Qantas suspends relationship with Tourism Australia; Claims Dixon "Sabotage"

[Must...Fly!]

QANTAS has dumped its 40-year partnership with the federal government's tourism body, claiming its boss Geoff Dixon is deliberately trying to sabotage the airline.

The national carrier has suspended a $50 million marketing deal with Tourism Australia, claiming its chairman Mr Dixon, a former Qantas CEO, was "agitating" behind the scenes to remove the current Qantas management. Qantas has formally suspended its relationship and will now redirect its significant marketing budget, which helps the federal government market Australia overseas, to state-based tourism bodies.


The Daily Telegraph has confirmed that Qantas boss Alan Joyce wrote to Tourism Minister Martin Ferguson late yesterday informing him that the Qantas board was suspending all future dealings with Tourism Australia.


It is believed the letter cited an "untenable" conflict of interest by Mr Dixon following reports he was leading a consortium to remove the current Qantas management and buy out the airline.
It claimed Mr Dixon could not act impartially as a government-appointed chairman while privately seeking to undermine the carrier.

......

Mr Dixon walked away from Qantas in 2008.

Qantas pulls $50 million deal over tourism 'sabotage' | News.com.au

 

[TiredOldFlyer]

Now now boys.............

 

[harvyk]

But seriously, hasn't most people dreamed of a QF without the current management? AJ is hardly a popular CEO with the people...

 

[markis10]

Apparently it was because of a conflict of interest according to the latest QF tweet. Thats a tad nasty IMHO, and shows things are getting serious.


@qantasairways shifts tourism funds from federal to state due to TA Chairman Dixon conflict of interest. We remain committed to Oz tourism

 

[cove]

Ethics course for Geoff??

 

[yohy?!]

i was most interested in the throwaway line that Dixon was trying to kill the EK deal behind the scenes - the game is indeed afoot

 

[JohnPhelan]

i was most interested in the throwaway line that Dixon was trying to kill the EK deal behind the scenes - the game is indeed afoot

The QF share price has increased substantially since the announcement of the EK tie-up. If Dixon is trying to buy up large chunks of shares, then clearly he wants the price for those shares to be as low as possible.

Emirates deal = higher share price? Then he needs to try to kill the EK deal to get the share price lower.

 

[markis10]

The QF share price has increased substantially since the announcement of the EK tie-up.

Substantially is a word I would not probably use, going from $1.15 to $1.35, in the context of it being $1.50 in June.

 

[JohnPhelan]

Substantially is a word I would not probably use, going from $1.15 to $1.35, in the context of it being $1.50 in June.

People no doubt use different adjectives, but I would class a 17% increase since the EK announcement as "substantial".

Re June price, yes it was $1.50 on 1 June - but fell to 0.97 on 11 June! On 25 July, it was 0.99. So the current 1.32 is substantially higher than those.

Semantics aside, if Dixon wants to launch a raid, he wants the share price as low as possible. If scotching the EK deal will lower the share price, then of course it would make sense for him to try to do that. The fact that it would totally stuff QF's European strategy is a side issue..........

 

[harvyk]

Substantially is a word I would not probably use, going from $1.15 to $1.35, in the context of it being $1.50 in June.

It all depends on exactly when you purchase said shares. If you purchased them at $1.50 you prob wouldn't be overly happy right now full stop, however had you purchased them at $1.15, you'd be laughing...
QF was for a long time on a downward spiral, so given the EK tie up has stopped that for now and even pushed the price up, I think the word substantially is justified.

 

[markis10]

It all depends on exactly when you purchase said shares. If you purchased them at $1.50 you prob wouldn't be overly happy right now full stop, however had you purchased them at $1.15, you'd be laughing...
QF was for a long time on a downward spiral, so given the EK tie up has stopped that for now and even pushed the price up, I think the word substantially is justified.

I did say in the context of where it was in June, I know a few here took the opportunity to buy in at sub $1 so I am sure they are happy with their investment even after the ATO donation, where there is winners there are losers, those investing before June this year are probably in the later category, and likely to be watching closely at the latest developments. I must admit at the AGM I was surprised at how there was a sudden focus on dividends etc in terms of speechs before questions, at least why that was so now has some clarity!

I wonder why the HO details for QF have changed?

 

[moa999]

i was most interested in the throwaway line that Dixon was trying to kill the EK deal behind the scenes - the game is indeed afoot

That was interesting.
But also the comments that he would try and get a closer relationship with CX in Asia.

As has been said before.... I can see why QF wants it, I can't see why CX would want it.
- CX already flies to every port in Australia, and has better frequencies than QF generally
- CX elites can earn points and interline on QF via oneworld relationship
- QF is trying to compete directly with CX in HK via Jetstar Hong Kong

 

[eastwest101]

Agree that there is a lot of speculation - but I think the problem is more between Geoff Dixon and other senior QF management (and not necessarily at Alan Joyce). Even Dixon would have to admit that the EK deal is at least one viable way to get QFi back in action again.

moa999 may be right - if QF wanted to get closer to CX then Jetstar HK and maybe JQ Asia would have to dissappear fast. I think current QF management are very wedded to the JQ business model so wouldn't see that happening unless Alan Joyce were to go... probably too late now with current management in place - there have been almost as many bridges burnt with CX as with SQ.

I think Tourism Australia has even more homework to do than QF management, to regain some semblence of a viable business and strategy. I did read about someone in Tourism Australia having a go at some of the airlines about Sydney-Uluru airfares a few weeks ago so things are a bit tense between the airlines and TZ at the moment.

 

[Must...Fly!]

Thought it over a bit, no doubt there is some self-protection from management here, but can you really blame them? It's rather obvious the market thinks the EK deal is a good solution, so it seems right to continue it. I certainly think the relationship with TA is untenable if Dixon is sniffing around with some investors - which has been the rumour for months (or longer) anyway.

 

[yohy?!]

That was interesting.
But also the comments that he would try and get a closer relationship with CX in Asia.

As has been said before.... I can see why QF wants it, I can't see why CX would want it.
- CX already flies to every port in Australia, and has better frequencies than QF generally
- CX elites can earn points and interline on QF via oneworld relationship
- QF is trying to compete directly with CX in HK via Jetstar Hong Kong

this is true, by killing HKG-LHR they have put themselves in a position where are they focused on Asia from HKG but without a close arrangement with CX to maximise connections into asia.

They need to work out something that puts QF code onto KA and CX flights with reciprocal CX code going onto SCL and other flights maybe?

Jetstar HK will be easy to kill or fold into 3K if necessary will just be tricky not p!ssing off MU who seem to be a major traffic feeder now into QF at HKG also.

 

[whatmeworry]

A bit OT but a workmate was looking the Socceroos page today and wanted to know why they listed Etihad as Docklands stadium and not Etihad. Had to remind him that the Socceroos are sponsored by QF.

I don't like AJ or Dixon and I am not too impressed with AJ's plans for QF but he was of course left lemons by Dixon and his probably trying to do his best to make lemonade out of them lemons.

 

[amaroo]

Good one QF.....given the results that TA have achieved you would have thought that GD has plenty of other things to sort out.

Same could be said for the current Leightons CFO.....wonder what the board thinks about his time consuming day dreaming! It's not like LEI is riding high in the market....lol.

 

[nlagalle]

That was interesting.
But also the comments that he would try and get a closer relationship with CX in Asia.

I find Dixons thoughts about Asia laughable. If he wants closer ties with CX, why didn't he do that while he was QF CEO??

 

[Mal Ware]

Tourism backs Dixon over Joyce

[h=1]Tourism backs Dixon over Joyce[/h]

"The stand-off between Qantas Airways chief Alan Joyce and Tourism Australia chairman Geoff Dixon over the airline’s future has widened, with the tourism body’s board and the federal Tourism Minister backing Mr Dixon on Wednesday night .


Many of the nation’s biggest government and industry tourism bodies declined to comment on the fallout between Mr Joyce and Mr Dixon, though unanimously said a rift between the national carrier and TA was damaging for the sector." Tourism backs Dixon over Joyce

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joyce doing things his way again, determined to destroy an Australian Icon.

I wonder if there has ever been a CEO in the history of CEO's that has brought upon so much negative publicity to the company they are in charge of as much as Joyce has.

The guy has to go...

 

[mannej]

Re: Tourism backs Dixon over Joyce

Joyce doing things his way again, determined to destroy an Australian Icon.

I wonder if there has ever been a CEO in the history of CEO's that has brought upon so much negative publicity to the company they are in charge of as much as Joyce has.

The guy has to go...

I would say yes to your rhetorical questions...

HIH Insurance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Firepower International - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christopher Skase - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia