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

Steve Purvinas, legend

Old 29th Oct 2019, 01:46
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Dirty South
Posts: 389
Originally Posted by Global Aviator View Post
Iím sure that thanks to Prune QF is madly ordering aircraft...

To think that there is no aircraft replacement plan... oh you will say Iím naive call me a QF angel...

787ís are new are they not? Sunrise will be new will it not? The 200 buses (ok no idea how many actually) are going where?

[Nip. Tuck]


How does that window taste ?
JPJP is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2019, 01:50
  #62 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 1,946
Originally Posted by T-Vasis View Post
An example:

Cathay Pacific and Cathay Dragon combined ~181
Qantas Group (includes QLink, Network, Qantas INT/DOM, Jetstar Group) ~367

367/2 = 183 or 50%.
As you have included aircraft which QF have minority ownership, Cathay Group has the following

CX Pax 134 (100% ownership)
CX Cargo 20 (100% ownership)
KA Pax 49 (100% ownership)
LD Cargo 11 (100% ownership)
UO Pax 24 (100% ownership)
CA Pax 421 (20% ownership)
CA Cargo 15 (49% ownership)
swh is online now  
Old 29th Oct 2019, 06:01
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 1,293
Originally Posted by dragon man View Post


There are people who get it Iím pleased to see. We will see in the new year when the tides out who is naked, the DFW , Lax and Sfo loads on the 380 and 747 are very ordinary at the moment.
Interestingly, it was announced today that DFW is increasing from 6 x week to Daily, so loads canít be too bad.
Transition Layer is offline  
Old 29th Oct 2019, 06:49
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sincity
Posts: 997
Originally Posted by Transition Layer View Post


Interestingly, it was announced today that DFW is increasing from 6 x week to Daily, so loads canít be too bad.
Nah ya can't make money on the 380 over ten hours

My mates a 777 captain. Told me

Monopoly helps
maggot is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2019, 12:28
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 58
Steve might have been on to something with regards to the aging frames: https://www.theage.com.au/business/c...30-p535xo.html
TimmyTee is offline  
Old 30th Oct 2019, 23:32
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Coal Face
Posts: 553
Originally Posted by TimmyTee View Post
Steve might have been on to something with regards to the aging frames: https://www.theage.com.au/business/c...30-p535xo.html
The cracks - which Qantas said do not immediately compromise safety
Translation: The wing won't fall off.....yet. Safety is our number one priority, after executive remuneration.
Chronic Snoozer is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 00:34
  #67 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 989
Originally Posted by Chronic Snoozer View Post
Translation: The wing won't fall off.....yet. Safety is our number one priority, after executive remuneration.
Gold, post of the day.
dragon man is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 01:40
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 23
Not sure how Steveís comments to ground the ENTIRE 737 fleet over the pickle fork issue is going to help the engineers and pilots who will sitting around doing nothing with no overtime, bills to pay, etc. Seems a little flippant following his level headed article this thread discusses. The FAA directive allows them 7 months to inspect. But then again the FAA lacks credibility right now so how can you trust them?
Green.Dot is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 01:43
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Coal Face
Posts: 553
But its OK to ground the entire QANTAS fleet because of difficult market conditions?
Chronic Snoozer is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 01:48
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 23
Originally Posted by Chronic Snoozer View Post
But its OK to ground the entire QANTAS fleet because of difficult market conditions?
Donít think I said that
Green.Dot is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 03:20
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 75
Poor article by the biggest own goal kicker in Australian industrial relations history.

Agree that no one is really worth $24m/year remuneration. Thats a solid starting point.

However the selective choice of facts damages the credibility of his subsequent arguments.

Fair comparison on fleet age would be British Airways - big legacy airline, full service, covering domestic and international flying, similar tax environment. Their average fleet age is 13.7 years. Bang - that point is lost Mr Purvinas, case dismissed.

Did Senior Management also have a pay freeze. Yes. Bang - point lost again - case dismissed.

Mr Purvinas does not seem to understand the difference between cashflow and accounting or is choosing to mislead the reader. If Qantas was to spend $1bn on new aircraft this year, it would not take $1bn off the bottom line. The new aircraft are depreciated over 20 years so in simple profit and loss figures, the impact would be around $50m increase in depreciation (keeping it simple). This would be partly offset by lower operating costs and lower maintenance costs if its replacing an old aircraft or by increased revenue/margin if its an addition to the fleet. So the exact impact is not obvious but worst case its a $50m cost per year.

The underlying issue is that current accounting/tax rules essentially force an Australian airline to keep aircraft for 20 years otherwise they take a financial hit from retiring the aircraft early.

It could be argued that by not purchasing more new aircraft now, Joyce is doing future management a very big favour by not lumbering them with ongoing depreciation costs for aircraft that may become obsolete/inefficient in less that the required 20 year life of the aircraft. He is allowing future management the flexibility to purchase the most efficient and suitable aircraft at that time.

Lets not start that the "own goal kicker" appears to be advocating that QF should be replacing the current 737 fleet faster? That would have worked out real well if they had gone for the Max.

I have to wonder who the own goal kicker is really representing?. New aircraft = less maintenance whilst older aircraft = more maintenance = more work for the people he represents.

Keep the first two paragraphs and keep the last sentence.

The last sentence is a fair point:
"Even if Qantas was well run, I do not believe any one person deserves a yearly salary package that an average person couldn't spend in a lifetime."
CamelSquadron is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 04:06
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 583
Did Senior Management also have a pay freeze. Yes. Bang - point lost again - case dismissed.
Not quite. Their bonus was still paid as expected. Now if asking the staff to 'agree' to a pay freeze then surely accepting a bonus, in some cases a significantly increased bonus, is a little contradictory and does little for staff engagement.
C441 is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 04:16
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Richmond
Age: 66
Posts: 108
“I have to wonder who the own goal kicker is really representing?. New aircraft = less maintenance whilst older aircraft = more maintenance = more work for the people he represents.”
It is a pathetic attempted payback for having his a*se well and truly kicked in 2011 and the subsequent loss of in the order of 5000 engineering jobs.
JamieMaree is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 04:20
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: In da Big Smoke
Posts: 2,371
It could be argued that by not purchasing more new aircraft now, Joyce is doing future management a very big favour by not lumbering them with ongoing depreciation costs for aircraft that may become obsolete/inefficient in less that the required 20 year life of the aircraft. He is allowing future management the flexibility to purchase the most efficient and suitable aircraft at that time.
The problem with that argument is that how long is to long? Depending on what happens with the 737, if you wipe out a portion of your fleet with some AD then should have you waited 20 years to find a replacement?

By delaying purchasing new aircraft management also benefit from some supercharged bonuses in the meantime with their resignation occurring just in time for fleet replacement.
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 06:44
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 75
Originally Posted by C441 View Post
Not quite. Their bonus was still paid as expected. Now if asking the staff to 'agree' to a pay freeze then surely accepting a bonus, in some cases a significantly increased bonus, is a little contradictory and does little for staff engagement.
$54m of bonuses were paid to non management staff who accepted the pay freeze. Another convenient missing fact!

CamelSquadron is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 07:16
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Darwin
Posts: 314
You mean the $2500 bribe that no one has got or the $1250 staff travel that is worthless as Staff Travel is the plaything of Executives come holiday season?
What The is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 07:24
  #77 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 989
Originally Posted by What The View Post
You mean the $2500 bribe that no one has got or the $1250 staff travel that is worthless as Staff Travel is the plaything of Executives come holiday season?
Cynical but spot on.
dragon man is offline  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 07:41
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 610
The other aspect of this is the constant bleating about safety... when something really serious comes along no one will listen because safety has been raised over and over again for industrial reasons.

As for those saying that Joyce grounded the fleet for industrial reasons, yeh, he also grounded the A380 until it was absolutely certain that the engine failure could not happen again... many other airlines - and some that are lauded as the best - did quick inspections and kept flying them... some said at the time they couldn't possibly have completed the inspections in the time. Don't get me wrong, I agree no one is worth $24M.

I think he lost me when he heaped Germany and Hong Kong in with the third world.
Media is also selective. Qantas does some maintenance off shore and as for the A380, the 747 was maintained by UA in SFO for the first 3-4 years Qantas had them as they only had 4 aircraft, yet VA does ALL its maintenance off shore and never a peep about that.
AerialPerspective is online now  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 07:44
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 610
The fact is though that while new aircraft orders make for big headlines... "airline xx commits to $3BN order for new aircraft"... reality is they're not spending $3 billion in one hit, the aircraft are most likely leased, for an amount surely more than the cost of maintaining the older aircraft, at least initially and then the increased costs are offset by reduce maintenance and fuel costs as the lease continues.
Qantas is not going to 'spend' $15 billion or similar replacing aircraft, it will spend an incremental amount to lease the aircraft each year until it either owns them or disposes of them.
AerialPerspective is online now  
Old 31st Oct 2019, 07:47
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Richmond
Age: 66
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by JamieMaree View Post
ďI have to wonder who the own goal kicker is really representing?. New aircraft = less maintenance whilst older aircraft = more maintenance = more work for the people he represents.Ē
It is a pathetic attempted payback for having his a*se well and truly kicked in 2011 and the subsequent loss of in the order of 5000 engineering jobs.
The legend tells lies and is a distorter of the facts. From tonightís news quoting him
Ē as the FAA says this could cause loss of control and Qantas shouldnít be flying themĒ unquote
JamieMaree is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.