE are full during this period. Yes, I know business travellers like their frequency- but it is inefficient. It is why the B767 worked so well, every 1/2 hour, occasionally every 1/4 hour on Mondays and Fridays , 250 seats...etc. QF would be much better served with A321 or 797. The early VX series 738 are now 18 years old. Judging on the limited perspective of the number of MEL's, they are starting to get tired. Knowing this lot, they won't order new a/c..they'll just keep buying shares.
Sick of hearing them talking about International 'struggling' International feeds a lot of domestic traffic into domestic and regional. Back in the days of more reasonable/capable management, this was taken into consideration.
The cry a few years ago that "International had not met its cost of capital since 199x something was utter crap. I have all the Annual Reports, most of which during that period lauded the fact that International continued to carry the business despite poor performance from domestic.
The cry a few years ago that "International had not met its cost of capital since 199x something was utter crap. I have all the Annual Reports, most of which during that period lauded the fact that International continued to carry the business despite poor performance from domestic.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the overwhelming needs from my perspective is more seats SYD-MEL-BNE. It is where most of the "Groups"- I hate that word- profit comes from. Even at 15 minute intervals during peak, most of the B738's on SYD-MEL-BNE are full during this period. Yes, I know business travellers like their frequency- but it is inefficient. It is why the B767 worked so well, every 1/2 hour, occasionally every 1/4 hour on Mondays and Fridays , 250 seats...etc. QF would be much better served with A321 or 797. The early VX series 738 are now 18 years old. Judging on the limited perspective of the number of MEL's, they are starting to get tired. Knowing this lot, they won't order new a/c..they'll just keep buying shares.
Qantas would have had a twin aisle high capacity aircraft, product differentiation on their competitor and an aircraft that could operate rather like the 767 into those mid range sectors.
For reasons best know to the self anointed ,world's greatest airline management, they preferred to give them all to the low fare and low yield sibling.
With terminals, tarmac and airspace congested it is anything but efficient where it takes more fuel, more flight attendants, double the pilots, double the engines and double the airframes (give or take) to fly the same ASK, into an ever congested terminal environment.
Pilots will be soon coping with increased cross wind limits in Sydney (prior to a runway change) as the system rentiers seek to squeeze every drop of out the profusely sweating and overworked infrastructure.
The inefficiency of the airline is obvious to industry observers who are not members of the Chairman's lounge or otherwise on the speed dial for Olivia's upgrades.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Asia
Posts: 1,030
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alan recently did quote the 787 is too capital intensive for triangle routes. Jetstar do run a lot of 321 flights MEL/SYD.
All eyes will be on Virgin and it’s MAX 10 introduction. Most certainly appears to be a gamble that will pay off. QF has probably missed the boat before Western Sydney opens for any MAX 9/10 order and VA will have about 4 years of the extra capacity before it opens.
Never understood why nobody went for the -900ER. Great workhorse USA Domestic and would be a good fit for Sydney.
All eyes will be on Virgin and it’s MAX 10 introduction. Most certainly appears to be a gamble that will pay off. QF has probably missed the boat before Western Sydney opens for any MAX 9/10 order and VA will have about 4 years of the extra capacity before it opens.
Never understood why nobody went for the -900ER. Great workhorse USA Domestic and would be a good fit for Sydney.
it is anything but efficient where it takes more fuel, more flight attendants
What is the minimum cabin crew complement for the 787 vs the 738?
I suspect you are wrong on both counts. You could operate 2 738's and burn less fuel per passenger and require the same amount of cabin crew.
738 minimum crew complement is 4 crew. 787 is 8 crew. We operate the 738 with 4 cabin crew every day. Certain flights at certain times of day get an extra crew member for meal service requirements.