FA4B6
Topic Author
Posts: 1078
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:00 am

Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 1:54 pm

Im confused.

What is the difference between QANTAS and Australian Airlines? And where does JetStar and JetStarAsia fit into all of this? Whats the story? I love Australian Airlines livery and logo!


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Neville Murphy
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gerry Stegmeier



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Grahame Hutchison
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Melvin Rafi

"Leap! And the net will appear."
 
ted747
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:28 am

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:31 pm

Ok - as basic as i can be after a few red wines at lunch.....

Qantas - is a full service carrier with F/J/Y on most routes servicing long haul destinations. It is also a full service carrier on domesitc routes offering J/Y classes to major domestic ports.

Australian Airlines - is an all economy class international carrier servicing South east Asian ports. It is based in Cairns. Flys an all 767 fleet. Destinations include Singapore, Denpasar, Hong Kong etc.

Jetstar - is a low cost domestic carrier serving leisure destinations such as the Gold Coast, Tasmainia etc. Operates with a current combo of 717 and A320 fleet - moving to an all A320 fleet eventually.

Jetstar Asia - is a low cost international carrier serving South East Asian ports based out of Singapore.

hope this basic info sheds some light.

t.
 
FA4B6
Topic Author
Posts: 1078
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:00 am

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:43 pm

Seems to me like someone at QANTAS Group has too much time on their hands! Arent Australian and JetStar a little redundant? [mmm wine sounds good]
"Leap! And the net will appear."
 
miami1
Posts: 652
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 10:31 pm

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:50 pm

Redundent how?

Jetstar is aimed specifically at low cost and leisure markets and allows the Group to compete with Virgin Blue. Jetstar is aimed specifically at routes under 5 hours.

Australian Airlines is Qantas' way of minimising losses on marginal international routes over 3 hours where Mainline cannot make profit.

AO is full-service Y class, whereas Jetstar is paid food and drinks, free seating etc... (Although JQ International flights will have allocated seating.)
 
FA4B6
Topic Author
Posts: 1078
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:00 am

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:56 pm

Quoting Miami1 (Reply 3):
Australian Airlines is Qantas' way of minimising losses on marginal international routes over 3 hours where Mainline cannot make profit.

ok I dont get it .. how can Australian make a profit on these routes when QANTAS cant yet Australian is owned by QANTAS .. Im sorry for being so lost .. just seems confusing.
"Leap! And the net will appear."
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:02 pm

Quoting FA4B6 (Reply 2):
Seems to me like someone at QANTAS Group has too much time on their hands! Arent Australian and JetStar a little redundant? [mmm wine sounds good]

Yes wine is good.

Australian and Jetstar aren't redundant when you think about it because they are both offering products which QF do not offer. Australian offers the cheaper leisure travel internationally and Jetstar offers low cost travel domestically which allows QF to maintain its own operations domestically and internationally while allowing for two seperate entities with differing leadership structure.
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
777STL
Posts: 2770
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 8:22 am

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:02 pm

Quoting FA4B6 (Reply 4):
ok I dont get it .. how can Australian make a profit on these routes when QANTAS cant yet Australian is owned by QANTAS .. Im sorry for being so lost .. just seems confusing.

Australian is all economy and offers less service, it's an international LCC if you will. Qantas is full service, a traditional international airline. Plus with Australian, Qantas can cheapen the service without having to worry about the cheapening being associated with the Qantas name, if that makes any sense.
PHX based
 
miami1
Posts: 652
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 10:31 pm

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:02 pm

Staff efficiency and productivity. Lower wages. Also more efficient systems in regards to catering etc. Scheduling efficiencies.

AO flights are not eligible for FF point accural.

One class layout that Qantas cannot use without damaging its marketing image.

Generally AO is a much leaner, well-oiled operation as a stand alone unit.
 
ted747
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:28 am

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:04 pm

Yep - the reds were good now feel like a sleep but have 3 hours left at the office  Embarrassment

Reason AO can make money on routes that QF can't is becuare AO has significantly lower operating costs than the parent Qantas. Australian may be owned by Qantas but it operates in its own right. ie Cabin crew on AO are paid less than crew on QF. It has much tighter turn around times than QF. ie quicker to turn around a 767 than a 747 and planes dont make money sitting on the tarmac. You can also fit more seats on a all y class 767 operated by AO than a dual class 767 operated by QF. Catering costs are lower as level of in flight service is different. I may be wrong here as I have not flown AO but I dont imagine there would be inseat entertainment units in each seat so lower infastructure costs etc etc. ...

Someone more sobre than me may be able to better articulate??
 
ted747
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:28 am

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 3:07 pm

Qantas is very sensitive to it image as a full service premium long haul carrier and like the guys said above dont want to cheapen that by cutting services and product whilst still flying under the name of Qantas itself.

need another wine .....
 
TBCITDG
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2004 5:17 am

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:03 pm

A friend of mine told me that they will change to product in the future to offer a 2 class operation. Also his new contract sates that they are now able to fly longer routes on another aircraft type.

1. Can Qantas replace almost any route with Australian (claiming that it is unprofitable)?
2. Won't costs go up at Australian if they offer a different product?
3. Won't people prefer to pay an SQ ticket, should AO ever fly to Europe and the like? I mean prices aren't that much different should they fly to Honolulu, or Athens etc etc etc than full service carriers?
 
6thfreedom
Posts: 2622
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2004 11:09 am

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:05 pm

Quoting Ted747 (Reply 1):
Australian Airlines - is an all economy class international carrier servicing South east Asian ports. It is based in Cairns. Flys an all 767 fleet. Destinations include Singapore, Denpasar, Hong Kong etc.

Not quite.

1. AO is a full service, all economy, leisre destination airline.

2. AO has a MAJOR investment in Japan, serving Nagoya, Osaka, Fukuoka and Sapporo from Cairns.

3. It's focus is predominatly inbound travel from Asia to Cairns [Northern Australia].

4. Outbound destinations from southern Australia are Bali/Singapore. Sabah use to be served, but has been dropped. Phuket charters operated over the next few months, and possible future services to Vietnam, Hawaii and/or Singapore
 
bill142
Posts: 7853
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 1:50 pm

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 11:27 pm

AO and JQ are subsidiaries with different management. Both cater to different markets and have different operating structures. Jetstar is actually the remnants of Impulse Airlines.
 
FA4B6
Topic Author
Posts: 1078
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:00 am

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Fri Jun 10, 2005 11:46 pm

Thanks for clearing this up for me everyone!
"Leap! And the net will appear."
 
airnewzealand
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 6:00 pm

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Sat Jun 11, 2005 12:00 pm

AO is a good carrier, as stated i will not go thru what or who they focus on.

AO has recently re-negotiated thir contracts, tho They can still only operate one type of aircraft (QF were trying to get them to operate the 747-300). and no a two class service does not make sense for the markets they are covering- if it has been said (tho wouldnt put it pass QF).

Catering is basically the same guys (they serve same meals as QF usually.)
The good thing about AO is wages are alot cheaper as are the airports they serve.Though rumour in the pipeline is they will soon be doing HNL from CNS or BNE. Things will get very interesting.

Cheers
AirNewZealand
 
qfatwa
Posts: 496
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 1999 5:39 pm

RE: Qantas Vs. Australian

Sat Jun 11, 2005 10:49 pm

Just to add a couple of things:

After takeoff a service of towel (prepackaged) and water (bottle poured) is made so that the customer has crew interaction immediately, before the crew sett up beverage or meal carts.

AO catering is not like QF who buy from a subsidiary called Snapfresh. AO is catered by Caterair in Cairns (for all ex CNS) and Sydney, Alpha in Darwin and another caterer in Bali. All meals are prepared daily to AO specifications based on the route/passenger mix - appropriate to the cultural taste. {Good for jobs in Cairns}.

There is a meal choice - vegetarian [which suits most palates] and meat as there are no special meals (very expensive item!!). A child's meal may be ordered and a fruit platter on request. All other normal special meals (except Kosher) are covered by the above choice. Much easier for the crew too!!

All aircraft to Japan, HKG and Singapore are catered for the return trip - part of the keeping costs low [no paying for meals in Japan at yen rates!!]. There are two main meals (out of each port) and a snack bag into the Asian city, and a breakfast muffin snack into CNS.

AO introduced the cafe style/size take away hot beverage cup (now followed by QF domestic) to serve a full size cup of tea or coffee - once through the cabin gives the customer a full sized hot beverage rather than the mini-cup designed to fit the height of the tray. A second service is on request.

Ice creams are served mid flight.

AO (after the contract is signed - still in the pre-vote period) will be able to diversify the fleet or change base aircraft type - any more than one aircraft defeats the "simplicity plan". The 747-300 is to AO a dead issue - not part of the plan [although many at QF will try to push it to AO]. QF have placed inseat entertainment in 5 of the 6 [Nalanji is now in storage at Avalon and not destined to have inseat entertainment], but only operate three in regular service. The 747-300 with inseat entertainment doesn't match the AO 767-300 fleet with wall screens [big cost to have inseat entertainment]. They are old generation aircraft [4 pilots including 2nd officer and Flight Engineer - none of these on the AO payroll now!!] and carry big costs which AO can't sustain.

The rumour of HNL is precisely that - not a good option for AO as the 767-300 is a two pilot aircraft [rare to carry a third pilot and HNL is too long for two pilot operation]. There are other factors against HNL!!

AO is a low cost carrier designed to achieve a bare profit on routes where QF can't make money, and to keep the Australian flag in markets from which QF would withdraw.It is NOT a low fare carrier - it is designed to be a part of the QANTAS group operations and attempts to find its own unique markets - Sapporo (a hit with Australian skiers), Phuket - non stop from Sydney, and Sabah - big for frequent flyer redemption, but insufficient yield to maintain the service and return a profit.

AO will grow conservatively - currently delayed the sixth aircraft due to fuel prices and the tight state of the aviation business as profits are hard to make, and AO will not jeopardise the future by making risky business decisions.