Ansett gone .......but ?
 

8 years ago the airline ceased operations in its major form.
Has the industry become any better for the loss of this world class organisation?
While we are in some shed waiting for Tiger, squashed in a Virgin tin can or sneered at up the pointy end of a QF filght do you lament the way things used to be?

:ok:

funny this thread should appear... I was watching some of their TV commercials on youtube yesterday.

i miss it to death....

as a passenger...... and as work (over 20 years ago :ok: )

Ansett will never be forgotten, nor will TAA and East West,

AN did indeed technichally die when the aeroplanes Reg owned where sold off and the 737s and 767s were leased by the the Fat prick and Abeles.

The monies gained from that were stripped from the Company. The rest is history.

TN was is the same leaky boat after years of the Government stripping profits out of the operation and eventually was aquired by QF on Government order to keep it afloat.

East West on the other hand was aquired by stealth by the evil empire as we were a huge and growing threat. Ansett with its lame management had no idea how to run a lean machine and eventually shut us.

But back to the original question, the answer is NO. Ansett will be remembered not for the fat bastard that killed them but will most definitely be remembered for the terrific people that gave it a heart and soul.

Two generations down the track there may be a lack of knowledge in the general public, but the memory will live on down family lines.

Best all

EWL

One BIG difference between then and now, a return fare from BNE to MEL (or CNS) was something like $800 or more, now usually can get them for $100-150.

RU/16 Better get used to it mate...any opportunity! :rolleyes:

Bottom line, Ansett was the beneficiary of some dodgy Government intervention & in the end, with a multitude of other factors involved, it was brought down by the same dodgy Government intervention.

As for service standards, well, as Airsupport says, $800 got you a little more polish on the flight, in the airport facilities, and other areas but most people just see the bottom line. As with life, society seems to bend to the lowest common denominator. People used to put on a tie & hat to go out, now, well, just take a look around.

Some companies can move with the times, others cannot, or will not. There was no one in upper management at Ansett capable of reading the times, so it fell by the wayside. Like Qantas has now, Ansett looked like it was starting to head down the path of lowering its services in order to cut costs. Alas, too little, too late...

Who says Ansett has gone? Been to the Sim Centre in Tullamarine lately? Ansett stuff everywhere right down to the Link Trainer. It is actually a good place for "if only" scenarios as an example of what could have been possible if it was run as a business and not as a plaything.

Ansett gone .......but ?
 

Just wondering,

why was this this thread padlocked ????????????:rolleyes:

It was just getting to be a thread that was a display of some great memories and experiences, with minimal angst for all involved ! At least from my perspective, as humble as it may be :sad:.

Disappointed :*

SRU

Ansett was the best airline compared to the crap around today.

then why is is it not still here ah?

Yes, why on Earth was it padlocked?

It was one of very few threads here worth reading and posting on, yet you lock it. :confused:

IF anyone was posting inappropriate things on the thread, then okay take action against them, but NOT the thread. :(

Why is it not still here.

Because it was losing money.

Almost as much money as QF did as the Department Of Flying The Flag.

But alas, AN didnt have decades of tax payer money to prop it up.

Certainly the then PM's overt assitance to his best mate PA didn't help!:hmm:
A b*gga it, lock this thread too!!

Its costs (notably the salaries of pilots, cabin crew and engineers) had grown so large over the years that it had become vulnerable to external economic factors. So vulnerable was Ansett that, in the end, no bang was required to knock it over - merely a whimper.

This was in large part due to the efforts of the various unions. Unions are supposed to look after their members but in all too many cases around the world (in not just airlines), it is their actions that ultimately put their members out of work. I am of course referring to the continuous upwards "creep" in pay and conditions.

It must have been great working there and being on the receiving end of those enormous salaries. I wonder how many realised the danger posed by those enormous salaries?

P.S. Great thread. A shame the original was locked as some photos were, I believe, just about to be posted.

In actual fact the salaries were on a par with Qantas except for the flight attendants who were paid less than their QF counterparts. Ansett failed solely due to mismanagement.

"I am of course referring to the continuous upwards "creep" in pay and conditions."

So you would prefer all wages were kept stagnant for say 5 or 10 year periods while inflation (read- COST OF LIVING) rises annually. :hmm:

No. He would prefer that wages FELL over a 5 -10 year period. It would let business create new "opportunities". (read - line management's pockets).

B*gger it. This thread will get locked, too.

So you would prefer all wages...

An unfortunately naive view of industrial relations...

Stand by for the implementation of the current Australian rule set (when we find out what it is).

I am fully expecting to have to retrench to balance the inevitable wages and conditions push in a very tight business situation. Sad, but if the troops want to push up their individual conditions, it very likely will be at the expense of a buddy's total conditions ...

I dont want to take this thread off topic as the last thread was a goldie.

My reply will be in a new topic in General Aviation q's section...

Ansett had to be gotten rid of because it would have been a huge threat to Air New Zealand and Qantas under the stewardship of SIA.

How is it that Ansett was Airline of the year 2 years in a row, Olympic official carrier then just vanish into thin air.

ANZ bought Ansett though it could not afford it, they paid 150 mill more than what SIA offered News Corp for their half, only to stop Ansett from flying across to the West Coast USA, as ANZ thought that domain belonged to them and Qantas exclusively.

They all new that Ansett was a real danger to them, as Branson said that Ansett International was the best airline service in the world.

So when the payment came up ANZ could not afford to make the payments and just let Ansett adrift after gutting all the assets, meanwhile Trickie-Dickie had Howard and co in his pocket, so no life-line, not like for the Auto industry or many other examples (Howards Bro.) where the gov bailed out troubled industries.:sad:

In actual fact the salaries were on a par with Qantas except for the flight attendants who were paid less than their QF counterparts. Ansett failed solely due to mismanagement.

Z Force, you hit it on the head there, and the pilots were actually costing a lot less post 89 than before, but let's not get into the pre/post $hit fight here.

Richard Cranium, you're no d1ckhead after all.

The minister for QF, John Anderson, insisted that ANZ buy Ansett (and he could have just as easily stopped them in the national interest) so that they wouldn't kill QF stone dead as would have been inevitable. SIA was and is a great airline from a marketing point, and QF wouldn't have stood a chance.

The pollies had to keep the gravy train gold passes on QF going. It'd be too tough if they had to pay for their own tickets, especially on the most generous superannuation in the country.

I think the moderator binned the original thread because East West Loco and me indicated that we had trouble with understanding the following.....



NOTE:

To post a picture on PPRuNe, it has to be on a website already - whether your own or someone else's. If it's not, all is not lost ...... read on.

If the picture already on a website .....

It will have an URL (the unique 'address' of that pic on the web)
To find the URL (using Windows):
Right-click on the picture and select 'Properties'
You'll see lots of info, including the URL.
Highlight and Copy the entire URL.
NB: Always highlight from the beginning or you may not get the full URL if it's long.

If the picture is on your hard disk .....

Option 1: Find a friend with a web site who will 'host' the picture for you They'll send you the URL for your picture so you can then post it.
or

Option 2: Use a photo-hosting site.

PhotoBucket seems to be the best, very simple to use and it's free.
An 'offshoot' of Photobucket is TinyPic but as far as I can see this one does not have a facility to resize the image.

Once you've loaded your picture on the host, it will give you the URL - or you can use the procedure described above.

Photobucket also allows you to reduce the size of any pics which are too big for the PPRuNe web page.

NB: Some photo-hosting services host your pics but won't allow you to link to them from another site.

Size is important!

Picture size must not exceed 800x600 pixels MAXIMUM, to avoid the PPRuNe thread viewing window becoming too large.

You can see the size of any image (in Windows) by right-cliking on the image and selecting 'properties'.

There are many ways to resize images, and since most photogs have digicams now and these normally come with image handling programmes it should not present too much of an intellectual challenge to produce the correct size!

There are many Shareware image handling programmes plus lots of FREE downloadable ones. A simple 'Google' search or read of a computer magazine or two will produce plenty of ideas. There are also several FREE 'on-line' image re-sizing sites. Here are a few links for you:-

1 Izhuk.com

2 Resizeimage.4u2ges.com

3 Resize2mail.com

4 Online-image-resize.kategorie.cz

5 Graphicssoft.about.com

PLEASE NOTE that since these are FREE they do impose certain restrictions on file types and sizes and normally require you to permit their 'cookies' onto your machine.

Now to Post!:

Begin to post as normal.

Click the IMG button - one of the buttons above the text box. NB: Ensure you have something other than 'BASIC EDITOR' selected in your 'User CP'/'Edit Options'

An 'Input Box' will appear.

Copy the URL into the address line as instructed.

Click OK.

Add whatever text you wish and Submit.

At first, as with any new process involving computers, you'll probably go through some moments.


Common Problems:

No 'Image' icon etc on the 'Reply' screen:

Wrong 'Editor' mode selected.

Picture doesn't display:

Your post may show a link, not a picture - edit your post.

Check to see if 'URL' appears anywhere in the web address of the picture. If it's there at all, it will be there twice. Remove both.

(You've used information from the URL, but those letters should not appear in the final address or you'll get a link instead of a picture.)

You have IMG..../IMG around the image:

You have copied an IMG tag from Photobucket rather than the URL tag. To get rid of it, either edit out the excess [IMG] [/ IMG] in your post or replace the code using the URL tag.

Copyright claims etc

In PPRuNe, we don't allow pictures which have any commercial links embedded or attached. Please 'edit' these out.


As usual, a PM to your local 'mod' will hopefully result in assistance if you get stuck!...



It would appear that unless one conforms to the mods standard of computer skills, then one is not welcome on prune! :ok:

IT skills
 

Nice one Obie,

Mmmmm ... Me, I'm Just a pilot, - Illiterate and can't add up :eek:, To wade through that hurts my head, so no pictures for me! :O

Anyway, lets pick up from the former thread. Stories - planes, people and memories.
Cheers all :ok:

OK!...So, now that we're back on again, we need one of the mods to take EWL's pics and put them on prune for us!

sru is obviously as useless as me and Loco, so we need the help of one of the mods, or preferably Bill gates, to access these exclusive pics!

It was you that pushed the wife of the Travelodge manager into the pool, wasn't it, EWL? [ fully clothed, I might add!]

Read "A sting in the tail of $49 Tiger fare" and tell me you dont miss the Ansett experience!

re post 21
 

Thats a truly original version of events, especially the bit about Air NZ seeing AN as a threat......:rolleyes:

"version of events" regarding "Air NZ seeing AN as a threat".

Actually, its an opinion, not someone's "version" of an "event".

And as an opinion, it is certainly valid.

Now what? :confused:

You seem to have partially merged the two threads, but without saying it is a merged thread. :confused:

Makes no sense at all now. :(

Re post 28
 

Version ... opinion ... how about ... fantasy.

Go look up a dictionary.

Slamer.

And your version of events is based upon........?

Perhaps you were a senior level manager at ANI?

Or were you working for the Transport Minister?

Or maybe you were a lobbyist working for QF at the time.

I was one of these and have close friends who occupied the other positions during the final months and years of AN. The company was a small pawn in a wider game of chess involving many agendas - crushing organized labor, politicians dancing to the tunes of powerful lobbyists in Canberra, nationalistic flag waving involving 3 countries, incompetent NZ government (once described as children playing an adults game), even paybacks for disparaging remarks made about CASA by a senior AN manager.

Prof

First of all, TN was not so much propped up by the Government over the years but rather was stripped of profits by them year after year.

If a fleet upgrade was needed they then had to go back to the government and beg for a portion of it back.

Secondly, can you not see SIA's failed Grand Plan?

With 2 members on the board of NZ, talk them around taking over AN. They were well aware that the NZ incumbents couldn't run a chook raffle much less AN and that it would collapse. The theory was that SQ would then ride in like a white knight and rescue the carrier and its people and be a hero.

Why you ask would they do it that way? Simple - by putting NZ in the driver's seat SQ would not lose face when it fell over initially. Why did they want Ansett? Rights to the Pacific ex Australia which they have lusted over for years were at stake, plus the domestic feeds ex Australia they were going to eventually lose whe AN self immolated all on its own. What buggered up the master plan? A bunch of life support systems for tea towels flying aeroplanes into stationary objects. Poor timing - not of their own cause.

SQ had 2 choices to rebirth the AN Empire, which was top heavy and management weak but with a first class front end.

One was to remove the top 3 to 4 levels of management and put their own selections into their seats. This would have been extremely expensive with redundancies, long service and the like. The other and cheaper way was to cause it to fail. That worked fine, but 9/11 screwed to puppy.

Let us be certain about one thing - SQ is the villain, and always has been. SQ was the disease, NZ was the vector, AN was the casualty.

The rebirth may well have worked, but for some very foxy stretching until all other consortiums fell away as the costs rose.

I would love to know the numbers on the cheques SQ wrote for that little excercise.

Sermon endeth, but have a good look at the events.

Best all

EWL

At last..someone that knows what their talking about.

Nice airline, raped by AirNZ

Re post 31
 

If I did I wouldnt be stupid enough to admit it. Those with integrity and sense stayed well away from what was clearly going to be a disaster. It was well recognized at the time they hardly had their .... "best and brightest" ... on the job.

Ask yourself, who owned Brierleys investments and where was that Biz based....?

EWL has made a fairly accurate summary

PS: Im sure the pre 89 Ansett was a fine company.

" Im sure the pre 89 Ansett was a fine company."

Pointless any more discussion. your agenda has been clearly annunciated.

John Anderson was to aviation as sandpaper is a toilet paper replacement - ie it does half the job and leaves the area bleeding and in need of a professional/doctor.

With cameras on him, he once shook my hand and asked me who I worked for.

I replied 'Alliance' (having just had JH onboard the week before after the 146 broke down).

His reply was a very awkward 'Oh, um, Oh, ahh... theyre owned by impulse aren't they?'

I replied 'no', and he turned the colour of the 'target' store logo he was standing in front of.

Interesting comment Prof.

How has our agenda been annunciated?

You allude to knowledge from inside.I was at a fairly high level and through mates was privvy to P & L figures and a whole lot more. I was in the middle of the mess.

You make statements, and then back off in your last post.

I am not criticising, but would just like to know where you are coming from.

If the discussion is pointless to you Prof, then you are not and were not involved, but if you were then you were totally irrelevant,

That is the only reason I can imagine you would be so dismissive of an event that caused a great deal of angst, depression to the point of suicide and personal hardship to a great number of terrific people.

I was from a different culture, but the same sub species. We were all AIRLINE and in those days we shared a bond.

Once at least in your life, I hope you can find that bond wth a like group of people.

If you were a part of an Airline, I am sure you had no idea or need for the culture.

An Airline was something to treasure - and we did and still hold memories close. It is what we are and what provided the basis to our self esteem and self image.

Sermon endeth, but never underestimate the love of Airline workers for their carrier.

EWL

I think The Professor's comments allude to Slamer's comments.

Eastwest has in my opinion written one of the best posts I've seen in the last few years re: Ansetts demise.

A little bit of self critical honesty, and good helping of cynicism would lead most clear thinking and rational individuals (I would think) to a very similar conclusion.
Its quite pathetic the amount of parochial and jaundiced vitriol that is thrown about in this discussion...when its quite clear SQ were the puppet masters.

EWL.

Cool your jets sunshine. Twice now you have taken up an argument with me that I have never made.

I did not refer to TN at all.

I did not imply that you had an agenda.

“…can you not see SIA's failed Grand Plan?”

Absolutely. I fully agree with your comments regarding SQ…..Except for this:

“A bunch of life support systems for tea towels flying aeroplanes into stationary objects.”

This was certainly problematic. But when SQ was waiting in the wings as the Tesna operation was being launched, it was pretty obvious that the roadblocks being continually put in place were not constructed by terrorists but by political agendas and power plays in Canberra. Mr Cheong subtly attempted to highlight this point during a national radio interview. Obviously too subtly because very few people picked up on the message.

“Pointless any more discussion. Your agenda has been clearly annunciated.”

This comment was aimed only at Slamer. Any further discussion about AN’s demise is pointless with someone who is viewing the issue with dispute colored glasses.

For info.

I was not involved with the dispute. I was not employed by AN during its dying days. I was a non-flying manager with AN for many years and still to this day have a fond affection for the company and its people. I am a capitalist, pure and simple. My comments here on pprune clearly indicate that I am in favor of letting the market make decisions.

But what troubles me is that the collapse of AN was not such an example. A troubled carrier it was, but make no mistake, there were forces at play that ensured any financial weakness displayed by AN would be exploited to provide opportunity for change that is still playing out today.

I'm a believer in the capitalist system as well but a lot of the problems we have been created by the greed, immoral activities and policies of some board members.

This is the main reason for the current GFC...
It's all too easy to blame someone else for the demise of a concern when poor management was the core problem to begin with.If there was no inherent problem then the other forces would not have eventuated or been able to have a significant effect....