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

Project Sunrise

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 19th Dec 2019, 04:34
  #901 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: All over the Planet
Posts: 868
Received 12 Likes on 5 Posts
Will someone, anyone, please explain how more dollars will reduce or eliminate fatigue?
Ken Borough is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 04:43
  #902 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 324
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
If the pilots worked for less (or harder for the same), more destinations would become possible. However, there comes a point where you say to the company ‘this is what we are worth’. Do it or don’t.

AJ has proven to be a risk averse CEO with respect to own metal revenue generation. I’m willing to bet the ROIC demands placed on the sunrise case is disproportionately high. His excuse that there are better returns elsewhere in the business ignores the reality he is in fact running an airline. The capital bomb is still ticking. It’s not up to the pilots to diffuse the bomb when new conditions have already been established which are globally competitive.

So do it... or don’t Alan.

crosscutter is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 04:44
  #903 (permalink)  
V24
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Oz
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ken Borough
Will someone, anyone, please explain how more dollars will reduce or eliminate fatigue?
They won’t. The pay and the fatigue management are separate issues.
V24 is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 04:48
  #904 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As one of the employees who is still yet to get their bonus from 2018, fully support the pilots knocking it back. Don't cave in to the demands - it isn't worth it in the long term
Qantas 787 is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 04:49
  #905 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by chuboy
What are the demands of the union - i.e. how many extra dollars per flight is a "few"?

If you look at the profit vs revenue of any airline in the world, you will see that margins are indeed tight. Just saying.
It is only tight because airline use subjective inclusions and exclusions to massage their CASK (Cost of ASK) this statement although objectively true is very difficult to quantify.
Further non operating overhead is indirectly carried in the seat cost: Something has to pay for diversity management, administration and the like. With around 90% of that revenue coming from selling seats, it makes for a tight business.
By way of example, on South East Asian carrier includes and engineering cost component in the Fuel Included CASK (which seems reasonable) another carrier in the same region does not.
Rated De is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 05:24
  #906 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 608
Received 67 Likes on 27 Posts
Originally Posted by chuboy
What are the demands of the union - i.e. how many extra dollars per flight is a "few"?
It’s not about the demands of the union, if indeed there have even been any. It’s about the demands of the company, which stated that concessions would be required or the project would be abandoned. Remember this is after the pilots accepted a couple of pay freezes in recent years and agreed to a 30% productivity gain on the 787, when the last couple of years have seen record profits and executive remuneration. In light of that, I’m not sure why some people (yes you, Geoffrey Thomas) seem to believe that the pilots should just agree to whatever the company demands.
itsnotthatbloodyhard is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 06:29
  #907 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,625
Received 600 Likes on 170 Posts
“Yes you Geoffrey Thomas” because he is a f##kwit who knows nothing about aviation.
dragon man is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 06:35
  #908 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dragon man
“Yes you Geoffrey Thomas” because he is a f##kwit who knows nothing about aviation.
Not quite nothing, spending a summer throwing bags for MMA gave Mr Thomas key insight.
Insight to what no one is really sure, but the Chairman's lounge membership sure does help focus his attention.
Rated De is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 07:12
  #909 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,625
Received 600 Likes on 170 Posts
Originally Posted by Rated De
Not quite nothing, spending a summer throwing bags for MMA gave Mr Thomas key insight.
Insight to what no one is really sure, but the Chairman's lounge membership sure does help focus his attention.

Gold, gold gold.
dragon man is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 08:26
  #910 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Richmond
Age: 70
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes on 11 Posts
Originally Posted by Rated De
Not quite nothing, spending a summer throwing bags for MMA gave Mr Thomas key insight.
Insight to what no one is really sure, but the Chairman's lounge membership sure does help focus his attention.

GT might be some of what you accuse him of.
one thing he is not is an anonymous unidentifiable germ like yourself. You must have a monopoly on the poison keyboard market.
Show your achievements or your credentials to enjoy some credibility.
Dragon Man is just a low class whinging employee of Qf.
JamieMaree is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 09:02
  #911 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: In a house
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
It’s not about the costs. It’s about the long term compounding costs.

Alan proved that with the pay freeze.

So while you may think it’s about small margins. It’s not. It’s about the compounding savings in the years to come.

It’s also about this. You’ve got to park your capital somewhere. If you can park the cash in domestic and get a better return, they will. Hence why the margins/business case are probably wafer thin compared to the return of parking the cash in another devision.

Pilot costs would not factor in regarding profit or loss. But they may make a difference in the business case of where the best ROI is.

So I guess if the 4 major sticking points are not resolved, then maybe domestic may see some cheap max aircraft.
Blueskymine is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 09:44
  #912 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 303
Received 16 Likes on 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Derfred

Now, this is the sticking point: Qantas have claimed that the business case won't stand up if the pilots don't agree to these concessions.

This is where Qantas have made themselves look very foolish, because anyone can see that if the project is built around such tight margins that a few dollars out of the pilots' pockets will make or break the business case, then it most certainly should not go ahead. Or, as is obviously the case, the business case presented to threaten the pilots is a complete fabrication and nobody believes a word they are talking about. The obvious truth is that Qantas are putting a lot of pressure on pilots to reduce costs in general and are using such threats as a negotiating tool. The pilots don't like being lied to, and this probably isn't helping the negotiation.
If it's all down to negotiating the last brass razoo out of the EBA, to make this finely-balanced equation work, then they must have cast-iron certainty about every other revenue and expense line in the feasibility. Which, of course, cannot possibly be true. For a start they don't know for sure what the best deal is going to be on whichever customised airframes, engines and interior packages they end up buying. Supposing for one moment the unicorn of an aircraft capable of consistently delivering 20+ hour sectors with 300 passengers, bags and freight in all seasons and conditions is actually obtainable... How much will those cost? What will be their operating CASK sans crew cost? They don't know this stuff - they're simply making a string of assumptions.

In every feasibility of this kind I've ever looked at, the cost of flight crew is the least of your worries. Easily covered by an extra percentage point or two on RPK, mostly from the pointy end.

It's really very undignified of them to be carrying on about the pilots making or breaking the cost structure when it's patently obvious that cannot be true. And very unedifying behaviour.
Pearly White is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 11:03
  #913 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Living with consequences
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
- MFF
- ULH
- Consigning future colleagues to a B scale

I wouldn’t do any of that for a pay rise, JUST SAY NO

Last edited by Emmit Stussy; 19th Dec 2019 at 11:22.
Emmit Stussy is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 16:05
  #914 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,408
Received 361 Likes on 210 Posts
" the cost of flight crew is the least of your worries" probably but the aim has to be to reduce the uncertainty as much as possible. Every cost you can lock in (and hopefully cut) is a big help in the final economic runs
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 19th Dec 2019, 18:38
  #915 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,625
Received 600 Likes on 170 Posts
Originally Posted by JamieMaree
GT might be some of what you accuse him of.
one thing he is not is an anonymous unidentifiable germ like yourself. You must have a monopoly on the poison keyboard market.
Show your achievements or your credentials to enjoy some credibility.
Dragon Man is just a low class whinging employee of Qf.
And you of course are not an unidentifiable germ?
dragon man is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2019, 04:03
  #916 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So if fuel costs between now and March rise 20% then the whole thing must be cancelled??...surely if the margins are that tight???...Bueller?
The whole thing is a scam, made to look as though the greedy pilots brought about it's downfall.
The A350- if we ever get it- will be a one for one replacement of the A380. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't believe me? When they were selling the 787 deal, how many aircraft did they say were we going to order? 35? It was going to be a "growth aircraft". How many do we have? 13 & 1/2, including the one having gear retraction practice in MEL.
24 million reasons to say no.

Last edited by Street garbage; 20th Dec 2019 at 04:14.
Street garbage is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2019, 04:14
  #917 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Emmit Stussy
- MFF
- ULH
- Consigning future colleagues to a B scale

I wouldn’t do any of that for a pay rise, JUST SAY NO
Gold mate, sums it up nicely.
Street garbage is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2019, 06:18
  #918 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,625
Received 600 Likes on 170 Posts
dragon man is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2019, 06:52
  #919 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Weltschmerz-By-The-Sea, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 1,365
Received 79 Likes on 36 Posts
Originally Posted by dragon man
All of those survey results pretty much match both experience and expectations. I won’t mention my favourite European or North American airlines because I am still hoping for a staff seat next time
Australopithecus is offline  
Old 20th Dec 2019, 07:12
  #920 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,408
Received 361 Likes on 210 Posts
"Ryanair was at the bottom with a customer score of just 44 per cent after receiving one star out of five in all categories apart from value for money, which was two stars. It has been voted the worst for six years in a row."

And yet if things got tough they'd probably be the last airline flying in Europe. At least Ryanair don't peddle the myth that it's going to be a wonderful experience - O'Leary normally compares it to getting a 'bus.
Asturias56 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.