If it is true that Mr Meyer has exited the business, this is potentially another dissenting view that has been dismissed.
Mr Buchanan after securing the 788 from QF mainline passionately explained that the Long Haul Low Fare model was unsustainable.
He was sent on gardening leave shortly thereafter.

Fort Fumble is devoid of any differing opinion.
Despite Tino's best efforts, the ever increasing fuel price exposes them for what they are; One Trick ponies.

Dragon man,
So, what about all the work going on in the desert?? No comment??
Maybe OJT is one of them??
I don't know if it is, or exactly how many are on the way back, it is more than one.
Tootle pip!!

I've already asked you this but you didn't reply.
Please define new fleet and the routes they will work.

But there is little difference between the rape of Qantas and the rape of other Australian greats (and New Zealand greats for that matter)

The tide is going out, fuel price is rising. Oil traders have positioned accordingly. 4 November may see the term structure indicate more contango; QF fuel expense rises.

With Mr Clifford off to fairy land, just in the nick of time, rather like Rio Tinto. Tom wasn't so lucky.

A fuel inefficient fleet and petrol prices at the pump down edging towards $2.00 a litre, Little Napoleon needs another distraction.
It might be 'transformation purge' it, it may even be industrial, but the simply fact is Qantas needed a new fleet a decade ago.

Mr Joyce can spend his remaining time virtue signalling the entire dying print media, but the facts speak for themselves..

Everyone can voice their concerns but the reality is, the new chairman, the board, the media.......don't give a s%$T.
No one appears capable to take a clinical look at the numbers nor see the trainwreck approaching, that whoever the next CEO is, will inherit.
Bring on the next happy clappers meeting in the street!
Did someone mention engagement? What a fine set of numbers for a case study.
The future will get very ugly and people will lose their livelihoods.
That's the legacy.

With the exception of possibly a South American route (although LAN are doing it in a 789) and perhaps to South Africa, all the other routes currently flown, can NOW be flown by the big twins.
Pick one? All the airlines flying the Pacific did, whether it be a B777 or a B789, "the World's most enlightened airline management' chose to ignore this, instead getting lucky with a low fuel price. The fuel included CASK on any route is lower with a big twin. Lower fuel expense would cushion earnings volatility.
As was evident in FY15, $597 million of the 'turn around profit' was reduced fuel expense as fuel prices fell.
Axiomatically, the reverse is true: the impact is much more a problem for QF with their fleet metrics than the competitors as Operating expense rise disproportionately on a rising fuel price.


This is the genesis of the ICCT article in January 2018.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-...-study/9333616

If it is true as Keg alluded to that the there is yet another 'efficiency drive' then again Fort Fumble is a dollar short and a day late.

I do. How about one massive fleet (Australia's largest?) of 14 Dreamchangers and code share the rest. I wouldn't put anything past them. They've taught me _anything_ is possible, even if it is totally self destructive and makes no sense to anyone not personally benefiting from the idea.

A good old purge with the 'aviation lightweight' still there.

A worrying development is that rising fuel prices with Qantas show no real sign of waning, as the geo-politics imply more risk premium. The term structure for oil is not good for an airline with fleet metrics like Qantas.


.

They have seen the results and whilst the free cash flow was ok in June, it gets chewed up with fuel. There fleet metrics are still horrible.
Those airlines with an efficient fleet are better placed to absorb volatility. There is no one else to blame.

Perhaps worrisome for the Australian government is that Qantas has already established a narrative suggestive the QSA 1992 that is the problem.
It isn't. However a government may be pressured into concessions. It is no secret Qantas want to merge.

The fact remains that they are neglectful, wasteful and a long way behind the curve.
Mr Goyder ought have a close look at the inter-segment management accounts. The ones that rarely leave the special hiding place on QCA9

The sky is not falling in at QCA/B/C - and by the sounds of it if it were, there would be some baskets to gather it up in.

Yes, fuel is rising, but QF have done well with hedging such that it's not (yet) going to have a major impact. Arguably, they are getting a huge operational hedge by replacing the 747s with 787s, even if in their config the benefit is only a few %.

Hedging will help to lower the impact on cash flow, as will suspending dividends, which I expect will happen soon given the tax losses from previous years have been reversed and so they will not have any more franking credits. As it is, they have managed to use cash to buy their last few 787-9s, and they are buying a stack of 737s, A320s and A330s as they come off-lease, which the credit ratings agencies like. The debt has been but, is now at a lower rate, and a longer maturity, and the rating is at investment-grade. So even assuming that they have to quickly renew everything, they would have lessors and banks falling over themselves to give Qantas attractive rates.

Best of all, the biggest irritant for them - Virgin - are just getting their heads above water financially and gave away their cost advantage as the Borg took them upmarket. Both carriers took hits in the capacity war, but Virgin came off second-best and had to have its balance sheet revamped a couple of times. And if the rumours of HNA seeking an out are true, while Etihad would probably exit at the right price, things aren't going to get easier on the other side of the fence any time soon.

So, in summary...chill, Winston.

I'd like to see some money diverted away from AJ and various others for precisely the same reason.:=

But WTF would I know?:confused: I'm only someone whom, once a year, fills a seat in Row 44 or thereabouts on a 744 long haul flight out of YSSY and returns a few months later. And have done each year, at approximately the same time of year for the last six years.

The A/C are showing their age!!:hmm:

Clearly,
UBS,
S&P,
The ICCT ,
and Roger Montgomery need to settle.

Despite every other airline having re-equipped almost without exception a decade ago, QF know something everybody else doesn't!

As Mr Montgomery mused;

Mr Montgomery is already half right, it is a new Chairman's problem.

There will be no jets brought back from the desert.

Some crystal ball gazing. Whilst the dead stop date for the 744 is somewhat fixed (end of 2020 and wouldn't surprise me if it coincides with the 100th anniversary on 16 November) the reality is that this date could be moved either way quite quickly. Note that as at the Nov 2020 date the Qantas fleet has all fourteen 787s in it. So either there is a reduction of four airframes to do the flights the last retiring 744s were doing or there are likely to be more 787s due to arrive from early 2021. I don't discount the possibility of the 787s actually 'slow flying' in the lead up to the last of the 744 replacements also and being able to ramp up their hours to cover the loss. My gut says more 787s in 2021 with Sunrise jets due to come on line 12-18 months later in 2022.

At the moment it's likely the 744 fleet could survive with all the Captains and F/Os currently on it staying until the last flight if they choose to do so. The last four jets (needed to fly a HND- SYD- JNB- SYD service) can be heavy crewed with Captains and F/Os. Wouldn't surprise me though if they RIN S/Os before that or at least hope they take promotion to F/O on the 737 for the newbies, or the A330 or 787* for those who've been around a while. As at November 2020 we start the RIN process for Captains and F/Os and we'll know a bit more about aeroplane orders beyond that time from mid to late next year.

I do strongly suspect that any decision to retire the 744s earlier than November 2020 will come with a commensurate acceleration of 787 arrivals and potentially additional airframe orders due by the end of 2020 also. If this occurs the RIN process simply starts earlier than November 2020.

When the RIN occurs the top 35ish 744 Captains not retiring can displace to the A380 if they so choose. The remaining 30-35ish won't have the seniority to displace to the A380 and either retire or go to the redeployment positions available on the 787 (or heck, even displace to the A330! :eek: ). Logistically, if Qantas wanted to shrink capacity in the short term this RIN is possible anytime from January next year given the numbers of 787s due to arrive over the subsequent 12 months. I don't reckon this is capacity reduction is likely... yet.

Anyway, lots of water to go under the bridge on this one. We'll see how it plays out.

(*Rumours of vertical promotion coming back for 787. Very second to third hand info though).

My apologies, I used the wrong term, but the strategy has been the same - pay dividends when the accumulated losses are providing a tax shield, which runs out this fiscal year. They've also done a heap of share buybacks to keep the investors happy, but both of those are can be put on ice if needed to invest in fleet. If they had to do it today, they would probably rely on the debt market to finance new jets as rates are still at historic lows, but they are a few years off from making a major decision on that.

Also, for the record, the S&P report was not as alarmist as some reckon it was. Have a read, they say that the fleet is fit for purpose now, but will require replacement later on, as all ageing aircraft do. They see some risk in that, but it's nothing that a competent management team cannot handle. Of course, the definition of competent varies from person to person.

Interesting rumour I’m hearing today is that Fridays meeting is actually to discuss keeping the 747s longer now because the loads are so high that the 787 can’t replace them.

Qantas doesn't care about that.

Qantas cares about money and training costs. :hmm:

...and I should add: its only a rumour.

Initially it meant promotion from SO to FO, or FO to captain on the same aircraft type.

It was fine on all fleets until the powers that be put a stop to it on the 747-400, ie as an SO you could promote to FO on the 747-300, A330, 737 or 767 but not the 747-400. Similar story for FO to captain.

Now it also applies to the A380 and 787, which means SO's have to promote to the 737 or A330 before they can be an FO on the 744, A380 or 787.

It would seem to the outsider that the things that airline ought have corporate knowledge of, the corporation has forgotten. For a long established airline in the modern age to make 'rookie errors' with flight crew numbers, fleet metrics and the 'bread and butter' operational decisions it a reflection of senior management, no matter what token department head carries the can: Fish rot from the head.

Its business seemingly doubling up on presence 'with dual brand strategy' eating its yield pouring resources into a segment that is heavily dependent on mother Qantas, yet is incredibly demand elastic.
A strategy, optimising fleet and network appears the purview of Mr Meyer. Whilst once must give kudos to Qantas for creatively spinning every possible thing into some sort of 'info-mercial' running an airline isn't list on the list of priority.
It could be Mr Meyer decided a safe exit is preferable.

Perhaps Mr Clifford is smelling the breeze.