United Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, RR: 17 Posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1381 times:
I understand that it was the April Grounding which put Ansett Australia in a worse Financial Situation. However, Ansett was very sick before the April grounding.
If the Ansett April Grounding did not take place, would Ansett be flying now? I doubt it......
Comments?
By the way, is Ansett Australia's brand name still up for sale? Although no one might want it.
VirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4502 posts, RR: 50 Reply 1, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 1341 times:
Well, Ansett had the bad luck (although some people will tell you it was more to do with political pressure being exerted on CASA, in deference to another Australian airline) of having groundings over the busy Christmas and Easter periods. This doubtless had a very negative effect on their bottom line. Perhaps had the groundings not occured, they would have had enough cash to last longer, perhaps long enough to allow the Air New Zealand group to secure capital. However, the post September 11 downturn, and the effects of the domestic price war, surely would have still been crippling. Simple answer - who knows?
Of course, it is all academic - the April groundings did happen, and the whole thing turned to custard.
V/F
"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
Go Canada! From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 2955 posts, RR: 12 Reply 5, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1274 times:
It could be profitable in the long run.
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Im sorry united, i know you liked ansett but its time to let go, it wouldnt have been successful with or without the april grounding, it simply speeded up the process.
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
United Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, RR: 17 Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1245 times:
Just a pure speculation........If the April grounding did not take place, Air New Zealand could have had enough time to raise money for Ansett. Comments?
Please do not run this into an Air New Zealand VS Ansett war.
Bigo747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1246 times:
Go_Canada: The whole 767 grounding is the major factor that turns Ansett dramatically.
Publics and the travellers lose their cofidence on Ansett Australia because of the B767 grounding, plus the news of AN flying "unhealthy" 767 for 3000hrs.
September 11 is just another factor that directly hits Ansett.
Aamd11 From UK - Wales, joined Nov 2001, 1038 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1240 times:
Its known fact that the 767 grounding was just another nail in the coffin of AN, along with Spetember 11th, and the general travel slump.
They all played a large role in killing the airline, the price wars fought by AN, QF and Virgin [and at one point Impulse] hurt AN too.
Only if Impule and Virgin did not enter the market, only if the groundings didnt occur, would Ansett be in a better position to turn around its fortunes for the better.
I cant remember the exact grounding details, was it only 762s or were 763s involved too? and how many 763s did AN bring in to cover the grounded 767s?
i can recall AC and Canadian aircraft being flown in Australia, but how many a/c in total??
Tsentsan From Singapore, joined Jan 2002, 2016 posts, RR: 16 Reply 11, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1237 times:
I remember AN brought in one SQ744 to "assist"... the SQ 744 from SYD i think would do a domestic flight to MEL and back for Ansett Australia.....
Other than that, I think one AC763 was involved...
For the groundings, all 767s were involved.. I think it was discovered that they fixed 767-200 flaps on the 767-300 or something like that.. and lots of maintenance cover up...
United Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, RR: 17 Reply 12, posted (10 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 1237 times:
Ansett has been sick for a long time.........
Ansett might not be able to survive even without the April Grounding. They were very sick before the grounding. 9.11 has nothing to do with the collapse of Ansett since they were dying before that. Besides, AN did not fly to USA.
And if I remember correctly, AN was moved into administration before 9.11
Bigo747 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1166 times:
Impulse and Virgin Blue only played a small role to kill Ansett. But it shouldn't be considered as a factor for Ansett's demise. They were tiny babies at that time.
It's the public's confidence towards Ansett Australia that killed AN.
VirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4502 posts, RR: 50 Reply 15, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1169 times:
Bigo747 - I think you are underestimating the effect that the fare war sparked by these two carriers had on Ansett. It was no coincidence that Ansett's problems began snowballing from the second half of 2000. Ansett would still have been in difficulties if the AN/QF duopoly had have been maintained, but it would have been somewhat healthier.
V/F
"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
United Airline From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, RR: 17 Reply 16, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 1150 times:
Someone should have bought the airline..........Indeed there is a future for it.
Let's just hope that Ansett will return as a larger/more successful airline in the future.
Ryanair!!! From Singapore, joined Mar 2002, 4652 posts, RR: 27 Reply 17, posted (10 years 8 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 1144 times:
United Airline,
you do not seem to understand the extend of Ansett's internal "cancer". When the administrators took over, they were "appalled" at the state of the airline's books. Simply because there was no money left. Singapore Airlines, while many argued, may have saved the airline but was blocked by ANZ, wasn't too keen towards the end because Ansett was already run to the ground by the former owners.
Someone could have saved the airline by buying it? True, someone with a lot of balls. But looking at the timing (travel slump, worldwide recession, 911...), many reasons contributed to why the airline industry was a battered one. What's more to invest in a sick airline at a time when all the major carriers were suffering? Not a wise decision, even I can imagine.
So you see, we would never know if Ansett could be saved... Move on matey.
Welcome to my starry one world alliance, a team in the sky!
Sponsor Message: 
From Hong Kong, joined Jan 2001, 8792 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4502 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Mar 2002, 4652 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 2955 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From UK - Wales, joined Nov 2001, 1038 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
