Air NZ set to fly Australian routes
Kavu
Amateurish in a number of ways,indicative of a national chip on the shoulder or a callousness to others misfortune.
Can just see Dixon shaking your PMs hand,promising no significant New Zealand job losses from the inevitable synergies of a QF/AIRNZ tie up.
For you,luckily,the analogy ends there because Qantas has expertise.
Or unluckily,AIRNZ in a wave parochial Kiwi hysteria,could go it alone.
But I don`t believe your little economy could afford another billion dollar bailout.
Amateurish in a number of ways,indicative of a national chip on the shoulder or a callousness to others misfortune.
Can just see Dixon shaking your PMs hand,promising no significant New Zealand job losses from the inevitable synergies of a QF/AIRNZ tie up.
For you,luckily,the analogy ends there because Qantas has expertise.
Or unluckily,AIRNZ in a wave parochial Kiwi hysteria,could go it alone.
But I don`t believe your little economy could afford another billion dollar bailout.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have said it before. Will say it again. ANZ is now in the hands of different management. The SIA crowd who hired a bunch of Ozzzis to run things have all gone.. Why do the VITRIOLIC comment still arrive on this forum. GET a life- Move on
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australians, so well balanced with chips on both shoulders!
AirNZ put the last nail in Ansetts coffin, but all the other nails were put in by Australians..
Murdoch/Keating
89
Aussie Govt
QF
Unions
An management
SIA
etc
and for all of you who have lost the plot " Get counselling "
AirNZ put the last nail in Ansetts coffin, but all the other nails were put in by Australians..
Murdoch/Keating
89
Aussie Govt
QF
Unions
An management
SIA
etc
and for all of you who have lost the plot " Get counselling "
Guest
Posts: n/a
EP, thanks for that. You are all class my friend. My point was that it was more of an asset sale and belt tightening that landed Ansett with the 124 million profit and it wasn't sustainable long term or even next year. I don't and I never have denied that a huge amount of money was lost in the period after, that the Air NZ management made a horses ass of the whole deal, whether they should have gone there or not and they should have been far more accountable for their actions. And Gnadenburg I probably should give the ex AN drivers a bit of slack but I keep thinking of that Micheal Douglas movie "Falling Down" The main character gets out of bed every morning and puts on his work clothes, picks up his briefcase and heads off to work even though he lost his job months before.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting point about Air NZ putting the final nails into the coffin BArbers Pole.
Yep - AN was screwed over royally by its previous owners who took large gobbs of money out of a then profitable Ansett to save the carcasses of News Corp (which would have surely gone under some years back) and TNT (Sir Peter - the patron saint of Flight Engineers).
No capital injection for years on end and still they managed to keep their heads above water.
Now comes along Air NZ and pays off TNT for 50% and unbelievably pays a huge amount for the remaining 50% (upping SQ's offer by some $200 million no less!).
To top things off Air NZ failed to appoint a CEO for close to 10 months during which time two new start-up carriers were destroying Ansett's customer base and with nobody steering the ship!
A little reckless wouldnt you say in times of tough competition?
Pathetic, abysmal, misguided and incompetent management in its true form typified by the so called business people from across the Tasman.
That Air NZ board is now termed a laughing stock in world business.
So Ansett is gone and 16,000 direct jobs are lost (up to 50,000 indirectly has been quoted).
Air NZ could have accepted the SQ offer and would have been in bed happily with them but as usual stubborn nationalistic kiwi pride has made Air NZ now a minor player which is still struggling for funds after even having been re-nationalised and with a doubtful future.
I hope the kiwi tax-payers are happy with their lot having been lumbered with a slug that was once a kiwi icon.
Air NZ is now a marginalised minor regional airline and if not careful will go the way of Air Nauru or Solomon Island Airlines.
Blame the Air NZ board and the politicians in NZ with short-man "kiwi" syndrome.
Qantas will hopefully jump in and help sort this mess out - and the NZ govt and kiwi tax-payers will have alot to be thankful for.
Failing that Qantas NZ with its additional 3 aircraft will erode what narrow profitability Air NZ may still proclaim.
Yep - AN was screwed over royally by its previous owners who took large gobbs of money out of a then profitable Ansett to save the carcasses of News Corp (which would have surely gone under some years back) and TNT (Sir Peter - the patron saint of Flight Engineers).
No capital injection for years on end and still they managed to keep their heads above water.
Now comes along Air NZ and pays off TNT for 50% and unbelievably pays a huge amount for the remaining 50% (upping SQ's offer by some $200 million no less!).
To top things off Air NZ failed to appoint a CEO for close to 10 months during which time two new start-up carriers were destroying Ansett's customer base and with nobody steering the ship!
A little reckless wouldnt you say in times of tough competition?
Pathetic, abysmal, misguided and incompetent management in its true form typified by the so called business people from across the Tasman.
That Air NZ board is now termed a laughing stock in world business.
So Ansett is gone and 16,000 direct jobs are lost (up to 50,000 indirectly has been quoted).
Air NZ could have accepted the SQ offer and would have been in bed happily with them but as usual stubborn nationalistic kiwi pride has made Air NZ now a minor player which is still struggling for funds after even having been re-nationalised and with a doubtful future.
I hope the kiwi tax-payers are happy with their lot having been lumbered with a slug that was once a kiwi icon.
Air NZ is now a marginalised minor regional airline and if not careful will go the way of Air Nauru or Solomon Island Airlines.
Blame the Air NZ board and the politicians in NZ with short-man "kiwi" syndrome.
Qantas will hopefully jump in and help sort this mess out - and the NZ govt and kiwi tax-payers will have alot to be thankful for.
Failing that Qantas NZ with its additional 3 aircraft will erode what narrow profitability Air NZ may still proclaim.
To all of our Kiwi friends above.
I think the whole issue would have the all important CLOSURE with a New Zealand admission of guilt.
To see your PM in Australia recently,refusing apportioned blame to be levelled at AirNZ,the hostility understandable.
Australians still remember Cheong shaking Howard`s hand on the steps of parliament,promising a lifeline.
Under the tenure of Air NZ employment at Ansett was unpleasant.No direction,no goals,no leadership,gross incompetence and razor gangs who proceded to rid AN of its expertise and replace with inept or insipid managers.
TJ a prime example.We could not believe,both at the coalface or in management,AirNZ with its billion dollar investment could suffer such a fool.His QF 1 style management cost NZ a lot of money.He was not Robinson Crusoe either.
Most AN people have moved on,to see New Zealanders at all levels washing their hands of Ansett and blaming employees for the demise,the root of the hostility.
So if you can`t handle a bit of angst toward New Zealand,get some counselling.Try and address that national chip too.
Someone mentioned unions,when did AirNZ ever approach an Ansett union in the dark hours?That`s right,they never did.Indicative of ineffectual New Zealand management.
I think the whole issue would have the all important CLOSURE with a New Zealand admission of guilt.
To see your PM in Australia recently,refusing apportioned blame to be levelled at AirNZ,the hostility understandable.
Australians still remember Cheong shaking Howard`s hand on the steps of parliament,promising a lifeline.
Under the tenure of Air NZ employment at Ansett was unpleasant.No direction,no goals,no leadership,gross incompetence and razor gangs who proceded to rid AN of its expertise and replace with inept or insipid managers.
TJ a prime example.We could not believe,both at the coalface or in management,AirNZ with its billion dollar investment could suffer such a fool.His QF 1 style management cost NZ a lot of money.He was not Robinson Crusoe either.
Most AN people have moved on,to see New Zealanders at all levels washing their hands of Ansett and blaming employees for the demise,the root of the hostility.
So if you can`t handle a bit of angst toward New Zealand,get some counselling.Try and address that national chip too.
Someone mentioned unions,when did AirNZ ever approach an Ansett union in the dark hours?That`s right,they never did.Indicative of ineffectual New Zealand management.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
Just how gullible are you ex-Ansett people?
Ansett was running in the red for many, many years, until MIRACULOUSLY - in the time frame of around 15-18 months - a Saviour did the seemingly impossible.
Suddenly Ansett was not only making a profit, but an EXTRAORDINARILY large one at that.
How was it possible??
Rod had been lured down to AN, from CX (where his only claim to fame had been years of undustrial unrest with the pilot group), and the rest is history - as was Rod`s association with Ansett!
Almost as soon as he had made Ansett APPEAR marketable, he was gone.
Whether some fanciful accounting was committed is debatable. However corporate management/accounting (mal)practices as have been seen at Enron, WorldCom etc., are now hopefully about to be investigated at Ansett and our other well-known recent icons, involving names such as Murdoch and Packer.
Ansett was an already gutted and filletted carcass by the time Air New Zealand got to it.
Ansett was running in the red for many, many years, until MIRACULOUSLY - in the time frame of around 15-18 months - a Saviour did the seemingly impossible.
Suddenly Ansett was not only making a profit, but an EXTRAORDINARILY large one at that.
How was it possible??
Rod had been lured down to AN, from CX (where his only claim to fame had been years of undustrial unrest with the pilot group), and the rest is history - as was Rod`s association with Ansett!
Almost as soon as he had made Ansett APPEAR marketable, he was gone.
Whether some fanciful accounting was committed is debatable. However corporate management/accounting (mal)practices as have been seen at Enron, WorldCom etc., are now hopefully about to be investigated at Ansett and our other well-known recent icons, involving names such as Murdoch and Packer.
Ansett was an already gutted and filletted carcass by the time Air New Zealand got to it.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: brisbane
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptin M quite right AN was a mess by the time that AirNZ acquired 100% ownership,however not beyond saving!
Ansett had a long history of uninterested owners who had taken what they liked from it, but the minute it required something back it was up for sale.
If the sheep shaggers had simply kept 50% and allowed SIA the other 50% AN would still be a viable and strong Australian carrier.
If there is one person to blame for AN's demise it's Cushing and his master plan for Brierley to exit AirNZ.Despite all the bleeting from across the pond about having to buy AN to access the aussie market,Cushing bought the other half of AN in an attempt to force SIA to buy out Brierley's investment in AirNZ.
So when SIA attempted to throw the life ring to AN,AirNZ was there to cut the tether and allowed it to drown in years of mismanagement and uninterested owners.
There is hostility towards AirNZ and rightly so,however our own government and deputy PM made a trip across the pond in Aug. last year to persuade the NZ government not to allow SIA to increase its stake in case it marginalised poor little QANTAS.
Ansett staff have a right to be mad about its demise and like the pre-89ers deserve a grieving period,I just hope that in 13years time they have got on with their lives.
Ansett had a long history of uninterested owners who had taken what they liked from it, but the minute it required something back it was up for sale.
If the sheep shaggers had simply kept 50% and allowed SIA the other 50% AN would still be a viable and strong Australian carrier.
If there is one person to blame for AN's demise it's Cushing and his master plan for Brierley to exit AirNZ.Despite all the bleeting from across the pond about having to buy AN to access the aussie market,Cushing bought the other half of AN in an attempt to force SIA to buy out Brierley's investment in AirNZ.
So when SIA attempted to throw the life ring to AN,AirNZ was there to cut the tether and allowed it to drown in years of mismanagement and uninterested owners.
There is hostility towards AirNZ and rightly so,however our own government and deputy PM made a trip across the pond in Aug. last year to persuade the NZ government not to allow SIA to increase its stake in case it marginalised poor little QANTAS.
Ansett staff have a right to be mad about its demise and like the pre-89ers deserve a grieving period,I just hope that in 13years time they have got on with their lives.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Granted, it is a bit long and I have cut out the part from Ansett onwards, with no disrespect to those suffering as a result of it. But it does show the dodgy underhanded tactics that Qantas have used since 1988 when they obtained the shareholding in Air NZ that British Airways wanted. So you can say that Air NZ's actions over Ansett were reprehensible but it would appear Qantas was doing plenty to Air NZ years before. You probably didn't want to know that, it ruins a good story.
Qantas manoeuvres have scuppered Air NZ on at least three occasions.
Underarm bowling in the boardroom
08.08.2002
By FRAN O'SULLIVAN and MATHEW DEARNALEY
HERALD INQUIRY - It's been trumpeted as a "partnership of equals".
A grand transtasman partnership between Air New Zealand and Qantas which will tidy up their domestic backyards, leaving them free to expand internationally.
But will a Qantas-Air New Zealand partnership - to use Qantas chief Geoff Dixon's words - save Air New Zealand or destroy it?
Qantas' blatant interference in last year's attempt by Air New Zealand to get Government approval for a Singapore Airlines-led recapitalisation causes unease in Kiwi business circles. This year, Dixon reportedly told a Qantas management summit that he would attack Air New Zealand and "put it out of business".
Qantas later denied the reports. But Air New Zealand chairman John Palmer declared his airline would take steps to protect its position. Confidential negotiations have been going on for four months over a renewed Qantas bid for a stake of 20 to 25 per cent in Air New Zealand.
Details are being finalised, but any deal is likely to include a placement of Air New Zealand shares to Qantas. There are also discussions over whether the two airlines should take cross-shareholdings in each other.
Negotiators know that any agreement they reach will have to pass strong governance tests to satisfy public scrutiny.
A Herald inquiry has disclosed three major occasions in the past 10 years on which Air New Zealand's plans have been scuppered by Qantas.
* The failure of a little-known bid by Air New Zealand in 1992 for Australian Airlines, which went to Qantas instead.
* The scuttling of the Australian Open Skies agreement in 1994, which ended Air New Zealand's plans to start its own domestic carrier in Australia.
* Air New Zealand's failed recapitalisation plan, which led to Qantas gaining domination of Australia's domestic market after Ansett Australia collapsed.
Two of these failures took place during the eight-year period when Qantas held a stake in Air New Zealand. The question which privately worries some of Air New Zealand's current directors is whether the past will repeat itself if Qantas climbs on board again.
A lot took place during 1989 and 1996, when Qantas was last on the Air New Zealand board. Qantas beat off strong competition from British Airways to become a major participant in a consortium which bought Air New Zealand from the Government in 1988.
Jim Scott was boss when the airline was privatised. Qantas then held a 19.9 per cent stake. Scott's joy at being "liberated" from the shackles of Government control quickly turned sour. Qantas' 19.9 per cent stake gave it two board seats.
The two directors had to leave the room during discussions on sensitive competitive matters, but Scott believes they picked up enough between meetings to piece together Air New Zealand's long-range strategy.
"Qantas sat at the table and dorked us - of course they were asked to leave, but they knew what was going on, they understood the strategy of Air New Zealand to strengthen its position."
Scott points to the failed Australian Airlines bid.
In 1992, Qantas was Australia's international airline, Australian Airlines was a major domestic carrier. Both were owned by the Australian Government.
Scott says Canberra wanted to follow New Zealand's lead and test the market by selling the domestic airline in 1992, before deciding whether to privatise Qantas.
Australian Airlines was Air New Zealand's long-term alliance partner exchanging traffic at the international border. Ansett served a similar role for Qantas.
Air New Zealand's strategy was to buy Australian Airlines, paving the way for a true single market spanning the Tasman. Air New Zealand had fed the Australian Government with the idea of selling.
"We needed to secure our position and create a true transtasman single market operation, because our research shown 60 per cent of inbound tourists visited both countries," Scott said.
But Air New Zealand's plan was scuttled the year after the board dumped Scott as CEO.
Former director Jim Farmer says Air New Zealand placed the highest indicative bid. But Qantas lobbying ensured it won ownership of Australian Airlines on extremely favourable terms, including the forgiveness of a large amount of debt.
"So the Australian Government bought its own company - you tell me if that's not a defensive move," says Scott.
"Ansett and Air New Zealand became orphans."
He believes similar defensive strategies are now in play - Qantas wants to prevent any other airline from moving in, and to keep our national carrier weak and in its place.
Many directors preferred his successor, Jim McCrea, who drove the company to become an efficient, relatively low-cost airline. Under McCrea's leadership Air New Zealand established a competitive cost advantage over Qantas and later reversed gains which the new Ansett New Zealand had made on its territory.
Qantas was represented on the board by chairman Gary Pemberton and chief executive James Strong. Farmer says Air New Zealand's independent directors were impressed by their calibre - but they were still leaders of Air New Zealand's major international competitor.
Requirements of confidentiality were made known, first implicitly and then explicitly. At management level suspicions ran high. There were concerns that proposals - particularly on routes - would get back to Qantas which would counter-attack.
Farmer says this had a "hugely detrimental effect" on the amount of information presented at board level.
Sir Selwyn Cushing, who was deputy chairman from 1989 until 1998, said it was very difficult for managing directors to put projects forward, especially projects competing against Qantas who "were your opponents and vicious opponents".
"It was a bit like the All Blacks coach John Mitchell telling George Gregan (Wallabies halfback) how to play the scrum."
Air New Zealand's second strategic move into Australia came unstuck in 1994. In 1992, Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating called for common transtasman borders.
This was the launchpad for the Open Skies negotiations.
Air New Zealand had planned to make up for its failure to gain control of Australian Airlines by starting a new domestic airline in Australia, a forerunner of today's Virgin Blue.
Peter Harbison, director of Australia's Centre for Asia-Pacific Aviation, condemns the shabby treatment Australia has dished out to the New Zealand aviation industry.
"It is criminal, some of the things we are doing."
To him the most glaring example was Australia's cancellation of Open Skies. Maurice Williamson, who inherited the transport portfolio from Storey, had negotiated an agreement with his Australian counterpart, Laurie Brereton.
But six days before the agreement went into effect it was abruptly pulled. Williamsom believes Qantas and Ansett combined forces to squash the move.
"I think that was awful - we got shut out and I got a blurry fax."
Harbison reveals: "We helped Air New Zealand draft a plan for a low-cost airline before Brereton pulled the plug".
Williamson still has trouble accepting how commercial pressure could have prevailed against a deal signed by the Australian Prime Minister. Williamson made two trips to Canberra before he was able to see Brereton. When they did meet, Brereton told him that if Air New Zealand wanted to fly in his country it would have to buy into an Australian airline.
At a joint press conference outside the Australian Parliament, Williamson was so outraged at the breach of an agreement that New Zealand's foreign affairs officials had to hold him back.
"I told them I didn't expect to be treated like this by a spiv in the back streets of Kings Cross, but they said 'Calm, Minister, calm down - don't ruin the rest of our relationship'."
Officials later told him that Pemberton and Strong had met Brereton and Keating days before the plug was pulled.
The Qantas chiefs warned that if Canberra wanted a "half-way" decent sale of its airline, it should keep Air New Zealand out. Ansett also met Brereton to pile on the pressure. The withdrawal of the Australian Government's approval was followed by a stiff message from Canberra.
If Air New Zealand wanted to penetrate the Australian domestic market, its only entry would be via Ansett. Williamson said Air New Zealand's purchase was ill-advised. He thought then that the airline was "a dog", but believed he had no right to intervene, although the Government held a non-voting Kiwi share in Air New Zealand.
Air New Zealand had three directors on Ansett's board, but News Corp retained management control. Key financial information - such as that on route profitability - was flawed.
The rest is history. The financial bite was too big for Air New Zealand to manage without further capital from Singapore Airlines.
Three fundamental issues:
* How can competition be protected if Qantas is involved in Air New Zealand?
* If Qantas takes a 20 to 25 per cent stake, will that block out another more friendly shareholder once world aviation recovers?
* The most important "moral issue" - should a company which has tried so hard to damage Air New Zealand be allowed to pick up the victor's spoils?
Qantas manoeuvres have scuppered Air NZ on at least three occasions.
Underarm bowling in the boardroom
08.08.2002
By FRAN O'SULLIVAN and MATHEW DEARNALEY
HERALD INQUIRY - It's been trumpeted as a "partnership of equals".
A grand transtasman partnership between Air New Zealand and Qantas which will tidy up their domestic backyards, leaving them free to expand internationally.
But will a Qantas-Air New Zealand partnership - to use Qantas chief Geoff Dixon's words - save Air New Zealand or destroy it?
Qantas' blatant interference in last year's attempt by Air New Zealand to get Government approval for a Singapore Airlines-led recapitalisation causes unease in Kiwi business circles. This year, Dixon reportedly told a Qantas management summit that he would attack Air New Zealand and "put it out of business".
Qantas later denied the reports. But Air New Zealand chairman John Palmer declared his airline would take steps to protect its position. Confidential negotiations have been going on for four months over a renewed Qantas bid for a stake of 20 to 25 per cent in Air New Zealand.
Details are being finalised, but any deal is likely to include a placement of Air New Zealand shares to Qantas. There are also discussions over whether the two airlines should take cross-shareholdings in each other.
Negotiators know that any agreement they reach will have to pass strong governance tests to satisfy public scrutiny.
A Herald inquiry has disclosed three major occasions in the past 10 years on which Air New Zealand's plans have been scuppered by Qantas.
* The failure of a little-known bid by Air New Zealand in 1992 for Australian Airlines, which went to Qantas instead.
* The scuttling of the Australian Open Skies agreement in 1994, which ended Air New Zealand's plans to start its own domestic carrier in Australia.
* Air New Zealand's failed recapitalisation plan, which led to Qantas gaining domination of Australia's domestic market after Ansett Australia collapsed.
Two of these failures took place during the eight-year period when Qantas held a stake in Air New Zealand. The question which privately worries some of Air New Zealand's current directors is whether the past will repeat itself if Qantas climbs on board again.
A lot took place during 1989 and 1996, when Qantas was last on the Air New Zealand board. Qantas beat off strong competition from British Airways to become a major participant in a consortium which bought Air New Zealand from the Government in 1988.
Jim Scott was boss when the airline was privatised. Qantas then held a 19.9 per cent stake. Scott's joy at being "liberated" from the shackles of Government control quickly turned sour. Qantas' 19.9 per cent stake gave it two board seats.
The two directors had to leave the room during discussions on sensitive competitive matters, but Scott believes they picked up enough between meetings to piece together Air New Zealand's long-range strategy.
"Qantas sat at the table and dorked us - of course they were asked to leave, but they knew what was going on, they understood the strategy of Air New Zealand to strengthen its position."
Scott points to the failed Australian Airlines bid.
In 1992, Qantas was Australia's international airline, Australian Airlines was a major domestic carrier. Both were owned by the Australian Government.
Scott says Canberra wanted to follow New Zealand's lead and test the market by selling the domestic airline in 1992, before deciding whether to privatise Qantas.
Australian Airlines was Air New Zealand's long-term alliance partner exchanging traffic at the international border. Ansett served a similar role for Qantas.
Air New Zealand's strategy was to buy Australian Airlines, paving the way for a true single market spanning the Tasman. Air New Zealand had fed the Australian Government with the idea of selling.
"We needed to secure our position and create a true transtasman single market operation, because our research shown 60 per cent of inbound tourists visited both countries," Scott said.
But Air New Zealand's plan was scuttled the year after the board dumped Scott as CEO.
Former director Jim Farmer says Air New Zealand placed the highest indicative bid. But Qantas lobbying ensured it won ownership of Australian Airlines on extremely favourable terms, including the forgiveness of a large amount of debt.
"So the Australian Government bought its own company - you tell me if that's not a defensive move," says Scott.
"Ansett and Air New Zealand became orphans."
He believes similar defensive strategies are now in play - Qantas wants to prevent any other airline from moving in, and to keep our national carrier weak and in its place.
Many directors preferred his successor, Jim McCrea, who drove the company to become an efficient, relatively low-cost airline. Under McCrea's leadership Air New Zealand established a competitive cost advantage over Qantas and later reversed gains which the new Ansett New Zealand had made on its territory.
Qantas was represented on the board by chairman Gary Pemberton and chief executive James Strong. Farmer says Air New Zealand's independent directors were impressed by their calibre - but they were still leaders of Air New Zealand's major international competitor.
Requirements of confidentiality were made known, first implicitly and then explicitly. At management level suspicions ran high. There were concerns that proposals - particularly on routes - would get back to Qantas which would counter-attack.
Farmer says this had a "hugely detrimental effect" on the amount of information presented at board level.
Sir Selwyn Cushing, who was deputy chairman from 1989 until 1998, said it was very difficult for managing directors to put projects forward, especially projects competing against Qantas who "were your opponents and vicious opponents".
"It was a bit like the All Blacks coach John Mitchell telling George Gregan (Wallabies halfback) how to play the scrum."
Air New Zealand's second strategic move into Australia came unstuck in 1994. In 1992, Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating called for common transtasman borders.
This was the launchpad for the Open Skies negotiations.
Air New Zealand had planned to make up for its failure to gain control of Australian Airlines by starting a new domestic airline in Australia, a forerunner of today's Virgin Blue.
Peter Harbison, director of Australia's Centre for Asia-Pacific Aviation, condemns the shabby treatment Australia has dished out to the New Zealand aviation industry.
"It is criminal, some of the things we are doing."
To him the most glaring example was Australia's cancellation of Open Skies. Maurice Williamson, who inherited the transport portfolio from Storey, had negotiated an agreement with his Australian counterpart, Laurie Brereton.
But six days before the agreement went into effect it was abruptly pulled. Williamsom believes Qantas and Ansett combined forces to squash the move.
"I think that was awful - we got shut out and I got a blurry fax."
Harbison reveals: "We helped Air New Zealand draft a plan for a low-cost airline before Brereton pulled the plug".
Williamson still has trouble accepting how commercial pressure could have prevailed against a deal signed by the Australian Prime Minister. Williamson made two trips to Canberra before he was able to see Brereton. When they did meet, Brereton told him that if Air New Zealand wanted to fly in his country it would have to buy into an Australian airline.
At a joint press conference outside the Australian Parliament, Williamson was so outraged at the breach of an agreement that New Zealand's foreign affairs officials had to hold him back.
"I told them I didn't expect to be treated like this by a spiv in the back streets of Kings Cross, but they said 'Calm, Minister, calm down - don't ruin the rest of our relationship'."
Officials later told him that Pemberton and Strong had met Brereton and Keating days before the plug was pulled.
The Qantas chiefs warned that if Canberra wanted a "half-way" decent sale of its airline, it should keep Air New Zealand out. Ansett also met Brereton to pile on the pressure. The withdrawal of the Australian Government's approval was followed by a stiff message from Canberra.
If Air New Zealand wanted to penetrate the Australian domestic market, its only entry would be via Ansett. Williamson said Air New Zealand's purchase was ill-advised. He thought then that the airline was "a dog", but believed he had no right to intervene, although the Government held a non-voting Kiwi share in Air New Zealand.
Air New Zealand had three directors on Ansett's board, but News Corp retained management control. Key financial information - such as that on route profitability - was flawed.
The rest is history. The financial bite was too big for Air New Zealand to manage without further capital from Singapore Airlines.
Three fundamental issues:
* How can competition be protected if Qantas is involved in Air New Zealand?
* If Qantas takes a 20 to 25 per cent stake, will that block out another more friendly shareholder once world aviation recovers?
* The most important "moral issue" - should a company which has tried so hard to damage Air New Zealand be allowed to pick up the victor's spoils?
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good people - let us step back from the arguements going on in here for a second and anylise where the animosity has been generated and who holds the black queen.
The fact of the Ansett demise was that Singapore Air realised that the Ansett empire had been so badly stripped that the only way to resurect a viable Star Alliance partner in Australia would be to remove and replace the top 4 levels of Ansett management, or to collapse the airline and play the Asian waiting game and pick up the assets at bargain basement prices and restart. Removing the top 4 levels of management would have been incredibly costly.
In order to collapse the AN empire, SQ placed through pressure on NZ (and at least 2 SQ members on the NZ board), NZ in control of an airline that was totally devoid of hope or chance in the environment of the time.
Predictably, AN went through the hoop and sadly fell to bits. This was not unexpected at high government level as a client of mine who is a UN operative at the time serving in Sri Lanka recieved a memorandum a full week before the collapse on AN advising him and all UN operatives to reorganise any planned travel on AN after 13 September as the were not going to be flying.
Unfortunately this well organised campaign has severely hurt many good people, but one should be well aware where to point the bone.
It is not the rank and file NZ staff, nor the crews and groundies handling SQ.
The SQ management has been driving this International debacle from the start for their own needs and future profit.
If NZ enters the Australian domestic market, I can only assume that SQ is wishing to avoid losing face yet again (came out squeaky clean last time using NZ as the whipping boy) and sounds like they may be trying that again, with NZ the only loser if it fails.
Look beyond the horizon people, there is a lot more going on here than is immediately obvious, and our trans Tasman mates should not be shunned on the whole. It aint their fault, just as the AN collapse was the final 5 thousand feet of descent of an already inverted airline. Their management needed a huge amount of beating with a clever stick, but the airline was totally flamed out when it was inherited.
The men and ladies in the blue suits and neat uniforms are simply our fellow travellers in this mess. We need to have a beer with them after work and agree that we need to look at upper management for accountability and some clear indication of their intentions.
It is the hidden agendas that are killing our industry, and they are NOT Kiwi or Aussie based.
Please - let us try to hold our fragile industry together and nail the infiltrators.
Best all.
EWL
The fact of the Ansett demise was that Singapore Air realised that the Ansett empire had been so badly stripped that the only way to resurect a viable Star Alliance partner in Australia would be to remove and replace the top 4 levels of Ansett management, or to collapse the airline and play the Asian waiting game and pick up the assets at bargain basement prices and restart. Removing the top 4 levels of management would have been incredibly costly.
In order to collapse the AN empire, SQ placed through pressure on NZ (and at least 2 SQ members on the NZ board), NZ in control of an airline that was totally devoid of hope or chance in the environment of the time.
Predictably, AN went through the hoop and sadly fell to bits. This was not unexpected at high government level as a client of mine who is a UN operative at the time serving in Sri Lanka recieved a memorandum a full week before the collapse on AN advising him and all UN operatives to reorganise any planned travel on AN after 13 September as the were not going to be flying.
Unfortunately this well organised campaign has severely hurt many good people, but one should be well aware where to point the bone.
It is not the rank and file NZ staff, nor the crews and groundies handling SQ.
The SQ management has been driving this International debacle from the start for their own needs and future profit.
If NZ enters the Australian domestic market, I can only assume that SQ is wishing to avoid losing face yet again (came out squeaky clean last time using NZ as the whipping boy) and sounds like they may be trying that again, with NZ the only loser if it fails.
Look beyond the horizon people, there is a lot more going on here than is immediately obvious, and our trans Tasman mates should not be shunned on the whole. It aint their fault, just as the AN collapse was the final 5 thousand feet of descent of an already inverted airline. Their management needed a huge amount of beating with a clever stick, but the airline was totally flamed out when it was inherited.
The men and ladies in the blue suits and neat uniforms are simply our fellow travellers in this mess. We need to have a beer with them after work and agree that we need to look at upper management for accountability and some clear indication of their intentions.
It is the hidden agendas that are killing our industry, and they are NOT Kiwi or Aussie based.
Please - let us try to hold our fragile industry together and nail the infiltrators.
Best all.
EWL
You can take the bou out of the Airline, but you can never take the Airline out of the boy.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gaunty
Mate I am so saddened by this debate and all others including '89 where those who are in alleged control set groups of good and honest hard working people against each other for their own greedy wants and needs.
I am sure I will die wanting us all to get along, as I am one little voice.
That doesn't stop one trying though does it?
The anger needs to be directed in all cases toward Abeles and Murdoch, Hawke, the weak people at NZ Management, the SQ heirachy, and our attitude not to recognise what was coming to pass in this and previous situations.
We have unfortunately allowed ourselves to be passive masters of our own destiny.
Regretful regards to all
EWL
Mate I am so saddened by this debate and all others including '89 where those who are in alleged control set groups of good and honest hard working people against each other for their own greedy wants and needs.
I am sure I will die wanting us all to get along, as I am one little voice.
That doesn't stop one trying though does it?
The anger needs to be directed in all cases toward Abeles and Murdoch, Hawke, the weak people at NZ Management, the SQ heirachy, and our attitude not to recognise what was coming to pass in this and previous situations.
We have unfortunately allowed ourselves to be passive masters of our own destiny.
Regretful regards to all
EWL
IwantamyA4sback
Yours a slide to continue.
Can`t afford an air force,can`t afford a nationalised airline.
Xenophobia entirely appropriate for this forum.
Yours a slide to continue.
Can`t afford an air force,can`t afford a nationalised airline.
Xenophobia entirely appropriate for this forum.
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 13th Aug 2002 at 13:33.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your Kiwi Education
EWL
Sorry mate, you have lost the plot. These kiwis have made
some diabolicle boo boos, and fully deserve whats about
to happen with a two-pronged attack from both Qantas
with their extra 3 737s and Virgin Blue which should be
announced before this month is out. Remember!! , if you have
an animal with a terminal illiness it is best to put it out of its
misery with a painless injection from your friendly vet. (read
QF & DJ)
Try this quote from Jim Thorn in the July issue of 'Australian
Aviation' under the heading of 'Australian Aviation Makes
a Quarter Century' page 39 referring to Compass II.
"....And an interesting side note on all this...At the time one
of the white knights looking to save Compass II was Air NZ.
Air NZ had always wanted a real base in Australia and
therefore full access to the vast Australian domestic market
as witnessed years later by its huge money wasting effort
to acquire all of Ansett. Anyway, Air NZ could at that time
had acquired a major shareholding in Compass II for something
in the order of $30m. It would have saved the young Australian
airline and the Kiwi airline would have had its Australian base
secured for a pittance. Instead it decided not to proceed with
the rescue and walked away from one of the best hands its
management ever held. Years later I mentioned this to then
CEO Jim McCrea and he acknowledged that they had got it
wrong, and this was well before Air NZ even began to think
about throwing money at Ansett."
EWL, if the above does not convince you what this company
called Air NZ is all about, you are beyond help, try and think
of the words- Stupid- Incompentent- Should stick to Sheep
and Corner Dairys and you will be doing yourself a favour.
PS: Kiwis! Do yourselves some good. Give up at least 25%
to Qantas and save yourselves, but being honest, I have
no doubt you are brilliant enough to sell to Bangladesh
airlines before Qantas. Yes! , I watched the dismal performence
of the Kiwis on the national I.Q. TV program the other night, now I'm starting to believe the result.
Air NZ Management in action (Trying for Aussie domestic operation)
Kiwi wet dream
Sorry mate, you have lost the plot. These kiwis have made
some diabolicle boo boos, and fully deserve whats about
to happen with a two-pronged attack from both Qantas
with their extra 3 737s and Virgin Blue which should be
announced before this month is out. Remember!! , if you have
an animal with a terminal illiness it is best to put it out of its
misery with a painless injection from your friendly vet. (read
QF & DJ)
Try this quote from Jim Thorn in the July issue of 'Australian
Aviation' under the heading of 'Australian Aviation Makes
a Quarter Century' page 39 referring to Compass II.
"....And an interesting side note on all this...At the time one
of the white knights looking to save Compass II was Air NZ.
Air NZ had always wanted a real base in Australia and
therefore full access to the vast Australian domestic market
as witnessed years later by its huge money wasting effort
to acquire all of Ansett. Anyway, Air NZ could at that time
had acquired a major shareholding in Compass II for something
in the order of $30m. It would have saved the young Australian
airline and the Kiwi airline would have had its Australian base
secured for a pittance. Instead it decided not to proceed with
the rescue and walked away from one of the best hands its
management ever held. Years later I mentioned this to then
CEO Jim McCrea and he acknowledged that they had got it
wrong, and this was well before Air NZ even began to think
about throwing money at Ansett."
EWL, if the above does not convince you what this company
called Air NZ is all about, you are beyond help, try and think
of the words- Stupid- Incompentent- Should stick to Sheep
and Corner Dairys and you will be doing yourself a favour.
PS: Kiwis! Do yourselves some good. Give up at least 25%
to Qantas and save yourselves, but being honest, I have
no doubt you are brilliant enough to sell to Bangladesh
airlines before Qantas. Yes! , I watched the dismal performence
of the Kiwis on the national I.Q. TV program the other night, now I'm starting to believe the result.
Air NZ Management in action (Trying for Aussie domestic operation)
Kiwi wet dream
Last edited by go_dj; 13th Aug 2002 at 19:20.
Evertonian
Ahhh, EWL.
Once again you wear your heart on your sleeve, and someone tries to knock it off!!!
Indeed, we need to look beyond the horizon, for that's where we shall see how so many of us have been played for fools. Just wait & see who buys out Corrigan next year!!!
Once again you wear your heart on your sleeve, and someone tries to knock it off!!!
Indeed, we need to look beyond the horizon, for that's where we shall see how so many of us have been played for fools. Just wait & see who buys out Corrigan next year!!!
Kiwi PPRuNer
Join Date: May 2000
Location: rockingham, western australia
Age: 42
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well quite frankly i couldnt give a f&*k over who f*#ked who,
whats happened has happened, and if u must be reminded air nz was a private company when it brought ansett.
when i fly i dont care who its on, as long as i get there at reasonable cost, and in one piece, more often than not i fly qantas, more often than not caus its scheldues tie in with
mine
whats happened has happened, and if u must be reminded air nz was a private company when it brought ansett.
when i fly i dont care who its on, as long as i get there at reasonable cost, and in one piece, more often than not i fly qantas, more often than not caus its scheldues tie in with
mine
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Devonport Tasmania Australia
Posts: 1,837
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
go_dj
I am only too aware that the management of NZ makes Inspector Clouseau look like Albert Einstein.
I think if you read the post carefully, what I am saying is that the front lines should not be biting at each other, and that some of the major problems are buried in closets long closed, and I do NOT in any way see NZ as an innocent victim. Their greedy wishes for a foothold here are well known.
We all know NZ should adopt the tag of "Shame of the Pacific" for its management ineptitude, but the airline they were put in to allegedly resurrect was already way below the radar and beyond help.
That does not change the fact that the front line staff of Aussie and Kiwi arlines are sniping at each other.
Kiwi or Aussie bashing does nothing for anything but obviously stung egos.
SQ knew that AN was non-retrievable, and that the only way to restructure the Australian link in Star Alliance was to collapse the airline, wait for the right time and remember what I say.This is the final boot to fall, and fall it will.
This may be the only way NZ can be made viable as well. Maybe this is just what the tilt at the Aussie market is. An excuse to put them down.
Buster
If I stop wearing my heart on my sleeve, please slap me - hard!!
Our industry is too all consuming to hate others.
Best all
EWL
I am only too aware that the management of NZ makes Inspector Clouseau look like Albert Einstein.
I think if you read the post carefully, what I am saying is that the front lines should not be biting at each other, and that some of the major problems are buried in closets long closed, and I do NOT in any way see NZ as an innocent victim. Their greedy wishes for a foothold here are well known.
We all know NZ should adopt the tag of "Shame of the Pacific" for its management ineptitude, but the airline they were put in to allegedly resurrect was already way below the radar and beyond help.
That does not change the fact that the front line staff of Aussie and Kiwi arlines are sniping at each other.
Kiwi or Aussie bashing does nothing for anything but obviously stung egos.
SQ knew that AN was non-retrievable, and that the only way to restructure the Australian link in Star Alliance was to collapse the airline, wait for the right time and remember what I say.This is the final boot to fall, and fall it will.
This may be the only way NZ can be made viable as well. Maybe this is just what the tilt at the Aussie market is. An excuse to put them down.
Buster
If I stop wearing my heart on my sleeve, please slap me - hard!!
Our industry is too all consuming to hate others.
Best all
EWL