|
Jetstar strike threat ‘We will sell the 787s’
Quick peeps...agree to what Gareth wants otherwise the big sardine machines are gone!! What a fantastic way to shift the blame of piss poor fleet and management decisions to the flight crew! What next? ‘The A321s are going to Japan’ ‘Avalon to be closed’ ‘Muffins up by a dollar’ It would never have happened if all those pilots earning 300 grand accepted the lowest pay in the industry! Onya Gareth. The Qantas-owned airline said in response to the strikes, they will also consider selling three of their long-haul aircraft. The contingency planning has identified three 787-8 aircraft operated by Jetstar that are serving loss making and marginal international routes, with a final decision expected to be made in the first quarter of calendar 2020. |
Wasn’t that the plan anyway. Although I do like the terms “sell”. Let me guess...they’ll be “sold” just before a major maintenance check. |
All the 787s will go back to QF as they’re due for maintenance. Don’t fall for the BS.. |
Sure thing Gareth.
Better than any other idiot in the village you would be aware that selling what you don't own is a felony... If this is where Fort Fumble are already at, capitulation will follow. |
thought this move would have atleast taken another few months or so. Must be getting desperate in HQ.
|
Who cares, no aircraft decision will be made on the back of Pilot Pay negotiations, if these aircraft go then they were always going to. |
Destined for QF anyway.
|
Loss making routes
How long they been losing money for??
Dont know how they can be losing money when everything is gifted,oh i forgot,the pilots are overpaid & the CEO is finding it hard to survive on 3m a year. |
Originally Posted by blubak
(Post 10640894)
How long they been losing money for??
Dont know how they can be losing money when everything is gifted,oh i forgot,the pilots are overpaid & the CEO is finding it hard to survive on 3m a year. Its very hard to understand why everyone doesn’t see things his way. You guys are just selfish! |
Originally Posted by V-Jet
(Post 10640898)
You can understand his position. He earns EIGHT times less than a Qantas CEO, so surely JQ staff should earn eight times less than Qantas. Stands to reason. Its very hard to understand why everyone doesn’t see things his way. You guys are just selfish! Pedant hat off! |
Originally Posted by plainmaker
(Post 10640903)
You cannot earn eight times less (think about it - $20 million eight times would be $160m, so Evans would be paying them to work there. He actually earns 1/8th of his boss' earnings (or 0.125).
Pedant hat off! |
I think you have to let the corporate remuneration argument go and focus on our station in life..., If this is a battle being fought to make some puerile socialistic statement, I’d rather contribute to Greta’s GoFundMe page for climate change than union fees. Get real and think adult. |
Originally Posted by FOI
(Post 10641015)
I think you have to let the corporate remuneration argument go and focus on our station in life..., If this is a battle being fought to make some puerile socialistic statement, I’d rather contribute to Greta’s GoFundMe page for climate change than union fees. Get real and think adult. Ask around the C suites Australia wide, media circles not flush with QF advertising revenue and even quietly ask some of the morons in Canberra and one thing is repeated: $24 million. |
The Qantas-owned airline said in response to the strikes, they will also consider selling three of their long-haul aircraft. |
Originally Posted by Rated De
(Post 10640833)
Sure thing Gareth.
Better than any other idiot in the village you would be aware that selling what you don't own is a felony... If this is where Fort Fumble are already at, capitulation will follow. Is it just me or is this as nonsensical as a building owner saying to the cleaners... "If you don't agree to lower wages, I'll burn the building down!!!" |
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective
(Post 10641244)
You beat me to it, all 11 have on their certificate "Owner: Qantas Airways Limited" - thus, they can't sell sh-t... as others have said, they'll go back to QF and probably replace some A330s and yes, QF will have to wear the maintenance cost.
Is it just me or is this as nonsensical as a building owner saying to the cleaners... "If you don't agree to lower wages, I'll burn the building down!!!" How about we just stick to flying planes. Some of these comments are making us (as a profession) look really stupid. |
Originally Posted by AerialPerspective
(Post 10641244)
You beat me to it, all 11 have on their certificate "Owner: Qantas Airways Limited" - thus, they can't sell sh-t...
Never forget that they are willing to take a hit to the bottom line and be as vindictive as a scorned woman if it means breaking the backs of those who stand between them and their profits. |
Originally Posted by plainmaker
(Post 10640903)
You cannot earn eight times less (think about it - $20 million eight times would be $160m, so Evans would be paying them to work there. He actually earns 1/8th of his boss' earnings (or 0.125).
Pedant hat off! |
Originally Posted by Paragraph377
(Post 10641590)
Yeah, don’t be too sure about that. Qantas Group has some well paid accountants running the business. For many years they have been able to shuffle assets and play with numbers to meet their own financial agenda. From QF grounding international operations to JQ threatening to sell planes, there is no length that they will not go to in their journey to halt wage increases. Wage increases for the minions equals less profits for shareholders and less bonuses for management. It is what it is. It’s a game that has been played out for many decades and a game that will be played for decades to come. Never forget that they are willing to take a hit to the bottom line and be as vindictive as a scorned woman if it means breaking the backs of those who stand between them and their profits. That requires a transfer of ownership, which if not already completed would be a rather empty threat.. N'est ce Pas? It is more than probable that Little Napoleon is running yet another proxy war against staff and that Qantas not Jetstar owns the aircraft. Mr Evans as the CEO in waiting, gets to read the script. |
I find it curious that JQ has 8 flights MEL-HBA on both Sat 21 and Sun 22 Dec. Seats are available on every flight !
|
To the best of my knowledge, Jetstar has never “owned” an aircraft, and they do not have any to “sell”. All their aircraft are owned or leased by Qantas Airways Ltd, or their wholly-owned companies in off-shore tax shelters. Qantas can move these assets around the group as they wish, Always have, always will. QF currently “allocate” 11 B787 assets to Jetstar. They can reallocate any time. If 3 B787’s move to QF mainline ops next year, then they were always going to. A good CEO “never wastes a crisis”. If it was planned to move 3 B787’s anyway, they would have noticed that impending PIA was on the cards, and put that announcement in their back pocket and announced it at a time that it would appear to be the pilots’ fault - or at least a threat that some may fall for. That they did it so early is quite surprising, it might indicate some desperation. A good CEO would have waited a bit longer. Announcing it now makes it so ridiculously obvious that only a child would fall for it. They are obviously being advised by the same IR team who are making it the pilot’s fault if the sunrise A350’s don’t get ordered, with the accompanying media fanfare. Funny that! The same Execs are on record just the other day telling QF pilots that JQ B787’s were earning higher ROI than QF, which is why they have to cut more costs in the current LH EBA. I wouldn’t have believed it if I hadn’t heard it myself. And suddenly this week the JQ 787’s ain’t doing so good. So there you go. The insults to intelligence alone are staggering. You can’t believe a word they say. So don’t. Use your common sense. |
Derfred said it! If threatening to punish pilots for availing themselves of their right to PIA didn’t get the attention of the commission, following through with it will. It’s illegal and it’s a bluff, don’t fall for it. |
When an organisation has deeply embedded in its DNA to lie manipulate and spin, it is self evident that after a while even it forgets the part of the script...
Just wind the memory back to 29 October 2011, Qantas was in terminal decline. Yet with not a solitary aircraft order, the same contracts and a well timed write-down it is somehow transformed. As Mr Ferguson of S&P rightly stated they have a lot of gall.. |
4 x JQ 787's to be returned to mainline to replace the first 4 x A330-200's purchased, as design airframe hours are close to end of life.
|
We will sell the 787's
Originally Posted by Prolapsed Annulus
(Post 10656318)
4 x JQ 787's to be returned to mainline to replace the first 4 x A330-200's purchased, as design airframe hours are close to end of life.
Who can believe anything they say. |
Originally Posted by Prolapsed Annulus
(Post 10656318)
4 x JQ 787's to be returned to mainline to replace the first 4 x A330-200's purchased, as design airframe hours are close to end of life.
|
You ingrates better start behaving or the toys are going on eBay. Parenting and airline management aren’t so far removed.
|
I’m not sure whether the QF A332’s are classed as early or later builds, I’d assume later but QF has the option to look at ESG (extended service goals) which gives operators the opportunity to extended the operational life of an aircraft in terms of flight hours/cycles.
I believe the standard LOV for an A330 is 100,000hrs. Personally I find it hard to believe that the QF ones are getting close to this figure. |
Gligg only posts on recruitment selection and training. Draw your own conclusions.
|
Originally Posted by Sunfish
(Post 10657798)
Gligg only posts on recruitment selection and training. Draw your own conclusions.
|
Originally Posted by Tom/PER
(Post 10657791)
I’m not sure whether the QF A332’s are classed as early or later builds, I’d assume later but QF has the option to look at ESG (extended service goals) which gives operators the opportunity to extended the operational life of an aircraft in terms of flight hours/cycles.
I believe the standard LOV for an A330 is 100,000hrs. Personally I find it hard to believe that the QF ones are getting close to this figure. |
Originally Posted by Australopithecus
(Post 10658263)
60,000 hrs is the original service life for the 330. There is an Extended Service Goals program for the 330, but the ongoing maintenance costs are reported to be very costly, and render the aircraft just barely economical to operate.
The cost of acquisition of a comparative Boeing product substantively higher than an Airbus product. The difference was, that the projected maintenance costs of the Boeing product over the life of the aircraft were more linear. Airbus in stark contrast, was cheaper to acquire but progressively more difficult to keep as maintenance went exponential! Given that much of the analysis is spreadsheet driven and the purchasing decision increasingly a finance only consideration, bottom line short term impact became the focus. This worked fine provided a Full Service Airline kept the fleet renewal program rolling. |
Good point Rated De, it reminds me o the early marketing of Airbus. When it came to countries like Australia, they played up the German provenance, “you are buying a Mercedes Benz”. Anyone ever encountered the cost of keeping a Benz running?
|
The first four QF A332’s are very close to 60,000 hours and I have been advised that the parts that comprise the “Extended Service Goals” package have been ordered for them. I don’t know how many extra hours this buys but it should be sufficient to keep them going until the 18 A321 LR’s & 36 A321 XLR’s are introduced into JQ thus freeing up the B787-8’s to transfer to QF mainline as A330 replacements.
|
GB, Australia’s weird depreciation tax rules make it economical to keep refurbishing old aircraft. Buying new is a capital expenditure, buying parts just gets expensed. The ATO has no idea.
|
You are spot on Sunfish. Australia's tax rules make it less attractive to turn-over assets. We are at a great disadvantage in Australia with regards to this.
|
Originally Posted by Sunfish
(Post 10659363)
GB, Australia’s weird depreciation tax rules make it economical to keep refurbishing old aircraft. Buying new is a capital expenditure, buying parts just gets expensed. The ATO has no idea.
Buying an aircraft and bringing it on balance sheet also changes gearing ratios. When "incentivised" insiders have self interest at stake, short term incentives (bonus) often can distort the decision making framework. |
It appears Jetstar staff have been told that they will cease operations to Honolulu in the coming months with the 3 787’s to be transferred to QF to start servicing the route.
|
Originally Posted by Bad Adventures
(Post 10666352)
It appears Jetstar staff have been told that they will cease operations to Honolulu in the coming months with the 3 787’s to be transferred to QF to start servicing the route.
My theory, 3 787s to go to QF in the short term, then the remaining 8 from 2024 when the A321XLRs begin to be delivered. Having read some articles the A321 XLR appears to be a very capable aircraft, with a rear centre tank holding 12,900 litres of fuel, giving an overall capacity of around 29 tonnes (with 8 baggage hold positions). That should give enough range to fly east coast Australia to SGN/HKT/BKK, allowing JQ to return to a single fleet and for QF to start retiring their older A330s. https://www.flightglobal.com/program...133136.article |
The problem with Jetstar though is they will get the A321 XLR with 240 seats on it which will severely restrict the range and also make passenger comfort unbearable for medium/long range operations. I note from the article above to achieve the maximum range airbus is saying a two or three class config with no more than 200 seats.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:27. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.