Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Financial Crisis Hits Qantas  
User currently offlineREALDEAL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 13040 times:

sales below targets across all classes ...

NZ & BKK routes faring badly

numbers UK & US down

especially 3 to 5 months hence

in today(Tue 21OCt Brisbane Courier Mail newspaper page 55)

No surprises here, but what can they do on routes such as BNE/LAX.

One flight a day, can hardly downsize aircraft (744-400), although could make a few flights a week via AKL.

SYD/LAX they could cut number of flights per day

MEL/LAX could possibly make the 1 stop service a change of aircraft in AKL, ie. 744 operates AKL/LAX/AKL & much smaller aircraft MEL/AKL/MEL ie. smaller than 332

64 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCastropRauxel From Germany, joined Sep 2008, 466 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 12988 times:

I think QF biggest problem, is that it's mainly O&D carrier. technically, with the geographical location of Australia, the only place QF can connect passengers to/from is New Zealand (NZ, btw, has the same problem). it's hard to work under this limitation simply because every new carrier opening a route to Australia, will take another chunk of the revenue. I guess their hope now is that the A380 will give them an edge; but then again, not only to them but also to all other A380 carriers flying to Australia.

User currently offlineREALDEAL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 12867 times:

with all these A380's coming online, QF, SQ, EK etc. we think QF might need to park some 744's or does it have any it can return to leasees?

Trying to sell them now would not yield very much, so they might be better holding onto to them.

Did notice QF is using 743's MEL/AKL/LAX. Maye these will be finally retired when more A380's comeonline very soon.


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21413 posts, RR: 60
Reply 3, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 12776 times:



Quoting REALDEAL (Thread starter):
One flight a day, can hardly downsize aircraft (744-400), although could make a few flights a week via AKL.

If only they had 777s…  Wink



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5551 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 12672 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
Quoting REALDEAL (Thread starter):One flight a day, can hardly downsize aircraft (744-400), although could make a few flights a week via AKL.

If only they had 777s…  

If only Boeing had been on time with the B787  sigh 

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineA350 From Germany, joined Nov 2004, 1100 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 12574 times:

Arent't some of QF's 744s in the right age for a freighter conversion anyway? Then they can be sent to the dessert with a limited financial loss. A handful of leased A343s may be a good interim solution. They offer reduced capacity and nice commonality to the A330s and can go when the Dreamliners arrive or the Jumbos are called back.

Just my  twocents 

A350



Photography - the art of observing, not the art of arranging
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21413 posts, RR: 60
Reply 6, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 12537 times:



Quoting Gemuser (Reply 4):
If only Boeing had been on time with the B787

They wouldn't have any even then. JQ would just be getting their first.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineGarethW From New Zealand, joined Apr 2006, 308 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 12315 times:



Quoting REALDEAL (Reply 2):
Did notice QF is using 743's MEL/AKL/LAX. Maye these will be finally retired when more A380's comeonline very soon.

I'm sure you knew this, we've been discussing it in the Aus Av forum for at least a year! I believe the consensus is that they will be gone by Jan when there are enough 744s again to take over the QF25/26 daily, ergo, due to A380 arrivals.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
If only they had 777s…

Very well said sir, but let's not get into that again!



How good is it?
User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5551 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 12298 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 6):
They wouldn't have any even then. JQ would just be getting their first.

JQ would have their 2 or 3rd by the end of this month. Don't think it would be hard to swap them around within the group if it was required by business conditions. A damm sight easier than introducing a new type your best analysis says you didn't need.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4773 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 12282 times:



Quoting REALDEAL (Thread starter):
One flight a day, can hardly downsize aircraft (744-400),

They could take it back to 5-6 weekly, at least until VA starts up BNE-LAX (which with their delays is looking like it might be some time now).

Quoting REALDEAL (Thread starter):

MEL/LAX could possibly make the 1 stop service a change of aircraft in AKL, ie. 744 operates AKL/LAX/AKL & much smaller aircraft MEL/AKL/MEL ie. smaller than 332

That just isn't really on the cards as it is a pain for the pax, also QF does quite well with the cargo revenue to MEL since the aircraft doesn't have to carry much fuel. Keeping it on alternating days between 744 and A332 (MEL-AKL-LAX) could be a longer term possibility... AKL-LAX loads seem to be dropping considerably not only for QF but for other carriers such as NZ, TN, FJ.

Quoting REALDEAL (Reply 2):
Did notice QF is using 743's MEL/AKL/LAX. Maye these will be finally retired when more A380's comeonline very soon.

Unless something quite unexpected happens, they will be retired by the end of this year definantly! The delay to the A380 is the reason why they are still around, with 3xA380 in service by the end of the year for QF then there is no need to keep the 743s especially with the downturn in demand and the extra capacity of the A332s. Another factor is that if QF wanted to keep flying the 743 into next year, it would have problems with crew currency as there are no longer techcrew training facilities for the 743...they would have to go to the UK most likely to do this...



54 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineSydscott From Australia, joined Oct 2003, 2805 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 12140 times:



Quoting REALDEAL (Thread starter):
SYD/LAX they could cut number of flights per day

I thought that the plan was always to reduce SYD-LAX down to twice daily from its current level once more A380's arrived. A downturn in demand would see this happen sooner.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 9):
Keeping it on alternating days between 744 and A332 (MEL-AKL-LAX) could be a longer term possibility... AKL-LAX loads seem to be dropping considerably not only for QF but for other carriers such as NZ, TN, FJ.

MEL-AKL-LAX seems to be a prime candidate for the 787 once they arrive for QF mainline. The interesting thing about the financial crisis is that it might make more sense for QF to introduce some early 787's into mainline service, instead of JQ, to drop capacity on some 744 routes and keep yields up.

Quoting REALDEAL (Thread starter):
No surprises here, but what can they do on routes such as BNE/LAX.

They could probably get away with reducing BNE-LAX by a couple of services and re-routing people via SYD or AKL. With V Australia coming in this could be a way to manage capacity although it now looks like DJ has picked the absolute worse time to start a new long haul carrier!


User currently offlineCharles79 From Puerto Rico, joined Mar 2007, 1321 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 11351 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
If only they had 777s…

 Confused

Not sure how that plays into their current situation. The problem is not the aircraft type perse, is the lack of passengers. If anything, something closer in size to A332/763 would make more sense as the 777 might still be too large for some routes. Or do what I think they might do and consolidate some frequencies into one single A380/744 service. Either way, their situation is not unique, all airlines are feeling the squeeze, with or without 777s (or whatever type of a/c one thinks is best).


User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4679 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks ago) and read 11006 times:



Quoting REALDEAL (Reply 2):
Did notice QF is using 743's MEL/AKL/LAX. Maye these will be finally retired when more A380's comeonline very soon.

The B743 is operating the QF005 tomorrow (22nd Oct)...! Let's not forget the problem with Qantas at this present moment is the fact expansion has been given the go ahead with plans to have approximately 8 A380 frames in service by now allowing the early retirement of the ageing B743 fleet however unexpectly the A380 delay occured...

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
If only they had 777s…

YES, thats right ONLY if they had 777s  Sad

Quoting A350 (Reply 5):
A handful of leased A343s may be a good interim solution.

WHY...? Qantas pretty much own the B744 fleet... Leasing aircraft just doesnt make any sense to me...

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21413 posts, RR: 60
Reply 13, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 10874 times:



Quoting Gemuser (Reply 8):
JQ would have their 2 or 3rd by the end of this month. Don't think it would be hard to swap them around within the group if it was required by business conditions.

It sure would be hard to do.

Different crews, different configuration, different service level.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineSunriseValley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4603 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 10822 times:

I object to the title of the thread ! There is absolutely no justification for a title as blatantly false as this.
REALDEAL , this term applies to the likes of Alitalia not QF. There is no reason to believe that QF will not turn a profit, ableit smaller, but to use terminology that suggests that their capital has been eroded to zilch is irresponsible.
I would expect to read this sort of headline in a N.Z. newspaper on aviation matters.


User currently offlineJfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8089 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 10317 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Given the links to LHR and LAX Qantas operates, there is no smaller plane then teh A330-200. Since it has few in teh fleet its not really viable on more then one route. Reducing flight frequency is really option QF has, 744 are the planes they operate to LAX so one reduction daily would help. Reducing Business Class fares from teh $ 18,000 for a roundtrip might help too. People will pay 5,000 or 7,500 but the price of a new honds is too high.

User currently offlineManfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 9781 times:



Quoting REALDEAL (Reply 2):
with all these A380's coming online

In all honesty, if upper managment see this as being a long term downfall in pax loads, the best thing would be to cancel the rest of their 380 orders and switch them to 330's.

Think about it....it really is the most logical thing to do. The last thing an airline wants when numbers are down is a fleet of VLA's that are only half full. Dangerous proposition no matter how you cut it.



757: The last of the best
User currently offline413X3 From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 1983 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 8842 times:

Why would they cancel the A380 order? By reducing the amount of airplanes required for a route by having only 1 A380 instead of 2 744's 3/4th full as an example, you are helping your profits, not hurting.

User currently offlineCOFanNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 8760 times:



Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 14):
I object to the title of the thread ! There is absolutely no justification for a title as blatantly false as this.

??

The current worldwide financial crisis (and it's a bit tough at this point to argue that there isn't one) has impacted Qantas just like it has impacted all carriers. This thread specifically discusses the impact of the current financial market on Qantas.

Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 14):
but to use terminology that suggests that their capital has been eroded to zilch is irresponsible

I don't see where this is implied. Qantas isn't in a financial crisis, the worldwide financial crisis is hitting Qantas.


User currently offlineJAAlbert From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1491 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 8403 times:

On a brighter side to us passengers -- perhaps we'll see some good deals to SYD this spring!

User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6286 posts, RR: 54
Reply 20, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 7717 times:

All businesses have ups and downs. When you have ups, you put money in the bank in order to ride through downs and prepare for next up.

That's how most industries run. But for some unknown reason the airline industry always tended to have another philosophy: During ups you scrape by and maybe even pay a minor profit to the shareholders. During downs you produce irrecoverable debts and lay off the employees who should prepare for next up.

But is the so called economic crisis the only reason? Maybe it could be a combination of two or more reasons.

For fifty years QF was riding on top of "Our flight iron is top-notch, we never do stupid things".

I mean, blowing a big hole in a 747 fuselage, that happens from time to time, even in the best family. But QF should have chosen to do that (and other minor things) when the world press was busy 25 hours a day covering a world wide crisis, or even better, an escalating war in Caucasus or whereever. They didn't do that. They blew that hole while ten million journalists were starved almost to dead and day by day had to fill their newspapers with reprints of twenty years old cartoons and little else.

The result is that QF is now busy telling potential customers that QF is "no less safe" than other airlines flying to and from OZ.

I don't think that anybody today is specially scared of flying with QF. But until lately the situation was different. If people were a little scared of flying in general (much people are), then they would often automatically choose QF because "We never do stupid things". Those people now flip a coin or choose which carrier has the most fit schedule instead of insisting on QF.

The halo has faded. As long as those poster size newspaper pictures and artificially loooong TV reports of the hole in the jumbo haven't been forgotten, then the "We never make stupid things" ads won't work.

It should in fact work the other way around. Because sure QF 747s have now been inspected for preventing future holes in the fuselage better than any other 747s.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineYULWinterSkies From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2169 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 7611 times:



Quoting CastropRauxel (Reply 1):
I think QF biggest problem, is that it's mainly O&D carrier.

Well, i thought that would have been an advantage. Aren't airlines making most of their revenue on o&d flights instead of flights full of connecting pax?



When I doubt... go running!
User currently offlineF27friend From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 29 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 7397 times:



Quoting Sydscott (Reply 10):
MEL-AKL-LAX seems to be a prime candidate for the 787 once they arrive for QF mainline. The interesting thing about the financial crisis is that it might make more sense for QF to introduce some early 787's into mainline service, instead of JQ, to drop capacity on some 744 routes and keep yields up.

Wouldn't be interesting if they (QF/JQ) did a swap 787 to QF and 744 to JQ? Esp. for longhaul JQ routes like HNL, TYO, OSA, BKK? Bit hard to get a 744 out of OOL though.



F27 & F28 Fan
User currently offlineAerorobNZ From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 6897 posts, RR: 13
Reply 23, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 7290 times:



Quoting REALDEAL (Thread starter):
NZ & BKK routes faring badly

No surprises. QF has chronic delays through AKL for QF25 in particular, but also QF190 and a very dated interior product. No money can be made when you offload all your pax to your competitor and operate the flight up to LAX without pax as they did the other night.


User currently offlineGemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5551 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 6631 times:



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 13):
It sure would be hard to do.

Different crews, different configuration, different service level.

No, not really!

The only thing requiring time to change is the internal configuration. Which would take a few weeks at the most, probably less.

The crewing is irrelevant. JQ technical crews can operate them, if necessary, cabin crew can be put through the JQ training course. There are no labour agreements in place to prevent this, although QF pilots might object some, but not a lot as they know that they will ALL end up JQ pilots if they push managemnet too far.

IF the board of the QF Group decided to make this change in response to the current finincial crisis then it could be implemented relatively quickly, not overnight, but certainly within the three months from beginning of August to end October, maybe faster.

Still at the end MUCH easier and cheaper than introducing a new type that your best analysis said you didn't need.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
25 Kent350787 : Which would be the 787, wouldn't it? And as for reducing capacity, surely reducing frequency is the way to go about it rather than buying new metal t
26 DxBrian : Go to the QANTAS website. They are offering sales now with the introduction of the A380. I think the current promotions are now thru Nov 17 and in May
27 6thfreedom : That's the multi billion dollar question, and if anyone knew how long this strom would last, then they would make themselves billions... 6 months ago
28 ANstar : Reduce frequency - it hasn't been daily that long. QF could write off the Manilla 747, retire 743's etc etc reduce frequency on some LAX routes. That
29 REALDEAL : don't blame the messenger ... that was the article title in the paper 330's don't have the range !!!
30 EK413 : And damage Qantas reputation by writing off their first aircraft... Fat chance of that happening... EK413
31 TN486 : IMHO the thread title should read The Global Financial Crisis Hits Qantas. When I first saw the thread starter I thought "Oh Oh". So yeah, I suppose
32 Ken777 : Qantas, like other airlines, are going to have to be good at balancing prices and aircraft flying various routes in order to maximize their profits, o
33 ANstar : LoL... I think it is a bit late! Their reputation ha salready been damaged. Who is going to care if that aircraft doesn't enter service again? It owu
34 Astuteman : Trouble is, you've got posters on here deciding unilaterally on here what those numbers are going to be, when the people with the best data are the a
35 CastropRauxel : Just think where LH/LX, AF/KL and BA would be if they did O&D only.
36 Decromin : NOt sure why this would make any difference ... I thought I read that the cost to repair the damage was being covered by insurance - I suspect the ex
37 Travelhound : I thought Geoff Dixon said it was only going to take around $10 million to repair. Probably worth the spend at that price. I suppose we will have to
38 Post contains links VHVXB : recent article published by the Australian said average LF on SIN-SYD was 90%. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...ory/0,28124,24506693-23349,00.h
39 ANstar : Yes - but if insurance is paying them a certain amount of $$$$ and they are alos looking to retire 747's due to A380 deliveries, surely they could ta
40 Decromin : Depends on the value before and after the repairs, the lenght of time out of service, and the money that could be earned in the next 2 years of opera
41 CPDC10-30 : Not strictly true - I've enjoyed their service on LHR-HKG and they also offer LHR-SIN and LHR-BKK. The A332 should allow them enough flexibility to s
42 Baroque : I must admit I laughed when I saw the thread title, not at QFs current woes, but thinking what the title would have been if the buyout had gone ahead
43 Astuteman : Only 425 pax on each flight on average? Positively screams out for a downsize.......... Rgds
44 Prebennorholm : It depends. The insurance company will pay either the repair, or they will pay the market value of similar good plane and take over the damaged plane
45 CastropRauxel : ...en route to Australia, and if the aircarft could have managed the direct flight without a stopover, this wouldn't even be happening. Apart from th
46 Travelhound : Yes, but isn't it common practice for engines, interiors and fuselage to be separated in insurance policies / financing / etc. From where I am sittin
47 Baroque : That could well have been the optimistic version. As it is, the 787 is suddenly costing close to 50% more than it was 3 months ago which presumably w
48 ANstar : Whilst the currency has moved alot in the last month or so, it was only at 0.75 US when the 787 order was placed, so no where near as dramatic. The A
49 Baroque : True but that 0.75c was about half way up what turned out to be a hump rather than the linear trend it seemed to be on its long journey from under 50
50 Gemuser : BUT QF have a considerable portion of their income and day to day expenses in $US, E & GBP so the effect of the $A rate is different for them. They a
51 Baroque : No argument there, but it is still likely that even with all their internal and external protective systems, the stunning drop in the A$ will have al
52 Prebennorholm : It doesn't matter how many insurance companies are involved on the whole plane. The insurance company, which carries the fuselage, will have to pay w
53 ANstar : There is an SMH article that says they are hedged at .80 US cents for currency on all their new aircraft purchases.
54 EK413 : Havent seen any updated images of OJK, would be interested to see the progress... With a shortage of longhaul frames I doubt QF would scrap OJK, just
55 Airnewzealand : Most of our aircrats are still going out full... Especially SIN/Aussie-LAX/JNB/LHR/FRA. Tasmans are very low at the moment. I recently operated a flig
56 ANstar : Exactly! And all the new orders can be used to replace aircraft pretty much 1 for 1 if need be.
57 Post contains links and images ANstar : Pic was taken 7th September - so about a month and a half after the incident. Doesn't look like much is going on to me! Also the news form a week or
58 SunriseValley : Believe the delay is due to the time necessary for Boeing to supply the replacement panel.
59 NA : I thought OJK´s repair is almost done. When is QF retiring the 763s? Some of these are getting old, too, like VH-ZXA, ZXB or -OGA. The 762s were wfu,
60 ANstar : So I presume the Boeing strike is causing delays on this? I believe they were due to stand down one 767from flying duties this quarter (as per their
61 Baroque : Ouch. Looks as if they should rename it the Norman W Gunston - the Little Aussie Bleeder, the W being of course for Wollongong, his other name being
62 REALDEAL : this idea a bit out of left field, but ... could QF push some of their older aircraft onto FJ ? QF owns something like 46% of FJ & many of FJ's costs
63 ANstar : I reckon the FJ/QF partnership is not on the best terms at the moment.
64 REALDEAL : yes but doubt if anyone would be buying QFs 46% share at anything other than giveaway prices, so they might be stuck with each other. Also, the last
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Crisis At Qantas Over A380 Delay? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 20:18:17 by AerospaceFan
Impact Of TZ's Financial Crisis On MDW? posted Wed Aug 25 2004 15:55:41 by Leelaw
Another Strike Hits Qantas posted Mon Aug 19 2002 12:54:28 by Singapore_Air
Emirates Hits Back At Qantas Claims posted Tue Nov 8 2005 13:30:09 by Dxb
Qantas Grip On US 'hits Tourism' posted Sat Dec 13 2003 20:28:10 by Flyinghighboy
Qantas Hits Back At Virgin! posted Fri Jul 18 2003 15:51:55 by Beno
Financial Times Spells "Qantas" Wrong posted Fri Nov 16 2001 19:45:17 by Singapore_Air
Qantas 333 Incident! posted Tue Oct 14 2008 12:27:15 by Plairbus
Icelandair Economic Position & Iceland Crisis? posted Sun Oct 12 2008 10:43:58 by Oa260
AA908 Hits Turbulence: Six Hospitalized posted Fri Oct 10 2008 19:09:44 by LVTMB