Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
QF Separates International & Domestic Ops  
User currently offlineQFVHOQA From Australia, joined Mar 2012, 445 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 11855 times:

According to the Sydney Morning Herald, QF will split QF international and QF domestic into two separate "businesses". Whether this means they will be separately listed remains to be seen.

Quote:
"Formally separating the management of Qantas International and Qantas Domestic will ensure that we can independently run each business according to its specific priorities and market conditions," Mr Joyce said in a statement.

Full article: http://www.smh.com.au/business/qanta...national-wings-20120522-1z25o.html

The Qantas Sale Act will prevent QF from doing the same as VA did when it split into separate companies. Any airline operating under the Qantas name needs to be majority Australian owned. This seems to just be creating extra costs by duplicating a lot of management roles.

67 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJackbr From Australia, joined Dec 2009, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 11625 times:

Leading on from a thread I started earlier - could this mean the complete removal of LH Cabin Crew from any domestic flights?

User currently offlinelegs From Australia, joined Jun 2006, 240 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 11544 times:

Quoting QFVHOQA (Thread starter):
creating extra costs by duplicating a lot of management roles.

Not only that, but how will Qantas International restructure in order to arrest their loss making ways of recent years?


User currently offlinesmi0006 From Australia, joined Jan 2008, 1533 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 11142 times:

I conceded I have minimal business understanding of these complexities but a few questions stand out for me; How will this impact international aircraft operating domestically? How will these resources be shared between the two business? What percentage of domestic flights are operated by internationally configured A330s and 747s?

How can two business that are very much intertwined be operated independently?

Qantas have stated that they only want to invest in the profitable growth areas of the business, whilst this has previously been JQ, as domestic seems to be preforming very well- can we now see as previously rumoured 787s going to domestic sooner?

Interesting development regardless! Shall be watching to see if this has an impact. I do hope it does.


User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 11014 times:

Would this help Joyce to portray QF international as a loss maker and lobby for a sell off to a foreign investor? There are already assertions that the accounting in the Group favours JQ in terms of costs.


When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlinepeanuts From Netherlands, joined Dec 2009, 1438 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 10950 times:

I'm sure this all makes sense to Mr. Joyce somehow. For others it's just more shuffling of deck chairs...


Question Conventional Wisdom. While not all commonly held beliefs are wrong…all should be questioned.
User currently offlinestrangr From Australia, joined Apr 2012, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 10866 times:

QF International to become Jetstar?

This would then mean it can bypass the 50% Australian ownership rules, no?


User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5580 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 10823 times:

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 4):
lobby for a sell off to a foreign investor?

I'm sure that he would like to do that, but...

Quoting QFVHOQA (Thread starter):
The Qantas Sale Act will prevent QF from doing the same as VA did when it split into separate companies. Any airline operating under the Qantas name needs to be majority Australian owned.

It isn't possible.



(any allegations of creative accounting in JQ's favour are just that: allegations)

Quoting peanuts (Reply 5):
I'm sure this all makes sense to Mr. Joyce somehow. For others it's just more shuffling of deck chairs...

I agree. There must be some kind of internal logic, but from the outside there doesn't appear to be any at all.

As others have already said, the two parts of the business are too inextricably linked. Indeed right now we have a thread about LH crews operating SH. Further they've just announced that they will be re-adding the 747 on SYD-PER. That would have to be operated by LH crews and using an international aircraft, even if they were able to separate the rest the operations into PMTN and PMQF.

[Edited 2012-05-22 00:43:43]

[Edited 2012-05-22 00:49:57]


Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineAirNiugini From Australia, joined Mar 2010, 235 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 10823 times:

Isn't Virgin Australia doing something like this to bypass ownership regulations?

Hopefully QF international can start pulling some decent figures to ensure it's survival.

Quoting smi0006 (Reply 3):
How can two business that are very much intertwined be operated independently?

It might just be in a managerial sense. Operationally speaking, I'm sure not too much will change.


User currently offlineFlyboyOz From Australia, joined Nov 2000, 1986 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 10775 times:

Quoting strangr (Reply 6):
QF International to become Jetstar?

I hope NOT! or ...QF international to become RedQ?



The Spirit of AustraliAN - Longreach
User currently offlineAirNiugini From Australia, joined Mar 2010, 235 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 10744 times:

Quoting FlyboyOz (Reply 9):

I reckon... Hopefully they fight hard for the international sides survival... I think the small international footprint could not possibly get any smaller, I hope we see some growth in mainline QF international services soon.


User currently offlineJackbr From Australia, joined Dec 2009, 666 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 10728 times:

It could be just like TAA again...

User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 10620 times:

Quoting smi0006 (Reply 3):
How will this impact international aircraft operating domestically?
Quoting smi0006 (Reply 3):
How will these resources be shared between the two business?
Quoting smi0006 (Reply 3):
What percentage of domestic flights are operated by internationally configured A330s and 747s?
Quoting smi0006 (Reply 3):
How can two business that are very much intertwined be operated independently?

I expect that there will be virtually no change to how things are run today. The only changes are that the group is now officially appointing a CEO for the International/Domestic arms and there will be two sets of figures in the Annual Reports where there used to be one.

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 4):
Would this help Joyce to portray QF international as a loss maker and lobby for a sell off to a foreign investor? There are already assertions that the accounting in the Group favours JQ in terms of costs.

Any Australian International airline has to remain Australian owned. It's the domestic arm that VA has opened up to foreign ownership. So this move cannot be designed to flog off the foreign arm...

In any case, as RyanairGuru pointed out, the QF Sales Act restricts QF from using the same ownership laws as VA.

Quoting peanuts (Reply 5):
For others it's just more shuffling of deck chairs...

I find myself leaning towards this view. This is about creating a clear accountability for different parts of the business and setting up a more structured corporate structure.

Hopefully having dedicated arms will allow the respective businesses to better focus on their market/business as an independent entity, without having every single decision negotiated with the respective executives. This should create better results...


User currently offlineAusA380 From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 310 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 10545 times:

It will be really interesting to see how corporate costs and IT etc are allocated to the different "portfolio entities".

User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5580 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10506 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 12):
The only changes are that the group is now officially appointing a CEO for the International/Domestic arms and there will be two sets of figures in the Annual Reports where there used to be one.

I'm leaning towards this view, but I have to question how they will split costs on the balance sheet.

Will QFD nominally "lease" the international 747s, 330s and 767s used on domestic routes from QFI? Or will QFD collect the revenue and QFI pick up the tab? If it's the latter then that is clearly an attempt to inflate QFD's profits and QFI's losses.

The same applies to QFI crew on QFD aircraft - all the 767 pilots are LH, and some SH aircraft operating domestic flights are crewed by LH FAs. Does QFD pay QFI to "contract" that labour? Again, if not then that is passing the labour costs to QFI but keeping all the revenue in QFD.

I guess it does go both ways: QFD aircraft are used on the Tasman routes (albeit crewed by JetConnect) and Noumea - but those two markets are still sufficiently small that there will be a net "loss" for QFI if there isn't some form of leasing/contract agreement.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10365 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 14):

I imagine the splitting of costs will occur in the same way as they do internally today -- QF already reports separate domestic/international profit figures, so they must be splitting the costs somehow in their financing as it is.

It will be really interesting to read through the first financial reports next February, hopefully we will be able to get some idea of the processes QF uses... It would be very interesting if there was a substantial change in the profit distribution (ie showing that QF has been unfairly attributing costs to International).


User currently offlinestrangr From Australia, joined Apr 2012, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10328 times:

I think as it stands at the moment the sale act is preventing Qantas being a profitable business. This act was struck if i am not mistaken when TAA was sold (a government owner) to a private company.

The only way I can see QF becoming profitable at present is for them to sell something. Other then that i believe the aim is to run them lower and lower until something switches, they could have a sale act that states certain things like Must remain Qantas Name, Must remain with the Flying Roo, must have x employees from australia.


User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5580 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 10294 times:

Quoting strangr (Reply 16):
This act was struck if i am not mistaken when TAA was sold (a government owner) to a private company.

TAA and Qantas were both government owned. The government merged their two entities and sold the resulting company (which - as we all know - maintained the QF name)


Re qf002 - true, I'd forgotten that they already give profit figures for both halves of the business. I guess this dispels my questions since splitting the company would make it harder to hide cross-subsidisation.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 10135 times:

Quoting strangr (Reply 16):
I think as it stands at the moment the sale act is preventing Qantas being a profitable business.

   It's ridiculous that a private company can be so heavily restricted by the government in the supposedly open/free market that the rest of the industry enjoys.


User currently offlinevhtje From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2009, 373 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 10072 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting qf002 (Reply 18):
It's ridiculous that a private company can be so heavily restricted by the government in the supposedly open/free market that the rest of the industry enjoys.

Fine. You get elected parliament and be the politician brave enough to introduce an amendment to the Qantas Sale Act that allows Qantas to be majority foreign-owned. Or be the politician brave enough to scupper the Qantas Sale Act in its entirety.

Look - I am not saying you're wrong, nor am I saying that the Qantas Sale Act is fair and doesn't hinder Qantas' performance - I'm just pointing out that no politician will ever allow it to be changed. Can you imagine the public outcry and consequential political fallout if was changed?

Public opinion may change in the future, who knows, but the time certainly isn't now.


User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6431 posts, RR: 38
Reply 20, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 10010 times:

Quoting strangr (Reply 16):
I think as it stands at the moment the sale act is preventing Qantas being a profitable business.

What does the ability to sell a higher percentage of an airline to foreigners have in common with being a profitable business?



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 9936 times:

Quoting vhtje (Reply 19):
I'm just pointing out that no politician will ever allow it to be changed. Can you imagine the public outcry and consequential political fallout if was changed?

100% agree.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 20):
What does the ability to sell a higher percentage of an airline to foreigners have in common with being a profitable business?

The QF Sales Act goes much, much further than foreign ownership... It also dictates restrictions on things like the location of "the principal operational centre for Qantas" (the majority of facilities that facilitate international services -- things like mx, catering etc -- have to be in Australia), the nationality of it's directors, the location of the HQ etc.

It really does restrict their ability to cut costs in the same way other airlines.


User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5664 posts, RR: 6
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9836 times:

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 20):
What does the ability to sell a higher percentage of an airline to foreigners have in common with being a profitable business?

The problem is the small size of the Australian capital markets. QF can't effectively make a share issue, which it should, because of this. In any share issue it has to make sure that only 50% goes to non Australians, very difficult in practice and the Australian probably couldn't absorb a $500 million capital raising now or in the near future.

This lack of capital, as opposed to debt is why QF has deferred the A380s and they haven't ordered more A330 etc. It is a major problem for all large Australian companies, but especially for QF with the ownership restriction other companies don't have.

IMHO QF should make a large capital raising that is under written by the Commonwealth Government, because they are preventing QF from doing it. That way if any shares are not sold on the market are paid for by the government and can be sold back on to the market slowly over time.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlineaerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9524 times:

Quoting FlyboyOz (Reply 9):
QF international to become RedQ?

RedQ operated by... Jetstar? Maybe QFI could simple contract out its operations to JQ (in QF guise) and lease them the aircraft, thereby generating lease revenue while lowering costs fairly substantially.

Convoluted sure, but possible?


User currently onlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7229 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9286 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 12):

I expect that there will be virtually no change to how things are run today. The only changes are that the group is now officially appointing a CEO for the International/Domestic arms and there will be two sets of figures in the Annual Reports where there used to be one.

In my opinion the decision is about money, if everything is going to remain the same the cost will also. I expect the international arm to start having more non-Australian Staff working at lower wages, more a/c being based outside of Australia effectively making Australian runs visit versus a return to home, a/c spend more time outside of Australia where cost may be lower, and how knows, eventually all cabin crew will be non-Australian based quite likely also at lower wages.
Does the Qantas act also state that the majority of staff be Australian?


User currently offlineQFVHOQA From Australia, joined Mar 2012, 445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9342 times:

Quoting gemuser (Reply 22):
This lack of capital, as opposed to debt is why QF has deferred the A380s and they haven't ordered more A330 etc. It is a major problem for all large Australian companies, but especially for QF with the ownership restriction other companies don't have.

I think this is the largest issue with the QF Sale Act. The inability to raise capital on foreign markets, where Asutralia is viewed as a high interest investment, greatly limits QF's ability to acquire newer aircraft. Maybe once the Australian public are faced with a choice of either a foreign owned QF or no QF international, maybe this piece or law will go out the window. Until then, Australians will continue to bash QF.

Quoting par13del (Reply 24):
I expect the international arm to start having more non-Australian Staff working at lower wages, more a/c being based outside of Australia effectively making Australian runs visit versus a return to home, a/c spend more time outside of Australia where cost may be lower, and how knows, eventually all cabin crew will be non-Australian based quite likely also at lower wages.

It would probably be cheaper for QF to have LAX based crew than SYD based crew on SYD-LAX flights. Australian wages are so high compared to other parts of the world they may go down this route eventually. HKG wages are lower too.


User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5580 posts, RR: 5
Reply 26, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 9119 times:

Quoting par13del (Reply 24):
Does the Qantas act also state that the majority of staff be Australian?

Bizarrely no.

The act does state that 66% of Directors must be Australian citizens, the company cannot be incorporated outside of Australia, and the facilities (taken in aggregate) used to support international flights must be primarily located in Australia, but there is nothing about employees.

The relevant provision of the Act is Section 7:




The articles of association of Qantas [i.e. the company constitution] must...

(a) impose restrictions on the issue, transfer and ownership (including joint ownership) of shares in Qantas so as to prevent foreign persons having relevant interests in shares in Qantas that represent, in total, more than 35% of the total value of the issued share capital of Qantas; and

(b) impose restrictions on the issue, transfer and ownership (including joint ownership) of shares in Qantas so as to prevent an individual foreign person having relevant interests in shares in Qantas that represent more than 25% of the total value of the issued share capital of Qantas; and

(e) prohibit Qantas from taking any action to bring about a change of its company name to a name that does not include the expression "Qantas"; and

(f) prohibit Qantas from conducting scheduled international air transport passenger services under a name other than:
(i) its company name; or
(ii) a registered business name that includes the expression"Qantas"; and

(g) require that the head office of Qantas always be located in Australia; and

(h) require that of the facilities, taken in aggregate, which are used by Qantas in the provision of scheduled international air transport services (for example, facilities for the maintenance and housing of aircraft, catering, flight operations, training and administration), the facilities located in Australia, when compared with those located in any other country, must represent the principal operational centre for Qantas ; and

(i) require that, at all times, at least two-thirds of the directors of Qantas are to be Australian citizens; and

(j) require that, at a meeting of the board of directors of Qantas, the director presiding at the meeting (however described) must be an Australian citizen; and

(k) prohibit Qantas, at all times, from taking any action to become incorporated outside Australia.




Note the bit about foreign ownership: it is 35% not 50%

For anyone interested the full statute can be found here: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2004A04487



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently onlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7229 posts, RR: 8
Reply 27, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 9113 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 26):
(for example, facilities for the maintenance and housing of aircraft, catering, flight operations, training and administration), the facilities located in Australia, when compared with those located in any other country, must represent the principal operational centre for Qantas

Thanks for the info, not being a lawyer I'm thinking that the word "compared" is what management might have used to get a lot of out-sourced maintenance out of the primary company. As long as they keep some services in Australia they should be ok, so no catering both ends of the flight inbound to Australia, making the dumping of lavs and possible increasing turns to allow an additional 30mins cleaning time should do the trick, one could also make some line maintenance inspections mandatory during the turn time, increasing the workload for one or two staff per turn to be in legal compliance is much cheaper than having full blown maintenance done overnight.

The next few months should bring more details to light as they need to commence getting financial gains from the change, so keep eyes open.


User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 28, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 8846 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 26):
Note the bit about foreign ownership: it is 35% not 50%

The legislation you linked to is the original form -- there have been multiple ammendments since 1992. The legislation as it stands today can be found here.

See Part 7(a)  

I find Part 7 (aa), added in 1995 from what I can tell, more interesting -- no foreign airline can own more than 35% of the company.

Quoting par13del (Reply 27):

I would suggest that the wording implies that the majority of QF's operating business must take place in Australia. So it makes sense for QF to eventually do the cheaper 51% of the stuff here and send the more expensive 49% of the work overseas.

I wonder if these restrictions will apply to the Group as a whole, or individually to the specific divisions? For example, could Domestic be a 100% Australian operation and International a 98% foreign operation? And does this restriction also apply to wholly owned QF subsidiaries, such as JQ?


User currently offlineaerorobnz From Rwanda, joined Feb 2001, 7193 posts, RR: 13
Reply 29, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 7776 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 14):
I guess it does go both ways: QFD aircraft are used on the Tasman routes

No, Jetconnect aircraft trans tasman are ZK-ZQx series. They are not domestic at all as they are NZ based.


User currently offlineBoeing773ER From United States of America, joined Dec 2011, 432 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (2 years 4 months 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 7336 times:

This is so strange, a few weeks ago I was going to make a post on here about the idea having two separate companies with the same brand name (one being the international, one being domestic)

I have no idea how this is going to play out for QF, I hope this solves all their problems.



Work Hard, Fly Right.
User currently offlinestrangr From Australia, joined Apr 2012, 110 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 5912 times:

we are seeing it at the moment with Telstra...

Wholesale and Retail Divisions, this was I believe a FORCED separation. I can understand that the government has a reasonable concern that they do not want the Australian Airline dissolved and become a misspelled Quantas "an american airlines group airline" for example

In saying that though, QF can not continue to be run the way it is, the world has changed in 20 years, the airline industry has changed much more then anyone in 1992 would have expected there was next to no real competition in 1992 (Ansett and Qantas competed but with in reason)

Now you have an aggressive VA which can do some of these things because of cheaper labor agreements. newer fleets, and the ability to have foreign money pumped into it.


User currently offlineJQflightie From Australia, joined Mar 2009, 980 posts, RR: 1
Reply 32, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4718 times:

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 23):

Very possible, they already do this with Cobham, operating as QantasLink on B717 aircraft.



Next Trip: PER-DPS-LOP-CGK-KUL-PVG-LHR, LCY-MAD-VLC, BCN-LYS-TLS-IST-JED-KUL-SGN-CAN-MEL
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4833 posts, RR: 9
Reply 33, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4592 times:

Looks like just another accounting trick to make Intl appear to be performing badly.


56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 34, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 4541 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 33):
Looks like just another accounting trick to make Intl appear to be performing badly.

If anything, quite the opposite. We will now be able to see inside all the finances for both parts of the business which will make it very hard for QF to hide domestic costs in the international column...


User currently offlineBill142 From Australia, joined Aug 2004, 8451 posts, RR: 8
Reply 35, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4276 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 34):
If anything, quite the opposite. We will now be able to see inside all the finances for both parts of the business which will make it very hard for QF to hide domestic costs in the international column...

Or Jetstars costs.


User currently offlineLHRFlyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2010, 815 posts, RR: 1
Reply 36, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 4230 times:

Quoting Boeing773ER (Reply 30):
I have no idea how this is going to play out for QF, I hope this solves all their problems.

Unless this is groundwork for a very radical restructuring I can't see how it will change anything.

The constraints of geography, fleet, regulation, and cost will all remain.


User currently offlinetravelhound From Australia, joined May 2008, 938 posts, RR: 12
Reply 37, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4034 times:

Quoting LHRFlyer (Reply 36):

My thoughts as well. With JQ, frequent flyers and their transport arm currently representing a fair proportion of QF's total turnover, it could be time for a new corporate structure. If we throw in JQ's operations in Japan and Hong Kong and RedQ into the mix than QF in 2020 could be a very different operation to what it is today.

I'd suggest we will see a further separation of QF corporate and it's operating entities in the years to come. Exciting times for QF!


User currently offlineaerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 4
Reply 38, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3963 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 33):
Looks like just another accounting trick to make Intl appear to be performing badly.

I'm not sure publicly traded companies can employ, and get away with, accounting "tricks". Surely someone with a bit of nous would have obtained the relevant data to prove this by now, no?


User currently offlineditzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 718 posts, RR: 1
Reply 39, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3888 times:

Erroneous post. Sorry.

[Edited 2012-05-23 05:04:34]

User currently offlineQFVHOQA From Australia, joined Mar 2012, 445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3891 times:

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 38):
I'm not sure publicly traded companies can employ, and get away with, accounting "tricks". Surely someone with a bit of nous would have obtained the relevant data to prove this by now, no?

Public companies can get away with all sorts of accounting tricks, even if they are audited. Enron is a huge example, and its auditors Arthur Andersen went out of business for overseeing Enron's lies.


User currently offlineditzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 718 posts, RR: 1
Reply 41, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3889 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 14):
QFD aircraft are used on the Tasman routes (albeit crewed by JetConnect)

Tasman flights using VH-registered aircraft (of which there are many) are operated by QAL pilots and cabin crew.


User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 42, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3864 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 12):
Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 4):
Would this help Joyce to portray QF international as a loss maker and lobby for a sell off to a foreign investor? There are already assertions that the accounting in the Group favours JQ in terms of costs.

Any Australian International airline has to remain Australian owned. It's the domestic arm that VA has opened up to foreign ownership. So this move cannot be designed to flog off the foreign arm...

I said "Lobby" (i.e. the government remove obstacles) to sell to a foreign interest.

Joyce ONLY knows and therefore enjoys running an LCC. QF international is not his game and as a non-Australian probably has no sentimental or cutural attachement to the brand. Succeeding at what he knows means sooner or later, getting QF international of his plate...



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5580 posts, RR: 5
Reply 43, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3779 times:

Quoting ditzyboy (Reply 41):
Tasman flights using VH-registered aircraft (of which there are many) are operated by QAL pilots and cabin crew.

Oh really? I didn't realise that, sorry



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 44, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3751 times:

Quoting ditzyboy (Reply 41):
Tasman flights using VH-registered aircraft (of which there are many) are operated by QAL pilots and cabin crew.

It's actually very rare to see VH aircraft on the Tasman, aside from those few flights that are actually operated by QF rather than Jetconnect. As it stands, QF121 SYD-ZQN is still operated by QF, so uses VH aircraft and QF141 (used to be tied into the A332) has continued to be operated by QF, using VH aircraft. If Jetconnect gets another 738 then I'd expect both these flights to be transferred to NZ operation.

But as it stands, there are only 9 (out of 110+) weekly Tasman flights operated by VH aircraft.

There has only been 1 flight this month where a VH aircraft has operated where a ZK plane usually would. A cursory glance through April tells a very similar story.

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 42):
Joyce ONLY knows and therefore enjoys running an LCC. QF international is not his game and as a non-Australian probably has no sentimental or cutural attachement to the brand. Succeeding at what he knows means sooner or later, getting QF international of his plate...

Can I ask where this AJ = LCC attitude comes from (not just you, OzGlobal -- a lot of people bring it up)?

He worked for EI in the period 1988-1996, long before it became a LCC.

He worked for both AN and QF from 1996 till 2003, neither of which can be described as LCC's. From what I can tell, his only association with LCC's is his 5 year stint as CEO of JQ.

How, therefore, can it be said that he only knows and enjoys running LCC's? In his 24 year career in the industry, only 5 have been in a role within a LCC.

I would consider myself to have a very strong sentimental and cultural attachment to the QF brand, and I moved to this country from the UK in the same year as AJ. We even became Australian citizens in the same year -- 2003.

If AJ wanted to shut down QF International, then he would just do it. He's shown that he's willing to do radical things for the overall benefit of the company in the past, so why not just cancel orders, sell planes and shut it all down?

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 42):
I said "Lobby" (i.e. the government remove obstacles) to sell to a foreign interest.

My apologies. To answer this specific question, not at all. Even if the QF Sales Act was to be thrown out (also not going to happen), the Corporations Act 2001 has heavy guidelines around foreign ownership (these laws also apply to VA and any other Australian company).


User currently offlineADent From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1386 posts, RR: 2
Reply 45, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3549 times:

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 38):
I'm not sure publicly traded companies can employ, and get away with, accounting "tricks". Surely someone with a bit of nous would have obtained the relevant data to prove this by now, no?

Huh???

It is said every company keeps 3 sets of books. 1 maximizing profits and shown to the investors. 1 maximizing losses to shown to the tax authorities. And the 3rd that shows the real results and shown to management.

There are many fully legal ways to shift costs around and many, many rules on what is proper.



Say you have a maintenance facility that services narrow body and wide body aircraft how do you divide up the overhead costs - building repair/upgrades, lights, power, IT, property taxes, mail room, etc.

- If you have 80 NB visits and 20 WB visits maybe the overhead should be divided up 80/20.
- But the floor space is divided up 50/50, so maybe the overhead should be 50/50.
- The labor hours are split 60/40 - so split costs that way.
- Or how about we set up the facility as a separate company and make the WB cost plus - WB is too critical to outsource - and make the NB cost competitive to win and keep the work. NB runs a loss, but since WB is cost plus those costs go up.
- Sell the facility and lease it back. The sale proceeds go to profits. Facility items like A/C replacement - switching lighting to LED, a new roof - go from capital costs to operating costs.


User currently offlineditzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 718 posts, RR: 1
Reply 46, posted (2 years 4 months 22 hours ago) and read 3444 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 44):
But as it stands, there are only 9 (out of 110+) weekly Tasman flights operated by VH aircraft

Perhaps I was forward thinking, but I suggest you look at the planned flying from June.


User currently offlineditzyboy From Australia, joined Feb 2008, 718 posts, RR: 1
Reply 47, posted (2 years 4 months 21 hours ago) and read 3435 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 44):
But as it stands, there are only 9 (out of 110+) weekly Tasman flights operated by VH aircraft

Perhaps I was forward thinking, but I suggest you look at the planned flying from June.


User currently offlinebrons2 From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3013 posts, RR: 4
Reply 48, posted (2 years 4 months 21 hours ago) and read 3421 times:

Why hasn't AJ been fired yet? All he seems to cause is turmoil. At some point, I'd think people would realize that he is the problem, not the solution.


Firings, if well done, are good for employee morale.
User currently offlinegemuser From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 5664 posts, RR: 6
Reply 49, posted (2 years 4 months 21 hours ago) and read 3401 times:

Quoting brons2 (Reply 48):
Why hasn't AJ been fired yet? All he seems to cause is turmoil. At some point, I'd think people would realize that he is the problem, not the solution.

Because the Board of Directors disagree with you! They (and the rest of the local financial community) like what he is doing.

Gemuser



DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
User currently offlinesunrisevalley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4988 posts, RR: 5
Reply 50, posted (2 years 4 months 20 hours ago) and read 3378 times:

Quoting brons2 (Reply 48):
Why hasn't AJ been fired yet? All he seems to cause is turmoil. At some point, I'd think people would realize that he is the problem, not the solution.

The problem is the change in the market that QF finds it self in. The addition of VA and DL on the North American market . the Arab carriers siphoning off traffic to Europe, Chinese carriers increasing their presence into Australia, tough competitors like CI, CX , MU and so on and so forth.


User currently offlinefiscal From Australia, joined Oct 2009, 330 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (2 years 4 months 19 hours ago) and read 3319 times:

Quoting QFVHOQA (Reply 40):
Public companies can get away with all sorts of accounting tricks, even if they are audited. Enron is a huge example, and its auditors Arthur Andersen went out of business for overseeing Enron's lies.

A bit of a contradiction there? They did get found out, and the auditors paid for not being duly diligent.

AJ's actions may well be an accountability move. During difficult times the Qantas Act is truly restrictive, we all agree it is not in Qantas's long term future, but while you have a union dominated government, it is not going to change.

Change is, however, on the horizon. A change of government is imminent, and if present polls are any indication, it may provide Qantas with a much more sympathetic ear, and maybe the chance to remove some of those restrictions, whilst still maintaining the "Austalianess" of the company.

Having clear accounting makes good sense, and like any good chess player, if you want to win, you need to plan your moves well in advance.


User currently offlinebos2laf From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 374 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (2 years 4 months 19 hours ago) and read 3326 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 18):
It's ridiculous that a private company can be so heavily restricted by the government in the supposedly open/free market that the rest of the industry enjoys.

see also: Air Canada Public Participation Act for another outrageous bit of legislation

To legislate how a (now) private company must run its business and where it must maintain its headquarters is just beyond me. The government opted to privatize AC, but said "Oh, by the way... We're still going to dictate how you do business and where you maintain facilities."


User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5580 posts, RR: 5
Reply 53, posted (2 years 4 months 16 hours ago) and read 3193 times:

Quoting bos2laf (Reply 52):

The AC legislation is even worse than the QF one! Isn't there a provision in there that all customer-facing staff have to be bilingual? Needless to say, that makes hiring CSAs in Kelowna, BC a challenge - you get hired on your language skills rather than your merits.

Quoting qf002 (Reply 44):
Can I ask where this AJ = LCC attitude comes from (not just you, OzGlobal -- a lot of people bring it up)?

He worked for EI in the period 1988-1996, long before it became a LCC.

He worked for both AN and QF from 1996 till 2003, neither of which can be described as LCC's. From what I can tell, his only association with LCC's is his 5 year stint as CEO of JQ.

How, therefore, can it be said that he only knows and enjoys running LCC's? In his 24 year career in the industry, only 5 have been in a role within a LCC.

  

Did anyone else see the article about Alan Joyce in the Weekend Australian Magazine the other week? I believe it was the weekend 12-13 May.

It was a very interesting article. I haven't said the most complimentary things about him in the past, but I have a lot more respect for him now.

In that article he recounts a conversation with Willy Walsh which goes along the lines of:

Joyce: "Why do we run full service legacy carriers? LCCs are so much easier."
Walsh: "Because we can make a difference".

Joyce said that comment had a profound impact on him and has stuck with him ever since. I really got the impression that his heart is in Qantas, even if that would be lambasted as good PR. He does seem to genuinely believe in what he is doing.

Oh, and on the anti-union issue... he has voted Labo(u)r his entire life, regardless of country.


Unfortunately the article isn't freely available. I encourage everyone to read it if they get the chance.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineQantasAirways From Australia, joined Mar 2001, 1278 posts, RR: 3
Reply 54, posted (2 years 4 months 16 hours ago) and read 3122 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 53):

Here's a link to the article about Alan Joyce
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...belts/story-e6frg8h6-1226349882403



Spirit of Australia
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 55, posted (2 years 4 months 15 hours ago) and read 3077 times:

Quoting ditzyboy (Reply 47):
Perhaps I was forward thinking, but I suggest you look at the planned flying from June.

I am just looking at QFSource, so can't see ahead in the schedules. I was just basing my post on the past 12 months...

Quoting gemuser (Reply 49):
Quoting brons2 (Reply 48):
Why hasn't AJ been fired yet? All he seems to cause is turmoil. At some point, I'd think people would realize that he is the problem, not the solution.

Because the Board of Directors disagree with you! They (and the rest of the local financial community) like what he is doing.

And the Board of Directors aren't idiots.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 53):
Did anyone else see the article about Alan Joyce in the Weekend Australian Magazine the other week? I believe it was the weekend 12-13 May.

It was a very interesting article. I haven't said the most complimentary things about him in the past, but I have a lot more respect for him now.

I hadn't see that -- very interesting, thanks  
Quoting QantasAirways (Reply 54):

Thanks for the link -- some people mightn't be able to read though, it's subscription only...


User currently offlineaerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 4
Reply 56, posted (2 years 4 months 14 hours ago) and read 3003 times:

Quoting QFVHOQA (Reply 40):
Public companies can get away with all sorts of accounting tricks, even if they are audited. Enron is a huge example, and its auditors Arthur Andersen went out of business for overseeing Enron's lies.

Someone always brings up Enron. That was a decade ago, in the United States, and accounting practices (and monitoring of them) have been changed since then. Plus that took a particularly special combination of a corrupt company and its corrupt accountants melding. Are you accusing Qantas's acountants of being corrupt? AND their auditors? wow that's quite a conspiracy there.

Quoting ADent (Reply 45):
There are many fully legal ways to shift costs around and many, many rules on what is proper.

And there are thousands of analysts who can recognise this in financial statements and report back on it. Not to mention, they're regularly audited. And now, even laymen like you or me will be able to see, if we can actually be bothered looking.

So either back up the assertion that QF is somehow fiddling the numbers with evidence, or back off.


User currently offlineZK-NBT From New Zealand, joined Oct 2000, 5334 posts, RR: 11
Reply 57, posted (2 years 4 months 12 hours ago) and read 2880 times:

Quoting ditzyboy (Reply 46):
Quoting qf002 (Reply 44):
But as it stands, there are only 9 (out of 110+) weekly Tasman flights operated by VH aircraft

Perhaps I was forward thinking, but I suggest you look at the planned flying from June.

So whats happening then? I notice QF141/114 SYD-AKL-SYD and also QF45/46 SYD-CHC-SYD and QF135/136 MEL-AKL-MEL plus ZQN services.

I'm not sure on MEL-AKL and SYD-CHC though, that means 2 Jet Connect aircraft out of service, I'd say it may be a mistake. There are reduced frequencies some days for both QF and JQ.


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4833 posts, RR: 9
Reply 58, posted (2 years 4 months 11 hours ago) and read 2823 times:

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 38):
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 33):
Looks like just another accounting trick to make Intl appear to be performing badly.

I'm not sure publicly traded companies can employ, and get away with, accounting "tricks". Surely someone with a bit of nous would have obtained the relevant data to prove this by now, no?

They can and do get away with it. So long as they aren't tax dodging or breaking other laws the government really doesn't care if the books show QF (airline) losing money but JQ making money so long as it comes out even in the end of QF (company).

Quoting qf002 (Reply 44):
Can I ask where this AJ = LCC attitude comes from (not just you, OzGlobal -- a lot of people bring it up)?

He worked for EI in the period 1988-1996, long before it became a LCC.

He worked for both AN and QF from 1996 till 2003, neither of which can be described as LCC's. From what I can tell, his only association with LCC's is his 5 year stint as CEO of JQ.

So AJ was involved with EI.... (an airline that basically turned to rubbish, became a LCC and is a shadow of its former self), and he was involved with AN.... where exactly is AN now??
He doesn't exactly have the best record...



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineQFVHOQA From Australia, joined Mar 2012, 445 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (2 years 4 months 10 hours ago) and read 2792 times:

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 56):
Someone always brings up Enron. That was a decade ago, in the United States, and accounting practices (and monitoring of them) have been changed since then. Plus that took a particularly special combination of a corrupt company and its corrupt accountants melding. Are you accusing Qantas's acountants of being corrupt? AND their auditors? wow that's quite a conspiracy there.

I never actually accused QF of accounting tricks, I was merely providing an example that a publicly listed company is capable.

I do think many companies practice transfer pricing, as it is very difficult to prove and prosecute. This ABC opinion piece suggests transfer pricing is more common than you think. Google had earnings of $1.1 billion in Australia and only paid $74,176 in tax. http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4028038.html


User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 60, posted (2 years 4 months 9 hours ago) and read 2664 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 58):
So AJ was involved with EI.... (an airline that basically turned to rubbish, became a LCC and is a shadow of its former self), and he was involved with AN.... where exactly is AN now??
He doesn't exactly have the best record...

AJ left EI a decade before it went downhill, in fact he was working for them in their heyday. And he left AN 18 months before they went bust...

In any case, I think it's really quite a massive stretch to say that AJ's association to the company has anything to do with the EI and AN issues. He was in low level positions and wasn't making serious decisions until he reached QF.


User currently offlineaerokiwi From New Zealand, joined Jul 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 4
Reply 61, posted (2 years 4 months 7 hours ago) and read 2539 times:

Quoting QFVHOQA (Reply 59):
I do think many companies practice transfer pricing,

Transfer pricing is mostly about transnational companies using their various bases of operations (tax jurisdictions) to gain a tax advantage, eg. Google. QF and JQ are domiciled in Australia for tax purposes. Where are they transfer-pricing to for tax purposes? And why is the Google example applicable? And if it is, then hey look, everyone can see it. Is QF somehow better at hiding these alleged shady dealings?

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 58):
They can and do get away with it.

Cool. Demonstrate it.


User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5580 posts, RR: 5
Reply 62, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2350 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 58):
So AJ was involved with EI.... (an airline that basically turned to rubbish, became a LCC and is a shadow of its former self)

He left EI in 1998 - at the peak of its game.

aerlingus[blob]com came to be in 2003

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 58):
he was involved with AN.... where exactly is AN now??

He was in middle management ... not the bloody CEO!

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 58):


They can and do get away with it. So long as they aren't tax dodging or breaking other laws the government really doesn't care if the books show QF (airline) losing money but JQ making money so long as it comes out even in the end of QF (company).

Thank you. And I'll just add one more thing: Australia is now regarded internationally as having the toughest Corporations Law in the world on this matter. Our very own HIH and James Hardie focused the legislative mind and the reforms in the early 2000s were far from insignificant.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlinefiscal From Australia, joined Oct 2009, 330 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2278 times:

Quoting QFVHOQA (Reply 59):
I do think many companies practice transfer pricing

Not in Australia. Paul Keating introduced tax laws to counter this practice years ago, and took all the pleasure out of it....

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 58):
They can and do get away with it. So long as they aren't tax dodging or breaking other laws the government really doesn't care if the books show QF (airline) losing money but JQ making money so long as it comes out even in the end of QF (company).

I dont think ASIC would agree with you, and indeed the ASX would not either.

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 58):
So AJ was involved with EI.... (an airline that basically turned to rubbish, became a LCC and is a shadow of its former self), and he was involved with AN.... where exactly is AN now??
He doesn't exactly have the best record...

I can only repeat what others have said - He was not involved. We know your displeasure, but facts are facts.


User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5580 posts, RR: 5
Reply 64, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2242 times:

Quoting fiscal (Reply 63):
I dont think ASIC would agree with you, and indeed the ASX would not either.

  

While the ATO might not care too much so long as they get their $$$s, misleading the market is a serious breach of a director's duties and can result in both civil liability and (if serious) criminal prosecution.



Sorry, I didn't mean to quote Zkpilot...

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 62):
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 58):


They can and do get away with it. So long as they aren't tax dodging or breaking other laws the government really doesn't care if the books show QF (airline) losing money but JQ making money so long as it comes out even in the end of QF (company).

Thank you. And I'll just add one more thing: Australia is now regarded internationally as having the toughest Corporations Law in the world on this matter. Our very own HIH and James Hardie focused the legislative mind and the reforms in the early 2000s were far from insignificant.

... I was actually agreeing with:

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 56):
Someone always brings up Enron. That was a decade ago, in the United States, and accounting practices (and monitoring of them) have been changed since then.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently onlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7229 posts, RR: 8
Reply 65, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2157 times:

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 53):
Joyce: "Why do we run full service legacy carriers? LCCs are so much easier."
Walsh: "Because we can make a difference".

Joyce said that comment had a profound impact on him and has stuck with him ever since.

An interesting way of looking at it, or for me, ignoring the true situation. LCC's appeared because legacy carriers were catering to their market segment only, now that additional markets have been opened, legacies can make a difference, without implying that LCC's did not make a difference. Semantics, maybe.

Quoting RyanairGuru (Reply 64):
... I was actually agreeing with:

Quoting aerokiwi (Reply 56):
Someone always brings up Enron. That was a decade ago, in the United States, and accounting practices (and monitoring of them) have been changed since then.

To be snippy, tell that to all the governments and banks that are hitting tax payers left and right with more money for bailouts and debts, wonder who really learned a lesson  


User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4833 posts, RR: 9
Reply 66, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1725 times:

So I hear an interesting rumour recently....
Apparently the Qantas board has done a secret deal of sorts with a Chinese carrier (and not EK as has been speculated). This deal supposedly took place during/after the private equity saga. The Chinese carrier wants to use Qantas brand and image in its own market as it is struggling to get both Chinese and foreigners to trust its own brand. Basically the rumour goes that by separating Qantas into multiple units the company can make International appear to be an unviable business. In so doing they hope to either have the govt nationalize International or repeal part of the Qantas Sale Act to allow aforementioned Chinese carrier to swoop in. Jetstar HKG has apparently been in the planning process for 4 years now also.
I know it is just a rumour, but it is entirely possible.



56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 67, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1658 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 66):

This rumour seems really, really far fetched to me.


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...
QF Confirm International Equipment Upgrades posted Mon May 31 2010 02:43:47 by tayser
DHL US Domestic Ops Done? posted Sat Jan 3 2009 04:54:40 by Tjwgrr
DHL To End US Domestic Ops posted Mon Nov 10 2008 08:14:55 by Apodino
QF Slashes International Capacity posted Wed Jun 4 2008 23:11:28 by Aussie747
783 - US Domestic Ops... posted Fri Jun 22 2007 18:44:22 by FlyABR
Delta International ATL Ops Prior To 1994 posted Tue Apr 17 2007 02:49:42 by 1337Delta764
New Airline Starts Domestic Ops In Guatemala posted Wed Aug 30 2006 16:07:01 by Carmenlu15
These Safety Things - Affecting Domestic Ops? posted Sat Aug 12 2006 15:28:47 by Joffie
787-3 Or 787-8 For Delta Domestic Ops? posted Thu Dec 29 2005 21:10:18 by 1337Delta764
International-domestic Transfer @ BOM posted Fri Nov 18 2005 18:16:23 by Pe@rson