"The Real Reason for Jetstar" | Australian Frequent Flyer
Australian Frequent Flyer

Welcome to Australia's leading independent Frequent Flyer and Travel Resource since 1998!
Our site contains tons of information that will improve your travel experience.

Joining AFF is fast, simple & absolutely free - register now and take immediate advantage of these great BENEFITS.

Once registered, this box will disappear. And you will see fewer advertisements :)

"The Real Reason for Jetstar"

Status
Not open for further replies.

bambbbam2

Active Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
857
This is from another forum, so the views do not necessarily reflect mine!

"Imagine you're a big iconic airline with a name starting with 'Q'. You've built your reputation on being a champion of Australian values, with a safety record second to none. You achieved that reputation and safety record by spending lots of money on gold standard local engineering, triple redundant safety systems in your planes and maintenance schedules, the highest standards of aircrew training, and the like.

Trouble is, the international airline market is getting very competitive. Airlines which don't invest as much in safety, quality and 'Australian values' are able to offer air fares much cheaper than you. They are winning marketshare, and making bigger profits.

You decide that, to compete, you have to cut costs. So, you start trying to cut back on aircrew training and inflight systems, lowering them to be in keeping with those of other carriers. You try to outsource maintenance roles to cheaper countries.

Trouble is, everytime you try to lower standards, you hit turbulence. Unions. Government regulations. Worst of all, customer backlash about being 'unAustralian'.

What do you do...?

You start a new airline. Let's call it 'JetStar'. From the outset, you have lower training, safety and maintenance standards, so noone can ever complain about them being lowered. You have fewer aircrew on each flight, and you make those aircrew do jobs on the ground that used to be performed by ground engineeers. Then you start expanding your new airline to that it's taking over the routes of your old, expensive and established airline.

Within a few years, your new low-cost airline is making a motza. Sure, it's having safety issues. (In fact, some observers believe it's only a matter of time until it has a major accident ... just like your rivals airlines have.) And thanks to the cannibalisation of its routes, your old 'safe Australian iconic airline' has shrunk to become a low marketshare premium brand.

But hey, you're overall in front.

In the news today: Qantas' low-cost carrier Jetstar has announced it will expand flights into Europe and North America by 2010. It also unveiled four old, refurbished planes that will begin taking the airline's first international passengers later this month.

Uncanny, eh?"
 

JohnK

AFF Supporter
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
41,100
Compromising training, safety and maintenance standards. Not very encouraging!
 

Dave Noble

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
6,419
JohnK said:
Compromising training, safety and maintenance standards. Not very encouraging!
It has to comply with Australian safety standards whatever an unnamed person on another unknown forum says

Dave
 

maninblack

Established Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Messages
2,303
bambbbam2 said:
In the news today: Qantas' low-cost carrier Jetstar has announced it will expand flights into Europe and North America by 2010. It also unveiled four old, refurbished planes that will begin taking the airline's first international passengers later this month.
They were essentially the newest planes in the Qantas fleet. And they are getting new 787's before Qantas. So this comment is a complete nonsense.
 

Mish

Junior Member
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
26
Well he does have a point of kind. All airlines around the world have to abide by the legal "safety standard" or they cannot fly.

How did QANTAS get such a great safety record?? Surely it wasn't from just plain following the legal standard. If that is the case then it's a pretty good run of good luck. (and I hope it continues during my life!!!!)

Aren't we heading down the path of the US Airlines with all this? Don't they have pretty regular airline accidents?
 

JohnK

AFF Supporter
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
41,100
Kiwi Flyer said:
dont feed the troll
I am sorry but this statement is just do stupid and so FT'alkish. What troll? Spammer? On a message board everyone is entitled to an opinion, right or wrong. I know stuff all about flying and i agree with it. If you want to be a low cost carrier and save money these are the exact ways to do it.
 

Mish

Junior Member
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
26
I'm not sure what the pay discrepancies between Qantas and Jetstar staff are (from what I've heard they are in the order of $50 to $100K for the captain) - but if they are of a reasonable size, surely that means you get lower quality people? I know where I work , we've had tremendous trouble recruiting good people since they cut the wages in one area. (IT Software Engineers)
 

Dave Noble

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
6,419
JohnK said:
I am sorry but this statement is just do stupid and so FT'alkish. What troll? Spammer? On a message board everyone is entitled to an opinion, right or wrong. I know stuff all about flying and i agree with it. If you want to be a low cost carrier and save money these are the exact ways to do it.
Quoting an unnamed person from an unnamed location who may or may not know bog all about the subject anyway......I'll agree with Kiwi Flyer on this.

Australian registered carriers have to abide by Australian standards on safety , whether it be Qantas , Jetstar or Virgin; there is no difference in the requirements

Dave
 

maninblack

Established Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2006
Messages
2,303
It's an opinion. Like most opinions, it contains some truth, some error, some inaccuracy, some bias, some grudges and so on.

We all have views on Jetstar and QF's motives. So far (my opinion) it's a bit of a silly airline, bad website (actually embarrassing website), and all the silly cost cutting that won't wash with Australians like paying for water or for kids pencils and colouring book or to use the toilet or whatever. Just like no allocated seating, that will all be gone in a year as the market rejects it. The airline will develop, eventually cost virtually as much to run as QF, given that they will have to run a whole seperate infrastructure and then either dissappear just like Australian, or if on the other hand it proves to be highly profitable, be floated off as a seperate entity. I just don't think that they will be able to compete on all the touted long-haul routes against the Asian and Mid east airlines with a no frills service, frankly, Australian travellers are generally too wealthy to put up with it.

Time will tell :-|
 

aus_flyer

Established Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2005
Messages
1,361
maninblack said:
frankly, Australian travellers are generally too wealthy to put up with it.
This is an interesting (and I agree valid) comment. It's no secret that Australia has one of the highest levels of overseas travel, per capita, of any developed country.

I think this is a combination of financial ability to do so, and interest in the rest of the world (as compared to Americans who think Australia has Lions, Zebras, Giraffes and the (Austrian) Boys Choir). But that's another story all together...

In the US... only a very small percentage of the population have a passport.

The point to my rabble is that the US and Australian markets have very different expectations. In the US, planes are buses that fly. They are not luxurious, do not offer free food, and often don't offer entertainment.

Australia is very different. We have for a long time been used to full-service as the norm. The idea of having to pay for food, water, pillow, etc. is outrageous... whereas in the US, it's standard.

As commented in previous post above, only time will tell whether Australians adapt to the flying bus, or continue to expect the flying restaurant.

Here ends my rabble
 

pshepvic

Established Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
2,046
It's also worthwhile to note that the "old" A330's from Qantas are not really that old - only 3 years in fact, and being former Qantas planes have quite possibly been maintained very well over those 3 years.
I'm quite happy to fly Jetstar now, and in the future when they get their brand new fleet of 787's ... by then the "old" planes will be a staggering 5 or 6 years old. Gosh, if age of planes was a major problem, I'd never fly Qantas at all - some of their 747's and 767's are over 20 years old.
 

pshepvic

Established Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
2,046
maninblack said:
... Just like no allocated seating, that will all be gone in a year as the market rejects it....:-|
By the way ... allocated seating on Jetstar was introduced last month ... you can even select an Exit row online when booking (interesting that CASA has let that through...)
 

serfty

Moderator
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
40,265
Flights
My Map
pshepvic said:
... you can even select an Exit row online when booking (interesting that CASA has let that through...)
You can ONLY select exit rows if booking a JetFlex Fare, JetSaver PAX don't have this option.

More here on a Post I made on FT: JQ allocated seating ...

As to the OP here, I reckon there's a lot of informed Bias in it and I would not waste any more time with it.
 
Last edited:

Dave Noble

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2005
Messages
6,419
pshepvic said:
By the way ... allocated seating on Jetstar was introduced last month ... you can even select an Exit row online when booking (interesting that CASA has let that through...)
Can't see any reason why they would regulate on pre-selection of seats; QF have allowed WPs to pre-select exit seats on QF for a long time. If the person does not meet the critiera for seating in an exit seat , they can still be moved out

Dave
 

Kiwi Flyer

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2004
Messages
5,453
Dave Noble said:
Can't see any reason why they would regulate on pre-selection of seats; QF have allowed WPs to pre-select exit seats on QF for a long time. If the person does not meet the critiera for seating in an exit seat , they can still be moved out

Dave
Indeed as with other airlines that allow pre-selection of seats (yes including exit rows), pre-selection is no guarantee that of a particular seat. Instead consider it more of a requested preference which the airline has noted.

WP = w@nker platinum
 

clifford

AFF Supporter
Joined
Jul 6, 2004
Messages
1,776
Kiwi Flyer said:
Indeed as with other airlines that allow pre-selection of seats (yes including exit rows), pre-selection is no guarantee that of a particular seat. Instead consider it more of a requested preference which the airline has noted.
Never had a problem with UA or SQ on that score, Kiwi. But you have to be at least 1P with UA (ie fly the UA miles).

:)
 

Kiwi Flyer

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2004
Messages
5,453
I don't have any problem keeping my seat either (well apart from yesterday's auto-cancel). But from time to time I see at check in someone unhappy that they have been moved from their pre-selected seat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Community Statistics

Threads
81,262
Messages
1,873,842
Members
49,115
Latest member
ASimpleMind
Top