Plane Talking or Plane Biased?

[ChrisCunard]

I'm wondering if anyone here knows why Ben Sandilands seems to dislike Qantas / QF management so much?

He is a very articulate writer, and clearly has knowledge on aviation. But... If you read his blog it is often as if it's an anti-Qantas blog.

There are hardly any stories about other airlines, and only the Qantas ones seem to be so negative, so angry and seemingly so very biased.

Heck if I relied only on plane talking for my aviation news, I'd never fly QF; as he makes them sound unsafe, badly managed and about ready to collapse.

On the other hand, it reads as if DJ is the handsome prince (Prince JB who couldn't possibly make a mistake) here to save us from the evil AJ...

Had to rant and wondering if anyone knows why he is so anti Qantas? Perhaps an op up was refused once?

Chris.

 

[docjames]

He seems to think he's "hard hitting" rather than "biased".

Anyone with more than a passing interest/knowledge in aviation matters can see the bias.

As to the root-cause, who knows, but IMO it's that he is amongst the plethora of staff and others that hark back to "the good old days" of Qantas pre-privatisation (read: loss making) without any realisation of sustainability and commercial reality.

 

[munitalP]

I had an infraction a few years back due to stating my thoughts on this man as well as posting a picture of the footy shows tool of the week award. I too read his comments (seldom) with a feeling he must have been turned down for an upgrade at some stage.

If QF were a person, Ben Sangaland would be in court for slander tomorrow I feel.

 

[TheInsider]

Heck if I relied only on plane talking for my aviation news, I'd never fly QF as he makes them sound unsafe, badly managed and about ready to collapse.
Chris.

Well those last two points can be disputed quite a bit

 

[yohy?!]

OP I think you might want to spend a little more time actually reading the articles. Particularly the coverage of QF32 which demonstrates that Ben's beef is with management and not with QF staff.

I'm not sure in the spectrum of media there is any other commentator able to provide this level of analysis or detail on aviation matters (it's certainly not coming from the 'lamestream' media!).

 

[ChrisCunard]

OP I think you might want to spend a little more time actually reading the articles. Particularly the coverage of QF32 which demonstrates that Ben's beef is with management and not with QF staff.

I'm not sure in the spectrum of media there is any other commentator able to provide this level of analysis or detail on aviation matters (it's certainly not coming from the 'lamestream' media!).

I've read pretty much every article since QF32 and you're right - it is with QF management in large. But funnily enough, QF management's decisions are a large part of what makes up QF today.

My "gripes" are:

- bias against QF disproportionate to that of other airlines, especially DJ (and also the fact he forgets that JB was instrumental in many of the QF decisions he disliked in the 90's and 00's),
- tendency to make it sound as if QF are about to collapse,
- "conspiracy theory" style reporting around offshore maintenance, fleet choices, JetStar etc,
- all of the solutions for QF seem to point to firing AJ and / or going back in time and embracing the 777 during the 1990's... Not really very helpful, and
- constant Qantas bashing does nothing to help the airline - when was the last time that a positive QF story appeared on Plane Talking?

Imagine if the reporter spent as much energy on covering Australian Aviation in a wholistic manner, rather than picking QF's every move to bits?

While I absolutely agree that Ben is very well informed and certainly knows Aviation (as mentioned in my opener), I think Geoffery Thomas would have a few things to say about your last comment

 

[yohy?!]

I've read pretty much every article since QF32 and you're right - it is with QF management in large. But funnily enough, QF management's decisions are a large part of what makes up QF today.

My "gripes" are:

- bias against QF disproportionate to that of other airlines, especially DJ (and also the fact he forgets that JB was instrumental in many of the QF decisions he disliked in the 90's and 00's),
- tendency to make it sound as if QF are about to collapse,
- "conspiracy theory" style reporting around offshore maintenance, fleet choices, JetStar etc,
- all of the solutions for QF seem to point to firing AJ and / or going back in time and embracing the 777 during the 1990's... Not really very helpful, and
- constant Qantas bashing does nothing to help the airline - when was the last time that a positive QF story appeared on Plane Talking?

Imagine if the reporter spent as much energy on covering Australian Aviation in a wholistic manner, rather than picking QF's every move to bits?

While I absolutely agree that Ben is very well informed and certainly knows Aviation (as mentioned in my opener), I think Geoffery Thomas would have a few things to say about your last comment

Whilst the blog is Qantas heavy, that is relevant given QF's lead position in the market.

There are real issues out there with Qantas (shrinking market share, collapsing share price, non-existent dividends, IR woes, market announcement smoke and mirrors'') that point to serious issues internally that cannot be ignored or written off as bias.

With regard to reporting on wholistic aviation - this ignores the plethora of posts on CASA and ATSB issues that are extremely important in the current climate.

(Duly noted on Geoffrey Thomas, I will look him up - the point stands on the mainstream media though!)

 

[docjames]

Whilst the blog is Qantas heavy, that is relevant given QF's lead position in the market.

So QF/JQ have ~65% or the Dom market, and about ~25% international (combined).

So shouldnt QF/JQ coverage be ~ 65% of domestic stories, and 25% of international (simplistically speaking).

However QF/JQ seems to get 90+% of the cover.

 

[Kendall Roy]

(Duly noted on Geoffrey Thomas, I will look him up - the point stands on the mainstream media though!)

One could argue that Thomas is pro QF Management whilst Sandilands is anti.....

 

[ajca]

There's no doubt Ben is well qualified to be critical of Qantas management.

Surprisingly, he doesn't talk much about his Harvard MBA, his PhD in aeronautical engineering, and his many years of experience being CEO of a major international airline. But he certainly highly qualified to tell others how to run multi-billion dollar global businesses, navigate complex industrial relations situations, and design cutting-edge jet aircraft. The guy is really amazing.

I posted this in another thread but it is more relevant here. For the record, I am being sarcastic. Ben's only experience in business management or aviation is writing about what other people are doing as a (justifiably) lowly-paid journalist. He has never run a public company, led IR negotiations, designed an aircraft, managed relationships with investors, developed fleet or route strategies for a major airline, or done anything other than criticise the work of others who are smarter and more successful than himself.

He does however have some small business experience - his LinkedIn profile claims that he is the owner of "Ben Sandilands Media and Public Relations". One wonders who his PR clients are and how this does not represent a conflict of interest with his work as a 'journalist' at Crikey. And why his side-business is not disclosed on his Crikey blog.

Imagine the response if a real journalist (e.g. one at the AFR or SMH or The Age) was running an undisclosed PR business on the side. Especially if that journalist spent so much time driving an agenda against one of Australia's most iconic companies...

 

[drron]

Whilst the blog is Qantas heavy, that is relevant given QF's lead position in the market.

There are real issues out there with Qantas (shrinking market share, collapsing share price, non-existent dividends, IR woes, market announcement smoke and mirrors'') that point to serious issues internally that cannot be ignored or written off as bias.

With regard to reporting on wholistic aviation - this ignores the plethora of posts on CASA and ATSB issues that are extremely important in the current climate.

(Duly noted on Geoffrey Thomas, I will look him up - the point stands on the mainstream media though!)

The last 4 of your points apply equally to DJ.Their share price as a percentage of decade highs is similiar to QF,cant remember if they have had a dividend but certainly not as many as QF.IR is hopeles-just now I cant get to my bookings for seat selection.And I am probably not alone thinking that their announcements aren't always spot on.
And just as an aside I have just had my first flight in J with SQ.Their service I felt was not as good as an average QF flight-yes their FAs are young and attractive but my immediate thought was "Stepford Wives"

 

[777]

I would have thought its obvious: Ben's an old school aviation guy (been covering it for years) not a MBA management type and he thinks the attitude that the MBA brigade are bringing to the airline are destroying what he, and other aviation types, value about Qantas.

You can agree or disagree (or, in my case, a bit of both) but that's pretty obviously the angle he's coming at it from and he's not alone in that.

 

[eastwest101]

... not a MBA management type and he thinks the attitude that the MBA brigade are bringing to the airline are destroying what he, and other aviation types, value about Qantas.

You can agree or disagree (or, in my case, a bit of both) but that's pretty obviously the angle he's coming at it from and he's not alone in that.

I second 777's comments but would also add the old story about not "shooting the messenger".

 

[drron]

Not everyone loves Ben-
Ben Sandilands : Crikey : A coughy Writer, Plagiarist, Venomous, Sarcastic, Hardly A Journalist - Australia's Worst Journalist, News Website, Newspaper, Free to Air TV, Books, Radio, Publishers

And when did he get his MBA.He started at the SMH in 1963-
Ben Sandilands - The Drum Opinion (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 

[nlagalle]

OP I think you might want to spend a little more time actually reading the articles. Particularly the coverage of QF32 which demonstrates that Ben's beef is with management and not with QF staff.

Baloney, Ben is one of the biggest Qantas bashers around. You only need to read the tone of his articles to see it.. So whilst I take his articles with a grain of salt, he is entitled to write them as such as it's an opinion piece as opposed to balanced article. And pleased don't tell me it is balanced when he writes things like:

If Alan Joyce at Qantas wants to bury John Borghetti at Virgin Australia for making him look tragic when it comes to staff engagement and customer focus ​

​

Virgin’s vengeful return to Mt Isa

Qantas, Jetstar carpet bomb Virgin Australia

just to list a couple..

 

[ozavanti]

Yohy, I cant say that i agree with your analysis of Kyle Sandilands long lost brother in saying:

I'm not sure in the spectrum of media there is any other commentator able to provide this level of analysis or detail on aviation matters (it's certainly not coming from the 'lamestream' media!).

The difference in analysis from someone like Will Horton at the Centre for Aviation is simply chalk and cheese compared to Ben. Will goes into depth but treats the subject matter with professionalism and in turn gains respect. On the other hand, Ben has some interesting things to say, but i find that the vitriol spewed out by him causes the impact of the message to be lost.

 

[loobloke]

It is a blog - an opinionated piece. It is a type of writing that encourages commentary from readers and I'm sure he is aware of his bias and the direction he wants to take his blog.

I personally enjoy media like such (though I do think he does over do it sometimes) and find it interesting to compare different articles from different perspectives. You just need a tolerance to reading through the bias and I definitely don't view it as a factual source for information, not that it is intended to be....
There are a magnitude of different media covering aviation issues, each with their own means and purpose; choose one with a perspective that tickles your fancy.

 

[pat25d]

IR is hopeles-just now I cant get to my bookings for seat selection."

You know that IR is Industrial Relations, I think you mistook it for IT.

 

[drron]

You know that IR is Industrial Relations, I think you mistook it for IT.

I will wear my glasses next time!

 

[ajca]

I would have thought its obvious: Ben's an old school aviation guy (been covering it for years) not a MBA management type and he thinks the attitude that the MBA brigade are bringing to the airline are destroying what he, and other aviation types, value about Qantas.

You can agree or disagree (or, in my case, a bit of both) but that's pretty obviously the angle he's coming at it from and he's not alone in that.

I do not understand this anti-MBA thing. Is it really that bad to have professional managers running a multi-billion dollar company (airline)? Would things really be better if we let Ben Sandilands run the show?