PPRuNe Forums - MERGED: Alan's still not happy......

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)

- - MERGED: Alan's still not happy...... (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/528014-merged-alans-still-not-happy.html)

the public will love the notion of a national airline. right up to the point they have to pay for it.

just like the car industry.

With all the requests by management to sign the petition to keep QANTAS viable I am in two minds. I'm like the faithful dog who has been slapped on the nose too many time's, I want to bite you but you're still the one who feeds me.:confused:

anyone who signed that petition is a dolt.

the petition doesnt actually say what action you are endorsing. it makes no claim or demand of the recipient. which is what petitions normally do.

bga could come up with anything he likes and says "look! i've got 18000 signatures agreeing with me"

signing that gives him cart blanche to do what he likes

One has to wonder what the information the good Senator and Borghetti have in their back pockets?

Xenophon calls for forensic review of Qantas accounts

Quote:

Xenophon calls for forensic review of Qantas accounts

Ben Sandilands | Nov 28, 2013 1:00PM | EMAIL | PRINT

For the first time in the Qantas v Virgins and evil foreign backers hysteria that is pushing China and Indonesia tensions off the top of news pages a political figure has taken aim at alleged self harm by Qantas management.
This is independent SA Senator, Nick Xenophon’s detailed statement.

Call for Qantas CEO and Chairman to quit
35,000 jobs at stake – Government must act to prevent break-up of national icon

Independent Senator for South Australia, Nick Xenophon, has called on the Government to “forensically examine” Qantas’ latest claims and then act in accordance with the national interest.
In 2011, Senator Xenophon introduced legislation to strengthen the Qantas Sale Act to prevent offshoring of jobs and the dilution of the Qantas brand via overseas-based subsidiaries. The ALP and Coalition both opposed the proposed changes.
Qantas has been lobbying the Australian Government over the proposed $350 million capital-raising by Virgin, which will effectively see that airline being over 70 per cent controlled by foreign interests, as well as having cheap access to funds.
“Qantas is right to say there’s an unlevel playing field over the proposed Virgin deal, but Qantas has other problems that directly relate to their own decisions,” Nick said.
Senator Xenophon was scathing of the “cannibalisation” of Qantas by its offshoot Jetstar, in particular “the apparent black hole that is Jetstar’s Asian experiment”.
He also singled out Alan Joyce’s decision to ground Qantas on October 29 2011, during an industrial dispute, which cost the airline upwards of $200 million.
Senator Xenophon said that abandoning the safeguards of the Qantas Sale Act would be a “massive mistake that would put at risk not only a national icon, but tens of thousands of jobs”.
“Since Mr Joyce commenced his term on 28 November 2008, there has been no clear long term, consistent strategy for the airline, and his Chairman Mr Clifford must share responsibility for this haphazard approach as well,” Nick said. “They both need to go to give Qantas clear air.”
“Before the Government considers any action on Qantas, it needs to examine Qantas’ books forensically to determine if there’s been any cost-shifting between Qantas and Jetstar,” Nick said.
Senator Xenophon said the economic and social impacts of losing Qantas to foreign or private equity interests would be enormous. He called on the Federal Government to:

Delay the Virgin capital raising, pending an examination of Qantas’ claims;
Examine all policy settings that impact on Qantas, especially the operation of foreign state-backed carriers, including the more the more generous depreciation allowance overseas; and
Examine price-capping of Australian airport charges, which are amongst some of the highest in the world.

In the interests of the thoughtful national debate which all sides of politics seem to support, even without forensic accountants, this observer’s comment is that freezing the Virgin Australia capital injection for any period of time would play right into Qantas hands, and possibly destroy the Virgin competition, and inflict deep harm on the South Australian and national economy.

Virgin Australia adds to calls for Qantas scrutiny

Quote:

Virgin Australia adds to calls for Qantas scrutiny

Ben Sandilands Nov 28, 2013 4:39PM

Virgin Australia has joined the calls for a much closer look at the underlying factors in Qantas calling for actions to curb its $350 million capital raising.
It’s a very short statement:

Over the last three years, Virgin Australia has had a consistent strategy of bringing strong competition to all key market segments, including the corporate, government, regional, leisure and budget segments.
We have made significant progress in this regard, despite our major competitor’s publically-stated strategy of maintaining a 65 per cent share of the Australian domestic aviation market at all costs. Virgin Australia believes that a level playing field should include a full and proper investigation of our major competitor’s 65 per cent “line in the sand” policy.
Virgin Australia is a publically listed company and it fully complies with all its legal obligations. Virgin Australia’s recently announced Entitlement Offer is designed to raise funds, which is something that any publically listed company can do.
As an ASX-listed company, our aim is to create a long-term sustainable and profitable business, for the benefit of our shareholders, our 9,500 employees, our customers and ultimately for the Australian economy.
The Qantas Sale Act is a matter between the Government and Qantas.

However the sting is in the call for a close look at the 65% line-in-the-sand fetish in the Qantas group.
On its own words, Qantas used that ‘line’ as the rationale for adding excessive capacity on routes where the Virgin Australia competion had been doing the most damage, with the intention of driving it into loss.
However the tactic has also severely impacted the Qantas performance, and been a major factor in driving down the QAN share price, which in turn has arguably seriously impacted the Qantas capability of seeking its own capital raisings to counter the ‘generosity’ of Air New Zealand, Etihad and Singapore Airlines.
Virgin’s statement seems crafted to make politicians and Qantas shareholders the same question:
Should the government bail out or partially renationalise Qantas to save it from its own mistakes?

Just another possible route onto the aus-usa routes for the usual suspects :suspect:

Quote:

According to Crikey
Quote:
Coalition says Qantas can have state money if public want it. BEN SANDILANDS | NOV 28, 2013 12:35PM

I could live with government investment in QF. But only if it it comes with the condition that the current board are given the bum's rush :ok:

Quote:

I could live with government investment in QF. But only if it it comes with the condition that the current board are given the bum's rush

Just are the employees of Holden are. But is it in the interests of Australian taxpayers to prop up a business such as Qantas? Like Other debates such as Australia becoming a republic I want to see the business case.

In the forthcoming debate and scrutiny of the books hopefully this will come out.

Alan Joyce and his Mahogany Row are doing a pretty good job lobbying the Sydney centric Libs with their rent-seeking. Ultimately, to receive a hand-out would be just like the Australian auto-industry, globally uncompetitive and destined to fail. If it's a bad business model it should fail, propping it up with hand-outs robs Peter (taxpayers) to pay Paul (QF board.)

This has always been political and bigger than the Qantas brand. The Australian public need to decide many things going forward in their (unproductive) lives. Amongst them is whether Qantas is an Australian icon or not. In this globalised world I don't think any "brand" can or should claim they're local.

Therefore the QSA should be abolished. Any tinkering by giving hand-outs to "compete" or "level the playing" field is being disingenuous and a waste of tax payers money. Qantas claiming that Virgin aren't "playing fair" is also a furphy. Qantas thinking that 2/3 of domestic traffic should be theirs is fair and equitable??

Perhaps Qantas complaining about Singapore etc don't like the free market priciples they operate to, hence their worry about being uncompetitive?

Qantas invests heavily off-shore in their Jetstar brand. VAA doesn't invest off shore. It could be argued that the Virgin brand is present overseas, however they're all completely separate businesses run by a varied and diverse range of interests (albeit with some having a minority philanthropic equity stake by Richard Branson himself), unlike Qantas which clearly controls it's many Jeststar iterations.

Qantas is iconic in my mind, but being a free market person, it shouldn't be protected in the way that is currently being put forward. Seems to me that its actually VAA that is seeking a level playing field, at least domestically. 50% Qantas and 50% VAA is level, not 2/3 Qantas 1/3 VAA.

Ultimately, this is about Australia's competitiveness and where Qantas sits in the Australian psyche.

However, this just plays into my long held belief the board have been using all this time to it's advantage. Trash the brand to such an extent that the share price plummets to encourage a private take-over bid and get a nice payout. Amusingly, If not leveraged too highly, this would be to all Qantas employees and hence the Australian publics benefit. :eek::ok:

Joyce is a master at distraction. This takes people's attention away from the fact that the business is in diabolical trouble. If the foreign ownership levels were lifted but Joyce and the current board stayed nothing would be any different. Joyce has his back to the wall, the half yearly results in January will be shocking. I feel the end game is just beginning.

I wonder if EK is watching all this with a glint in their eye?

Let's be frank here.

Qantas enjoyed a ten year monopoly in the Australian domestic business market as well as a monopoly on the Pacific for who knows how many years. In all that time they simply raped the Australian public and booked significant profits. Whether or not that was reflected in the balance sheet is irrelevant, the money was made and the management used it.

The fact is Dixon and then Joyce p!ssed away all those years of profits on their misguided Asian affair. Had it not been for this high risk adventure Qantas would have a massive warchest of cash to fight this battle. The fact they chose to squander that money is reflected in the share price.

Why on earth would the taxpayer give even a passing thought to throwing good money after bad to prop up this dysfunctional business model? A bad business is a bad business. Taxpayer money wont change that and will turn it into another bottomless pit of govt funding similar to the auto industry.

Cut it loose and let it sink or swim, using someone elses money, not mine.

EK won't buy in but they might be disappointed if QF have the government change the market place. The guvmint mightn't have the money (taxpayers) to renationalise the airline but they could restrict foreign access to Australia if they want to protect our iconic Aussie flying business.

EK? Maybe Cathay might be interested too. :ok:

EK will be watching this very closely. They have virtually stolen Qantas's business from them without having to cough up a cent. If Qantas is cut loose they will be forced to buy into Qantas in a big way to protect the best investment they never made.

EK will be dearly praying for the Government to bail Qantas out, that way EK will be able to continue to pick up all the traffic and use all the landing rights without paying a cent. I doubt that CX or SQ or whoever else would be interested would afford them the same luxury.

If the restrictions embedded in the QSA are removed there will be a stampede of International airlines with a vested interest in trying to get on the share register.

Of course the other option is EK could start a wholly owned domestic operation in Australia and completely f^ck the industry for us.

QF is finished and it breaks my
Heart! 93 years of iconic history tossed away - the Board should hang its head in shame!!

Quote:

Prehaps Qantas complaining about Singapore etc don't like the free market priciples they operate to, hence their worry about being uncompetitive?

I don't believe nationalised airlines with soveriegn wealth funds and favourable taxation and accounting standards qualify as free markets. The idea of free markets is that the government stays out of them!

That aside Vorschit is correct. Alan has been wasting squillions overseas and now wants everbody else to fund his Australian op that he has neglected. If they stuck to the local market and funded the local Jetstar and QF ops they would never have the problems they do now.

So glad I voted for the Libs............

For those who missed it

AJ says

Quote:

"there is no time to change legislation to make foreign ownership possible"

I note Bill Shorten all of a sudden sounding "chippa" but did nothing much when in government, and Joe Hockey was just going through the motions, negative at best.

Funny lot those guys in Canberra.

I find it absolutely amazing that Q suddenly finds itself in this position going by what was said back on August 29/08/2013

Quote:

I note the lines in the above clip "it will get even better soon"

and

"we are two years into our turnaround plan for Qantas International and we are on track towards our target of returning to profit financial year 15"

It appears a lot has changed since late August...

I guess the "turnaround plan" has had a few unexpected hurdles placed on the track since then... it never ends.. as usual, positives few and far between from the boys in the suits, five years of it now, I feel for you guys and girls, you all do a great job keeping the show on the road considering all of the above and it's still a great airline, kudos :ok:

.

Terms of conditions for refunds!!

The complexities of a 'bail out' argument are too many to discuss here.
However one thing is certain;

- Not one cent of taxpayer money should be handed over to Qantas unless a strict scope or deed of request clause is attached, which should include the removal of Joyce, Clifford and the entire board of directors. For starters.

- As the astute Xenophon says, 'a thorough forensic audit of the QF Groups books' should be undertaken. This should also be done prior to one dime being handed over. The forensic examination should, as a minimum, be back dated 5 years to when Joyce commenced. But perhaps it should go back let's say 8 years in total?

- Any forensic examination of Alan Capone's bookwork should not be outsourced to BCG, or to any organisation that has been fattened excessively by feeding from the QF gravy train.

- Any investigation that uncovers any suspect, deliberate, questionable, misleading, malfeasant activity needs to be forwarded to the relevant authorities and those in accountable positions should be held totally to account.

Don't spend one cent of my money on QF

Although I would not be happy to see the demise of QF remember the debt that was written off to privatise the business. Why should we pay again, Joyce has caused this not Virgin. Get him out and his cronies then we can talk