I'll agree he did do a good job at a LCC, As for the full fledged Airline he fails miserably and as the headline of this topic states, "First loss in 20yrs" and as CEO he must be held accountable for this no ifs buts or maybe's..

Dixon didn't help things but the loss and drive and long term knowledge of his product like John Borghetti had is probably the greatest loss.

QANTAS does offer just as cheap fares as the rest I flew with them to LA from Perth and booking in advance I was able to travel on the A330 to Syd and than the A380 to LA and what a smooth experience it was and came in $2100 return..

With regards to maintenance bigger facilities in Australia just not as many like you mentioned.

Seeing the Red roo sink due to lack in my eyes a lack of investment is just a horrible situation and needs to be stopped

QF aren't failing due to a lack of investment, it's that they have to offer competitive prices similar to their competitors to get people to fly with them, however as their cost base is much higher than their competitors if they offer the tickets at a similar price then they're going to make a loss. So if you're getting cheap tickets from them then that's where the losses are arising from, that $2100 you paid for your trip to LA, if you thought that that was competitive compared to their competitors, then you're helping them make a loss, if you want them around in the future, pay the higher prices they need to sustain their cost base, or else have them cut their cost base down by centralising maintainance and lowering their wages. You can't have your cake and eat it.

 

Regards,

Ró.

Your obviously an Alan Joyce admirer.. sorry to tread on toes, And with the cake... Well you know what to do with that

Your obviously an Alan Joyce admirer.. sorry to tread on toes, And with the cake... Well you know what to do with that

I hardly ever met the man when he worked for us, I don't know him personally, I am neither his supporter nor his opponent, I'm just presenting the facts. Qantas is a business, and as such must be run like one, if you sell something below cost, you make a loss, you either have to cut the cost, or increase the price you sell it for, and if you increase the price you sell it for, you'll likely sell less. It's economics, the function of Qantas is to make a profit for its shareholders, if it's long haul devision is making a loss, it either needs to be changed or scrapped, a business cannot keep up loss making segments of it's operations just because they always ran those routes, or they get a sense of pride from it.

 

Regards,

Ró.

Your obviously an Alan Joyce admirer.. sorry to tread on toes, And with the cake... Well you know what to do with that

 

There is absolutely no need for insults.

 

You expressed your view and i expressed mine.

 

I am no sympathiser of anyone except the aviation industry, as i have worked in aviation since 1988.

I sympathise with the staff, not the people in charge as its the staff that will get the sack, its the staff that will have to take pay cuts to keep their jobs.

 

The people in charge can run it in to the ground and make it go bankrupt and they still get to keep their bonuses and million dollar pensions, there is no true incentive to make company's work work anymore when you are knowing you have nothing to lose if the company goes under.

The may have saved a few $$$ with nothing flying and of course no damage was done to their reputation either huh....

 

huh? People were buying tickets not knowing if the planes were going to fly on any given day because of industrial action. So what did the public and (which hurt QANTAS more) the businesses do? Bought tickets with the other guys who also accepted the Q Club members as their own. The reputation was being ruined either way and it had to end. The dollars 'saved' by not flying were nothing compared to the rest of the mess - in fact it's even listed as one of the contributors to the loss. No one came out of that disaster covered in glory - apart from Virgin. JB would have been laughing all the way to the bank.

That was sarcasm my my friend.. ;)

That was sarcasm my my friend.. ;)

 

It sounded rather insulting to me too...

 

But since your first post in this thread started with "The idiot Alan Joyce is destroying Qantas" I figured that you were probably too excited to participate in a constructive debate.

 

May I suggest you re-read what others have written in this thread? Makes a lot of sense to me - and to anyone who has been in business before. It might be useful for you in a few years...

 

Bruno

Here is a fluffy bunny and my sincerest apologies. (sarcasm again)

 

I posted another view that I do not share alone and for your information, I have been in the "industry" and still have a lot of mates at QF DJ even EK from maintenance engineers to pilots. And im still remotely involved in GA.

But lets not measure sticks because I wouldn't want another suggestion of what I need to do based on the fact I know nothing about what I write.... :huh:

Here is a fluffy bunny and my sincerest apologies. (sarcasm again)

 

I posted another view that I do not share alone and for your information, I have been in the "industry" and still have a lot of mates at QF DJ even EK from maintenance engineers to pilots. And im still remotely involved in GA.

But lets not measure sticks because I wouldn't want another suggestion of what I need to do based on the fact I know nothing about what I write.... :huh:

 

 

Thank you but I am not interested in your résumé, your list of friends, or your "sarcastic" apologies.

 

Personnaly, I am just interested in facts, ideas, common sense and good manners.

 

But then, it's only me ! :smile:

 

Bruno

Thank you but I am not interested in your résumé, your list of friends, or your "sarcastic" apologies.

 

Personnaly, I am just interested in facts, ideas, common sense and good manners.

 

But then, it's only me ! :smile:

 

Bruno

 

I don't know about that, fencer, remember that little exchange we had a few months back where you wrote:

 

"Kevin, I was referring to another thread when, among other outlandish statements, you were claiming that :

 

- in an airliner, speed is always controlled by the stick, especially during the landing phase (fortunately, after a few pages, Rónán came to my help and set you - and a few others in that thread - straight).

 

- the US Air Force doesn't know how to fly, contrarily to the US Navy (nobody bothered to argue this point with you...)

 

and, if I remember well, you also claimed at one point to be an airline pilot. So you'll understand that I am leery about getting in a long discussion, even though I may agree with some of the points you mention."

 

There might be a few phrases in there where you might not seem to have been interested in facts, ideas, good manners, and listed friends with a delivery tinged with sarcasm. :P

I don't know about that, fencer, remember that little exchange we had a few months back where you wrote:

 

"Kevin, I was referring to another thread when, among other outlandish statements, you were claiming that :

 

- in an airliner, speed is always controlled by the stick, especially during the landing phase (fortunately, after a few pages, Rónán came to my help and set you - and a few others in that thread - straight).

 

- the US Air Force doesn't know how to fly, contrarily to the US Navy (nobody bothered to argue this point with you...)

 

and, if I remember well, you also claimed at one point to be an airline pilot. So you'll understand that I am leery about getting in a long discussion, even though I may agree with some of the points you mention."

 

There might be a few phrases in there where you might not seem to have been interested in facts, ideas, good manners, and listed friends with a delivery tinged with sarcasm. :P

 

Hi Kevin,

 

Funny that you would mention that thread - and especially this post - because it seems to me that the points I was making then (about the way airliners are controlled, about the strange statements you had made about USAF versus USN, and about your claim to be an airline pilot) were (and are still) correct and that mentioning it again would be rather embarrassing for you.

 

Anyway, if you are happy to post it again, I have no problem with that.

 

Bruno

Hi Kevin,

 

Funny that you would mention that thread - and especially this post - because it seems to me that the points I was making then (about the way airliners are controlled, about the strange statements you had made about USAF versus USN, and about your claim to be an airline pilot) were (and are still) correct and that mentioning it again would be rather embarrassing for you.

 

Anyway, if you are happy to post it again, I have no problem with that.

 

Bruno

 

Perfectly happy to because you were feeling leery about and refrained from debating the merits of USAF vs USN with me back then. And I am always happy to do so as L.Adamson will attest. I can begin by saying that "Pitch is for Speed." The ball is in your court. :lol:

 

Either way, whether or not I, the US Navy, and Barry Schiff are correct about the primary purpose of pitch control, you will have to admit you are quite the hypocrite for criticising VH_JLC the way you did when you say the same kind of things yourself.

That was sarcasm my my friend.. ;)

 

It's not the kind of sarcasm that is tolerated around here especially when there is a personal bite in it. Warning Josh: Do it again or fluffy bunny me, or anything like it, and you will have a difficult time flying high in Avsim anymore, guaranteed.