Qantas deal 'a must'- the Minister for Qantas
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas deal 'a must'- the Minister for Qantas
By Luke McIlveen and Steve Lewis
May 01, 2003
DEPUTY Prime Minister John Anderson will personally intervene to win regulatory approval for a $500 million trans-Tasman alliance between Qantas and Air New Zealand, a move described as "highly anti-competitive" by competition watchdog Allan Fels.
Mr Anderson last night revealed he would attempt to persuade the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to overturn its rejection of the proposed alliance on the basis that a strong regional airline was in the national interest.
"It is in the national interest and therefore in the public interest for this region to have a strong and viable airline group that can sustain the current volatile aviation market now and in the future," Mr Anderson said.
"This proposed alliance is a potential first step in ensuring that this occurs."
Mr Anderson did not rule out canvassing new legislation to push through the alliance but would prefer to write to the commission first to request that the deal be allowed.
A spokesman for Mr Anderson said he would recommend to both Qantas and Air New Zealand that a more expansive list of undertakings be submitted to the ACCC. "We think they should come back with modified proposals that are more competitive," the spokesman said.
Professor Fels last night told The Australian: "There are established processes for the Government to make a public submission if they wish.
"The commission would consider the submission, but in the end the (Trade Practices) Act requires the commission to make its own independent decision on whether the alliance would be in the public interest," Professor Fels said.
In an interim report handed down on April 10, Professor Fels rejected Qantas's plan to buy a 22.5 per cent stake of Air New Zealand, saying the proposal was anti-competitive and likely to result in fare increases.
He said: "Passengers would be denied choice and increased airfares would be inevitable. The proposal would likely result in a substantial lessening of competition in a number of markets."
His remarks were backed up by the New Zealand Commerce Commission, which found the alliance would "likely result in a substantial lessening of competition".
Their findings drew fierce protests from Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon, who said the aviation industry was in financial crisis.
"It is surely in the interests of both New Zealand and Australia to have viable competitive airline systems," Mr Dixon said.
"This will not be advanced by competition authorities ignoring the realities of the world."
The Australian
May 01, 2003
DEPUTY Prime Minister John Anderson will personally intervene to win regulatory approval for a $500 million trans-Tasman alliance between Qantas and Air New Zealand, a move described as "highly anti-competitive" by competition watchdog Allan Fels.
Mr Anderson last night revealed he would attempt to persuade the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to overturn its rejection of the proposed alliance on the basis that a strong regional airline was in the national interest.
"It is in the national interest and therefore in the public interest for this region to have a strong and viable airline group that can sustain the current volatile aviation market now and in the future," Mr Anderson said.
"This proposed alliance is a potential first step in ensuring that this occurs."
Mr Anderson did not rule out canvassing new legislation to push through the alliance but would prefer to write to the commission first to request that the deal be allowed.
A spokesman for Mr Anderson said he would recommend to both Qantas and Air New Zealand that a more expansive list of undertakings be submitted to the ACCC. "We think they should come back with modified proposals that are more competitive," the spokesman said.
Professor Fels last night told The Australian: "There are established processes for the Government to make a public submission if they wish.
"The commission would consider the submission, but in the end the (Trade Practices) Act requires the commission to make its own independent decision on whether the alliance would be in the public interest," Professor Fels said.
In an interim report handed down on April 10, Professor Fels rejected Qantas's plan to buy a 22.5 per cent stake of Air New Zealand, saying the proposal was anti-competitive and likely to result in fare increases.
He said: "Passengers would be denied choice and increased airfares would be inevitable. The proposal would likely result in a substantial lessening of competition in a number of markets."
His remarks were backed up by the New Zealand Commerce Commission, which found the alliance would "likely result in a substantial lessening of competition".
Their findings drew fierce protests from Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon, who said the aviation industry was in financial crisis.
"It is surely in the interests of both New Zealand and Australia to have viable competitive airline systems," Mr Dixon said.
"This will not be advanced by competition authorities ignoring the realities of the world."
The Australian
Evertonian
What a PRlCK!!!
How much stronger would QF be if ANZ collapsed? You'd get the same result AND maintain the standard you set with AN's collapse!
Backbench for you fool!
How much stronger would QF be if ANZ collapsed? You'd get the same result AND maintain the standard you set with AN's collapse!
Backbench for you fool!
Could it be that like 2 other Pigs At The Trough (Bill Kelty and R.J. Hawke), Mr. Anderson has his eyes on business coming his way from Qantas after he leaves politics, or perhaps even a seat on the board?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too right, Al, that's what I've been claiming since his performance during the AN debacle. He is securing his position on the QF board once he has been in politics long enough to qualify for future benefits at our expense, then on to QF for Staff Travel! Belts and braces, eh?
Your comment describes him perfectly, Buster, but there's no way he'll see the back bench, not as long as Little Johnny's in charge.
Kind regards,
TheNightOwl.
Your comment describes him perfectly, Buster, but there's no way he'll see the back bench, not as long as Little Johnny's in charge.
Kind regards,
TheNightOwl.
Yes, he's true to form. 
His Government sets the rules then doesn't like it when the rules don't work in his favour.
Pity he isn't so keen on seeing a strong GA and independant regional airline network in Australia.
His Government sets the rules then doesn't like it when the rules don't work in his favour.
Pity he isn't so keen on seeing a strong GA and independant regional airline network in Australia.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deadline Extended and the Winner Is???
NZ's Commerce Commission has extended its deadline for submissions on a proposed alliance between Qantas and Air New Zealand, with the news boosting Qantas shares.
The competition watchdog said all parties would get more time to make submissions on its Air NZ-Qantas draft determination.
Qantas shares closed 14c higher at $3.18, adding to the previous day's strong gains. On Monday, the airline's stock dropped 15c to $2.85, its lowest since September 2001.
The watchdog expects to make its final determination in September, with the deadline for submissions now June 20.
Shaw Stockbroking research director Scott Marshall said the six-week extension was encouraging.
"They're certainly not closed in their mind on what their decision is going to be," he said.
Under the $500 million deal, Qantas would take a 22.5 per cent stake in Air NZ, with the two carriers forming a code share agreement.
The competition watchdog said all parties would get more time to make submissions on its Air NZ-Qantas draft determination.
Qantas shares closed 14c higher at $3.18, adding to the previous day's strong gains. On Monday, the airline's stock dropped 15c to $2.85, its lowest since September 2001.
The watchdog expects to make its final determination in September, with the deadline for submissions now June 20.
Shaw Stockbroking research director Scott Marshall said the six-week extension was encouraging.
"They're certainly not closed in their mind on what their decision is going to be," he said.
Under the $500 million deal, Qantas would take a 22.5 per cent stake in Air NZ, with the two carriers forming a code share agreement.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing worth doodly squat about NZ is it's people, and Pacific basin network.
QF must have eyes on codesharing (and not having to use their own people or rescources) into Pacific basin ports - like now not operating one single rat into PPT - all codeshare on TN (kinda spooky that).
NZ would also no doubt be forced to relinquish Star Alliance membership and that would leave a gaping hole in their global network, as serious as the hole in the One world network left after AC swallowed CP on the Canadian scene.
I can smell an SQesque plot here. Invest 500 mil - watch it collapse and step in with the 5th freedom rights granted through codeshares. If not for 9/11 Aussie domestic skies may have been a little different today.
Instant intra Pacific network for Australian or mainline according to market, and closure of the QF worldwide network over LAX to FRA and LHR.
Methinks the Rat does not want partial NZ ownership for it's potential profit, but to be in the box seat for a meltdown and the associated spoils.
Poor Air Tahiti Niui may see the shortest codeshare relationship in living memory.
Maybe Rene is actually saying buy buy buy.
Best all
EWL
QF must have eyes on codesharing (and not having to use their own people or rescources) into Pacific basin ports - like now not operating one single rat into PPT - all codeshare on TN (kinda spooky that).
NZ would also no doubt be forced to relinquish Star Alliance membership and that would leave a gaping hole in their global network, as serious as the hole in the One world network left after AC swallowed CP on the Canadian scene.
I can smell an SQesque plot here. Invest 500 mil - watch it collapse and step in with the 5th freedom rights granted through codeshares. If not for 9/11 Aussie domestic skies may have been a little different today.
Instant intra Pacific network for Australian or mainline according to market, and closure of the QF worldwide network over LAX to FRA and LHR.
Methinks the Rat does not want partial NZ ownership for it's potential profit, but to be in the box seat for a meltdown and the associated spoils.
Poor Air Tahiti Niui may see the shortest codeshare relationship in living memory.
Maybe Rene is actually saying buy buy buy.
Best all
EWL
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
www.virginblue.com.au
1st May 2003
Virgin Blue Reaffirms Its Views On QF-NZ
Open Letter to the Editors of the media as well as the respective regulators and governments in both Australia and New Zealand
Virgin Blue notes the articles based on the Qantas Media Release dated 29 April 2003 titled ‘Qantas to Lodge Submission on Air NZ Alliance.’
The release contained a number of statements including the comment attributed to the CEO of Qantas stating that “...just about every independent expert and commentator” supports Qantas’s views on the alliance and “Only the ACCC appears to think differently.”
It is regrettable that this suggestion is contradicted by hundreds of pages of submissions and reams of newspaper commentary from both sides of the Tasman.
Furthermore, the release went on to make the statement that “Virgin Blue has stated unequivocally that it will enter the trans-Tasman and domestic New Zealand Markets and be a significant competitor.”
Unfortunately the author of the statement chose not to highlight one of the key points of the Virgin Blue submission to the regulators – that Virgin Blue can only achieve such an outcome if Qantas and Air New Zealand are stopped from employing their most anti-competitive, low-cost products to target the routes we hope to fly.
Furthermore, we must have access to comparable facilities at competitive prices at the times of day when the public prefers to travel. Otherwise, it would be impossible to offer New Zealanders the same type of low fare competition that exists in Australia if we have no place to park the aircraft or check in passengers.
While we note Qantas and Air New Zealand’s sudden concerns for our well-being, Virgin Blue believes that the potential alliance partners could better spend time by addressing the core issues highlighted by the regulators that must be addressed if their proposal is to be allowed to move forward.
Continued posturing, legal manoeuvres and selective paraphrasing of Virgin Blue’s opinions will not address the anti-competitive issues or the needs of all travellers of Australia and New Zealand.
Instead of speculating as to what Virgin Blue needs to compete, Air New Zealand and Qantas only need to refer to Virgin Blue’s submission as well as the regulator’s draft decisions to deliver an outcome that will allow for sustainable competition.
We have clearly articulated our position that can be reviewed by anyone simply by clicking www.virginblue.com.au.
As long as Qantas and Air New Zealand are able to satisfactorily address the real anti-competitive issues we have identified, Virgin Blue has no intention of standing in the way of whatever these two traditional carriers deem necessary for their long term survival.
1st May 2003
Virgin Blue Reaffirms Its Views On QF-NZ
Open Letter to the Editors of the media as well as the respective regulators and governments in both Australia and New Zealand
Virgin Blue notes the articles based on the Qantas Media Release dated 29 April 2003 titled ‘Qantas to Lodge Submission on Air NZ Alliance.’
The release contained a number of statements including the comment attributed to the CEO of Qantas stating that “...just about every independent expert and commentator” supports Qantas’s views on the alliance and “Only the ACCC appears to think differently.”
It is regrettable that this suggestion is contradicted by hundreds of pages of submissions and reams of newspaper commentary from both sides of the Tasman.
Furthermore, the release went on to make the statement that “Virgin Blue has stated unequivocally that it will enter the trans-Tasman and domestic New Zealand Markets and be a significant competitor.”
Unfortunately the author of the statement chose not to highlight one of the key points of the Virgin Blue submission to the regulators – that Virgin Blue can only achieve such an outcome if Qantas and Air New Zealand are stopped from employing their most anti-competitive, low-cost products to target the routes we hope to fly.
Furthermore, we must have access to comparable facilities at competitive prices at the times of day when the public prefers to travel. Otherwise, it would be impossible to offer New Zealanders the same type of low fare competition that exists in Australia if we have no place to park the aircraft or check in passengers.
While we note Qantas and Air New Zealand’s sudden concerns for our well-being, Virgin Blue believes that the potential alliance partners could better spend time by addressing the core issues highlighted by the regulators that must be addressed if their proposal is to be allowed to move forward.
Continued posturing, legal manoeuvres and selective paraphrasing of Virgin Blue’s opinions will not address the anti-competitive issues or the needs of all travellers of Australia and New Zealand.
Instead of speculating as to what Virgin Blue needs to compete, Air New Zealand and Qantas only need to refer to Virgin Blue’s submission as well as the regulator’s draft decisions to deliver an outcome that will allow for sustainable competition.
We have clearly articulated our position that can be reviewed by anyone simply by clicking www.virginblue.com.au.
As long as Qantas and Air New Zealand are able to satisfactorily address the real anti-competitive issues we have identified, Virgin Blue has no intention of standing in the way of whatever these two traditional carriers deem necessary for their long term survival.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: brisbane
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"that Virgin Blue can only achieve such an outcome if Qantas and Air New Zealand are stopped from employing their most anti-competitive, low-cost products to target the routes we hope to fly."
I am so sick of this company. The above quote sums it up for me. Virgin's main business edge is to underpay workers and take maitanence short cuts. How they still manage to garner any loyalty amongst their employees is a tribute to their internal marketing and the desperation of their employees. I would be embarrassed to work for them. I am embarrassed to be in the same industry.
I am so sick of this company. The above quote sums it up for me. Virgin's main business edge is to underpay workers and take maitanence short cuts. How they still manage to garner any loyalty amongst their employees is a tribute to their internal marketing and the desperation of their employees. I would be embarrassed to work for them. I am embarrassed to be in the same industry.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Cairns
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All Virgin seem to do is complain about anything and everything Qantas does. They go running to the ACCC whenever it does not suit them so they can turn around and to try and steal the market and basically undercut Qantas (sound familar and everyone knows what happens to these companies) Anyone who runs a business tries to make it successful, secure for its employees and profitable. This industry is not just about giving the cheapest airfares and been "competitive". It is also about running a stable business and keeping people in jobs. Does Alan Fels want it to be like GA where you dont know if you have a job in a weeks time!!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Asia
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question for EastWest Loco,
You Said "I can smell an SQesque plot here. Invest 500 mil - watch it collapse and step in with the 5th freedom rights granted through codeshares. "
Iam not up to speed on the ins and outs of code sharing, What the 5th freedom rights???
TeaCup,
You Said "I can smell an SQesque plot here. Invest 500 mil - watch it collapse and step in with the 5th freedom rights granted through codeshares. "
Iam not up to speed on the ins and outs of code sharing, What the 5th freedom rights???
TeaCup,
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: uppercumbuktawest
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QFpaypacket,
The name says it all really!
Would you like to expand on your allegations of maintenance short cuts?
I think you will find that the maintenance is as good or better than that done at QF - ALAEA grandstanding aside.
The name says it all really!
Would you like to expand on your allegations of maintenance short cuts?
I think you will find that the maintenance is as good or better than that done at QF - ALAEA grandstanding aside.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
teacup
5th frredom rights involve originating traffic rights between 2 countries, neither of which is the country of origin of the carrier involved. For instance, it is possible to fly Taipei Los Angeles on Singapore Airlines or Jakarta Singapore on Cathay Pathetic.
The same applies to Qantas Auckland Los Angeles and Air New Zealand Sydney LA.
Regards
EWL
5th frredom rights involve originating traffic rights between 2 countries, neither of which is the country of origin of the carrier involved. For instance, it is possible to fly Taipei Los Angeles on Singapore Airlines or Jakarta Singapore on Cathay Pathetic.
The same applies to Qantas Auckland Los Angeles and Air New Zealand Sydney LA.
Regards
EWL
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Calling the Kettle Black
Yeah, I cant remember hearing about Virgin Blue placing an aircraft on line with no static inverter(B747 SYD-LAX), or dispatching an aicraft for a long overwater flight with no life-rafts(B737 MEL to CCH), yet these are 2 stunts that QF have pulled in the past. No organisation is perfect and ALL humans make mistakes; the idea is to build systems in which there are layers of redundancies that 'absorb' human error. All this nah-nah -nah stuff is infantile and counter productive. 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Townsville,Nth Queensland
Posts: 2,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mon "Australian Financial Review" 5/5/03
Costello tells Anderson off over Qantas
May 5
Toni O'Loughlin
Federal Treasurer Peter Costello warned Transport Minister and Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson yesterday against pressuring the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission into approving a merger between Qantas and Air New Zealand.
Mr Costello said Qantas and Air New Zealand had to change the original merger proposal to ensure competition would not be undermined.
"I don't think the proper way to progress this is to try and heavy the regulator," Mr Costello said, alluding to comments by Mr Anderson and NSW Premier Bob Carr that the merger was vital.
"The proper way to progress this is to try and make sure that structural improvements and undertakings can be given which will guarantee competition," Mr Costello told Channel 10's Meet the Press.
In particular, Qantas and Air New Zealand had to reassure the ACCC "that the consumer will not be slugged" with higher prices, Mr Costello said.
His comments follow those of ACCC chairman Allan Fels who said last week that he would not succumb to political pressure.
Nevertheless, Mr Anderson continued to urge the ACCC to take into account the view that "further alliances ... of international aviation players is inevitable".
"We have a chance in this region to secure a major player," he told Channel 9's Sunday program.
Qantas was doing well at the moment but "it's a dog-eat-dog world in international aviation", Mr Anderson said.
However, he said he did not believe Professor Fels would continue to rule it out unless he had good grounds for doing so.
The ACCC and its counterpart, the New Zealand Commerce Commission, rejected the proposed merger last month in a draft determination, arguing that the anti-competitive effect would have outweighed any public benefit from the deal.
Qantas and Air New Zealand are in the process of reapplying for a formal determination.
Costello tells Anderson off over Qantas
May 5
Toni O'Loughlin
Federal Treasurer Peter Costello warned Transport Minister and Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson yesterday against pressuring the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission into approving a merger between Qantas and Air New Zealand.
Mr Costello said Qantas and Air New Zealand had to change the original merger proposal to ensure competition would not be undermined.
"I don't think the proper way to progress this is to try and heavy the regulator," Mr Costello said, alluding to comments by Mr Anderson and NSW Premier Bob Carr that the merger was vital.
"The proper way to progress this is to try and make sure that structural improvements and undertakings can be given which will guarantee competition," Mr Costello told Channel 10's Meet the Press.
In particular, Qantas and Air New Zealand had to reassure the ACCC "that the consumer will not be slugged" with higher prices, Mr Costello said.
His comments follow those of ACCC chairman Allan Fels who said last week that he would not succumb to political pressure.
Nevertheless, Mr Anderson continued to urge the ACCC to take into account the view that "further alliances ... of international aviation players is inevitable".
"We have a chance in this region to secure a major player," he told Channel 9's Sunday program.
Qantas was doing well at the moment but "it's a dog-eat-dog world in international aviation", Mr Anderson said.
However, he said he did not believe Professor Fels would continue to rule it out unless he had good grounds for doing so.
The ACCC and its counterpart, the New Zealand Commerce Commission, rejected the proposed merger last month in a draft determination, arguing that the anti-competitive effect would have outweighed any public benefit from the deal.
Qantas and Air New Zealand are in the process of reapplying for a formal determination.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airline offers fare cap for NZ deal
By Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
May 10, 2003
QANTAS is prepared to cap prices on some routes if the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission allows its $500 million alliance with Air New Zealand to proceed.
The new offer was contained in a submission the airline planned to file with the ACCC last night in an attempt to overturn a draft determination rejecting its bid to take a 22.5 per cent stake in Air NZ.
Details of the filing will not be available until Monday but a Qantas spokesman said the airline was prepared to make "a new undertaking relating to pricing and a stronger and more substantial undertaking relating to capacity, facilities and services".
The pricing undertakings are understood to relate to trans-Tasman or New Zealand domestic routes, where the alliance will hold a monopoly.
The airline is also prepared to extend the timeframes in which its undertakings will apply.
The submission highlights a range of issues, including the effect of continuing problems in the aviation industry on both airlines and the likely contraction of Air NZ's international operations if the deal does not proceed.
It also notes Virgin Blue's intention to enter the trans-Tasman and domestic New Zealand markets and argues "real and substantial benefits" will flow from the alliance.
Qantas had previously offered a conditional moratorium on attacking trans-Tasman rivals, provision of facilities for up to 12 months and a promise not to reduce capacity on monopoly routes for two years.
But the ACCC found the harm caused by the deal's "highly anti-competitive" nature outweighed any benefits from the alliance.
ACCC chairman Allan Fels left little room for further negotiations when he said it was difficult to envisage what further undertakings could be offered to meet the watchdog's concerns.
His remarks were backed up by the New Zealand Commerce Commission, which found the alliance would "likely result in a substantial lessening of competition".
The NZCC calculated the alliance would cost its public up to $NZ401 million ($365 million) in lost productivity and efficiency.
Qantas has asked the ACCC to finalise its draft determination as soon as possible so the airline can, if necessary, lodge an appeal with the Australian Competition Tribunal.
Even if successful, an appeal could delay the deal for up 12 months and federal Transport Minister John Anderson has not ruled out new legislation to push through the alliance.
Qantas and partner British Airways warned in a separate submission that they would probably cut flights on the "kangaroo route" between Sydney and London if the ACCC did not renew a joint services agreement that allowed them to fix prices and share profits.
"Passengers would be denied choice and increased air fares would be inevitable. The proposal would likely result in a substantial lessening of competition in a number of markets."
May 10, 2003
QANTAS is prepared to cap prices on some routes if the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission allows its $500 million alliance with Air New Zealand to proceed.
The new offer was contained in a submission the airline planned to file with the ACCC last night in an attempt to overturn a draft determination rejecting its bid to take a 22.5 per cent stake in Air NZ.
Details of the filing will not be available until Monday but a Qantas spokesman said the airline was prepared to make "a new undertaking relating to pricing and a stronger and more substantial undertaking relating to capacity, facilities and services".
The pricing undertakings are understood to relate to trans-Tasman or New Zealand domestic routes, where the alliance will hold a monopoly.
The airline is also prepared to extend the timeframes in which its undertakings will apply.
The submission highlights a range of issues, including the effect of continuing problems in the aviation industry on both airlines and the likely contraction of Air NZ's international operations if the deal does not proceed.
It also notes Virgin Blue's intention to enter the trans-Tasman and domestic New Zealand markets and argues "real and substantial benefits" will flow from the alliance.
Qantas had previously offered a conditional moratorium on attacking trans-Tasman rivals, provision of facilities for up to 12 months and a promise not to reduce capacity on monopoly routes for two years.
But the ACCC found the harm caused by the deal's "highly anti-competitive" nature outweighed any benefits from the alliance.
ACCC chairman Allan Fels left little room for further negotiations when he said it was difficult to envisage what further undertakings could be offered to meet the watchdog's concerns.
His remarks were backed up by the New Zealand Commerce Commission, which found the alliance would "likely result in a substantial lessening of competition".
The NZCC calculated the alliance would cost its public up to $NZ401 million ($365 million) in lost productivity and efficiency.
Qantas has asked the ACCC to finalise its draft determination as soon as possible so the airline can, if necessary, lodge an appeal with the Australian Competition Tribunal.
Even if successful, an appeal could delay the deal for up 12 months and federal Transport Minister John Anderson has not ruled out new legislation to push through the alliance.
Qantas and partner British Airways warned in a separate submission that they would probably cut flights on the "kangaroo route" between Sydney and London if the ACCC did not renew a joint services agreement that allowed them to fix prices and share profits.
"Passengers would be denied choice and increased air fares would be inevitable. The proposal would likely result in a substantial lessening of competition in a number of markets."