PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific-90/)
-   -   So you need a new fleet Leigh? (https://www.pprune.org/australia-new-zealand-pacific/604103-so-you-need-new-fleet-leigh.html)

Rated De 12th Apr 2018 10:43


So it's not core business and they are going to use funds to invest in the airline, hopefully that's mainline.
No dear chap, declining yields and all, mean the free cash flow has declined a bit.

Maintaining momentum in our 'Executive bonus (LTIP) scheme is hard work.

Those bloody share buy backs are expensive work!

Qantas need a new fleet.

Roj approved 12th Apr 2018 13:02

:confused:Another part of the airline that was world class, reduced to nothing and being sold of for short term cash injection.

Like the engine testing and overhaul, once a world leader training the likes of SIA, Cathay, ANA, JAL, Lufthansa, now they send the aeroplanes away and just get them to do the maintenance:confused::ugh:

V-Jet 12th Apr 2018 18:09


Originally Posted by Roj approved (Post 10115847)
:confused:Another part of the airline that was world class, reduced to nothing and being sold of for short term cash injection.

Like the engine testing and overhaul, once a world leader training the likes of SIA, Cathay, ANA, JAL, Lufthansa, now they send the aeroplanes away and just get them to do the maintenance:confused::ugh:

They are selling the family silver. I don’t think I could have chartered a better course for destruction than the one being taken! I read Andrew David’s triumphant announcement of that with utter disbelief. It’s like the Sudetenland volunteering to annex itself to Germany before WWII!

Anyone notice the laser like focus on APU fuel usage? Laughable they are concerned about fuel with the fleet they’ve got but I’ve been told now by two very different sources that it’s little to do with fuel, and a lot to do with the fact Qf don’t own the engines any more but have sold and lease them - on an hourly rate...

Cant change the A in laser for some reason!!

Arthur D 13th Apr 2018 12:56


Originally Posted by V-Jet (Post 10116141)
Anyone notice the laser like focus on APU fuel usage? Laughable they are concerned about fuel with the fleet they’ve got but I’ve been told now by two very different sources that it’s little to do with fuel, and a lot to do with the fact Qf don’t own the engines any more but have sold and lease them - on an hourly rate...

VJ - it’s called Power By the Hour and has been around for a very long time. Look it up, nothing nefarious, a great way to de-risk a high risk asset as well as pull some predictability into your spending.

Yes I know, I’m an angel cos I didn’t knock the company and bang on about blah, blah, blah. 🙄

Ken Borough 13th Apr 2018 13:14

One needs to look at history regarding the sale of flight kitchens. Airlines were forced into establishing their own flight kitchens as in the day, no one offered the services they required. So to meet their demand, flight kitchens became part of airlines. The world has moved on and kitchens have long been considered to be not the core business of an airline. For the same reason, one could suggest that's why airlines don't own oil refineries.

V-Jet 13th Apr 2018 18:06

Arthur - it’s the lies, not the decision per se that is the issue!

Ken - As long as there are meals and beverages consumed on aircraft, there is a business case to supply them. As with Engineering and everything else that was once absolutely worlds best standard, these entities have been decimated, Qantas has offloaded anything that is attractive to others, most likely for a relative pittance. If there is a single dollar to made in a year, Qantas should be making it and not immediately offloading it so a major competitor can then use that dollar against them.

For Qantas to be failing to buy aircraft (are aircraft considered ‘core’ to an airline??) AND offloading major assets like catering - to its’ primary competitor, no less - the situation must be extreme. Is it extreme because there is no money left for Joyce to maintain his exorbitant salary/boasting rights, or is the airline starting to grind to a halt through gross mismanagement (crewing/outsourcing etc)?

JPJP 13th Apr 2018 20:32


Originally Posted by Ken Borough (Post 10117040)
For the same reason, one could suggest that's why airlines don't own oil refineries.

Deltas oil refinery ;)

https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/...pay-off-a.aspx

Along with the largest Maintenance facility in North America.

Aviation MRO Services, Aircraft Maintenance & Engine Overhaul | Delta TechOps

Not being a smart arse. Just pointing out that some ‘non-core’ businesss can work.

lc_461 14th Apr 2018 02:49

For a similar reason, QF used to do the lion's share of ground handling for international carriers coming to SYD/MEL/BNE etc... utilising assets that would generally otherwise be idle in between QF flights... Nevertheless a few years ago they decided this was non-core as well, forcing these carriers into the arms of the competition. A similar thing happened with Q Catering and a couple of big contracts not too long ago.

Keg 14th Apr 2018 03:07


Originally Posted by Arthur D (Post 10117027)
VJ - it’s called Power By the Hour and has been around for a very long time. Look it up, nothing nefarious, a great way to de-risk a high risk asset as well as pull some predictability into your spending.

Yeah. That ‘de-risk’ worked so well when one blew up on the wing of an A380 ex SIN. Not sure it worked real well for predictability of spending after that either.

Oriana 14th Apr 2018 03:35

Sure Keg, but there's insurance for that.:rolleyes:

Traffic_Is_Er_Was 14th Apr 2018 04:18


“Customers will continue to enjoy Qantas’ premium service, including unique Rockpool-designed menus for First and Business passengers, showcasing the best of Australian produce for millions of travellers each year,”
No they won't. They will 'enjoy' whatever Dnata can supply for the lowest possible price Qantas can negotiate, particularly down the back, where it is hardly a "premium service".

Rated De 14th Apr 2018 05:36


but there's insurance for that
The problem with outsourcing is that control of process is lost.
Whilst it is low fruit to the accountant to sell what was once owned, there are sound process control reasons for it. Qantas catering was low fruit, William Meaney was involved in the stripping of Swiss Air and its catering, selling Gate Gourmet to TPG (Texas Pacific Group) with whom he still has connections...Isn't he leaving the board now?



That ‘de-risk’ worked so well when one blew up on the wing of an A380 ex SIN. Not sure it worked real well for predictability of spending after that either.
Keg is absolutely correct. No one remembers that it was a Rolls Royce Trent 900. The media splashed pictures of a Qantas logo, not RR. Lovely Olivia was busy defending Qantas, not Rolls Royce.

Mr Joyce made reference to the 'responsibility for the engines not being a core responsibility of Qantas'. Nice Alan, real modern corporate speak. Had it ended worse he would have increased the private security detail to keep him safe.

Qantas still need a new fleet

Arthur D 14th Apr 2018 21:43

Keg, what would the difference have been if QF had owned the engines on the A380?

Was the PBH contract renegotiated after that event, not in QF’s favour?

As previously said, insurance covered the damage to the airframe, exactly what it’s for.

Keg 14th Apr 2018 23:19


Originally Posted by Arthur D (Post 10118618)
Keg, what would the difference have been if QF had owned the engines on the A380?

If we’d owned them an maintained them we would have been well aware that there were serious issues with a number of them across the fleet. This was an incident who’s direct cause was due to lack of Qantas oversight of the engines hanging on the wing.



Originally Posted by Arthur D (Post 10118618)
As previously said, insurance covered the damage to the airframe, exactly what it’s for.

Lol. I suspect Oriana’s comment was more about sarcasm than anything else. Brand damage? Grounding of the entire A380 fleet for weeks? How about the risk of a hull loss? Sure, no worries. Insurance has it covered! :ugh:

RealityCzech 14th Apr 2018 23:21


Originally Posted by Rated De (Post 10117845)

Qantas still need a new fleet

No it doesn't need one. It can also become more of a virtual airline instead of putting billions into new QI fleet. Basing your plan and thinking on the false premise that QI will inevitably be purchasing new aircraft is a mistake.

Dee Vee 14th Apr 2018 23:34


Originally Posted by 73to91 (Post 10115276)
Bonuses all round? surely not.
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/q...s-dnata-2018-4


Qantas is selling its catering businesses to dnata, an aviation services company that is part of the Emirates Group, a code-sharing partner.

Spot on, short term thinking, sell off the family farm, get a big bonus, retire with a Golden Handshake

Its the New Guy's problem to make money when you are paying a fortune for outsourced services that you used to own.
Of course the first thing the new guy does is write down the value of everything, declare a huge loss, and blame the outgoing guy.

The execs keeps getting the big bonuses, while the company is in a race to the bottom, and bankruptcy.

ExtraShot 15th Apr 2018 02:30


Originally Posted by RealityCzech (Post 10118672)
No it doesn't need one. It can also become more of a virtual airline instead of putting billions into new QI fleet. Basing your plan and thinking on the false premise that QI will inevitably be purchasing new aircraft is a mistake.


We keep hearing about these ‘Virtual Airline’ business models, but I can’t really think of one off hand. Where you might say codeshare, etc; all airlines use codeshare and the like to give its customers a slightly improved route network, this is hardly said business model. Every airline still flies its own metal on the routes where it can get the loads it needs and make money... people want to get the product / brands they pay for, and if they don’t get it they’ll go elsewhere.

Qantas is going to be increasingly competing with airlines that have already had more modern and efficient fleets for a decade. Most are already taking a step-change again, leaving Qantas at risk of being an entire generation behind, AND playing catch-up.

Qantas employees are constantly told they are too expensive, or that their Western Terms and conditions are uncompetitive in an Asian region, yet when it comes to making serious strides where costs can REALLY be impacted in competing with SQ and Cathay and the like, the current management seem to drag their feet.

Unfortunately for the IR bullies, using aircraft orders will no longer be effective as a tool in an industrial battle. The staff (pilots/engineers/and others), are now increasingly aware that either Qantas gets serious about a fleet renewal program, or it gets annihilated by it’s competitors who have been serious about it for a decade or more already. It’s only a matter of time before the share market becomes aware of this as well.

Alan Joyce has been at the helm for almost TEN years, and I can't think of one new aircraft order made in that time... but the time has come. They need to outline a fleet renewal program for the next decade, and it needs happen relatively soon.

Rated De is correct.

Australopithecus 15th Apr 2018 03:07

The aircraft that Qantas needs -big long range twins- both have delivery constraints that seem a bit unstable. There are big 777-9 and A350-1000 orders from the ME3 that could easily shrink or delay which could free up slots. If they don’t Qantas is really screwed.

There are circa 100 Airbus orders for the various JQ entities...if a conversion of some of those to 350s is even possible the first delivery would be 70 months away, assuming the Airbus order book stays stable. There are earlier 777 slots but then what happens with the 100 A320/1 order? Take them all?

In six years QF will lose all of the 747s, the early 330 deliveries will be time-ex or close to it and a lot of 737s will be worn out too.

Regarding virtual airlines: If Qantas had no planes what the hell would a customer even need them for? I might do that myself since I don't own any aeroplanes either. Hey everybody! Look at me...I'm an airline! Weeeeeee!

RealityCzech 15th Apr 2018 03:16


Originally Posted by ExtraShot (Post 10118739)
We keep hearing about these ‘Virtual Airline’ business models, but I can’t really think of one off hand. Where you might say codeshare, etc; all airlines use codeshare and the like to give its customers a slightly improved route network, this is hardly said business model. Every airline still flies its own metal on the routes where it can get the loads it needs and make money... people want to get the product / brands they pay for, and if they don’t get it they’ll go elsewhere.

Qantas is going to be increasingly competing with airlines that have already had more modern and efficient fleets for a decade. Most are already taking a step-change again, leaving Qantas at risk of being an entire generation behind, AND playing catch-up.

Qantas employees are constantly told they are too expensive, or that their Western Terms and conditions are uncompetitive in an Asian region, yet when it comes to making serious strides where costs can REALLY be impacted in competing with SQ and Cathay and the like, the current management seem to drag their feet.

Unfortunately for the IR bullies, using aircraft orders will no longer be effective as a tool in an industrial battle. The staff (pilots/engineers/and others), are now increasingly aware that either Qantas gets serious about a fleet renewal program, or it gets annihilated by it’s competitors who have been serious about it for a decade or more already. It’s only a matter of time before the share market becomes aware of this as well.

Alan Joyce has been at the helm for almost TEN years, and I can't think of one new aircraft order made in that time... but the time has come. They need to outline a fleet renewal program for the next decade, and it needs happen relatively soon.

Rated De is correct.

No, he is not.

Qantas' labour cost base is higher than almost all of its competitors - especially those in Asia, Middle East, New Zealand and South America. If you want an example of a virtual airline, try looking next door at Virgin. If there were easy millions to be made operating a full service international airline out of Australia with modern aircraft, Virgin would be expanding rapidly internationally. Look at the fares being offered to Europe by the Chinese and Middle East carriers. QAN offering these fares would not only be economically loss-making, they wouldn't even be cash flow positive.

I understand there is a strong view among some senior QAN people that no more investment should be made into QI. The 777X or A350 project is a once in a generation opportunity for QI to have a future of growth, but the numbers have to add up. Don't assume that they will.

Australopithecus 15th Apr 2018 03:27


Originally Posted by RealityCzech (Post 10118754)
No, he is not.

Qantas' labour cost base is higher than almost all of its competitors - especially those in Asia, Middle East, New Zealand and South America. ill.

You’re right...time for a sweeping cull of the campus. Time for executive remuneration to reflect the size of the airline. Time for honesty and not this puerile attempt to shape perceptions based on a lie.

Australopithecus 15th Apr 2018 03:34


Originally Posted by RealityCzech (Post 10118754)
No, he is not.

. If you want an example of a virtual airline, try looking next door at Virgin. If there were easy millions to be made operating a full service international airline out of Australia with modern aircraft, Virgin would be expanding rapidly .

How do you know what Virgin's shareholders want? They mostly want out of Virgin, and Virgin's management are well known to be inept with every fleet choice they have made for 15 years. Don't hold them up as a paragon of virtue.

Just leafing through the Chinese A320 cotract rate for captains...its about twice what I make on a bigger jet for QF. The US carriers all pay more, and soon Rated De's predictions will bear out.

RealityCzech 15th Apr 2018 03:44

Interesting response. At no point did I claim to know what VAH shareholders want nor hold VAH up as a paragon of anything. These straw man arguments are irrelevant.

That's a great n = 1 sample, but misleading. Look at the cost bases in their entirety as well as their ownership structures and the economics of the markets they operate in.

QAN is in a much stronger position financially than a few years ago, especially domestically. But the international scene just gets more and more competitive by the day and QI will only get investment if it can charge fares that allow the investment. Higher pilot costs make that less likely. A lot of pprune posters seem very excited about pilot shortages leading to huge wage rises for Australian pilots. I would bet that the numbers are also being run on doing less inhouse flying and more virtual flying instead of being forced to pay higher wages. That may end up being the path chosen.

It's just one big complex equation at the end of the day.

Street garbage 15th Apr 2018 03:44

So RealityCzech, how does remuneration of QF executives compare with other airlines in our region? Compared with say Singair, Cathay, Air NZ? How many of the 5000 front line employee's jobs could be still be employed with Mr Joyce's $25mil and Mr David's $10.4mil?
At least you are going to solve the Pilot employment crisis, a virtual airline doesn't need any of those pesky precious pilots..

RealityCzech 15th Apr 2018 03:47

The endless references to remuneration might make you feel better/worse,but they aren't going to influence outcomes relevant to your career. I'd politely suggest getting over it.

Rated De 15th Apr 2018 04:12

Imagine realityczech is dealing in reality. Let us explore this administrative wet dream! People wander around the 'campus', Waterside and even CX city (only Monday to Friday) dreaming stuff like this up. Far easier than actually generating revenue like flying passengers, serving passengers and fixing the operating assets.


(Assuming people still want to be in a Frequent flyer program that has no international flying attached to it),
  • Frequent flyer without the flying bit, generates $1.4 billion.
  • If Code share revenue is reported in "other revenue' it totals $377 million
Code share revenue is really interesting. Airline executives fall back on 'commercial-in-confidence' however that revenue must be reported in the Income statement somewhere. As we reported in another thread Mr Joyce was extremely careful to never discuss the 'amazing revenue improvement' generated by the rivers of code share revenue flowing form the Emirates 'alliance'.
Simple arithmetic from the cancellation of the Frankfurt (Via Singapore) the Hong Kong and Bangkok to London services at best generates $377 million.

Adding it all up, Qantas group generates with QF international axed about $10 billion.



Given that scenario;



You’re right...time for a sweeping cull of the campus. Time for executive remuneration to reflect the size of the airline. Time for honesty and not this puerile attempt to shape perceptions based on a lie.
A proportional cull of the non revenue generating designer coffee brigades would improve efficiency no-end.

Replacing a 'real airline' with a virtual one is something that exists in 'breakout rooms' industry wide. Perfect in theory, as the Professor eloquently draws his neatly constructed graph. MBA level managers the world over taught the theory. The problem they face is that it works far less eloquently in reality.

ExtraShot 15th Apr 2018 04:23


. If you want an example of a virtual airline, try looking next door at Virgin
Virgin, Not really the shining example of financial success that would support your case.

If Qantas managements aim is to become little more than another ‘Flight Centre’, they should probably inform their shareholders of said aim.

If they wish to remain a competitive airline, a serious program of fleet renewal occurring throughout the next decade, and beyond, needs to become a reality. The lack of which should start to pique the shareholders interest.

Street garbage 15th Apr 2018 04:31


Originally Posted by RealityCzech (Post 10118767)
The endless references to remuneration might make you feel better/worse,but they aren't going to influence outcomes relevant to your career. I'd politely suggest getting over it.

I would personally say I don't give a toss what "they" earn, by their basis of remuneration the rest of the company should be earning 10 times the world average, I just wish reasoned assessment would break out on the Campus, that you would stop blaming pilots for not renewing the fleet. People on the front line only see the slow motion train wreck that is occurring whilst Joyce fiddles.

Street garbage 15th Apr 2018 04:33

RealityCzech, your post is just another veiled threat from QCC that we you are not renewing the fleet until ....

Rated De 15th Apr 2018 04:34


Qantas' labour cost base is higher than almost all of its competitors - especially those in Asia, Middle East, New Zealand and South America.
A convenient part truth. Which part of the labour unit cost do you refer?
The data sets we use would show you are extremely choosy.


If you want to argue semantics, Qantas has an average stage length that means the longer the flight the lower the CASK and the labour cost whilst incremental increasing, is of a lesser order than say RPK growth. . Qantas factor productivity in key work groups, which we assume is the implication from your statement, are mid range and when adjusted for stage length are better than average.

When we include fuel in the CASK and adjust the unit cost, and hold the stage length constant, Qantas is very inefficient. Want to guess why?
Very good, they burn more fuel per RPK because over a given stage their fleet burn 64% more fuel.

Qantas 'worst major airline' for fuel efficiency on trans-Pacific flights, study suggests - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Qantas need a new fleet

itsnotthatbloodyhard 15th Apr 2018 06:39


Originally Posted by RealityCzech (Post 10118767)
The endless references to remuneration might make you feel better/worse,but they aren't going to influence outcomes relevant to your career. I'd politely suggest getting over it.

If you don’t like seeing endless references to executive remuneration, maybe you need to ease up on the endless references to labour cost base.

JPJP 15th Apr 2018 20:01


Originally Posted by RealityCzech (Post 10118765)
I would bet that the numbers are also being run on doing less inhouse flying and more virtual flying instead of being forced to pay higher wages. That may end up being the path chosen.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-conte...ne-of-lies.gif

V-Jet 15th Apr 2018 22:34

RC: Oh dear oh dear oh dear.....

This is one of those very rare occasions I agree with you! More likely an unique occasion - so don't think for one second think this relationship will evolve any further.

I have been convinced that Dear Leader is totally incompetent for a very long time.

There are TWO (possibly 3) things I give him credit for. Firstly, he can use the billions Qantas has provided him to renovate a room into a nice bar. Now many people have managed to create nice bar/cafe's without billions of dollars, or guaranteed licensing etc etc, but I am a generous man at heart, so lets give him credit there. What he's done with that cafe/bar mix, is to turn that into a brand of soft corruption worthy of Chairman Xi Jinping dealing with Pacific Islands. And there is NO doubt, that has been hugely successful - he's read the market very well in that regard. It's inoculated himself against negative press, a negative political environment and also given him enormous clout amongst the small CEO club of Australia. The final plank in his repertoire is his ability to argue for his own benefit (ie:lie:)) - at the expense of everything Qantas stands for -to rape the place with a vigour that defies his stature. To the point I'm sure his sexual partners would attest to same.

Undoubtedly this guy in a business sense has passion fingers (f%cked anything he's touched) but politically he's good.

So - given his great triumph is the Chairmans Lounge, what's he done that anyone with his skillset would do? He's expanded the concept massively. He's worked out that being a contestant on 'The Block' with an unlimited budget and not actually having to even swing a hammer himself is far easier than actually running an airline. Tricky things airlines, even with a near monopoly and possessing all the trickyness of a cunning Leprechaun!

I don't think he has any interest in actually running the airline (as do you RC), he is about using the Lounges to grab customers through the qantas.com website. And it is sort of working.

There are a couple of problems with this. Other airlines have them too, and once they exist around Australia the differentiation between Lounges will diminish. So too with the Chairmans Lounge. At the moment it buys political and press compliance, but as Qantas flies to fewer and fewer places, this will diminish rapidly.

The other tiny problem is that as a virtual airline, it has been done before. And quite well too. We have Google, Tripadvisor, Expedia, Webjet, Flightcenter, Priceline, Hotwire, Travelocity, Orbitz - and that's just off the top of my head. The reach of Qantas.com is pretty much domestic only - and anything just domestic, will, over time, simply wither without a product behind it. The major issue with any website is driving traffic to it. While the Lounges in Australia are attractive that will be possible. But without a SIGNIFICANT benefit to people, that will fall off quickly.

Then we get to the Company 'Mission Statement'. Successful Companies have a single statement that clearly states what it is they do. As far as I can work out, for Qf, it's 'What's in it for me?' because Qf has demonstrated it really doesn't know what it is anymore. Webjet? National Flag Carrier? Round the world airline? Domestic airline? Jetstar? Red Q? Licencing operation? Vehicle for the CEO's political ambitions? Hard to say... I asked this question of an HR drone in a 'meeting' they generously organised for me a few years ago, and they couldn't answer the question either, in fact, it had them totally stumped. If the Thought Police cannot answer such a simple question, what hope do the rest have who don't mainline Company KoolAid hourly?

In short, unbelievably, I think you are right RC. QF doesn't _need_ to have aircraft, but if it doesn't it will sooner or later cease to exist. I think most people here believe that is a shame.

Never in the history of Australian business have so few enriched themselves so much, at the expense of so many:).

Rated De 15th Apr 2018 22:46

A very accurate precis:


Then we get to the Company 'Mission Statement'. Successful Companies have a single statement that clearly states what it is they do. As far as I can work out, for Qf, it's 'What's in it for me?' because Qf has demonstrated it really doesn't know what it is anymore. Webjet? National Flag Carrier? Round the world airline? Domestic airline? Jetstar? Red Q? Licencing operation? Vehicle for the CEO's political ambitions? Hard to say... I asked this question of an HR drone in a 'meeting' they generously organised for me a few years ago, and they couldn't answer the question either, in fact, it had them totally stumped. If the Thought Police cannot answer such a simple question, what hope do the rest have who don't mainline Company KoolAid hourly?
Qantas was gifted an enviable position at Privatisation. Dissected by cost accountants it has hacked itself to pieces. It is not surprising that HR drones don't know the mission because theirs is all about self preservation and mission creep.

Qantas is not enlightened leadership, sadly despite knowing the price of everything and neatly inserting them in a mathematical model, Mr Joyce neglected the one limitation that actually matters:

The real world dynamic of airlines is impossible to model without very expansive limitations (assumptions)

Ask any researcher or analyst about models, the limitations (assumptions) necessary to get models to work mean in fact oftentimes they are highly unstable.

From all accounts, Mr Joyce has an autocratic style, top down and whilst politically astute (Chariman's lounge, upgrades and soft corruption) does not take kindly to critique, we had experienced this with him numerous times.
Thus in trusting the model he ignores anything not contained within it. For airlines this is a really tricky proposition. In fact if one looks at airlines that do it really well, empowerment of people, like Captains exercising command judgement is something that is encouraged. At Qantas we would respectfully suggest it is punished, autonomy of people, profesisonals doing their job is actively discouraged. This doesn't bode well in highly fluid industries.


Jim Collins wrote a great book, From Good to Great one of the most eloquent empirical studies into corporate performance.

Are you a hedgehog or a fox? In his famous essay “The Hedgehog and the Fox,” Isaiah Berlin divided the world into hedgehogs and foxes, based upon an ancient Greek parable: “The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing.”
Those who built the good-to-great companies were, to one degree or another, hedgehogs. They used their hedgehog nature to drive toward what we came to call a Hedgehog Concept for their companies. Those who led the comparison companies tended to be foxes, never gaining the clarifying advantage of a Hedgehog Concept, being instead scattered, diffused, and inconsistent. (our emphasis)


An empirical comparison of Qantas to its peers would suggest that foxes outnumber hedgehogs in Coward street.

Qantas need a new fleet

regitaekilthgiwt 15th Apr 2018 23:15

Well said angryrat and others.

Rabbitwear 16th Apr 2018 10:35

Qantas want a new fleet , they just want to crew it at Network rates !

Keg 16th Apr 2018 11:00


Originally Posted by Rabbitwear (Post 10120047)
Qantas want a new fleet , they just want to crew it at Network rates !

And given that Network can’t attract and retain pilots at their current rates how do you reckon that’ll go? :ok:

Qantas know they’re screwed. Hence they’re running roadshows and talking pilot academies and so on to try and work out precisely how screwed they are in the medium to long term, and whether there is enough interest out there for them to un-screw the situation.

Yep, they know they’re screwed. They’re still working on the presumption though that their pilots don’t know it also.

Jeps 16th Apr 2018 11:05


Originally Posted by Keg (Post 10120069)
And given that Network can’t attract and retain pilots at their current rates how do you reckon that’ll go? :ok:

Qantas know they’re screwed. Hence they’re running roadshows and talking pilot academies and so on to try and work out precisely how screwed they are in the medium to long term, and whether there is enough interest out there for them to un-screw the situation.

Yep, they know they’re screwed. They’re still working on the presumption though that their pilots don’t know it also.

Could the fact that they are now out of denial be considered an evolution of their thinking? :O:O:O

ruprecht 16th Apr 2018 11:32


Originally Posted by Jeps (Post 10120076)
Could the fact that they are now out of denial be considered an evolution of their thinking? :O:O:O

No, because now they’ll be looking to lay the blame elsewhere. :rolleyes:

knobbycobby 16th Apr 2018 13:23

RC
 
RC is one of Olivia’s angels. Or perhaps has less experience in aviation than even she does. Perhaps it’s another QF manager that hates his own kind.
All the poorly paid QF subsidiaries are struggling to attract suitable candidates.
Market forces go both ways. All the 457 visas under the sun won’t change that.
US Airline pay is up over 40% now. Given 2 CPT and 2 FOs in USA, Qantas crew in AUD terms are now cheaper. China pays over 400k net for a 737 CPT. EK is short of crews and cancelling flights as Tim Clark has mentioned publicly. Forbes and Bloomberg hate pilots as much as Reality Chezh and even they admit to the massive shortage.
CEO and Exec pay in Qantas is the highest in the globe by a long margin. Even the right wing media are disgusted by it. The public think it’s obscene.
Qantas office staff per aircraft the highest in the globe.
Shortage is real. You know it when the Angels are going fishing on PPRUNE.
8 Flights a day cancelled in QF domestically a day due crew shortages.

Blitzkrieger 16th Apr 2018 22:46

Good morning angels!



Qantas' labour cost base is higher than almost all of its competitors - especially those in Asia, Middle East, New Zealand and South America
Compared to when? Salaries have stagnated for a decade while productivity and flexibility (or exploitation if you will) have skyrocketed.


Anyway, well done for swaying a thread on fleet renewal incompetence into one about pilot salaries.


Qantas need a new fleet! For the angels, that means aeroplanes :cool:


Hooroo.


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:01.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.