Pearl
Government departments always want the best, but I have always found somewhere along line that they always go for the cheapest or most convient option.
I believe that is the hold up or delay with the Vic Air Ambulance contract. They wanted new aircraft but didn't like the price, so in the meantime the Aussie peso crashed back to 65 cents!
I believe that is the hold up or delay with the Vic Air Ambulance contract. They wanted new aircraft but didn't like the price, so in the meantime the Aussie peso crashed back to 65 cents!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RFDS?
I bet the RFDS central section get it with PC12's and their own medical staff who will fly in singles.
They also have a commercial advantage the others do not have, in that they get their funds topped up by donations from the general public, bequests etc. They also used to get a dollar for dollar subsidy for aircraft purchases from the federal government.
So they can probably undercut the others. Except the religious ones who can do the same, and make their pilots organise a cash flow to pay their own wages and expenses.
The "not for profit" outfits are hard to compete with, and they distort the commercial world by keeping prices down so it is difficult for others to keep standards up at those prices.
They also have a commercial advantage the others do not have, in that they get their funds topped up by donations from the general public, bequests etc. They also used to get a dollar for dollar subsidy for aircraft purchases from the federal government.
So they can probably undercut the others. Except the religious ones who can do the same, and make their pilots organise a cash flow to pay their own wages and expenses.
The "not for profit" outfits are hard to compete with, and they distort the commercial world by keeping prices down so it is difficult for others to keep standards up at those prices.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately the NT Govt got exactly what they paid for -
very old aircraft tarted up, and the problems that go with them -
lets see if the ALP is smart enough to do it properly this time.
I won't hold my breath though.
very old aircraft tarted up, and the problems that go with them -
lets see if the ALP is smart enough to do it properly this time.
I won't hold my breath though.
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bushy
I'm pretty sure the RFDS dont do it "for free". A lot of effort goes into running one of these outfits.
We should also be careful not to tar all RFDS sections with the same brush, they are individual organisations run separately in there own way. The commercial world does not fiorgive anyone for screwing up, RFDS or otherwise.
SN
I'm pretty sure the RFDS dont do it "for free". A lot of effort goes into running one of these outfits.
We should also be careful not to tar all RFDS sections with the same brush, they are individual organisations run separately in there own way. The commercial world does not fiorgive anyone for screwing up, RFDS or otherwise.
SN
Last edited by PPRuNeUser0161; 24th Jan 2009 at 12:17.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know all those things, but that does not change anything.
There is no level playing field. The "not for profit" organisations can quote low and then get money from the public to make up the shortfall. The others cannot do that.
I wonder what the commercial regulator would make of that.
There is no level playing field. The "not for profit" organisations can quote low and then get money from the public to make up the shortfall. The others cannot do that.
I wonder what the commercial regulator would make of that.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Conargo Pub
Age: 39
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bushy Said
So they can probably undercut the others. Except the religious ones who can do the same, and make their pilots organise a cash flow to pay their own wages and expenses.
Lets hope sanity prevails and all the NTAMS fellas and nurses get to keep their jobs. From what I know of the place there does not seem to bee too many worried people. Good luck to them.
DD
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bushy
I don't understand, why would you quote low? If its the ecconomy of scale thing its no different to Qantas quoting on a job against VB.
As far as employment is concerned I'm pretty sure there would be no less pilots emmployed under the RFDS than are currently employed with Pearl.
SN
I don't understand, why would you quote low? If its the ecconomy of scale thing its no different to Qantas quoting on a job against VB.
As far as employment is concerned I'm pretty sure there would be no less pilots emmployed under the RFDS than are currently employed with Pearl.
SN
Bushy, you seem to have something against RFDS, why??
Did they turn you down for a job once?
morno
Did they turn you down for a job once?
morno
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No I don't, and they didn't.
The facts are, For decades I have watched operators struggle to make ends meet while they tried to compete with various "not for profit" organisations that could get subsidised by fund raising from the general public and /or churches/government.
Wouldn't it be great for the bean counters if each pilot had to raise enough money to pay his own wages and expenses. There is one of these, and it's hard to compete with an organisation that does not have to earn enough money to pay wages.
This sort of thing is one of the reasons why GA is impoverished, and there are hardly any new aircraft.
Do you think CASA would give an AOC to a "not for profit" airline that relied on bequests and public appeals so they could compete with qantas?
The facts are, For decades I have watched operators struggle to make ends meet while they tried to compete with various "not for profit" organisations that could get subsidised by fund raising from the general public and /or churches/government.
Wouldn't it be great for the bean counters if each pilot had to raise enough money to pay his own wages and expenses. There is one of these, and it's hard to compete with an organisation that does not have to earn enough money to pay wages.
This sort of thing is one of the reasons why GA is impoverished, and there are hardly any new aircraft.
Do you think CASA would give an AOC to a "not for profit" airline that relied on bequests and public appeals so they could compete with qantas?
Last edited by bushy; 25th Jan 2009 at 14:12.
Station Air 8 - You're right on re: options offered 
Desert Duck - Yep NT Govt in general (NT Health any more of less so?) is "typical Govt." as you and Station Air 8 accurately described.
Bushy - Agree with what you're saying, but I have to say that at least RFDS might get some sort of outcome for the patients. Pearl really aren't the quality operator they once were. The aeromed contract, whilst it is underfunded by the client (the NT Govt), is still poorly managed. The "real client" (the patients!) often suffer as a result of this as much as anything else.
CR.
Desert Duck - Yep NT Govt in general (NT Health any more of less so?) is "typical Govt." as you and Station Air 8 accurately described.
Bushy - Agree with what you're saying, but I have to say that at least RFDS might get some sort of outcome for the patients. Pearl really aren't the quality operator they once were. The aeromed contract, whilst it is underfunded by the client (the NT Govt), is still poorly managed. The "real client" (the patients!) often suffer as a result of this as much as anything else.
CR.
Soooo, what you're saying bushy is that RFDS aren't one of those operators you're talking about? Because RFDS pay their pilots quite well. And in the grand scheme of things, donations, bequests etc. count for a very small part of their 'income'.
morno
morno
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmmmm
Morno,
Does the old saying "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" mean anything to you?
Bushy, you seem to have something against RFDS, why??
Did they turn you down for a job once?
morno
Did they turn you down for a job once?
morno
Thanks for that Tinpis, an interesting read.
He really does slam Pearl Av's King Air's! For good reason though. An unreliable aeromedical outfit, is nearly as good as nothing at all.
morno
He really does slam Pearl Av's King Air's! For good reason though. An unreliable aeromedical outfit, is nearly as good as nothing at all.
morno
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear oh dear
Morno,
You left out the tax breaks which are not an insignificant part of their bottom line.
Soooo, what you're saying bushy is that RFDS aren't one of those operators you're talking about? Because RFDS pay their pilots quite well. And in the grand scheme of things, donations, bequests etc. count for a very small part of their 'income'.
morno
morno
Does the old saying "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" mean anything to you?
.morno
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Morno,
Both quotes are from YOU on different threads relating Pearl/NTAMS. So mate if you can't work it out then why should I waste my time trying to explain to you.
By the way just found this on the net relating to RFDS 2006 Financial Report Qld section.
Financial Report 2006
Yeah I guess your right nearly 6 mil a year is only about 16% of their income "very small indeed". Some commercial companies make significantly less than that as profit, if it at all, plus they have to pay company tax
Both quotes are from YOU on different threads relating Pearl/NTAMS. So mate if you can't work it out then why should I waste my time trying to explain to you.
By the way just found this on the net relating to RFDS 2006 Financial Report Qld section.
OPERATING RESULT AND
REVIEW OF OPERATIONS
The operating result for the year was a surplus of
$3,886,000. (2005:$1,993,000). No income tax is
payable as the Service is exempt under Australian
taxation legislation.
REVIEW OF OPERATIONS
The operating result for the year was a surplus of
$3,886,000. (2005:$1,993,000). No income tax is
payable as the Service is exempt under Australian
taxation legislation.
Financial Report 2006
In AUD
RevenueCommonwealth Government Operating Grants 7,195,000
State Government Operating Grants 17,399,000
Specific Project Operating Grants 4,043,000
Visitor Centre Sales and Admissions 275,000
Total 28,912,000
State Government Operating Grants 17,399,000
Specific Project Operating Grants 4,043,000
Visitor Centre Sales and Admissions 275,000
Total 28,912,000
Other Income
Bequests 2,592,000
Donations 3,335,000
Net gain on disposal of property, P&E 88,000
Other Income 958,000
Total 6,973,000Bequests 2,592,000
Donations 3,335,000
Net gain on disposal of property, P&E 88,000
Other Income 958,000
And in the grand scheme of things, donations, bequests etc. count for a very small part of their 'income'.
morno
morno
Last edited by betaman; 26th Jan 2009 at 03:55.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Morno,
I am only responding to the posted quote above, which may be out of context.
An unreliable medical outfit can be interpreted a number of ways, I hope you are just talking a/c and not staff.
You might recall another aeromed set up that uses a piston powered job
I am only responding to the posted quote above, which may be out of context.
Thanks for that Tinpis, an interesting read.
He really does slam Pearl Av's King Air's! For good reason though. An unreliable aeromedical outfit, is nearly as good as nothing at all.
morno
He really does slam Pearl Av's King Air's! For good reason though. An unreliable aeromedical outfit, is nearly as good as nothing at all.
morno
You might recall another aeromed set up that uses a piston powered job
Maxgrad - "I hope you are just talking a/c and not staff."
Hit a nerve?
Some of the crew are less than helpful, and you KNOW that. You know who they are too. Maybe I am one, maybe not...
General morale is very low I would say, and the tight roster, late rosters, short notice changes, etc. are definitely a part of that. Exacerbated by managements complete faliure to acknowledge/address same. A wise man once said, "if you don't learn from your mistakes, you are condemned to repeat them" - well, it seems they haven't learnt yet.
And this KTR thing... I will admit, I can't say how I would react, if my job effectively became FIFO before my very eyes... But I think the deals done, and two tier working conditions, BLDSO etc. are a pretty good trade-off.
Flame away, if you feel the need... I'm more than ready. If you disagree, and care for an adult discussion then that's also an option.
Maybe I'm wrong and you can correct me...
CR.
Some of the crew are less than helpful, and you KNOW that. You know who they are too. Maybe I am one, maybe not...
General morale is very low I would say, and the tight roster, late rosters, short notice changes, etc. are definitely a part of that. Exacerbated by managements complete faliure to acknowledge/address same. A wise man once said, "if you don't learn from your mistakes, you are condemned to repeat them" - well, it seems they haven't learnt yet.
And this KTR thing... I will admit, I can't say how I would react, if my job effectively became FIFO before my very eyes... But I think the deals done, and two tier working conditions, BLDSO etc. are a pretty good trade-off.
Flame away, if you feel the need... I'm more than ready. If you disagree, and care for an adult discussion then that's also an option.
Maybe I'm wrong and you can correct me...CR.
Last edited by Counter-rotation; 26th Jan 2009 at 02:44.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: australia
Posts: 587
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes I do know who you are.
In my last past I intended to highlight that, yes the a/c are the intended target and not crew who are very hard working and dispite situations still get on with the business of safe legal flying.
This is a public forum so I invite you to ph me, you have my number, for this discussion in private where it should be kept.
In my last past I intended to highlight that, yes the a/c are the intended target and not crew who are very hard working and dispite situations still get on with the business of safe legal flying.
This is a public forum so I invite you to ph me, you have my number, for this discussion in private where it should be kept.