How would you run Qantas?

[medhead]

On a side note, if they're pushing JQ so much, why are the fares on qantas.com for Jetstar always a rip off and don't reflect the actual price/ sale? Would seem silly not to advertise a lower cost if you wanted to nudge customers onto the cheaper group airline.

I haven't paid much attention to JQ fare on qantas.com. But the times I have looked the fares on qantas.com do make sense because they include luggage. When comparing the straight jetstar fare with checked luggage has been within a few dollars of the qantas.com fare.

 

[Awesom Andy]

I haven't paid much attention to JQ fare on qantas.com.

Does anyone?

 

[maninblack]

Does anyone?

The sad thing is that I no longer pay much attention to any fare on Qantas.com

 

[katiebell]

QF flew HKG-LHR but withdrew from that route some years ago. It operated as the QF29/30 MEL-HKG-LHR

the timings were the best out of and into LHR and MEL, always full and hard to get discount J even months out. Never an empty J seat. A great loss

 

[katiebell]

Some thoughts on what is lacking at QF and what would make it a more attractive airline to fly with:
New CEO who does not try to turn QF into a LCC
New board

People will pay more value for money, not just the cheapest but QF have to provide the value and convince us that it is there

Stop lying to PAX: when the EK deal was promoted, AJ constantly said that we would get the best option where QF and EK were different. In the end we get the EK std: this means (for WP) 60% DECREASE in checked luggage allowance; higher fuel surcharges for J (QF had the same regardless of class but have aligned with EK’s tiered charges)
Stop cutting into premium prooducts: you might save lots of dolars by havein 1 less olive in a salad but that is a tiny fraction of the overall cost and worth much less than the good will and poorer experience of your premium pax.
F on more routes: the goodwill by upgrading a WP or 2 is worth a lot and there are plenty out ther who will pay for a premium experience
Treat Y pax well: most of us start in Y and choose our J carrier based on the Y experience

More frequent flights on international routes. Why o why did QF not get B777 when everone else doing ultra-long haul did?
More international destinations (use ATA to lounge to see where we go when not onQF): if QF don’t fly anywhere then no one will fly with them
If aircraft change is necessary then make it at an international port and not SYD (one of the worst hub ports anywhere). If I have to change aircraft and the choice is SYD or an international port then I will always choose the international port
Better use of OW airlines for codeshares
Promote benefits of OW for long haul
Ditch EK
Ditch DXB
Bring back QF 29/30 to LHR (excellent timings)
Flights to Canada NOT via USA
Hub via HKG or SIN and then connect with OW in Europe (or at least have good connections from Aus to transfer points)
Long haul departure and arrival times that are better for PAX (arriving between 0430 and 0630 is really bad: hotel rooms not ready, often short sector before so inadequate sleep and jet lag just so much worse)
Bring back the better long haul food on SYD/MEL-LHR flights
More Australian crew, train to stds and audit them. QF need to get rid of the legacy impression that the crew thinkPAX are an inconvenience in their jet-setting life style. Most crew today are great

Make the airline live up to its byline “spirit of Australia” i.e. showcase only Australian wines (no more NZ wines, nothing wrong with them per se but does not fit the image of Spirit of Australia)
Australian amenity kits and spas in Flounge
Get the meals out quickly after take off so pax can work, rest or sleep without interruption
Proper breakfast on long haul not the ‘café style’ (and what doestht mean anyway?)
Equivalent price for a seat no matter where it is booked (i.e. the csame price for a given class date and route no matter which country it is booked in)
Arriva lounge for longhaul early arrivals

Stop degrading WP (losses include any time access, higher SC earn for extra points etc)
Occasional complementary op up (not using FF points) as a token of appreication
Stop downgrading reward seats
Make reward seat booking easier (why, when looking for J to Europe do I get J on domestic and Y on longhauls???)
Keep gving pax something to aim for that they may actually cchieve: e.g. for LTG offer LTP (at present there is no lpoint flying OW once WP retained if the re is no hope of getting WP1, may as well use the points to get *A status)

If going to use the term ‘full service’ then actually be full service (a biscuit or min pretzels at 1800 is not a meal and I would actually like a meal then rather than at 2030 when I finally get home)
Wine and beer on weekend domestic flights (again ‘ful service’)
Actually provide the special meals that are listed as options (rather than VGML for all)

Stop selling JQ as QF: if I am faced with JQ or another airline, I choose the other airline in preference to deathstar

Basically listen to the PAX: it is all here on AFF if anyone at QF cared to read it.
Make it easier to give feedback: there is no point in telling me to go on line to give feedback when I am 2 hours into a 14 hour flight: what is wrong with a paper form?
Stop forcing pax to self service: impressions are biassed towards intial and final experiences so why start the experience with a machine?
Show QF is supporting Australia by having maintenace in Aus: i.e. by flying QF we are supporting fellow Australians ( use the buy Australian logo)

 

[katiebell]

re competitive fares when booking in Australia, I have just received an ad for QF ex LHR for flights LHR-MEL for £829 ($1550) rtn between 1 Feb and 15 Mar or 17 April and 30 June. Now if QF offered this FROM Aus there would be no trouble filing seats to lots of destinations in Europe

 

[marki]

Katiebell thanks I could not agree more !!

 

[puppysparkes]

I'm not sure if this article I spotted today has been posted elsewhere on AFF. Mods please delete if so: Armchair critics take flight of fancy on future of the air

It has been said that for every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple and wrong.
There is a never a shortage of armchair experts with theories on how to run Qantas, and the cabin has been crowded recently.
Over the past five years, Qantas has been navigating through a complex and cutthroat environment. Oil prices have reached record levels. The world economy has been subdued. We've seen Asian and Middle Eastern carriers, who can do things a lot cheaper, expand into our markets.
We've plotted a course through these challenges and we've adjusted it as circumstances shifted. But the reality is that the airline our passengers experience is one of the best in the world and we have a strategy to keep it that way.
Advertisement
For many on the sidelines, it seems few businesses are easier to run than the national carrier.
They include Tony Webber, a former Qantas finance employee, who was retrenched several years ago. His comments on the aviation world come from a one-dimensional view of supply and demand that ignores how a multifaceted market actually works.
One of his recommendations during his time at Qantas was to shrink our regional operations so prices and profits would rise. Apart from ignoring our role in the community such a move would also have rolled out the red carpet for our competitors to fill the space.
Commentators are welcome to their views. But their more serious claims cannot go unchallenged, because they are based on a misunderstanding of the aviation market and Qantas itself.
The first claim is that Qantas is a ''lazy'' company seeking a government handout, to be categorised with Holden. This could not be further from the truth. The Qantas Group has reduced unit costs by almost 20 per cent over five years, renewed its fleet with 130 new aircraft, innovated with technology and lifted customer satisfaction to record levels.
Few Australian firms have done more in the post-GFC period to reform in the face of structural economic change. We acknowledge there is more to do. In December, we announced the acceleration of this program to deliver a further $2 billion of savings over three years.
The second myth is that Qantas and Jetstar should stop targeting a combined, profit-maximising 65 per cent share of the domestic market.
The 65 per cent strategy is about giving our customers a market-leading choice of destinations, frequencies and seats at the times they want to travel. That scale is part of the premium service we offer and the fares we sell, and it reflects the investment we have made over many years in our regional operations and in building a national low-fares network with Jetstar. It is prized by our customers and it is a real competitive advantage that allows us to maximise earnings in even the toughest market conditions.
Stepping back from the 65 per cent would effectively be waving the white flag, not to mention abandoning our role in regional Australia and betraying the loyalty of our frequent flyers. Anyone who advocates this kind of approach does not understand the way business works. We plan to keep strengthening our competitive advantages, not walking away from them.
The third myth is that Jetstar has somehow ''hurt'' Qantas. Jetstar is a business that has been profitable in every year of its existence, opening up low-cost air travel and creating a new market alongside Qantas as part of a successful two-brand strategy. We co-ordinate which brand flies which route to best serve our customers and to maximise the return for the Qantas Group. If Qantas had not created Jetstar, someone else would have - and Qantas would have been the loser.
Many Australian firms would love to have Jetstar's profile in Asia. Our equity investment in these firms has been less than the outlay on a single A380. That's far less than the inflated figures tossed around by those who would rather scapegoat Jetstar - the same people who seize on any setback experienced by these start-up ventures as the ''real issue'' facing Qantas.
In truth, the value of these airlines is already more than their foundation capital, and it will increase as the Asian middle class drives nearly half the world's air traffic growth over the next 20 years. It takes breathtaking small-mindedness to dismiss this growth as an ''Asian distraction''.
The final myth is about Qantas employees being disengaged. No one is more passionate about Qantas than its people. Engagement levels are up across the business and at record levels in some areas. The transformation of Qantas is being led by employees, and they are the reason for the record customer satisfaction scores we're earning and the awards we're winning.
Aviation is a difficult business and the challenges are anything but straightforward. Some of them have been around for decades. We have a strategy to build a stronger Qantas Group for the long term - but the reality is more complex than the armchair experts will let on.


Gareth Evans is the chief financial officer of Qantas.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

the problem with the above text from Mr Evans is that parts of it are clearly spin.

the bit about staff being passionate and engaged? true maybe in some (many) circumstances, but the REALITY is sometimes different.

just on that point alone... we have check in staff that don't (or can't be bothered) to know rules for the through check of bags on oneworld airlines. they would have people claim bags in sydney and recheck just because they are not up to date. we have lounge staff not aware of access. we have some cabin crew that appear they would rather be anywhere also than serving passengers on board.

so already his comments appear to be unravelling.

then we have the bit about jetstar not hurting qantas... I might be confused on this but what about all those leased jetstar planes sitting on the tarmac around Asia because they have no where to fly?

130 new planes? great. but why am I still flying around major trunk routes on aging 767s that can't accommodate my cabin baggage easily? JAL and ANA refurbished their 767s and included new 777 style overhead lockers. not that hard right?

waiving a white flag regarding 65% market share? well GOOD project management is about constant review, and changing your project if something isn't working. do we really need 30 minute frequencies on the SYD-MEL route? back 'in the old days' we had slightly less frequency, but airports were less congested and flight times were much less!! so we have a 30 minute frequency now but have to take an earlier flight to arrive at the same time we would have under hourly frequencies? (maybe not exactly but you get the point).

again there is mention of competitors and their reduced costs. but when I think about it, really how much cheaper are foreign airlines's staff costs? SQ might pay their staff less, but don't they have more of them on each plane? I wonder how that works out to the total staff cost per flight?

do the extra costs QF supposedly have include DOT fines and price fixing fines?

 

[trippin_the_rift]

again there is mention of competitors and their reduced costs. but when I think about it, really how much cheaper are foreign airlines's staff costs? SQ might pay their staff less, but don't they have more of them on each plane? I wonder how that works out to the total staff cost per flight?

Good point. For example.

EK a380 has 31 crew (including dedicated cleaners... which are probably cheaper).
Qantas has 21 crew

For all things to be equal Qantas would need to be paying 50% more to crew than their full service competitors.

Then we take into account crews based outside of Australia and Jetconnect which are on similar contract agreements to other airlines (so there's no disadvantage to QF).

 

[katiebell]

I'm not sure if this article I spotted today has been posted elsewhere on AFF. Mods please delete if so: Armchair critics take flight of fancy on future of the air ...

For many on the sidelines, it seems few businesses are easier to run than the national carrier...



Gareth Evans is the chief financial officer of Qantas.

I have no doubts that running an airline is a difficult business but, like any other business, if you do not offer what the customer wants, you won't have a business no matter how much you cut costs. I would fly QF all the time if you actually provided a service I wanted to use. Sadly the QF product and my needs are less aligned after every QF 'enhancement'.

Many of the comments in this discussion are a refelction of pax unhappiness with the product QF is offering. If they did not care about the national carrier they would not bother writing they would just take thier money elsewhere.

A complaint is a gift as it gives a business a chance to improve. QF are fanstaically lucky that so many people are writng their thoughts and suggestions here: all freely available to Qantas without having to pay big fees to market research companies

 

[BD1959]

Going by MEL's International Terminal (glancing at it from 463 last night) Chinese Middle Class is certainly the future for aviation in APAC, the following 4 aircraft were visible (in order):

Air New Zealand A320
China Eastern A330
Air Sichuan A330
China Southern A330

So where was the Jetstar aircraft that QF Group is using to leverage off this growth?

Now, if QF (even JQi) had a 65% strategy - or even 10% - between Australia and China, or even stated that a percentage of those Chinese flights were mandated codeshare seats I'd be more convinced that they were serious about hanging on the coat-tails of the Chinese Dragon - but the CFO states that JQ, not QF codeshares are the future.

Is Jetstar seriously going to salvage the QF brand courtesy of the Chinese middle classes by running one low-price A320 flight between Singapore and each of its 3 China destinations on a frequency of 4 days per week?By the time the JQ franchise has even launched out of HK, how many Chinese will be paying serious (local) money to fly their own full-service carriers to destinations in Australia? How many of those will be doing so courtesy of a QF Codeshare seat?

Lordy, if this is the best that the CFO can come up with, no wonder the stock is junk.

Regards,

BD

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Going by MEL's International Terminal (glancing at it from 463 last night) Chinese Middle Class is certainly the future for aviation in APAC, the following 4 aircraft were visible (in order):

Air New Zealand A320
China Eastern A330
Air Sichuan A330
China Southern A330

So where was the Jetstar aircraft that QF Group is using to leverage off this growth?

Now, if QF (even JQi) had a 65% strategy - or even 10% - between Australia and China, or even stated that a percentage of those Chinese flights were mandated codeshare seats I'd be more convinced that they were serious about hanging on the coat-tails of the Chinese Dragon - but the CFO states that JQ, not QF codeshares are the future.

Is Jetstar seriously going to salvage the QF brand courtesy of the Chinese middle classes by running one low-price A320 flight between Singapore and each of its 3 China destinations on a frequency of 4 days per week?By the time the JQ franchise has even launched out of HK, how many Chinese will be paying serious (local) money to fly their own full-service carriers to destinations in Australia? How many of those will be doing so courtesy of a QF Codeshare seat?

Lordy, if this is the best that the CFO can come up with, no wonder the stock is junk.

Regards,

BD

ha... 65% strategy in China? how do you propose people even book tickets? Can't do it through the QF site unless you travel all the way to Beijing or Shanghai. Not very practical if you live in Chengdu, or Guangzhou. It's not even really practical when you live in Shanghai or Beijing.

 

[AnonymousCoward]

I have no doubts that running an airline is a difficult business but, like any other business, if you do not offer what the customer wants, you won't have a business no matter how much you cut costs. I would fly QF all the time if you actually provided a service I wanted to use. Sadly the QF product and my needs are less aligned after every QF 'enhancement'.

...

A complaint is a gift as it gives a business a chance to improve. QF are fanstaically lucky that so many people are writng their thoughts and suggestions here: all freely available to Qantas without having to pay big fees to market research companies

Yet I haven't seen a single person here quote how much extra they'd be willing to pay for all the extra services/benefits that are being asked (though lots of people complain about how expensive QF is...)

So either QF has to find something else to cut (suggestions welcome), or prices need to rise. How much extra are you prepared to pay?

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Yet I haven't seen a single person here quote how much extra they'd be willing to pay for all the extra services/benefits that are being asked (though lots of people complain about how expensive QF is...)

So either QF has to find something else to cut (suggestions welcome), or prices need to rise. How much extra are you prepared to pay?

Singapore Airlines does a pretty good job of charging more (or at least that's the perception). And lots of people are prepared to pay for that.

Cathay is charging $1000 more to fly to Shanghai than QF. I'd be happy to pay the CX price on QF if i got better services and better seats... so charging 'more' doesn't necessairly mean a premium - it might mean getting the same as your competitors.

 

[BD1959]

ha... 65% strategy in China?

No, I said 65% between Australia and China - which, based on the growth the Chinese carriers are experiencing, I said - or even 10%.

Of course you'd be highly unlikely to get rights in China, just like you'd hit all sorts of obstacles starting a LCC in HK or a full service carrier ex KL .... oh, wait a minute .....

Regards,

BD

 

[AnonymousCoward]

Cathay is charging $1000 more to fly to Shanghai than QF. I'd be happy to pay the CX price on QF if i got better services and better seats... so charging 'more' doesn't necessairly mean a premium - it might mean getting the same as your competitors.

To justify CX service/seats everyone on the plane would have to be willing to pay that extra. Do you think that's feasible? Australia's not a transit hub like SIN or HKG or DBX. I think QF's going to struggle to find enough people willing to pay old-style full service prices. And your post aside, I find very few posts here where people are stating that they are wiling to pay a lot more to the extra benefits they are asking for.

 

[Fruitcake]

how do you propose people even book tickets? Can't do it through the QF site unless you travel all the way to Beijing or Shanghai.

Mr Joyce expects the Australian public to support QF because it's an iconic Australian icon and has been the airline of choice of patriotic iconic Australians for millenia. Presumably that means Chinese nationals should also support their own airlines, so there should be no need for QF to sell tickets in China .

 

[BD1959]

I find very few posts here where people are stating that they are wiling to pay a lot more to the extra benefits they are asking for.

The issue is that courtesy of us sticking with Qantas, we are already paying a premium for - arguably - extra benefits which continually diminish.

Maybe we ask this in slightly different tones:

1) How far toward the competitors offering does QF have to move until you will stop paying the current premium

2) What premium differentiator would you like to see in order for you to pay a *marked* premium over the competition


Personally, my response to 1) is zero since my current Client has Qantas as their own preferred supplier - I don't: at this point have to justify paying the premium and - selfishly - I stick with QF until I retain WP this year. I will then switch over to VA and inform my Client of how much I'm saving them.

2) is much more difficult. However, I'd probably be prepared to pay an additional $40 per dom sector in Y for a hot meal, alcoholic beverage, guaranteed carry-on storage above my seat, jacket hung in a proper wardrobe and in-flight entertainment which comes through to more than one ear.

Regards,

BD

 

[MEL_Traveller]

No, I said 65% between Australia and China - which, based on the growth the Chinese carriers are experiencing, I said - or even 10%.

Of course you'd be highly unlikely to get rights in China, just like you'd hit all sorts of obstacles starting a LCC in HK or a full service carrier ex KL .... oh, wait a minute .....

Regards,

BD

yes... I knew what you meant and used a little poetic licence off that to make my point