Sarcasm and satire is obviously lost on some. If you're after my thoughts on the merits of B scales then a search of my posts- particularly on the recent C/C LH EBA thread- may be useful. :rolleyes:

Mate thats the first example I have seen of sarcasm and satire used like that.

Frankly, I couldn't be bothered with Qantas anymore and have stopped flying with them. If I want to fly anywhere within AUS, I fly myself. Once a year when I travel overseas to the UK for business, then Emirates first class (at LESS THAN half the price of Qantas business class!!) is the only way to go.

I neither care for, nor am even the slightest bit interested in whatever internal issues Qantas has. I don't like what they offer me for MY money, so I go elsewhere, in fact I'm fecked if I know why I wasted 5 mins of my day typing this

Unfortunately executive management appear to have no leadership skills. This reflects upon the extremely low morale amongst staff (and subsequently costs the company potentially higher earnings. And higher executive bonus's?????......)

Atlas Shrugged.....When I saw your post I thought you beauty I'll go Emirates next time but when I checked their respective web sites it didn't add up...

First on Emirates to LHR was around $17,000
First on QF to LHR was around $16000

Business on Emirates to LHr was around $8000
Business on QF to LHR was around $12000

These figures are return...

So Business is a huge advantage for Emirates but first class on Emirates is no where near half the QF business class.

...Or do you have another way like buying a round the world ticket to get the difference?

Dropt McGutz is right as you should not blame the staff for any short comings.

The blame sits squarely on the shoulders of management because their attitude filters down to employee's although I understand what people say when they don't want to spend their money on QF.

im not usually one to complain, but on a recent (august) syd-chc flight
i have decided to fly business class as a bit of a treat to myself,
breakfast comes round, i chose museli i think it was, the csm (or whatever its called these days) walks straight past with the milk after serving the bloke next to me,
now im not one for the govenment owning everything, but i think its time kev stepped up to the plate, brought back qantas and commenced a sweep of all the deadwood (start from the top) get it back to the good old days
where it was a pleasure to fly

Don't have the papers with me at the mo but when I flew SSY-LHR in Feb this year QF business was, I think, $12,236 and EM first was $6,490 or somtehing like, that through a travel agent in Sydney. I'll have root around and see if I can find the exact details

Qf recently spent a lot of money replacing all the economy trays, cups etc.
The money should of been spent on fixing the IFE. Not one pax so far has made any comment about the new trays, but people that have no IFE for 12hrs + get pretty peeved off and believe me, have plenty to say.

Another well thought out idea from management.

The new crockery was chosen to save weight ie. less fuel burn.

Here's an idea to save weight/fuel burn - remove the IFE altogether if it never works! Would save a whooole lot more than changing the crockery around :}

This may sound like a novel idea but how about buying a ife system that works in the first place.
and if you want to save money don't give a bonus to someone when things they authorised don't work.
They are only our customers so if they can't work out how to keep them happy turn it into a freight airline.
That would save a packet because we would not need pax services,CC management,ff schemes and lounges for a start.

No...............I know.......................let's change the shape of the Kangaroo......................oh........................and change the font of the lettering .....................that should waste a few millions that could be better spent elswhere !!!
:ugh:

.......Yep,Darth's next Bonus.....:yuk:

From what I have been told by a number of people, the ife QF chose, was not the one recommended by the staff that were doing the selection process. It ended up being selected by Marketing.

Rammel that notion is seconded! It was indeed chosen by marketing even after the selection staff recommended an alternative! (ie it was cheaper!)

The other cheaper alternative they went for was Airbus over Boeing.

Rammel, incorrect. I have spoken at some length to one of the engineers who was on the selection committee for the much maligned IFE. Although now retired he goes to my church and is in my parents Bible study group.

I joked with him that he was the one to blame for me spending long amounts of time on SATCOM discussing with the maintenance watch how to solve the myriad of problems. He acknowledged that indeed he was part of the process and that the company took the recommendation from the committee on which he was a part. That the successful tenderer didn't deliver wasn't foreseeable at the time and he felt that any committee today faced with the information that they had at the time would probably make the same decision. He acknowledged that hindsight is a wonderful thing.

This shouldn't be confused with the process that went towards buying the A330. My understanding is that the recommendation from both Flight Ops and engineering was to not go with the A330. However they were just two voices at the table and the aircraft selection 'committee' (not sure of their precise make up or whether they Flight Ops and Engineering have a vote at the table or just provide 'information') decided to go with the A330.

Did your section have anything to do with that twiggs?

It's hard to imagine that the old 'cartridge' film system gave fewer problems that the much vaunted IFE system installed......At least most of the flights in those days were shorter....