Not quite sure I understand what you are saying, can you expand on this.
While a BMW M3 might be a very good choice for me to drive to/from the office, I cannot justify purchasing one for that purpose while I have two other cars that can make the journey. The BMZ may be better suited to the task, but as I already own the others and they are well suited to other trips I also need to make, I will use them for trips to/from the office even though they may not be the optimal vehicle for the task.
Similarly for QF's fleet. While the 777-300ER is an excellent aircraft and would be very well suited to some routes QF operates, the do have other aircraft in the fleet that operate the routes even is not as optimally as they could if they purchased 777 aircraft.
Certainly QF has made some odd fleet decisions in the past, the A330 purchases seemed a little misguided when 777ER variants would have seemed a more flexible aircraft for a long haul carrier or even A340 for long skinny routes.
Hindsight is always helpful. However, QF made a decision several years back about their fleet future. Remember that QF has a long-term fleet program, partly due to the Australian taxation depreciation laws under which Qantas must operate. So unlike some airlines based in countries where they are allowed accelerated depreciation of aircraft assets which makes shorter lifecycle are turnover viable, Qantas has had to have a longer lifecycle view of its fleet.
So some years back they needed to choose their 10-15-20 year fleet plan for long-haul operations. They had 747 and 767 in the fleet at the time and had to decide what was going to replace these and remain in their fleet for the next 15 or 20 years.
While various models of 777 were available to them, none had the seating capacity as a replacement and growth for the 747 so the only choice at that time was the A380. Boeing has pontificated over their 747 replacement for a while and eventually pulled out of the race for a period, which was when QF had to make their further plans. So Airbus scored the large long-haul supply for Qantas. And as you noted, they threw in a sweet deal for some A330s as part of the overall sale.
So then looking at the next size down from the A380, Qantas had a choice of 777 (various models with different capacity/range), A330, 787 or A350. With a view to owning and operating these aircraft for an extended period (15-20 years), they were seeking newer generation technology than the 777 or A330 offered. Yes they could take delivery immediately for 777 or A330, but a little operating inefficiency in continuing to utilise their existing fleet while waiting for the new technology would provide them operating benefits for the next 15-20 years.
However, rightly or wrongly, the delay in delivery of both A380 and 787 has meant Qantas has to continue to operate their older fleet of 747 and 767 aircraft for longer than desired while many competitors are reaping the benefits of aircraft like 777.
So I see that the 777 would fit the QF fleet as an interim asset with a viable operating period of maybe 5-7 years. This is great for airlines whose prevailing taxation laws permit them to depreciate aircraft assets over say 3, 5 or 7 years (think about some Asian and Middle Eastern governments). But in Qantas' case, they would need to hold onto those 777s for maybe 15 years, by which time the operational efficiencies of the next generation of aircraft like 787 will be available to Qantas. And then if they had purchased 777 5-7 years earlier, it would be a matter of having to continue to operate them because tey have them and not because they are the most attractive for the mission.
I think that timing (and sweet deals on A330's) would have played a big role in decisions, I think that going on original delivery schedules QF should have about 10 A380's by now whereas the 747-8 was never going to be in service before 2010. Delays, the GFC etc etc changed everything in respect of how we look at the equation now.
I think if the 747-8 was scheduled to be in service a year or two earlier and Boeing would have offered sweet deals on 777 then things may have been diferent...but that was not the case.[/quote]
Absolutely agree. It was all about the timing. And the planned/expected timing for both A380 and 787 vs reality has hurt QF perhaps more than other airlines (see comments above re depreciation and fleet turn-over).
Add the arrival of Jetstar and the failed takeover attempt into the mix and you have a senior management who were not necessarily making all the right decisions.
Not sure I totally agree with you there, but I do understand your reasoning. I think they did make the right decision given the information and products available at the time they needed to make the decision. A different decision certainly would have benefited them today, but maybe not benefits them over the 15-20 year planned lifecycle of the fleet.
