WHO IS TO BLAME !!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Philippines
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHO IS TO BLAME !!
I'm sure this topic will generate a lot of controversy. The blame for this fiasco with Air New Zealand and Ansett must clearly be laid on the shoulders of the dithering New Zealand Government. ANZ had a brilliant strategy in place buying AN. ANZ could have placed itself in a very strong position with AN feed into it's expanding International services. 25% shareholder SQ would have taken a good slice of the pie also.
Most Countries have their own International Airlines. Most Countries have now privatised these Corporations, with a nasty clause in their Articles of Association. No foreign ownership above a certain percentage. Why not. Anyone from any Country can buy land,a corporation, an airline in the U.S. No one loses. Taxes are paid, employment levels are high. So the profit goes overseas. It doesn't seem to affect the largest economy in the world.
Governments do not have the expertise and professionals to run private enterprise. A lot of Governments do not have the expertise to run their own Countries, as we've now seen in New Zealand.
Had the N.Z. Government allowed decisions of the professionals at ANZ to prevail, a large force in Australian and New Zealand aviation would have been forged with SQ, and entered the world market.
Qantas is very aware of this problem as it's expansion ambitions are seriously hampered by foreign ownership regulations.
It is a sad day for aviation in Australia, especially for our colleagues at AN. Hold in there guys, all is not lost yet.
Most Countries have their own International Airlines. Most Countries have now privatised these Corporations, with a nasty clause in their Articles of Association. No foreign ownership above a certain percentage. Why not. Anyone from any Country can buy land,a corporation, an airline in the U.S. No one loses. Taxes are paid, employment levels are high. So the profit goes overseas. It doesn't seem to affect the largest economy in the world.
Governments do not have the expertise and professionals to run private enterprise. A lot of Governments do not have the expertise to run their own Countries, as we've now seen in New Zealand.
Had the N.Z. Government allowed decisions of the professionals at ANZ to prevail, a large force in Australian and New Zealand aviation would have been forged with SQ, and entered the world market.
Qantas is very aware of this problem as it's expansion ambitions are seriously hampered by foreign ownership regulations.
It is a sad day for aviation in Australia, especially for our colleagues at AN. Hold in there guys, all is not lost yet.
I posted the following on the Rumours & News forum & is probably as appropriate here.
The Guvnor says that both governments f**ked up which is a surprising comment when you consider that this mess stems from commercial decisions made by private companies. Where there was a government mistake was back in 1989 when the low-life PM (the "Honorable" R J Hawke) used tax payer funds to assist Ansett CEO Peter Abeles to fight the domestic pilots in a major dispute. This access to additional funds meant that the airline kept fighting (in lieu of negotiating) causing the airline's finances to get into a precarious state. This was confirmed in 1991 when the same government pulled the AOC on Compass Airlines (Mark 1) because Ansett was within 2 weeks of being placed in receivership and couldn't sustain the competition from the low cost upstart. Subsequent Ansett management failed to improve the Airlines financial position with significant evidence that assett stripping was being conducted by its parent companies (News Corp & TNT). When Rod Eddington was CEO of AN he was actually an employee of New Corp - makes you wonder whose interests he was looking after. The parent companies were only too pleased when the AirNZ board came along with "Mega Airline" ego ideas and bought AN (in two stages) for $1.2 billion dollars. AirNZ must have been unaware that Moody's had done an assessment on Ansett in 1995 which concluded that AN had nett assetts of A$150 million ($2.65B assetts & $2.5B debt) and by throwing in $100 million in goodwill it then concluded that the total value of Ansett was $250 million. Of course the AN management hotly disputed this figure.
There are a lot of people to blame but the current governments have basically let the airlines do what they wanted to do & therefore should not use tax payer funds to replace money taken from Ansett over many years.
The Guvnor says that both governments f**ked up which is a surprising comment when you consider that this mess stems from commercial decisions made by private companies. Where there was a government mistake was back in 1989 when the low-life PM (the "Honorable" R J Hawke) used tax payer funds to assist Ansett CEO Peter Abeles to fight the domestic pilots in a major dispute. This access to additional funds meant that the airline kept fighting (in lieu of negotiating) causing the airline's finances to get into a precarious state. This was confirmed in 1991 when the same government pulled the AOC on Compass Airlines (Mark 1) because Ansett was within 2 weeks of being placed in receivership and couldn't sustain the competition from the low cost upstart. Subsequent Ansett management failed to improve the Airlines financial position with significant evidence that assett stripping was being conducted by its parent companies (News Corp & TNT). When Rod Eddington was CEO of AN he was actually an employee of New Corp - makes you wonder whose interests he was looking after. The parent companies were only too pleased when the AirNZ board came along with "Mega Airline" ego ideas and bought AN (in two stages) for $1.2 billion dollars. AirNZ must have been unaware that Moody's had done an assessment on Ansett in 1995 which concluded that AN had nett assetts of A$150 million ($2.65B assetts & $2.5B debt) and by throwing in $100 million in goodwill it then concluded that the total value of Ansett was $250 million. Of course the AN management hotly disputed this figure.
There are a lot of people to blame but the current governments have basically let the airlines do what they wanted to do & therefore should not use tax payer funds to replace money taken from Ansett over many years.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SIA has out witted the govs of Oz, NZ, and the management of AN,ANZ and QF. It all started when SIA screwed ANZ into paying too much for AN.
They can be seen in their true colours right now. Wreckem Screwen and Controlem
They can be seen in their true colours right now. Wreckem Screwen and Controlem
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Melbourne - Australia
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pointy - why is the blame completely with the NZ government when the ANZ board admitted to botching the due diligence process when purchasing AN? Surely the government can only be blamed for not helping them get out of the mess - not from getting them into it. Directors are there to run businesses, not governments...
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Philippines
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point Lurk R, however I'm not looking at the chain of events that led to this debacle. Granted, a lot of blame can be apportioned along the way. My point is, at the end of the day Air NZ had a plan, and in my humble opinion, a good plan to set up a very strong operation with SQ. This plan was a commercial decision made by the Air NZ and SQ Boards. Had the N.Z. Govt. approved the Board's proposal, and within a reasonable time frame, not 3 months, a very different outcome would have eventuated.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 84
Posts: 492
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pointy, et al:- IMHO, you all miss the most important factor in apportioning blame for AN's current woes. It goes back much, much further than ANZ or any of the other d***heads who have had control in the recent past. I firmly believe ALL of AN's senior "management" are at fault, have been for the past fifteen years, principally because they look at running AN from the point of view of "the bottom line", i.e. as bloody accountants. Not one of them has shown any ability to run an airline, by definition a service industry, all they have been able to see is trendy management "feel-good, touchy-feely" techniques, instead of asking what travelling people need to get from A to B. The single-minded pursuit of the business traveller as the panacea to all financial ills has been proven to be an idiocy, and the alienation of "Mum, Dad and the two kids" on the annual holiday will come back to bite us sooner than later in terms of market share.
I have lost count of the times we have been re-organised, re-structured and any other term they could devise to disguise the real intent, namely people reductions in the fields where the real work of keeping aircraft flying is done. Guess where that is, LAME!
There isn't really any point in ranting on forever, I suppose, "plus ca change, plus le meme chose". If we do go down the tubes, at least I'll still have PPRuNe to keep up to speed with.
Regards to all,
TheNightOwl.
I have lost count of the times we have been re-organised, re-structured and any other term they could devise to disguise the real intent, namely people reductions in the fields where the real work of keeping aircraft flying is done. Guess where that is, LAME!
There isn't really any point in ranting on forever, I suppose, "plus ca change, plus le meme chose". If we do go down the tubes, at least I'll still have PPRuNe to keep up to speed with.
Regards to all,
TheNightOwl.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The list is long and distinguished...
The point is, nobody in the last 13 years has taken the hard decisions and turned AN around.
now we find ourselves in the current predicament!
The point is, nobody in the last 13 years has taken the hard decisions and turned AN around.
now we find ourselves in the current predicament!
Guest
Posts: n/a
TheNightOwl,
I wasn't actually having a go at you, I didn't notice before that you had mentioned me.
Just paranoid because if I even mention An**tt, some people say I am anti An**tt.
I am happy to take a share of the blame, and hopefully some credit, for whatever happened at Ansett from 1963 until 1990, but NOT since then...........
Best regards,
"lame"
Edit, so paranoid that I couldn't spell paranoid?
[ 11 September 2001: Message edited by: lame ]
I wasn't actually having a go at you, I didn't notice before that you had mentioned me.
Just paranoid because if I even mention An**tt, some people say I am anti An**tt.
I am happy to take a share of the blame, and hopefully some credit, for whatever happened at Ansett from 1963 until 1990, but NOT since then...........
Best regards,
"lame"
Edit, so paranoid that I couldn't spell paranoid?
[ 11 September 2001: Message edited by: lame ]
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Who is to blame? Here's MY priority:
(1) MURDOCH, ABELES, HAWK - all share equal pole position.
Reasons: Murdoch....despises unions, enjoys the "power", and playing "The General" during the wars with unions, needed the money gained from Ansett's asset-stripping to enlarge Newscorp;
Abeles....Greed - his physique said everything! Wanted the money from Ansett's asset-stripping to feed his fat belly and support Bob's daughter's coke habit;
Hawk...bum-boy for Rupert (who had cultivated him ie. bought him off, from an early age), allegedly corrupt and apparently willing to prostitute himself and his position for personal material gain.
(2) GRAEME MACMAHON....Abeles so called GM of Ansett, but in reality just a "headkicker" with no finesse. Replaced competent managers with "Yes men".
(3) A corrupt AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION, aided by a self-serving ACTU looking to "teach the pilots a lesson, for not affiliating with us"!
(4) The greedy overseas mercenary pilots that flocked to Australia, FULLY AWARE that there was an industrial dispute.
(5) The selfish/greedy domestic pilots who were sold their promises and code of ethics for a price and promotion. Especially the checkers and trainers, who realised that without them, the airlines would not have been able to process the new recruits, and revalidate the returns!
[b] A complacent Australian public, who really don't care about ANYTHING, unless it affects them directly - by which time it's probably too late!
Ansett's demise is not something that has happened suddenly - it is deep-rooted, and Ansett has been "teetering" for close on 8 years now. The shadow minister for aviation told me some time in 1994 that Ansett was THEN, within 2 weeks of going under!
You asked - that's MY opinion!
(1) MURDOCH, ABELES, HAWK - all share equal pole position.
Reasons: Murdoch....despises unions, enjoys the "power", and playing "The General" during the wars with unions, needed the money gained from Ansett's asset-stripping to enlarge Newscorp;
Abeles....Greed - his physique said everything! Wanted the money from Ansett's asset-stripping to feed his fat belly and support Bob's daughter's coke habit;
Hawk...bum-boy for Rupert (who had cultivated him ie. bought him off, from an early age), allegedly corrupt and apparently willing to prostitute himself and his position for personal material gain.
(2) GRAEME MACMAHON....Abeles so called GM of Ansett, but in reality just a "headkicker" with no finesse. Replaced competent managers with "Yes men".
(3) A corrupt AUSTRALIAN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS COMMISSION, aided by a self-serving ACTU looking to "teach the pilots a lesson, for not affiliating with us"!
(4) The greedy overseas mercenary pilots that flocked to Australia, FULLY AWARE that there was an industrial dispute.
(5) The selfish/greedy domestic pilots who were sold their promises and code of ethics for a price and promotion. Especially the checkers and trainers, who realised that without them, the airlines would not have been able to process the new recruits, and revalidate the returns!
[b] A complacent Australian public, who really don't care about ANYTHING, unless it affects them directly - by which time it's probably too late!
Ansett's demise is not something that has happened suddenly - it is deep-rooted, and Ansett has been "teetering" for close on 8 years now. The shadow minister for aviation told me some time in 1994 that Ansett was THEN, within 2 weeks of going under!
You asked - that's MY opinion!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: NSW Australia
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too lay a lot of blame on the travelling public! All Joe Blow cares about is how much he pays for his ticket. The travelling public want more and more and want to pay lesss and less to get it. Airlines seem to be prepared to race each other to the poor house to comply - a sort of "let's see who goes broke last" approach.
The public MUST realise that the margins for an airline are miniscule. QF returned a profit of $450m last year (on revenues of over $5b) and of this, $405m was from fuel hedging. Deregulation in Australia has failed!! Two strong airlines have become one, with a small player in the wings. The public may get worse service to regional areas and a price rise on mainline seats is inevitable. The public MUST realise that airliners provide a service which must be paid for - it is not a right or a public utility.
The public MUST realise that the margins for an airline are miniscule. QF returned a profit of $450m last year (on revenues of over $5b) and of this, $405m was from fuel hedging. Deregulation in Australia has failed!! Two strong airlines have become one, with a small player in the wings. The public may get worse service to regional areas and a price rise on mainline seats is inevitable. The public MUST realise that airliners provide a service which must be paid for - it is not a right or a public utility.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to agree with Curious G & Kaptin M comments.
This has been a long time coming and AIRNZ should of made the hard calls when we bought it but were restrained by the Aussie govt from laying off anyone & our Australian management team (20+)led by Tommey who had grandiose ideas, they should have just sorted it.
This has been a long time coming and AIRNZ should of made the hard calls when we bought it but were restrained by the Aussie govt from laying off anyone & our Australian management team (20+)led by Tommey who had grandiose ideas, they should have just sorted it.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When is some Australian televison (and print) journalist going to interview RJL Hawke and ask him the hard questions, not allowing himself to be diverted by the bodgie's well-tested obfuscations and verbal sleight of hand?
The man should be made pay for the major role he has played to this current sorry mess, if only by exposing him for what he truly is to the great Australian unwashed.
My commisserations and best wishes for the future to 95% of AN staff.
The man should be made pay for the major role he has played to this current sorry mess, if only by exposing him for what he truly is to the great Australian unwashed.
My commisserations and best wishes for the future to 95% of AN staff.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just finished watching Holmes (current affairs) in NZ.
They had the Chairman of AirNZ Dr Farmer on the show.
He didn't have a lot to say other than sorry for the job losses! But he said that both governments were very aware of what was going on way back in June. He showed a memo given to the OZ government which showed that Ansett was losing $18mil AUD a week, 2.6 a day. So must of been doing something right to get that to 1.3 a day.
I guess that they ran out of time and if the governments of both sides had approved their proposal in June then this mess would of been avoided.
Best wishes for all Ansett workers. I just hope that things can be cleared up in responsible way.
If AirNZ has taken 7 engines from Melbourne that aren't theirs then I am sure that it will come out. But I don't agree with taking it into your own hands and blocking NZ and QF aircraft from departing, then refusing to listen to the OZ Supreme Court. This won't be helping anyone. Short time gain for longterm pain!!
Once again best wishes to all Ansett staff for the future.
They had the Chairman of AirNZ Dr Farmer on the show.
He didn't have a lot to say other than sorry for the job losses! But he said that both governments were very aware of what was going on way back in June. He showed a memo given to the OZ government which showed that Ansett was losing $18mil AUD a week, 2.6 a day. So must of been doing something right to get that to 1.3 a day.
I guess that they ran out of time and if the governments of both sides had approved their proposal in June then this mess would of been avoided.
Best wishes for all Ansett workers. I just hope that things can be cleared up in responsible way.
If AirNZ has taken 7 engines from Melbourne that aren't theirs then I am sure that it will come out. But I don't agree with taking it into your own hands and blocking NZ and QF aircraft from departing, then refusing to listen to the OZ Supreme Court. This won't be helping anyone. Short time gain for longterm pain!!
Once again best wishes to all Ansett staff for the future.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Asia
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The dye was cast quite some years ago.
Tool Time on another thread has given a good historical tablet on what Peter Abeles did to Ansett. In fact on a still day you can still smell him at the top end of Swanston Street, such was his scent-marking.
Essentially the cash cow was milked and the assets run down.
When AirNZ bought the first 50% for way above net asset value the fuse was lit regardless of the "strategic" brilliance of the move and synergies sold to the press and the banks.
Any forensic accounting will show the role of Brierley Investments in what was to follow.
Being locked into Air NZ their survival was premised upon maintaining the value of their AirNZ holdings on the books. Look at BIL's 1999 and 2000 annual report to see what their gearing looked like and how critical it was to maintain book value of their major investments; AirNZ and James Hardie.
Also look at the common directors of the two companies.
Is it then any wonder that BIL's director on the Ansett board was disruptive and a leaking sieve at the time Ansett management was pushing the sale of the NewsCorp 50% directly to SIA.
BIL could not afford to write down their AirNZ holding should SIA get 50% of Ansett for a value vastly less than the AirNZ 50% was picked up for.
The rest I am afraid is hisotry. Oil prices and CASA groundings simply hastened the inevitable.
FWIW
Tool Time on another thread has given a good historical tablet on what Peter Abeles did to Ansett. In fact on a still day you can still smell him at the top end of Swanston Street, such was his scent-marking.
Essentially the cash cow was milked and the assets run down.
When AirNZ bought the first 50% for way above net asset value the fuse was lit regardless of the "strategic" brilliance of the move and synergies sold to the press and the banks.
Any forensic accounting will show the role of Brierley Investments in what was to follow.
Being locked into Air NZ their survival was premised upon maintaining the value of their AirNZ holdings on the books. Look at BIL's 1999 and 2000 annual report to see what their gearing looked like and how critical it was to maintain book value of their major investments; AirNZ and James Hardie.
Also look at the common directors of the two companies.
Is it then any wonder that BIL's director on the Ansett board was disruptive and a leaking sieve at the time Ansett management was pushing the sale of the NewsCorp 50% directly to SIA.
BIL could not afford to write down their AirNZ holding should SIA get 50% of Ansett for a value vastly less than the AirNZ 50% was picked up for.
The rest I am afraid is hisotry. Oil prices and CASA groundings simply hastened the inevitable.
FWIW
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Faulconbridge, New South Wales, Oz
Posts: 64
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the title of this thread would be better as "Who is responsible?"
Not much point in looking back.
Looking forward I don't see that the Aussie public should be paying $10 extra per trip.
Nor should ex-AN staff lose their entitlements.
See it as incumbent on our Govt to ensure the responsible people deliver, even if it upsets Madame Lash and disrupts ANZ.
We have the chance to fire our Govt in a couple of months, they know that.
Believe in 6 months our industry will be healthier and more productive, and more people than ever will be flying. As long as we are not compliant pv551e5.
Hope our unions and population don't wimp out. Be organized, and as unaccommodating as necessary. Please.
Not much point in looking back.
Looking forward I don't see that the Aussie public should be paying $10 extra per trip.
Nor should ex-AN staff lose their entitlements.
See it as incumbent on our Govt to ensure the responsible people deliver, even if it upsets Madame Lash and disrupts ANZ.
We have the chance to fire our Govt in a couple of months, they know that.
Believe in 6 months our industry will be healthier and more productive, and more people than ever will be flying. As long as we are not compliant pv551e5.
Hope our unions and population don't wimp out. Be organized, and as unaccommodating as necessary. Please.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiley
Nah they still wouldn't believe it and besides I can't stand seeing a grown man cry.
I seem to recall that when we were kids and got caught out, that "crying" to gain sympathy was considered to be a good Plan A to avoid the stick, Plan B was the "Geez I luv youse" rolling on your back and asking for a tickle puppy routine.
I don't suppose he feels motivated to help the "fellow Australians" that he was having a "love affair" with by returning the favour.
If you saw Dick on ACA fronting an Ansett staff rally, he reckons it is because the Govt wouldn't listen to him blah blah blah....AirNZ has stolen blah blah ......makes you want to throw up .....absolutely pathetic.
So now Dick is going to "save" the Ansett staff, because they aren't capable of looking after themselves without his dial on TV.
Run fast ......and keep going guys...run very fast and don't look back.
Nah they still wouldn't believe it and besides I can't stand seeing a grown man cry.
I seem to recall that when we were kids and got caught out, that "crying" to gain sympathy was considered to be a good Plan A to avoid the stick, Plan B was the "Geez I luv youse" rolling on your back and asking for a tickle puppy routine.
I don't suppose he feels motivated to help the "fellow Australians" that he was having a "love affair" with by returning the favour.
If you saw Dick on ACA fronting an Ansett staff rally, he reckons it is because the Govt wouldn't listen to him blah blah blah....AirNZ has stolen blah blah ......makes you want to throw up .....absolutely pathetic.
So now Dick is going to "save" the Ansett staff, because they aren't capable of looking after themselves without his dial on TV.
Run fast ......and keep going guys...run very fast and don't look back.