AJ's pessimism about QFi

Status
Not open for further replies.

Melburnian1

Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Posts
24,673
My apologies if this has been posted elsewhere, but I read today (perhaps in AFR - 'shrinking kangaroo' article) that QF CEO Alan Joyce ('AJ') disclosed that QFi made an (after tax?) profit of $86 million last year but this did not include depreciation charges of '$800 to $900 million.'

AJ then commented or inferred that no business could afford to replace equipment if it could not cover depreciation.

It must be difficult for any QF manager, but the same article also discussed how one stockmarket analyst had previously written (presumably due to information from QF) that the QF-EK tieup would deliver $130 million (annually) to QF, but now no longer believed that as management had gone silent.

Cheap shots are easy and like many of us I do not work in the sector, but this may be more evidence that AJ and the Board, including Chairman Leigh Clifford, have to go.

When the analysts are cynical or believe that they have been misled, it may not be long before some of QF's shareholders such as Balanced Funds Management eventually request for 'heads to roll.'
 
Last edited:
So who paid for the 787 simulators for JQ......

There are two reasons that QFi is losing money

1. JQi
2. Flight deck wages
 
lovestotravel, those of us outside the industry do wonder at the 'cost shifting' that goes on between subsidiaries.

After all, I don't know what percentage of its head office running costs QF allocates as a charge against QFd, QFi and JQ.

Sure, JQ has separate headquarters in Melbourne to QF's Coward Street, Mascot premises, but a few hundred million against the QF accounts that could arguably be a charge against the JQ accounts must help to paint a different (i.e. more negative) picture of QF if that is occurring.
 
lovestotravel, those of us outside the industry do wonder at the 'cost shifting' that goes on between subsidiaries.

After all, I don't know what percentage of its head office running costs QF allocates as a charge against QFd, QFi and JQ.
I read an article a while ago saying that contractors had been supplying things for JQ, and being told to bill QF.
 
So who paid for the 787 simulators for JQ......

There are two reasons that QFi is losing money

1. JQi
2. Flight deck wages

+ Too many Strategic U-Turns
+ Weak Strategy with Partners (BA,CX,MH,...)
+ Far too few synergies with Oneworld
+ Old planes with high operating cost
+ Cutting routes --> Lower Market Position --> Losses --> Cutting Routes --> Repeat until dead.
+ High wages

So the story repeats: I find many similar points with Lufthansa - they are virtually in the same boat.
Cutting routes, pissing staff, travel agents, retail partners, alliance partners and customers at the same time is not a good strategy!
 
There are two reasons that QFi is losing money

1. JQi
2. Flight deck wages

If QF was a USA airline, wouldn't its staff by now have agreed to wage and salary cuts?

Many at QF appear to be drastically overpaid compared with even other airlines in the so called 'developed world' - A380 pilots on an average of A$415,000, for instance.
 
Last edited:
If QF ws a USA airline, wouldn't its staff by now have agreed to wage and salary cuts?
If QF was a US airline, it would have gone through chapter 11 years ago and these problems would have been sorted out before they became the issue they are now.
 
lovestotravel, those of us outside the industry do wonder at the 'cost shifting' that goes on between subsidiaries.

Indeed

The excuse for the 787 simulators being billed to QF was that "QF would get them eventually" :p

As for wages, the guys on the big bucks are holding out as long as possible to earn as much as they can and then take a package to leave and retire pretty much!

Chapter 11 would be perfect for QF and ensure it survives more than another 5 years. Shame it can't happen here TBH
 
In light of a few of the questions asked above, maybe it is time to repost this.
QANTAS- Finally the truth is coming out!
This confirms what others have been saying for a while about how Qantas is subsidising Jetstar to its own detriment and to circumvent the Qantas Sale Act.

For those who haven't seen it, Senator Xenophon's speech of 23rd Aug is reproduced below.

Senator XENOPHON (South Australia) (19:37): I rise to speak tonight on an issue that is close to the hearts of many Australians, and that is the future of our national carrier, Qantas. At 90, Qantas is the world's oldest continuously running airline. It is an iconic Australian company. Its story is woven into the story of Australia and Australians have long taken pride in the service and safety standards provided by our national carrier. Who didn't feel a little proud when Dustin Hoffman uttered the immortal line in Rain Man, 'Qantas never crashed'?

While it is true that Qantas never crashes, the sad reality is that Qantas is being deliberately trashed by management in the pursuit of short-term profits and at the expense of its workers and passengers. For a long time, Qantas management has been pushing the line that Qantas international is losing money and that Jetstar is profitable. Tonight, it is imperative to expose those claims for the misinformation they are. The reality is that Qantas has long been used to subsidise Jetstar in order to make Jetstar look profitable and Qantas look like a burden. In a moment, I will provide detailed allegations of cost-shifting that I have sourced from within the Qantas Group, and when you know the facts you quickly see a pattern. When there is a cost to be paid, Qantas pays it, and when there is a profit to be made, Jetstar makes it.

But first we need to ask ourselves: why? Why would management want Qantas to look unprofitable? Why would they want to hide the cost of a competing brand within their group, namely Jetstar, in amongst the costs faced by Qantas?

To understand that, you need to go back to the days when Qantas was being privatised. When Qantas was privatised the Qantas Sale Act 1992 imposed a number of conditions, which in turn created a number of problems for any management group that wanted to flog off parts of the business. Basically, Qantas has to maintain its principal place of operations here in Australia, but that does not stop management selling any subsidiaries, which brings us to Jetstar.

Qantas has systematically built up the low-cost carrier at the expense of the parent company. I have been provided with a significant number of examples where costs which should have been billed back to Jetstar have in fact been paid for by Qantas. These are practices that I believe Qantas and Jetstar management need to explain. For example, when Jetstar took over the Cairns-Darwin-Singapore route, replacing Qantas flights, a deal was struck that required Qantas to provide Jetstar with $6 million a year in revenue. Why? Why would one part of the business give up a profitable route like that and then be asked to pay for the privilege? Then there are other subsidies when it comes to freight. On every sector Jetstar operates an A330, Qantas pays $6,200 to $6,400 for freight space regardless of actual uplift. When you do the calculations, this turns out to be a small fortune. Based on 82 departures a week, that is nearly half-a-million dollars a week or $25½ million a year.

Then there are the arrangements within the airport gates. In Melbourne, for example, my information from inside the Qantas group is that Jetstar does not pay for any gates, but instead Qantas domestic is charged for the gates. My question for Qantas management is simple: are these arrangements replicated right around Australia and why is Qantas paying Jetstar's bills? Why does Qantas lease five check-in counters at Sydney Terminal 2, only to let Jetstar use one for free? It has been reported to me that there are other areas where Jetstar's costs magically become Qantas's costs. For example, Jetstar does not have a treasury department and has only one person in government affairs. I am told Qantas's legal department also does free work for Jetstar.

Then there is the area of disruption handling where flights are cancelled and people need to be rebooked. Here, insiders tell me, Qantas handles all re-bookings and the traffic is all one way. It is extremely rare for a Qantas passenger to be rebooked on a Jetstar flight, but Jetstar passengers are regularly rebooked onto Qantas flights. I am informed that Jetstar never pays Qantas for the cost of those rebooked passengers and yet Jetstar gets to keep the revenue from the original bookings. This, I am told, is worth millions of dollars every year. So Jetstar gets the profit while Qantas bears the costs of carriage. It has also been reported to me that when Qantas provides an aircraft to Jetstar to cover an unserviceable plane, Jetstar does not pay for the use of this plane.

Yet another example relates to the Qantas Club. Jetstar passengers can and do use the Qantas Club but Jetstar does not pay for the cost of any of this. So is Qantas really losing money? Or is it profitable but simply losing money on paper because it is carrying so many costs incurred by Jetstar? We have been told by Qantas management that the changes that will effectively gut Qantas are necessary because Qantas international is losing money but, given the inside information I have just detailed, I would argue those claims need to be reassessed.

Indeed, given these extensive allegations of hidden costs, it would be foolish to take management's word that Qantas international is losing money. So why would Qantas want to make it look like Qantas international is losing money? Remember the failed 2007 private equity bid by the Allco Finance Group. It was rejected by shareholders, and thank goodness it was, for I am told that what we are seeing now is effectively a strategy of private equity sell-off by stealth.

Here is how it works. You have to keep Qantas flying to avoid breaching the Qantas Sale Act but that does not stop you from moving assets out of Qantas and putting them into an airline that you own but that is not controlled by the Qantas Sale Act. Then you work the figures to make it appear as though the international arm of Qantas is losing money. You use this to justify the slashing of jobs, maintenance standards and employment of foreign crews and, ultimately, the creation of an entirely new airlines to be based in Asia and which will not be called Qantas. The end result? Technically Qantas would still exist but it would end up a shell of its former self and the Qantas Group would end up with all these subsidiaries it can base overseas using poorly paid foreign crews with engineering and safety standards that do not match Australian standards. In time, if the Qantas Group wants to make a buck, they can flog these subsidiaries off for a tidy profit. Qantas management could pay the National Boys Choir and the Australian Girls’ Choir to run to the desert and sing about still calling Australia home, but people would not buy it. It is not just about feeling good about our national carrier—in times of trouble our national carrier plays a key strategic role. In an international emergency, in a time of war, a national carrier is required to freight resources and people around the country and around the world. Qantas also operates Qantas Defence Services, which conducts work for the RAAF. If Qantas is allowed to wither, who will meet these strategic needs?

I pay tribute to the 35,000 employees of the Qantas Group. At the forefront of the fight against the strategy of Qantas management have been the Qantas pilots, to whom millions of Australians have literally entrusted their lives. The Australian and International Pilots Association sees Qantas management strategy as a race to the bottom when it comes to service and safety. On 8 November last year, QF32 experienced a serious malfunction with the explosion of an engine on an A380 aircraft. In the wrong hands, that plane could have crashed. But it did not, in large part because the Qantas flight crew had been trained to exemplary world-class standards and knew how to cope with such a terrifying reality. I am deeply concerned that what is being pursued may well cause training levels to fall and that as a result safety standards in the Qantas Group may fall as well. AIPA pilots and the licensed aircraft engineers are not fighting for themselves; they are fighting for the Australian public. That is why I am deeply concerned about any action Qantas management may be considering taking against pilots who speak out in the public interest.

A lot of claims have been made about the financial state of Qantas international but given the information I have presented tonight, which has come from within the Qantas Group, I believe these claims by management are crying out for further serious forensic investigation. Qantas should not be allowed to face death by a thousand cuts—job cuts, route cuts, quality cuts, engineering cuts, wage cuts. None of this is acceptable and it must all be resisted for the sake of the pilots, the crews, the passengers and ultimately the future of our national carrier.​




 
I have no doubt that QFi is losing money...

Just look at the tiny amount of money that is being made by CX and SQ, and then add on top QFs higher cost structure across pilots/FAs, maintenance, airport/govt charges, and indeed management....

That said I have no doubt that costs are allocated in a way that is less favourable to QFi than it could otherwise be - not saying this is being done fraudulently or wrongly, but there are many cost allocation issues that are subjective.

My biggest area of 'profit' that should be allocated to QFi is FF.... IMHO the bulk of value of FF is related to the 'perceived ability' to redeem your points on that International Flight. Without QFi and its oneworld membership, the FF program is well, more like Flybuys.

---

Reality is International flying is a very high fixed cost, extremely low margin business and making money when your cost structure is way out of whack with your global competitors (particularly the expanding ones in Asia and the ME) is darn difficult.
 
My apologies if this has been posted elsewhere, but I read today (perhaps in AFR - 'shrinking kangaroo' article) that QF CEO Alan Joyce ('AJ') disclosed that QFi made an (after tax?) profit of $86 million last year but this did not include depreciation charges of '$800 to $900 million.'

AJ then commented or inferred that no business could afford to replace equipment if it could not cover depreciation.

I, too, read that article and found a couple of revelations (yes, I'm slow and old so apologies if this was blatantly obvious to everyone else.

1. On that depreciation comment, the upshot is that QF will not be taking up options on the B787-9 (or any other fleet aircraft) until it is back in profit. In the meantime, it's low-cost competitors continue to deploy the B787-8, further lowering their costs, further pushing QF's capability to be profitable etc etc etc.

2. The previous target of QFi being back to profit by 2015 has been abandoned with (currently) no new target - see 1.

No wonder they used the term "death spiral" !!!

Regards,

BD
 
1. On that depreciation comment, the upshot is that QF will not be taking up options on the B787-9 (or any other fleet aircraft) until it is back in profit. In the meantime, it's low-cost competitors continue to deploy the B787-8, further lowering their costs, further pushing QF's capability to be profitable etc etc etc.

Oh and who is paying for the A330 checks/refurbs are they come back to QF..

They are getting refitted into QF's current interiors and then go through another refit starting in November with the new J seats and Y upgrades....

It's a shame to see so much cash wasted at QF simply so it can be further shown to be "not profitable"
 
The Frequent Flyer Concierge team takes the hard work out of finding reward seat availability. Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, they'll help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

My biggest area of 'profit' that should be allocated to QFi is FF.... IMHO the bulk of value of FF is related to the 'perceived ability' to redeem your points on that International Flight. Without QFi and its oneworld membership, the FF program is well, more like Flybuys.

IMHO you are spot-on with that comment.
I suspect the bulk of the people accumulating points do so on the wishful thinking that they can fly Business or First somewhere like they see in the adverts and marcoms material splattered everywhere. They want the flatbed seat and then to be shown a bottle of wine like at a restaurant. Then in the end I bet they just throw them at a domestic flight on the golden triangle at last minute rates when Aunt May gets sick or Sally-Jean has a baby. So the burn is shocking for them but great for QF.

QFi should just be seen as a cost to the QFF program. The program would then look more 'normal' when it comes to operating profit etc. The program would then also fund expansion of the fleet i.e actually increasing award seats and thereby having people strive to generate more points. Heck why not let QFi even run on points vs cash.
 
Oh and who is paying for the A330 checks/refurbs are they come back to QF..
They have A330s coming back from JQ. They have an A330 refit and new seats starting later in the year....
Why aren't the 330's coming back from JQ getting the new seats now when they are out for checks and repainting anyway?
 
Presumably because the seats aren't ready / design approved etc.... I can't imagine they are holding back just for the sake of it
 
So who paid for the 787 simulators for JQ......

There are two reasons that QFi is losing money

1. JQi
2. Flight deck wages

Hi lovestotravel, first time poster and I also happen to be a Qantas pilot. I joined this forum originally with the intent of answering any questions that any of you might have, but then life got in the way and of course the whole industrial saga occurred which took my mind off of things. I'm quite curious about your statement regarding "flight deck wages" as it seems to point to the pilots on huge salaries being at the forefront of Qantas' demise. Where are you sourcing this information from? Have you done a comparison to other airlines to see whether Qantas pilot salaries compare or are inflated? Looking forward to your reply.

Regards,
A330 Driver
Qantas Pilot
Qantas Gold Frequent Flyer (because I pay to buy commercial tickets on Qantas)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top