Ozjet
Seriously mate, what is your agenda here?
Why don't you just let their accountants figure it out and go from there?
'The pain'? This is all about the engine noise isn't it LC?
Why don't you just let their accountants figure it out and go from there?
I think if CASA gives them one soon they can go broke sooner and spare us the pain.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Seriously what is my Agenda
What accountants? Some MBA graduate is doing all the work presumably. No accountant would be stupid enough to think of such an absurd entry into the market. And they wouldn't dare ask for more than $25/hour.
I guess I find it amusing how people dream about the future success of an airline which has no visible business plan. If you read the Melbourne Herald Sun on 12 August 05, Ozjet is now ready to buy the Ansett hangars. Now I am sure that is in the plan...and who will they ask to pay for that?
Now where were we $400 + super, electricity, rent, hangars, .... Sounds like about $800 return for a starter. + accountants + lawyers....their owner can't even manage to win a race! (or sell the racing business).
Sorry, got a bit side tracked there. Yes, the engine noise and the pollution. They should keep their grotty engines out of here, we Sydney folk are clean people.
Now, if our good wannabe has money to buy hangars, I am sure it has the money to operate cleaner and quieter aircraft. What on earth does Ozjet need so many hangars for? That place looks like it could take 8-12 jets at once. Fleet size 2 ? Is it expecting some breakdowns or does it think it can get them for a couple of million? I think a few people out there would be quite happy to pay in the order of $100 mil and it aint gonna be Ozjet. A quiet 737-300 costs less than $US10 mil. Take note of the comment by Mr Stoddart that he has something of lesser "value" in the UK. Well, maybe the Ansett hangars are "fantastic" literally.
I guess I find it amusing how people dream about the future success of an airline which has no visible business plan. If you read the Melbourne Herald Sun on 12 August 05, Ozjet is now ready to buy the Ansett hangars. Now I am sure that is in the plan...and who will they ask to pay for that?
Now where were we $400 + super, electricity, rent, hangars, .... Sounds like about $800 return for a starter. + accountants + lawyers....their owner can't even manage to win a race! (or sell the racing business).
Sorry, got a bit side tracked there. Yes, the engine noise and the pollution. They should keep their grotty engines out of here, we Sydney folk are clean people.
Now, if our good wannabe has money to buy hangars, I am sure it has the money to operate cleaner and quieter aircraft. What on earth does Ozjet need so many hangars for? That place looks like it could take 8-12 jets at once. Fleet size 2 ? Is it expecting some breakdowns or does it think it can get them for a couple of million? I think a few people out there would be quite happy to pay in the order of $100 mil and it aint gonna be Ozjet. A quiet 737-300 costs less than $US10 mil. Take note of the comment by Mr Stoddart that he has something of lesser "value" in the UK. Well, maybe the Ansett hangars are "fantastic" literally.
Just who is the lemming?
Mention Ozjet, and who comes a-runnin?
L_C, that's who!
Blah, blah, blah, flip-flopping all over the joint, clutching at straws, hoping someone will back him up. Nothing more than pure speculation, and as is the norm, taking the easy (negative) approach.
I never knew that Business Plans had to be passed thru L_C to be signed off on, or that the accessibility of a website is a direct correlation of a business' possible fortunes.
Agendas are meant for meetings.
L_C, that's who!
Blah, blah, blah, flip-flopping all over the joint, clutching at straws, hoping someone will back him up. Nothing more than pure speculation, and as is the norm, taking the easy (negative) approach.
I never knew that Business Plans had to be passed thru L_C to be signed off on, or that the accessibility of a website is a direct correlation of a business' possible fortunes.
Agendas are meant for meetings.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After the Adelaide/Melbourne switcheroo, I suspect Ozjets have been taking lessons from the Fox and Lew "Big Book on how to start an airline" with foreword by Mark and Mark. 
With the assistance of the ACTU the Marks have set amazing new benchmarks for the Administration industry in how to convert creditor and staff entitlements into houses, school fees, boats and skiing holidays.
With the assistance of the ACTU the Marks have set amazing new benchmarks for the Administration industry in how to convert creditor and staff entitlements into houses, school fees, boats and skiing holidays.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The Marks Cash In & Play Monoply with Ozjet
I would have to agree with you their Gaunty. It all seems very fishy. It's a wonder the creditors haven't all gone to the meetings and asked for an audit to be done on that administration.
I quite agree also with your switcheroo observation, this is very much the typical behaviour of a single entrepreneur who has no thourough background in RPT logistics and sees opportunities everywhere but cannot sew them together and so becomes grossly inefficient and misfocussed.
It's not uncommon for an administrator to lend funds to a prospective business to buy assets and as long as the administrator takes a charge over the asset there shouldn't be a problem in losing the asset for creditors. Unfortunately it does extend the administration with the loans then being sold to third party financial institutions who will discount them based on Ozjet's credit rading (not EAL's).
The big problem comes when the administrators start to deal with themselves and make returns without checks and balances. Therefore, the administrators may see that the advancement of the hangars to Ozjet is in the interest of the creditors and themselves. I think something like that needs to be put to a creditors meeting as it is a major asset and if I were a former Ansett employee I would vehemently object to this arrangement as it is too risky. It shares the same start up risk as Ozjet and I would be looking for a bank guaranteed security deposit of at least $200M for 5 years to be held in escrow to ensure former staff are at least paid out within the next 5 years.
I would have thought that the Ansett base would be more ideal for Jetstar or Virgin Blue or strong domestic/international Melbourne based airline. Letting it go to Ozjet would seem to be an absolute waste of good resources.
I am not sure what Ozjet's aim is with Adelaide, however, my view is that, Ozjet's financial position is driving much of this behaviour and I think there is grounds to be somewhat coy.
I quite agree also with your switcheroo observation, this is very much the typical behaviour of a single entrepreneur who has no thourough background in RPT logistics and sees opportunities everywhere but cannot sew them together and so becomes grossly inefficient and misfocussed.
It's not uncommon for an administrator to lend funds to a prospective business to buy assets and as long as the administrator takes a charge over the asset there shouldn't be a problem in losing the asset for creditors. Unfortunately it does extend the administration with the loans then being sold to third party financial institutions who will discount them based on Ozjet's credit rading (not EAL's).
The big problem comes when the administrators start to deal with themselves and make returns without checks and balances. Therefore, the administrators may see that the advancement of the hangars to Ozjet is in the interest of the creditors and themselves. I think something like that needs to be put to a creditors meeting as it is a major asset and if I were a former Ansett employee I would vehemently object to this arrangement as it is too risky. It shares the same start up risk as Ozjet and I would be looking for a bank guaranteed security deposit of at least $200M for 5 years to be held in escrow to ensure former staff are at least paid out within the next 5 years.
I would have thought that the Ansett base would be more ideal for Jetstar or Virgin Blue or strong domestic/international Melbourne based airline. Letting it go to Ozjet would seem to be an absolute waste of good resources.
I am not sure what Ozjet's aim is with Adelaide, however, my view is that, Ozjet's financial position is driving much of this behaviour and I think there is grounds to be somewhat coy.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Legal_Counsel
Classic herd behaviour.
The Creditors Committee is controlled by the ACTU using staff proxies, obtained on the basis of we are here to help you = we can play politics with this, otherwise we will lose a power base, and, who gives a stuff about the creditors even if they are our own members.
There is a very high probability that the airline would still today be flying had the ACTU not rejected and fired the original administrators.
The two prospective owners were not in the thrall of the ACTU and were in insisting on a reorganisation of the staffing conditions which would have seen off the ACTU .
Irony is that it is happening anyway and deliciously so, now that Corrigan has control of Virgin who stepped straight into the Ansett shoes.
The Marks approved either tacitly or implicitly the breathtaking fraud that was the Lew/Fox take over offer.
It was the Marks who kept the airline going at a significant nett loss to the creditors to enable the Bobbsey twins to make their play, with nothing more than a nod and a wink at risk to them.
Classic conflict of interest. The game was up the day I saw a media conference with the Marks wearing Ansett caps and talking about "their" airline. The language was unmistakable, they had been "captured".
It truly is, but first they have to tip out the incumbent Creditors Committee, to do that they need to be organised.
They rely on the fact that the staff creditors are not the least bit sophisticated in these matters, anybody capable of leading the charge now will be in other employment. They are easily driven on to the guns.
It would take a brave and resilient set of individuals, because it will not be the Marks it will be the Labour Govt and the ACTU with whom you will have to deal.
They have IMHO been fed just enough to to keep em quiet for long enough to go back to sleep/get alternative employment and mentally write off the entitlements that have been transferred elsewhere, leaving the carcass still with plenty of meat on it, to be picked over at their leisure.
Besides its Melbourne.
The home of Elliot, Freddo, Painters and Dockers, Tricontinental and a huge host of other colourful characters who with panache, the wink and the nod, make the Sydney "push" look like absolute rank amateurs.
One of their favourite sons in the eighties, simply "stole" in plain sight tens of millions of dollars from an insurance company he happened to own, to get himself out of a tight spot, he now parades on the world stage philanthropising? and lecturing all and sundry on corporate governance. And you all thought that life insurance company funds were "safe".
Administration 101 says; you keep it alive for as long as it is possible to take fees, then at the instant that this is no longer possible;............."your administrators regret that it is no longer possible ...blah blah blah...it has not been possible blah blah....it is now time to wind up the company and place it into liquidation, which will be handled by our sister company" which will suck whatever is left out of the bones.
Classic herd behaviour.
The Creditors Committee is controlled by the ACTU using staff proxies, obtained on the basis of we are here to help you = we can play politics with this, otherwise we will lose a power base, and, who gives a stuff about the creditors even if they are our own members.
There is a very high probability that the airline would still today be flying had the ACTU not rejected and fired the original administrators.
The two prospective owners were not in the thrall of the ACTU and were in insisting on a reorganisation of the staffing conditions which would have seen off the ACTU .
Irony is that it is happening anyway and deliciously so, now that Corrigan has control of Virgin who stepped straight into the Ansett shoes.
The Marks approved either tacitly or implicitly the breathtaking fraud that was the Lew/Fox take over offer.
It was the Marks who kept the airline going at a significant nett loss to the creditors to enable the Bobbsey twins to make their play, with nothing more than a nod and a wink at risk to them.
Classic conflict of interest. The game was up the day I saw a media conference with the Marks wearing Ansett caps and talking about "their" airline. The language was unmistakable, they had been "captured".
It's a wonder the creditors haven't all gone to the meetings and asked for an audit to be done on that administration.
They rely on the fact that the staff creditors are not the least bit sophisticated in these matters, anybody capable of leading the charge now will be in other employment. They are easily driven on to the guns.
It would take a brave and resilient set of individuals, because it will not be the Marks it will be the Labour Govt and the ACTU with whom you will have to deal.
They have IMHO been fed just enough to to keep em quiet for long enough to go back to sleep/get alternative employment and mentally write off the entitlements that have been transferred elsewhere, leaving the carcass still with plenty of meat on it, to be picked over at their leisure.
Besides its Melbourne.
The home of Elliot, Freddo, Painters and Dockers, Tricontinental and a huge host of other colourful characters who with panache, the wink and the nod, make the Sydney "push" look like absolute rank amateurs. One of their favourite sons in the eighties, simply "stole" in plain sight tens of millions of dollars from an insurance company he happened to own, to get himself out of a tight spot, he now parades on the world stage philanthropising? and lecturing all and sundry on corporate governance. And you all thought that life insurance company funds were "safe".
Administration 101 says; you keep it alive for as long as it is possible to take fees, then at the instant that this is no longer possible;............."your administrators regret that it is no longer possible ...blah blah blah...it has not been possible blah blah....it is now time to wind up the company and place it into liquidation, which will be handled by our sister company" which will suck whatever is left out of the bones.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Money is running out.
Coffee shop talk in Pitt St is Ozjet is about to make an announcement. Something to do with further delays.
Point taken Gaunty it is a complex issue which is at the root of frustation of many who might have seen a better outcome.
They should ban those jets from flying here too BOHEuropean.
It's a fact that Ansett could have continued to operate on a 1/4 of its fleet size with less than 2000 staff, and I think Air NZ could have achieved that with far less damage than had occurred with the total shut down of the airline.
If Qantas had been smart it would have supported the government to do that, because in effect all the airlines would have been winners and 3 airlines could have successfully brought about the same fare benefits to the public as the arrangement today at probably a far lessor cost.
Point taken Gaunty it is a complex issue which is at the root of frustation of many who might have seen a better outcome.
They should ban those jets from flying here too BOHEuropean.
It's a fact that Ansett could have continued to operate on a 1/4 of its fleet size with less than 2000 staff, and I think Air NZ could have achieved that with far less damage than had occurred with the total shut down of the airline.
If Qantas had been smart it would have supported the government to do that, because in effect all the airlines would have been winners and 3 airlines could have successfully brought about the same fare benefits to the public as the arrangement today at probably a far lessor cost.
Guest
Posts: n/a
No Confidence in Ozjet
The recent news that Ozjet is back in Adelaide looking for money clearly shows it hasn't got the money to operate the airline. Since when does a "business" airline develop a plan that hinges on government support. What a joke. Government should be more responsible.
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Coffee shop talk in Pitt St is Ozjet is about to make an announcement.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Lend me your ears.
Sorry Howard Hughes, what do you mean by that? To date I think I have been pretty spot on in picking up which way Ozjet will go.
The key changes will be:
1. Ozjet will change its offering to a 2 class 84 seat domestic shuttle between Adelaide and Melbourne to ensure it gets it F1 benefit both ways. It will abandon Melbourne - Sydney and Adelaide-Sydney as these markets are not sustainable for their own reasons. The Adelaide-Melbourne sector has sustainable advantage for the race oriented concept and fleet size will be limited to four aircraft for this sector running at 2 hour intervals.
2. To enhance connectivity to the Adelaide hub, the airline will start services to Perth and Darwin.
3. To achieve support from the SA Government it will operate regional shuttles out of Adelaide to improve commerce connections.
Basically this would hub and spoke Ozjet in Adelaide.
Ozjet could use Melbourne as a maintenance base although if it intends to use the BAe146s of former Ansett then that might be better handled by National Jet in Adelaide. Or it could use both, but I would imagine that this would be cost prohibitive.
I think its owners need to find an amicable solution for Ozjet. Continual press announcements leave some people wondering whether it is serious because most would know after the owner's effort in the Melbourne Grand Prix some people would treat these antics as a joke. I think people have basically concluded this animal probably wont fly and if it does, not for long.
Let's see who is right Howard Hughes. Pitt street has a pretty good ear.
The key changes will be:
1. Ozjet will change its offering to a 2 class 84 seat domestic shuttle between Adelaide and Melbourne to ensure it gets it F1 benefit both ways. It will abandon Melbourne - Sydney and Adelaide-Sydney as these markets are not sustainable for their own reasons. The Adelaide-Melbourne sector has sustainable advantage for the race oriented concept and fleet size will be limited to four aircraft for this sector running at 2 hour intervals.
2. To enhance connectivity to the Adelaide hub, the airline will start services to Perth and Darwin.
3. To achieve support from the SA Government it will operate regional shuttles out of Adelaide to improve commerce connections.
Basically this would hub and spoke Ozjet in Adelaide.
Ozjet could use Melbourne as a maintenance base although if it intends to use the BAe146s of former Ansett then that might be better handled by National Jet in Adelaide. Or it could use both, but I would imagine that this would be cost prohibitive.
I think its owners need to find an amicable solution for Ozjet. Continual press announcements leave some people wondering whether it is serious because most would know after the owner's effort in the Melbourne Grand Prix some people would treat these antics as a joke. I think people have basically concluded this animal probably wont fly and if it does, not for long.
Let's see who is right Howard Hughes. Pitt street has a pretty good ear.
Legal...
you claim you are spot on, but wheres the evidence? You saying you know for sure its going to be 2 class?
Dont take offense when I say I dont believe you!
Besides, what have you been spot on so far? When you predict every possible negative aspect of the start up, your bound to hit once or twice, no matter what start up! Its like getting excited because you won the lottery after buying every available ticket!
Despite that, I cant really see where your psychic powers have hit anything in relation to Ozjet!?
Finally, and I know this will sound harsh, but does your negative attitude stem from your sister being involved in the 732 Airtours accident? Everyone has motivation, is this yours? Tragic as it was, (and by what you say, she appears to have been one of the lucky ones!), it was 20 years ago and 732s have been flying pretty safely ever since, especially for their age! My only reason for asking is you are so passionate about it not succeeding, and have insulted the crew who got jobs on other threads... There has to be some motivation coming from somewhere? Or is it just bitterness about airlines - your comment suggesting pilots being paid $80,000 is too much could suggest this?!
you claim you are spot on, but wheres the evidence? You saying you know for sure its going to be 2 class?
Dont take offense when I say I dont believe you!
Besides, what have you been spot on so far? When you predict every possible negative aspect of the start up, your bound to hit once or twice, no matter what start up! Its like getting excited because you won the lottery after buying every available ticket!
Despite that, I cant really see where your psychic powers have hit anything in relation to Ozjet!?
Finally, and I know this will sound harsh, but does your negative attitude stem from your sister being involved in the 732 Airtours accident? Everyone has motivation, is this yours? Tragic as it was, (and by what you say, she appears to have been one of the lucky ones!), it was 20 years ago and 732s have been flying pretty safely ever since, especially for their age! My only reason for asking is you are so passionate about it not succeeding, and have insulted the crew who got jobs on other threads... There has to be some motivation coming from somewhere? Or is it just bitterness about airlines - your comment suggesting pilots being paid $80,000 is too much could suggest this?!
Guest
Posts: n/a
You are probably right.
Ozangel you are probably right. My sister would tell you she chose to fly with Airtours because she thought is was a safe company. She bears the scars of that decision and now trusts no one. And if you look at the history of that aircraft you realise that the engineers may have done her and others a gross dis-service. It certainly placed credence to Murphy's Law.
However, that aside, I wasn't trying to destroy the hopes and aspirations of people who need work. For some who have left their current employment with the established airlines, I say don't burn your bridge behind you.
My statistical analysis suggests the Ozjet model is not feasible. Yes there is a market for the product to some degree but not to the extent Ozjet believes. This is not about crossing the Atlantic where there is such a market. This is why i strongly believe Ozjet must change or it will fail.
However, that aside, I wasn't trying to destroy the hopes and aspirations of people who need work. For some who have left their current employment with the established airlines, I say don't burn your bridge behind you.
My statistical analysis suggests the Ozjet model is not feasible. Yes there is a market for the product to some degree but not to the extent Ozjet believes. This is not about crossing the Atlantic where there is such a market. This is why i strongly believe Ozjet must change or it will fail.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G-FIGP is reported to be painted one side OZJET and the other side EUROPEAN
I have also heared they want 12 737-200's out there by this time next year - looks like thats where the European fleet is going..
cya
Jimmi
I have also heared they want 12 737-200's out there by this time next year - looks like thats where the European fleet is going..
cya
Jimmi
