Why do we hold unreal expectations of Qantas?? | 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 :)

Why do we hold unreal expectations of Qantas??

juddles

Established Member
AFF Supporter
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
4,736
Qantas
Platinum 1
Flights
My Map
Qantas always gets many comments and feelings. We have within the forum everyone from basic pax to Qantas pilots.

Having watched these perspectives over many years, I get a sense that Qantas is somehow special. Despite it being a true independent company, there seem to me to be many opinions that do not see it as such. Everything from the CEO's wage to day-to-day changes. What is it that we believe of this airline? Is it an independent company? (I think the answer is yes) But if it it is so, why do we think that it should be pax-focused rather than shareholder focused?

I understand the misgivings of employees that want the best deal. I understand the desire by pax for things that are best for them. But what I see in the whole matrix is that Qantas is somehow viewed as the beast it tries to be with its sales pitch - the "Aussie" airline. Hence the expectations. Even though it is not.

I think I realized many years ago that despite my love of the concept of a true "Aussie" airline, this is just another business. It is not a thing created for the benefit of its employees. Or the passengers. It is strictly an entity that exists to try to make money for its shareholders. All businesses in Australia are like that, but with Qantas, they get held to a different expectation.

Why are we so (as a group) so socialist when it comes to Qantas? Do we desire that entity be Aussie and of the people?

I find myself defending much of what Qantas does. But I do it from the perspective of respecting that it is a private company. I feel that many here do not see that, and are held back by the nostalgia that Qantas is a public entity. It is not, it has not been for many years.

But despite what I say in support of Qantas, I also hold the desire in my heart that it could be public company. That it could make decisions based on support for its staff and customers.

And i see as truth that this is not the real case, so everyone, again from pax to pilots, will just get constantly disappointed.

Qantas is a company. They are not a public service. If there was scope for something better, it would have appeared.
 

Happy Trails

Established Member
AFF Supporter
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
2,367
But if it it is so, why do we think that it should be pax-focused rather than shareholder focused?
I dunno, perhaps 'cause the CEO keeps coming out with statements like these:

"Qantas always puts the customer first and we will take a lead role, working with our industry partners, in ensuring that service standards meet public expectations," he said.


And if we weren't putting the customer first, and weren't trying to figure out how to improve all the time, and come up with new service, and lead with innovation, we have no right to exist.

 
Last edited:

N860CR

Established Member
AFF Supporter
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
3,400
Flights
My Map
A better question is why do people defend it so much?

As a whole, this is a company that has little regard for its customers. Backend support is terrible, customer care is non-existent... the list goes on.

I was once a Qantas sheep but I must say that now I’ve moved on, I do see that many airlines actually run as decent businesses.

You’re spot on. They are not a public service or government department, so we should expect them to provide a competitive service. On an international scale at least, they simply do not.
 

TomCC

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Messages
39
There a certainly a handful here who will start foaming at the mouth at the mere mention of their name.

From my perspective, and I certainly do not fly so much as others but can't say they have let me down over the half dozen years or so of commencing work. I have found them to be very reliable in terms of timing (for context tend to be consistently travelling through PER, MEL, DRW, SYD and various smaller airports in the Pilbara, WA) and while I guess it's all subjectiveI have perceived their level of service to be above Virgin whenever I have flown them. Internationally have not done a whole lot of trips, but found their business offerings from Perth-Singapore and Sydney-Tokyo to be excellent. As I said, my international flying experience isn't all that extensive but as a comparison point Emirates and JAL business class were both of similar standard - all good experiences but not a lot differentiating them.

Any case, it's always the cool thing to be seen to be railing against the biggest player in the local game. I can see though how someone coming from the perspective of the constant experience of highly commoditised cattle runs from MEL-SYD might have a more jaded view.
 

MEL_Traveller

Enthusiast
AFF Supporter
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
19,509
Qantas markets itself as the flag carrier... the national carrier.

Qantas comes to the government, cap in hand, demanding taxpayer support and guarantees when things are going tough.

Fine for all the folk that say ‘Qantas must be doing ok, look at their profits’... but not so long ago they weren’t doing ok. Yet they seemed to be doing their level best to alienate anyone that wasn’t considered ‘worthy’ to fly them (anyone without status pretty much).

Once you start demanding taxpayer guarantees you invite commentary from said taxpayers.
 

GPH

Senior Member
AFF Supporter
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
5,207
Flights
My Map
I pity the next poor fool who replaces AJ. Qantas under Joyce has become very profitable at the expense (IMHO) of customer satisfaction. A fairly representative range of issues are highlighted on this site every day. When the time comes and there is no option but to fix these problems (websites, call centres et al) then we shall see why profit before people isn’t such a great idea.
 

opusman

Senior Member
AFF Supporter
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
5,612
Too many "enhancements" spun as enhancements makes one a bit jaded.
 

Pushka

Enthusiast
AFF Supporter
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
15,521
Flights
My Map
Being an Australian company then Qantas will always attract more attention here than any other airline.

As for expectations - maybe it has something to do with their hyped marketing text and use of emotional hooks - coming home - and their higher charges?
 

craven morehead

Established Member
AFF Supporter
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Messages
1,697
Qantas
Gold
Virgin
Red
Flights
My Map
They play the nationalist sentiment card but then charge a premium to fly with QF is where people become pi$$ed off. I think if the Red Roo was removed the from the tail of the planes they would be judged / considered differently and possibly held to the standards we judge other airlines by. ✈
 

Vic

Active Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2017
Messages
592
Because people hold them to the expectations of their marketing. Qantas try to profit from that sentiment and the "unreal" expectations created. Why shouldn't they be held to account when they fail to live up to their marketing, the "unreal expectations" that Qantas itself has promoted?
 

esseeeayeenn

Established Member
AFF Supporter
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
2,514
Qantas
Platinum
Flights
My Map
Qantas always gets many comments and feelings. We have within the forum everyone from basic pax to Qantas pilots.

Having watched these perspectives over many years, I get a sense that Qantas is somehow special. Despite it being a true independent company, there seem to me to be many opinions that do not see it as such. Everything from the CEO's wage to day-to-day changes. What is it that we believe of this airline? Is it an independent company? (I think the answer is yes) But if it it is so, why do we think that it should be pax-focused rather than shareholder focused?

I understand the misgivings of employees that want the best deal. I understand the desire by pax for things that are best for them. But what I see in the whole matrix is that Qantas is somehow viewed as the beast it tries to be with its sales pitch - the "Aussie" airline. Hence the expectations. Even though it is not.

I think I realized many years ago that despite my love of the concept of a true "Aussie" airline, this is just another business. It is not a thing created for the benefit of its employees. Or the passengers. It is strictly an entity that exists to try to make money for its shareholders. All businesses in Australia are like that, but with Qantas, they get held to a different expectation.

Why are we so (as a group) so socialist when it comes to Qantas? Do we desire that entity be Aussie and of the people?

I find myself defending much of what Qantas does. But I do it from the perspective of respecting that it is a private company. I feel that many here do not see that, and are held back by the nostalgia that Qantas is a public entity. It is not, it has not been for many years.

But despite what I say in support of Qantas, I also hold the desire in my heart that it could be public company. That it could make decisions based on support for its staff and customers.

And i see as truth that this is not the real case, so everyone, again from pax to pilots, will just get constantly disappointed.

Qantas is a company. They are not a public service. If there was scope for something better, it would have appeared.
(1) An airline doesn't have to choose between being shareholder focused and being customer focused. It could focus on customers as a business strategy to increase bookings, revenue and profits and thus deliver increased value and dividends to shareholders.
(2) Many of the criticisms I have seen are not that Qantas focuses on shareholders rather than customers, but that in some respects it focuses on staff rather than customers. Issues with hand luggage in overhead lockers, and the way cabin crew in J disappear for up to an hour after take off to get the ridiculously anachronistic drinks trolley ready are two examples which spring to mind. Neither have anything to do with shareholders. Other airlines strike a different balance. The ME3 treat staff badly and indulge (premium) customers too much. CX seems to strike a good balance. Even VA is more customer focused than QF, so it's not just a national thing due to culture or workplace laws.
(3) The main reason we have different expectations is historical. Your statement that Qantas was created to benefit shareholders is not entirely true. Qantas was a true national carrier, along with TAA on domestic routes. We were its shareholders. Then TAA became Australian Airlines and then it was merged with Qantas. Finally Qantas was privatised. But the image of Qantas as a national carrier is persisting in the public consciousness, lasting longer than the "I own an airline" t-shirts.
(4) Qantas exploits this, using nationalist symbolism consistently in its marketing, so if our expectations are unrealistic, it really has created a rod for its own back.
 
Last edited:

drron

Enthusiast
AFF Supporter
Joined
Jul 4, 2002
Messages
20,423
I have no unreal expectations of QF.I prefer them over VA domestically-I only fly Y as I refuse to pay J prices domestically.I do though have QF J flights when part of an OS itinerary.I expect it to be a Ho hum boring flight and I am usually not disappointed.
As for international flights.Haven't flown QF for some years so have no expectations.
 

MEL_Traveller

Enthusiast
AFF Supporter
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Messages
19,509
Because people hold them to the expectations of their marketing. Qantas try to profit from that sentiment and the "unreal" expectations created. Why shouldn't they be held to account when they fail to live up to their marketing, the "unreal expectations" that Qantas itself has promoted?
Their marketing is totally real! If you are a platinum. Then you get the choice seats, first crack at meal choices, wines, amenity kits, headphones and PJs from business class. You get a warm welcome and an offer to have your jacket hung up. And first crack at a spare seat beside you. All of those combined bring QF economy to a really good level.

The problem is if you don’t have that status. If I fly CX or SQ economy, I know what i’m going to get. It’s not dependent on status.
 

Vic

Active Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2017
Messages
592
Their marketing is totally real! If you are a platinum.
I'm platinum with Qantas. I don't agree even considering some of the mundane bus runs I take are too short for the full range of benefits you listed. I honestly haven't received a warm welcome in a long time. They actively ignored my partner on a recent international flight, in business. (same booking etc.)

I'm not complaining, I'm in the same boat as the OP in thinking the marketing is BS. But for the less frequent flyer who buys the marketing, I can totally see why they have expectations that I might think are unrealistic. I see my treatment and I'm supposed to be semi important.
 

downgraded

Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
339
It could focus on customers as a business strategy to increase bookings, revenue and profits and thus deliver increased value and dividends to shareholders.
But does it? It has down sized aircraft and can fill them at a premium, perhaps that's the model that is best. The notion of continuous growth as the only economic model is showing signs of weakness as Australia's island state capital cities prove that a model built on continuous construction and retail growth has limits.
 

esseeeayeenn

Established Member
AFF Supporter
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
2,514
Qantas
Platinum
Flights
My Map
But does it? It has down sized aircraft and can fill them at a premium, perhaps that's the model that is best. The notion of continuous growth as the only economic model is showing signs of weakness as Australia's island state capital cities prove that a model built on continuous construction and retail growth has limits.
It was implicit in my comment that, in my view, it does not.
 

Recent Posts

AFF on Air Podcast

  • British Airways Executive Club – AIR025
    Sat, 30 Nov 2019 22:53:26 AEDT
      Many Australians join Qantas Frequent Flyer by default. But even if you fly with Qantas regularly, you could benefit by using the British Airways Executive Club frequent f ...
  • Married Segments & More – AIR024
    Sat, 16 Nov 2019 04:32:20 AEDT
      Airlines seem to love married segments, but for frequent flyers and travel agents they can be extremely frustrating. Sometimes you'll find an award seat on a flight you w ...
  • HARS (Historic Aircraft Restoration Society) – AIR023
    Sat, 02 Nov 2019 13:24:03 AEDT
      The Historic Aircraft Restoration Society (HARS) boasts a collection of over 60 aircraft, including a retired Qantas 747, Super Constellation and DC-3s. John Travolta's Bo ...
  • “Hidden City” Court Case – AIR022
    Sat, 19 Oct 2019 09:30:46 AEDT
      Earlier this year, German airline Lufthansa tried to sue a passenger that exploited the loophole of hidden-city ticketing by skipping the last flight on their ticket. This ...
  • Summer in Europe – AIR021
    Sat, 05 Oct 2019 17:28:53 AEST
      Qantas and Virgin Australia are fighting over two rare and lucrative new landing slots for Tokyo's Haneda Airport. Meanwhile, four European airlines have gone bankrupt in ...

Community Statistics

Threads
83,973
Messages
1,955,029
Members
51,419
Latest member
Kelcan
Top