Besieged Qantas directors to meet in NY on crisis items

[oz_mark]

Not sure I agree here. The A380 has 332 economy class seats on the same 3x4x3 layout as the 747. That is only 17 more seats than the Kangaroo 3-class 744 and is actually 24 less seats than the 2-class 744 and a whopping 68 less economy seats than QF's 747-300.

So yes, its still economy, but not necessarily "bigger" in terms of numbers of passengers, just perhaps bugger in terms of cabin space.

The seatmap lists the economy seat pitch at 31", so I am not sure that there is any additional space for economy passengers over and above any other aircraft in the fleet. The additinal space is used for other classes.

 

[Flying Fox]

The seatmap lists the economy seat pitch at 31", so I am not sure that there is any additional space for economy passengers over and above any other aircraft in the fleet. The additinal space is used for other classes.

Don't forget that there is additional space for the amenities including the Self-Service Bars. I think that these would be good places to stetch your legs and have a look for a snack or two.

So whilst personal space whilst seated may not have improved, the overall cabin space per Y passenger probably has.

 

[NM]

The seatmap lists the economy seat pitch at 31", so I am not sure that there is any additional space for economy passengers over and above any other aircraft in the fleet. The additinal space is used for other classes.

Seat pitch is not the only measure of space (and I chose that word very carefully). It is my understanding that the cabin width (interior wall to wall) is greater on the A380 than the 744, so with 10 seats across there is more space per person across the cabin. I also believe the ceiling on the lower deck of the A380 is higher than the 744, which should provide a feeling of more space per person.

From the A380 wiki:

Compared to a 747, the A380 has larger windows and overhead bins, and 60 cm (2 ft) of extra headroom. The wider cabin allows for 48 cm (19 inch) wide economy seats at a 10 abreast configuration on the main deck, while 10 abreast seating on the 747 has a maximum seat width of only 44.5 cm (17.5 inch).

Airbus also claim the higher cabin pressure (equiv to 5000 ft vs typical 744@8000 ft) will make for a more comfortable and less fatigued passenger experience. This is also something Boeing are promoting with the 787 as a benefit for passengers.

 

[pauly7]

Just did a random comparison.

SYD-LAX Jan 15 return Feb 15 VA best fare in J is $9996 QF best is $13977.

Thats more than a few thousand :!:

V is $2471 in Y for those dates, QF best is $3113

Big difference again.

V is $3996 for Premium, $5398 on QF

If i was traveling from SYD I would choose VA in a flash on those prices.

Yes, but I can tell you that corporates - that QF still has a complete hold on, don't pay $13,977 or the $3113.....! (Can't comment on the premium Y because its not avail to book for our company)

 

[straitman]

Airbus also claim the higher cabin pressure (equiv to 5000 ft vs typical 744@8000 ft) will make for a more comfortable and less fatigued passenger experience. This is also something Boeing are promoting with the 787 as a benefit for passengers.

This will make a huge difference in several ways. As well as the degree of fatigue passengers feel at the end of a flight people will be less likely to contract coughs/colds etc due the increased, airflow and more 'normal' pressure airflow through the cabin. The 3000 ft difference doesn't sound like much but it is very significant.

 

[maninblack]

Yes, but I can tell you that corporates - that QF still has a complete hold on, don't pay $13,977 or the $3113.....! (Can't comment on the premium Y because its not avail to book for our company)

No, but V will be doing corporate deals too and will win some over gradually, as they have done slowly on domestic. Corporates want to save money too. Don't know what deal you have but is it 29% in J SYD-LAX?

I no longer have access to these fares but best deals we used to get on routes like LAX was around 15% from memory.

 

[pauly7]

No, but V will be doing corporate deals too and will win some over gradually, as they have done slowly on domestic. Corporates want to save money too. Don't know what deal you have but is it 29% in J SYD-LAX?
\.

Can't comment on our rates as a few people on this board know where I work

Just trying to compete with QF on price isn't going to win corporates I'm afraid - they have a laundry list of other considerations which is why DJ haven't done very well cracking business flyers on the domestic front.

However the V airline is a different product to DJ offering so will wait and see... Again I fear one big issue will be DJ's reluctance to tie into any decent airline partners or networks that can provide reach beyond a few select routes.

 

[dajop]

Just trying to compete with QF on price isn't going to win corporates I'm afraid - they have a laundry list of other considerations which is why DJ haven't done very well cracking business flyers on the domestic front.

Yes so true. I know a friend who was booked on QF (via corporate TA) to US for $16K return (in business class). Tried to convince his boss that a DONEx or DCIRC26 would do the job for $5K less, but require an extra two nights accom (on his own time - one each on the weekend either side), and was told no - to get the direct flight

 

[straitman]

Yes so true. I know a friend who was booked on QF (via corporate TA) to US for $16K return (in business class). Tried to convince his boss that a DONEx or DCIRC26 would do the job for $5K less, but require an extra two nights accom (on his own time - one each on the weekend either side), and was told no - to get the direct flight

Fortunately our company (extremely large multi national) isn't quite so cough as this :!:

We still have to account for everything but they like the idea of not spending where possible.

 

[pauly7]

Yes so true. I know a friend who was booked on QF (via corporate TA) to US for $16K return (in business class). Tried to convince his boss that a DONEx or DCIRC26 would do the job for $5K less, but require an extra two nights accom (on his own time - one each on the weekend either side), and was told no - to get the direct flight

16K to LA for a corporate...? hmmm.... maybe you mean NY. If not, remember quite alot of corporates operate on a rebate so that is just the billed $ amount before rebate - which your friend would never see!

RE the DONEx etc there are fringe benefit and insurance issues that sometimes prevent corporates from doing this and some just ban it completely - make you fly direct - to avoid confusion and time for internal HR to manage.

 

[oz_mark]

16K to LA for a corporate...? hmmm.... maybe you mean NY. If not, remember quite alot of corporates operate on a rebate so that is just the billed $ amount before rebate - which your friend would never see!
.

Certainly never been a fan of the rebate thing. The project seems to wear the cost as charged by the TA, but the rebate never seems to come back as a credit on the project.

 

[pauly7]

Certainly never been a fan of the rebate thing. The project seems to wear the cost as charged by the TA, but the rebate never seems to come back as a credit on the project.

Yes I feel your pain, it never comes back to my personal travel budget either! Ah well the company definitely gets it back... thats for sure.

 

[dajop]

16K to LA for a corporate...? hmmm.... maybe you mean NY. If not, remember quite alot of corporates operate on a rebate so that is just the billed $ amount before rebate - which your friend would never see!

RE the DONEx etc there are fringe benefit and insurance issues that sometimes prevent corporates from doing this and some just ban it completely - make you fly direct - to avoid confusion and time for internal HR to manage.

Not a big corporate so no access to route deals or rebates. Don't think it related to fringe benefits or anything, just perceptions of "junket". It's OK to spend an extra $5K as long it's not perceived to be a junket

I faced similar situation when I first did a DCIRC26, but by the time my expenses all came in, and I was asked to show it was cheaper, it ended up beng $2.5K less than a more direct routing (after accounting for corp. discount) so that carried the day. It's actually quite amazing the savings that can be had by allowing the employee an extra night or two accom and a circuitous routing (eg CX to US at the moment is $9K in business class - substantially less than QF, UA or NZ, for an extra few hours each way).

 

[maninblack]

16K to LA for a corporate...? hmmm.... maybe you mean NY. If not, remember quite alot of corporates operate on a rebate so that is just the billed $ amount before rebate - which your friend would never see!

RE the DONEx etc there are fringe benefit and insurance issues that sometimes prevent corporates from doing this and some just ban it completely - make you fly direct - to avoid confusion and time for internal HR to manage.

Yes ours were rebated.

As to dajop's 16K, even after rebates that would seem high for a corporate, sounds like a full J.

 

[JohnK]

The price of oil has gone from $40 a barrel 6 years ago to $50 3years ago to over $130 now.

I cannot understand why anyone uses the historical price of crude oil in Australia as a guideline of how hard it is to run an airline on higher fuel prices. I can understand US airlines having problems or even airlines in countries that are tied in to the US$ but not Australia.

I don't have the exact figures but I think crude oil was around US$40 a barrel in 2000 and the exchange rate was around A$1=US$0.50, so the effective price of crude oil was ~A$80 a barrel. Now 8 years later the price of crude is US$130 a barrel but the dollar is almost at parity to the US$ so the effective price of crude oil is ~A$140 a barrel.

So even if the price of crude oil may have gone up more than 3 times in terms of US$ dollars in that time it has gone up ~75% in A$. Not exactly a huge crisis. I am also not taking into consideration any costs for refining or the final price of JetA into the equation which may alter my argument.

Qantas can't be in too much of a crisis if they are making over $2 billion profit per year. Perhaps they are more concerned with executive salaries and lost opportunity to sell off the business.

 

[simongr]

So even if the price of crude oil may have gone up more than 3 times in terms of US$ dollars in that time it has gone up ~75% in A$. Not exactly a huge crisis. I am also not taking into consideration any costs for refining or the final price of JetA into the equation which may alter my argument.

Qantas can't be in too much of a crisis if they are making over $2 billion profit per year. Perhaps they are more concerned with executive salaries and lost opportunity to sell off the business.

One of their biggest variable cost components has risen by almost double - I would consider that significant to any business.

Given that QF were hedging the oil price for a lot of last year the full impact on the bottom line will only be felt in the 2008-2009 financial year.

 

[docjames]

I'd also observe that a large percentage of their costs and income is in USD too.

 

[NM]

Qantas can't be in too much of a crisis if they are making over $2 billion profit per year. Perhaps they are more concerned with executive salaries and lost opportunity to sell off the business.

Given that QF were hedging the oil price for a lot of last year the full impact on the bottom line will only be felt in the 2008-2009 financial year.

And there be the issue for Qantas. How do they continue the returns to their shareholders in the future. its ok to say they made $2B last year, but imagine how the company (and hence the services they can offer their customers) would be affected if that $2B was wiped of the balance sheet completely when their variable costs rise by $2.5B next year?

And yes, JohnK, I agree the A$ rise in fuel costs has not been anywhere as near as significant as the US$ rise. My records go back to October 2006 when oil was trading for US$58 and the A$ at US$0.76.80, resulting in an A$ price for oil around $76. So while US$ rate for oil is up 2.4 times, the A$ price is up about 2 times.

But unfortunately for QF, much of their balance sheet shows debits and credits in US$, so there are lots of swings and roundabouts involved in the final equation.

 

[simongr]

Perhaps they are more concerned with executive salaries and lost opportunity to sell off the business.

If QF have substantially reduced profits next year and the following year the execs will lose their jobs so they probably have the right to be concerned. If that happens though any new managers/execs coming in will be going through the business with a razor and the implication for customers and employees wont be pretty - worse than it is portrayed now...

 

[NM]

Qantas CEO Geoff Dixon has denied industry rumours that the airline is looking at a merger with Singapore Airlines, as both carriers face higher fuel prices.

“We have not had any discussion with Singapore Airlines on any issue involving the two companies, I don't think, for three years,” said Geoff Dixon. "I said hello to the chief executive of Singapore Airlines at the International Air Transport Association annual meeting and had not seen him for 12 months before that."