Australian Aviation Thread - March 2020

eta unknown · Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:21 am

UA has reinstated the SFO-SYD flight.

waoz1 · Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:12 am

eta unknown wrote:
UA has reinstated the SFO-SYD flight.

Isnt San Fran in lockdown? Whens it from

God help us

a36001 · Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:14 am

Chipmunk1973 wrote:
I have to offer kudos to Qantas Hotels reservations. With the changes to flights across the globe, I had several hotel reservations that I’d been trying to cancel. The 1300 number, which apparently goes to a call centre in Manila, has been inundated with calls. I tried many times this morning to contact it and was always met with an automated message of “The number you are trying to contact is congested. Please try calling at another time”.

About 2pm this afternoon I received a call from QF Hotel Res and were able to process several refunds, in addition to escalating some forward bookings in NAN and DXB to be qualified for a refund.

Given how under the pump these people are at the moment, I thought it was exceptional that they had an opportunity to contact me to resolve my issues.

I’ve spent 25+ years in IT technical support for a vast range of industries from airlines, to mining companies, and various levels of government. 99% of the time it is a thankless role. What they did today was truly exceptional and needs a massive thanks.

Thank you,
C1973

May I suggest you send them a quick email stating how pleased you are with the level of assistance you received. The folks on the phones are under extreme pressure and would appreciate knowing they are making a difference. :-)

eta unknown · Tue Mar 24, 2020 12:04 pm

UA reported SYD-SFO will operate as normally until 30May and is bookable on the website. However, in the meantime the Australian PM has just banned overseas travel (previously it was strongly advised not to travel) so maybe now UA will reverse the decision.

RyanairGuru · Tue Mar 24, 2020 12:07 pm

waoz1 wrote:
eta unknown wrote:
UA has reinstated the SFO-SYD flight.

Isnt San Fran in lockdown? Whens it from

God help us

From next week this will be the *only* flight between Australia and USA. Given that SFO is a large hub for United (much larger than either AA or DL at LAX) quite frankly it is the most logical remaining airline/route to provide connectivity to as much of the US as possible. This will be the only way to fly one-stop to places where there are still thousands of Australians such as Washington, Chicago, Boston, New York (admittedly also in lockdown) etc.

smi0006 · Tue Mar 24, 2020 12:27 pm

eta unknown wrote:
UA reported SYD-SFO will operate as normally until 30May and is bookable on the website. However, in the meantime the Australian PM has just banned overseas travel (previously it was strongly advised not to travel) so maybe now UA will reverse the decision.

Unlikely these flights are full of US nationals trying to get home, not Aussies. If these flights don’t occur I’d say the US government would charter them.

I’m hearing that the charter brokers are going off chops busy as airlines close routes, and transit ports close up.... but thousands are still stranded away from home- I doubt LY will be our last exotic visitor here. And I’d say AC/UA may extend their flights.

soyuz · Tue Mar 24, 2020 12:32 pm

Any info on why this evening’s QF1 was cancelled?

Edit: Please disregard. Diverted to DRW as planned. Mods, please delete.

tullamarine · Tue Mar 24, 2020 12:34 pm

smi0006 wrote:
eta unknown wrote:
UA reported SYD-SFO will operate as normally until 30May and is bookable on the website. However, in the meantime the Australian PM has just banned overseas travel (previously it was strongly advised not to travel) so maybe now UA will reverse the decision.

Unlikely these flights are full of US nationals trying to get home, not Aussies. If these flights don’t occur I’d say the US government would charter them.

I’m hearing that the charter brokers are going off chops busy as airlines close routes, and transit ports close up.... but thousands are still stranded away from home- I doubt LY will be our last exotic visitor here. And I’d say AC/UA may extend their flights.

Definitely no Australians heading over the Pacific...or anywhere. Following tonight's announcements, no Australian is allowed to leave the country except with DFAT approval for things such as compassionate reasons.

Dan23 · Tue Mar 24, 2020 2:22 pm

Does anyone have any details of the planned weights and fuel load for QF1 DRW-LHR tonight? Must have been on the heavy side assuming there was a reasonable pax load.

777LRF · Tue Mar 24, 2020 2:28 pm

Dan23 wrote:
Does anyone have any details of the planned weights and fuel load for QF1 DRW-LHR tonight? Must have been on the heavy side assuming there was a reasonable pax load.

I'd love to know this too and also I'm guessing its a crew change in DRW as well correct?

Also this flight is/was crewed by a UK based crew between SIN/LHR so how does that work?

ben175 · Tue Mar 24, 2020 3:55 pm

777LRF wrote:
Dan23 wrote:
Does anyone have any details of the planned weights and fuel load for QF1 DRW-LHR tonight? Must have been on the heavy side assuming there was a reasonable pax load.

I'd love to know this too and also I'm guessing its a crew change in DRW as well correct?

Also this flight is/was crewed by a UK based crew between SIN/LHR so how does that work?

I believe it’s LHR crew operating LHR-DRW-LHR. Someone I know who is SYD base crew was flown up to Darwin yesterday to take the plane to SYD. From what I saw on social media, QF flew an entire 738 up there with no pax, just crew.

zeke · Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:34 pm

Virgin Australia to cut 90% of its flight, Tiger Air to cease flying.

Standing down 8000 staff

Source : https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20200325/ ... y2pwh1.pdf

EK413 · Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:25 pm

Qantas completes $1.05b debt funding

Qantas has completed a $1.05 billion debt funding in order to strengthen the company's liquidity position as it navigates the coronavirus pandemic.

The debt was secured against the group's fleet of unencumbered aircraft. The loan has a tenure of up to 10 years with an interest rate of 2.75 per cent.

The funding increased the company's cash balance to $2.95 billionth an additional undrawn facility of $1 billion remaining available.

“Over the past few years we’ve significantly strengthened our balance sheet and we’re now able to draw on that strength under what are exceptional circumstances," said chief executive Alan Joyce.

Everything we’re doing at the moment is focused on guaranteeing the long term future of the national carrier, including making sure our people have jobs to return to when we have work for them again.”

https://www.afr.com/markets/equity-mark ... 325-p54dlv

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SCFlyer · Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:09 am

zeke wrote:
Virgin Australia to cut 90% of its flight, Tiger Air to cease flying.

Standing down 8000 staff

Source : https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20200325/ ... y2pwh1.pdf

IMO, can't see Tiger Air Australia resuming for the foreseeable future.

Wouldn't surprise me if TT's remaining fleet of 737s are absorbed back into VAd's domestic mainline ops once the health crisis subsides, whilst the remaining A320s are returned to Scoot Singapore.

a36001 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:18 am

Thoughts and best wishes to the Virgin and Tiger staff. Despite what the press and some at Virgin HQ say, every Qantas employee wants Virgin to survive this and come out the otherside as quickly as possible! Many of us within the Qantas family have family and friends who work at Virgin, Tiger and also Jetstar, no one is immune to this.

Obzerva · Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:31 am

a36001 wrote:
Thoughts and best wishes to the Virgin and Tiger staff. Despite what the press and some at Virgin HQ say, every Qantas employee wants Virgin to survive this and come out the otherside as quickly as possible! Many of us within the Qantas family have family and friends who work at Virgin, Tiger and also Jetstar, no one is immune to this.

Kudos, that's a great sentiment.
Everyone's hurting in this and it's good to see that just because people work for different employers in the same industry, it doesn't mean ill will to the others.

Hoping that airlines - and their people - can come out of this stronger and more resilient.

SCFlyer · Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:36 am

Obzerva wrote:
a36001 wrote:
Thoughts and best wishes to the Virgin and Tiger staff. Despite what the press and some at Virgin HQ say, every Qantas employee wants Virgin to survive this and come out the otherside as quickly as possible! Many of us within the Qantas family have family and friends who work at Virgin, Tiger and also Jetstar, no one is immune to this.

Kudos, that's a great sentiment.
Everyone's hurting in this and it's good to see that just because people work for different employers in the same industry, it doesn't mean ill will to the others.

Hoping that airlines - and their people - can come out of this stronger and more resilient.

Also to add, it's good to see that the majority of staff at both the QF and VA groups are basically ignoring AJ's recent temper tantrum and are united together.
Best of luck to everyone involved across the entire Australian Aviation industry.

qf2220 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:55 am

SCFlyer wrote:

Problem is that none of the shareholders are in a financial position to support VA whatsover. Branson only has a minority stake (10%) but I do agree with your point regarding the license fee that he obviously benefits from.

2 of them are basically already bankrupt in "administration" before the COVID crisis (EY and HNA), SIA/SQ has their own financial problems (to be fair - through no fault of their own) and are likely to get a bailout by the Singapore government, and who knows what happened to Nanshan.

Yes I definitely don't see EY or HNA coming to any party, HNA at least may be lucky to survive. One route of investment I could see is if VA is considered worthless, and the Australian government comes in with an investment in the airline where EY, HNA etc surrender their shares in return for the cash going to VA. Its in Australia's interest to have 2 carriers, (or more) and preserving this one for another day is probably not a bad policy for these times.

Ive always thought that a VA/NZ tie-up still makes sense, if done right.... It wasn't done right last time though and ego got in the way of the latest linkage.

qf789 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:29 am

Japan Airlines to suspend flights to MEL and SYD from 31 March

https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... yo-flights

ABpositive · Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:32 am

I drove on Princes Fwy between Melbourne and Geelong this morning and noticed about a dozen Qantas and Virgin planes parked at the Avalon airport. It looked surreal and took me a moment to remember what's going on... Are there any other odd places where the planes are being parked? Is the site in Alice Springs receiving any planes for storage?

getluv · Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:59 am

qf2220 wrote:
SCFlyer wrote:

Problem is that none of the shareholders are in a financial position to support VA whatsover. Branson only has a minority stake (10%) but I do agree with your point regarding the license fee that he obviously benefits from.

2 of them are basically already bankrupt in "administration" before the COVID crisis (EY and HNA), SIA/SQ has their own financial problems (to be fair - through no fault of their own) and are likely to get a bailout by the Singapore government, and who knows what happened to Nanshan.

Yes I definitely don't see EY or HNA coming to any party, HNA at least may be lucky to survive. One route of investment I could see is if VA is considered worthless, and the Australian government comes in with an investment in the airline where EY, HNA etc surrender their shares in return for the cash going to VA. Its in Australia's interest to have 2 carriers, (or more) and preserving this one for another day is probably not a bad policy for these times.

Ive always thought that a VA/NZ tie-up still makes sense, if done right.... It wasn't done right last time though and ego got in the way of the latest linkage.

It’s in Australia’s interest to have two carriers but it doesn’t mean that the other carrier has to be VA. Even if they get a government bailout, which the shareholders would have to agree to, don’t expect growth, international flights and new aircraft to be in their future.

NZ will be holding on by a tether after all is said an done. NZ is so reliant on international traffic flows, it will take years for it to recover.

BAeRJ100 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 3:10 am

ABpositive wrote:
I drove on Princes Fwy between Melbourne and Geelong this morning and noticed about a dozen Qantas and Virgin planes parked at the Avalon airport. It looked surreal and took me a moment to remember what's going on... Are there any other odd places where the planes are being parked? Is the site in Alice Springs receiving any planes for storage?

I believe it was mentioned earlier in this thread that all of QF's 747s were headed to ASP.

SCFlyer · Wed Mar 25, 2020 3:14 am

getluv wrote:
qf2220 wrote:
SCFlyer wrote:

Problem is that none of the shareholders are in a financial position to support VA whatsover. Branson only has a minority stake (10%) but I do agree with your point regarding the license fee that he obviously benefits from.

2 of them are basically already bankrupt in "administration" before the COVID crisis (EY and HNA), SIA/SQ has their own financial problems (to be fair - through no fault of their own) and are likely to get a bailout by the Singapore government, and who knows what happened to Nanshan.

Yes I definitely don't see EY or HNA coming to any party, HNA at least may be lucky to survive. One route of investment I could see is if VA is considered worthless, and the Australian government comes in with an investment in the airline where EY, HNA etc surrender their shares in return for the cash going to VA. Its in Australia's interest to have 2 carriers, (or more) and preserving this one for another day is probably not a bad policy for these times.

Ive always thought that a VA/NZ tie-up still makes sense, if done right.... It wasn't done right last time though and ego got in the way of the latest linkage.

It’s in Australia’s interest to have two carriers but it doesn’t mean that the other carrier has to be VA. Even if they get a government bailout, which the shareholders would have to agree to, don’t expect growth, international flights and new aircraft to be in their future.

NZ will be holding on by a tether after all is said an done. NZ is so reliant on international traffic flows, it will take years for it to recover.

The option of a "new" (replacement) second airline through outside investors picking up the VA assets (e.g the owned 737s and slots at SYD/MEL) at a 'liquidation sale' hosted by administrators can't exactly be ruled out either.

The investors are likely to come from outside the current shareholders as pretty much virtually no airline group worldwide has the financial position to take over anyone or anything.

EK413 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:16 am

Images of aircraft parked in AVV

https://www.facebook.com/groups/6492589 ... ?ref=share

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

aerokiwi · Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:32 am

getluv wrote:
qf2220 wrote:
SCFlyer wrote:

Problem is that none of the shareholders are in a financial position to support VA whatsover. Branson only has a minority stake (10%) but I do agree with your point regarding the license fee that he obviously benefits from.

2 of them are basically already bankrupt in "administration" before the COVID crisis (EY and HNA), SIA/SQ has their own financial problems (to be fair - through no fault of their own) and are likely to get a bailout by the Singapore government, and who knows what happened to Nanshan.

Yes I definitely don't see EY or HNA coming to any party, HNA at least may be lucky to survive. One route of investment I could see is if VA is considered worthless, and the Australian government comes in with an investment in the airline where EY, HNA etc surrender their shares in return for the cash going to VA. Its in Australia's interest to have 2 carriers, (or more) and preserving this one for another day is probably not a bad policy for these times.

Ive always thought that a VA/NZ tie-up still makes sense, if done right.... It wasn't done right last time though and ego got in the way of the latest linkage.

It’s in Australia’s interest to have two carriers but it doesn’t mean that the other carrier has to be VA. Even if they get a government bailout, which the shareholders would have to agree to, don’t expect growth, international flights and new aircraft to be in their future.

NZ will be holding on by a tether after all is said an done. NZ is so reliant on international traffic flows, it will take years for it to recover.

Realistically, it does have to be VA. If they do collapse, what other investor is ever going to enter the Australian market? Not only from he inherent risks in the airline industry, but on top of that the risk of a new pandemic, which likely hadn't been factored in to the equation beforehand.

I realise you're no fan of VA. But I think we're in a situation now that if QF really is - as Joyce so eloquently and tactfully said - the last man standing, then Australia will never see a second carrier again. And who benefits from that? I can think of only one.

If we do get through this with two carriers, I wonder if corporate Australia would be savvy enough to share their travel contracts around to ensure a two-carrier future? Because if they don't and one is left to weaken and die, well, they're hostage to QF forever more afterwards.

SYDSpotter · Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:28 am

qf2220 wrote:

Yes I definitely don't see EY or HNA coming to any party, HNA at least may be lucky to survive. One route of investment I could see is if VA is considered worthless, and the Australian government comes in with an investment in the airline where EY, HNA etc surrender their shares in return for the cash going to VA. Its in Australia's interest to have 2 carriers, (or more) and preserving this one for another day is probably not a bad policy for these times.

Ive always thought that a VA/NZ tie-up still makes sense, if done right.... It wasn't done right last time though and ego got in the way of the latest linkage.

An Australian Govt equity stake in VA is highly unlikely, if they are going to take an equity stake in VA they must also do the equivalent in QF as well or you will have a distorted market. VA would have access to more credit and cheaper credit compared with QF given it would be partially/fully owned by a sovereign government. There will be plenty of support forthcoming, but I don't believe that will extend to an ownership stake.

With NZ getting a NZ Govt bailout, a merger/acquisition of VA is going to be last thing on NZ's agenda. Any tie-up would require NZ to buy out the current shareholders, and a buyout of VA using NZ Govt money is not going to happen.

SYDSpotter · Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:29 am

aerokiwi wrote:
If we do get through this with two carriers, I wonder if corporate Australia would be savvy enough to share their travel contracts around to ensure a two-carrier future? Because if they don't and one is left to weaken and die, well, they're hostage to QF forever more afterwards.

If things back to how to things were prior to COVID 19, why would corporates change how they split their business between QF/VA? I would imagine the previous status quo would maintain all things being equal.

Chipmunk1973 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:56 am

I’m curious as to what the approach airlines will take when “normal” flying starts to resume. Discounted fares might be an encouragement to lure back travellers, especially to the leisure routes. But full fares will generate the revenue, but are obviously less enticing unless you absolutely have to travel.

Any thoughts on how they will balance this?

Cheers,
C1973

Chipmunk1973 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:58 am

a36001 wrote:

May I suggest you send them a quick email stating how pleased you are with the level of assistance you received. The folks on the phones are under extreme pressure and would appreciate knowing they are making a difference.

Have done that, but was unsure of how quickly that kind of message is disseminated. So I just posted the comment here too in case any of them are lurkers.

getluv · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:05 am

aerokiwi wrote:
getluv wrote:
qf2220 wrote:

Yes I definitely don't see EY or HNA coming to any party, HNA at least may be lucky to survive. One route of investment I could see is if VA is considered worthless, and the Australian government comes in with an investment in the airline where EY, HNA etc surrender their shares in return for the cash going to VA. Its in Australia's interest to have 2 carriers, (or more) and preserving this one for another day is probably not a bad policy for these times.

Ive always thought that a VA/NZ tie-up still makes sense, if done right.... It wasn't done right last time though and ego got in the way of the latest linkage.

It’s in Australia’s interest to have two carriers but it doesn’t mean that the other carrier has to be VA. Even if they get a government bailout, which the shareholders would have to agree to, don’t expect growth, international flights and new aircraft to be in their future.

NZ will be holding on by a tether after all is said an done. NZ is so reliant on international traffic flows, it will take years for it to recover.

Realistically, it does have to be VA. If they do collapse, what other investor is ever going to enter the Australian market? Not only from he inherent risks in the airline industry, but on top of that the risk of a new pandemic, which likely hadn't been factored in to the equation beforehand.

I realise you're no fan of VA. But I think we're in a situation now that if QF really is - as Joyce so eloquently and tactfully said - the last man standing, then Australia will never see a second carrier again. And who benefits from that? I can think of only one.

If we do get through this with two carriers, I wonder if corporate Australia would be savvy enough to share their travel contracts around to ensure a two-carrier future? Because if they don't and one is left to weaken and die, well, they're hostage to QF forever more afterwards.

ACCC does have the power to split a company, so essentially they could break JQ off from QF if they wanted to.

The Australian Government is better off offering money to Air NZ to run a competitor. VA is experiencing what a lot of companies and people are going through when you don’t have reserves or capital to prepare for rough times. I understand that this is exceptional circumstances but VA’s balance sheet and record over the past decade is not deserving of a bailout. Interesting how AJ’s hard tactics and modest capex spending on new aircraft have saved QF.

Corporate Australia will go where the savings are.

anstar · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:08 am

Chipmunk1973 wrote:
I’m curious as to what the approach airlines will take when “normal” flying starts to resume. Discounted fares might be an encouragement to lure back travellers, especially to the leisure routes. But full fares will generate the revenue, but are obviously less enticing unless you absolutely have to travel.

Any thoughts on how they will balance this?

Cheers,
C1973

There will be pent up demand. People will have been stuck in isolation for months and will want to get out.

SCFlyer · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:12 am

getluv wrote:
aerokiwi wrote:
getluv wrote:

It’s in Australia’s interest to have two carriers but it doesn’t mean that the other carrier has to be VA. Even if they get a government bailout, which the shareholders would have to agree to, don’t expect growth, international flights and new aircraft to be in their future.

NZ will be holding on by a tether after all is said an done. NZ is so reliant on international traffic flows, it will take years for it to recover.

Realistically, it does have to be VA. If they do collapse, what other investor is ever going to enter the Australian market? Not only from he inherent risks in the airline industry, but on top of that the risk of a new pandemic, which likely hadn't been factored in to the equation beforehand.

I realise you're no fan of VA. But I think we're in a situation now that if QF really is - as Joyce so eloquently and tactfully said - the last man standing, then Australia will never see a second carrier again. And who benefits from that? I can think of only one.

If we do get through this with two carriers, I wonder if corporate Australia would be savvy enough to share their travel contracts around to ensure a two-carrier future? Because if they don't and one is left to weaken and die, well, they're hostage to QF forever more afterwards.

ACCC does have the power to split a company, so essentially they could break JQ off from QF if they wanted to.

The Australian Government is better off offering money to Air NZ to run a competitor. VA is experiencing what a lot of companies and people are going through when you don’t have reserves or capital to prepare for rough times. I understand that this is exceptional circumstances but VA’s balance sheet and record over the past decade is not deserving of a bailout.

Corporate Australia will go where the savings are.

NZ doesn't have the track record in Australia. Although Ansett had similar problems, NZ bit more than they can chew at the time thanks to Selwyn 'Borghetti' Cushing and his sidekick Gary Toomey, and their 2nd failure ended in the clash of the egos between Luxon and Borghetti.

Saying that, SQ isn't much better with their mediocre track record of investments in Australia. (1st strike with the debt ridden NZ/Ansett group, 2nd strike with Tiger Airways Australia and 3rd strike with Virgin Australia). Add to SQ's failure with VS which led to DL buying their stake and DL having to rescue VS.

getluv · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:16 am

SCFlyer wrote:
getluv wrote:
aerokiwi wrote:

Realistically, it does have to be VA. If they do collapse, what other investor is ever going to enter the Australian market? Not only from he inherent risks in the airline industry, but on top of that the risk of a new pandemic, which likely hadn't been factored in to the equation beforehand.

I realise you're no fan of VA. But I think we're in a situation now that if QF really is - as Joyce so eloquently and tactfully said - the last man standing, then Australia will never see a second carrier again. And who benefits from that? I can think of only one.

If we do get through this with two carriers, I wonder if corporate Australia would be savvy enough to share their travel contracts around to ensure a two-carrier future? Because if they don't and one is left to weaken and die, well, they're hostage to QF forever more afterwards.

ACCC does have the power to split a company, so essentially they could break JQ off from QF if they wanted to.

The Australian Government is better off offering money to Air NZ to run a competitor. VA is experiencing what a lot of companies and people are going through when you don’t have reserves or capital to prepare for rough times. I understand that this is exceptional circumstances but VA’s balance sheet and record over the past decade is not deserving of a bailout.

Corporate Australia will go where the savings are.

NZ doesn't have the track record in Australia. Although Ansett had similar problems, NZ bit more than they can chew at the time thanks to Selwyn 'Borghetti' Cushing and his sidekick Gary Toomey, and their 2nd failure ended in the clash of the egos between Luxon and Borghetti.

Saying that, SQ isn't much better with their mediocre track record of investments in Australia. (1st strike with the debt ridden NZ/Ansett group, 2nd strike with Tiger Airways Australia and 3rd strike with Virgin Australia). Add to SQ's failure with VS which led to DL buying their stake and DL having to rescue VS.

NZ and SQ never really ran either. They had second rate management teams and never really had any control. NZ/SQ just wanted access to frequent flyers and domestic routes where they would never fly directly.

I wonder if NZ still had a 20% stake in VA, how dire the situation they would be in.

SCFlyer · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:23 am

getluv wrote:
SCFlyer wrote:
getluv wrote:

ACCC does have the power to split a company, so essentially they could break JQ off from QF if they wanted to.

The Australian Government is better off offering money to Air NZ to run a competitor. VA is experiencing what a lot of companies and people are going through when you don’t have reserves or capital to prepare for rough times. I understand that this is exceptional circumstances but VA’s balance sheet and record over the past decade is not deserving of a bailout.

Corporate Australia will go where the savings are.

NZ doesn't have the track record in Australia. Although Ansett had similar problems, NZ bit more than they can chew at the time thanks to Selwyn 'Borghetti' Cushing and his sidekick Gary Toomey, and their 2nd failure ended in the clash of the egos between Luxon and Borghetti.

Saying that, SQ isn't much better with their mediocre track record of investments in Australia. (1st strike with the debt ridden NZ/Ansett group, 2nd strike with Tiger Airways Australia and 3rd strike with Virgin Australia). Add to SQ's failure with VS which led to DL buying their stake and DL having to rescue VS.

NZ and SQ never really ran either. They had second rate management teams and never really had any control. NZ/SQ just wanted access to frequent flyers and domestic routes where they would never fly directly.

I wonder if NZ still had a 20% stake in VA, how dire the situation they would be in.

NZ owned 100% of AN and had direct managerial control of AN at the time of collapse.

NZ and SQ also had a boardroom seat at VA over the years and had a direct say in decisions and capital injections in that period.

On a side note: SQ wanted to buy the 50% of AN off News Corp, and NZ middle management okay-ed it. The problem is that the then-NZ chairman Selwyn 'Borghetti' Cushing used his veto rights to block SQ from buying into AN and demanded that SQ buy 20% in the combined NZ/AN instead, all because of egos at NZ at the time. Despite Cushing fully knowing his airline didn't have the balance sheet to repair an ailing AN.

eta unknown · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:25 am

Two DL 777 charters on way to SYD now from LAX: DL9994 & DL9995.

Does anyone know the situation with BA15/16: LHR-SIN-SYD vv.? It appears the service is still running via SIN where transit is no longer permitted.

SCFlyer · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:29 am

My understanding is SIN is a "gas and go" stop for BA15/16. Passengers aren't allowed off the plane in SIN while they refuel.
The "gas and go" stop in SIN may be tricky logistically if crew ends up "out of hours" if unusual circumstances happen mid-flight.

Source: https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... ore-sydney

EK413 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:36 am

SCFlyer wrote:
My understanding is SIN is a "gas and go" stop for BA15/16. Passengers aren't allowed off the plane in SIN while they refuel.
The "gas and go" stop in SIN may be tricky logistically if crew ends up "out of hours" if unusual circumstances happen mid-flight.

Source: https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... ore-sydney

Curious how BA will manage a gas n go via SIN.

Do the crew deadhead SYD-SIN leg & swap in SIN? Also interesting how the second sector catering is loaded?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aviator34ID · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:43 am

I don't see keeping a poorly managed airline going as a priority for government funds in this horrendous situation, particularly when there are no passengers. That would be punishing QF for running a well managed airline. If post the apocalypse there is only QF/JS left and demand for travel arises again, there will be someone who will want a piece of it. Super profits from a monopoly will always attract a competitor I think. However, if there is only sufficient travel demand for one airline to be viable for a period of time then that's the way it is. One healthy airline has to be better than two impoverished ones surviving on tax payer handouts.

eta unknown · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:49 am

Reduced VA schedule here- interesting BNE/MEL-PER operate, but no SYD-PER.
https://newsroom.virginaustralia.com/re ... schedule-0

Yes I'm curious how gas&go works for BA, but not QF (via DRW). You could double cater the flight ex SYD (you would need to revise the onboard product) but there's stil the crew swap, unless they are exempt from restrictions- I guess in theory they could be as SQ is still operating a handful of flights.
FYI all Malindo ADL/BNE/MEL/SYD-DPS flights are double catered on the inbound from DPS.

getluv · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:52 am

SCFlyer wrote:
getluv wrote:
SCFlyer wrote:

NZ doesn't have the track record in Australia. Although Ansett had similar problems, NZ bit more than they can chew at the time thanks to Selwyn 'Borghetti' Cushing and his sidekick Gary Toomey, and their 2nd failure ended in the clash of the egos between Luxon and Borghetti.

Saying that, SQ isn't much better with their mediocre track record of investments in Australia. (1st strike with the debt ridden NZ/Ansett group, 2nd strike with Tiger Airways Australia and 3rd strike with Virgin Australia). Add to SQ's failure with VS which led to DL buying their stake and DL having to rescue VS.

NZ and SQ never really ran either. They had second rate management teams and never really had any control. NZ/SQ just wanted access to frequent flyers and domestic routes where they would never fly directly.

I wonder if NZ still had a 20% stake in VA, how dire the situation they would be in.

NZ owned 100% of AN and had direct managerial control of AN at the time of collapse.

NZ and SQ also had a boardroom seat at VA over the years and had a direct say in decisions and capital injections in that period.

On a side note: SQ wanted to buy the 50% of AN off News Corp, and NZ middle management okay-ed it. The problem is that the then-NZ chairman Selwyn 'Borghetti' Cushing used his veto rights to block SQ from buying into AN and demanded that SQ buy 20% in the combined NZ/AN instead, all because of egos at NZ at the time. Despite Cushing fully knowing his airline didn't have the balance sheet to repair an ailing AN.

Didn’t NZ take full ownership 18 months before AN went to shit? The damage was done. That experience alone taught them a lesson to run for the hills with VA.

While NZ and SQ had seats on the board, they had multiple other people at the table with other vested interests.

A350OZ · Wed Mar 25, 2020 9:58 am

EK413 wrote:
SCFlyer wrote:
My understanding is SIN is a "gas and go" stop for BA15/16. Passengers aren't allowed off the plane in SIN while they refuel.
The "gas and go" stop in SIN may be tricky logistically if crew ends up "out of hours" if unusual circumstances happen mid-flight.

Source: https://www.executivetraveller.com/news ... ore-sydney

Curious how BA will manage a gas n go via SIN.

Do the crew deadhead SYD-SIN leg & swap in SIN? Also interesting how the second sector catering is loaded?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As a side note, I was meant to be on BA16 today going to Paris via LHR. Surprisingly, all my flights over and back were never cancelled or even rescheduled. Because I was holding off with cancelation in anticipation of changes to the schedule, I ended up scrambling to try and cancel them via our corp travel agent given their workload, but finally they confirmed it canceled last night.

Also, I second chipmunk1973’s positive experience with Qantas Hotels upthread. Had a non-refundable booking with them in London but they waived it and canceled within the promised response time (via email), and got a revised statement showing the refund going back onto my credit card.

eta unknown · Wed Mar 25, 2020 10:25 am

getluv wrote:
ACCC does have the power to split a company, so essentially they could break JQ off from QF if they wanted to.
The Australian Government is better off offering money to Air NZ to run a competitor. VA is experiencing what a lot of companies and people are going through when you don’t have reserves or capital to prepare for rough times. I understand that this is exceptional circumstances but VA’s balance sheet and record over the past decade is not deserving of a bailout. Interesting how AJ’s hard tactics and modest capex spending on new aircraft have saved QF.
Corporate Australia will go where the savings are.

ACCC may think they have such power, but realistically no:
a) JQ is a wholly owned subsidiary- separate financials don't exist
b) all of JQ's maintenance and other bills, etc are paid by QF
c) how do you compensate QF shareholders if part of their investment is cast off?
d) Imagine the optics of the Aussie Govt. giving money to foreigners (NZ) to run a competitor against an Australian company
e) Corporate Australia will give their business to whichever company offers them the best deal- they don't care about aviation rivalry.

I see Branson is pumping GBP215m into VS- what's he done for VA?

timtam · Wed Mar 25, 2020 10:35 am

eta unknown wrote:
getluv wrote:
ACCC does have the power to split a company, so essentially they could break JQ off from QF if they wanted to.
The Australian Government is better off offering money to Air NZ to run a competitor. VA is experiencing what a lot of companies and people are going through when you don’t have reserves or capital to prepare for rough times. I understand that this is exceptional circumstances but VA’s balance sheet and record over the past decade is not deserving of a bailout. Interesting how AJ’s hard tactics and modest capex spending on new aircraft have saved QF.
Corporate Australia will go where the savings are.

ACCC may think they have such power, but realistically no:
a) JQ is a wholly owned subsidiary- separate financials don't exist
b) all of JQ's maintenance and other bills, etc are paid by QF
c) how do you compensate QF shareholders if part of their investment is cast off?
d) Imagine the optics of the Aussie Govt. giving money to foreigners (NZ) to run a competitor against an Australian company
e) Corporate Australia will give their business to whichever company offers them the best deal- they don't care about aviation rivalry.

I see Branson is pumping GBP215m into VS- what's he done for VA?

Incorrect. The ACCC does not have the power to split a company.

Dan23 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 11:52 am

It appears there is an additional PER-LHR service tonight as QF5, scheduled to depart Perth at 2210 with an arrival in London at 0800. Should be operated by VH-ZNE which cut short QF10 in Perth earlier today.

The return QF6 is scheduled for Friday.

qf002 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:00 pm

Dan23 wrote:
It appears there is an additional PER-LHR service tonight as QF5, scheduled to depart Perth at 2210 with an arrival in London at 0800. Should be operated by VH-ZNE which cut short QF10 in Perth earlier today.

The return QF6 is scheduled for Friday.

Possibly in part due to weight restrictions on QF1/2 at the moment?

getluv · Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:02 pm

timtam wrote:
eta unknown wrote:
getluv wrote:
ACCC does have the power to split a company, so essentially they could break JQ off from QF if they wanted to.
The Australian Government is better off offering money to Air NZ to run a competitor. VA is experiencing what a lot of companies and people are going through when you don’t have reserves or capital to prepare for rough times. I understand that this is exceptional circumstances but VA’s balance sheet and record over the past decade is not deserving of a bailout. Interesting how AJ’s hard tactics and modest capex spending on new aircraft have saved QF.
Corporate Australia will go where the savings are.

ACCC may think they have such power, but realistically no:
a) JQ is a wholly owned subsidiary- separate financials don't exist
b) all of JQ's maintenance and other bills, etc are paid by QF
c) how do you compensate QF shareholders if part of their investment is cast off?
d) Imagine the optics of the Aussie Govt. giving money to foreigners (NZ) to run a competitor against an Australian company
e) Corporate Australia will give their business to whichever company offers them the best deal- they don't care about aviation rivalry.

I see Branson is pumping GBP215m into VS- what's he done for VA?

Incorrect. The ACCC does not have the power to split a company.

Apologies. I misspoke. No ACCC doesn’t have the power to force a company to divest, but misuse of market power and anti-competitive behaviour.

The ACCC has campaigned in the past to have the power to force companies to divest.

aerokiwi · Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:10 pm

getluv wrote:
timtam wrote:
eta unknown wrote:

ACCC may think they have such power, but realistically no:
a) JQ is a wholly owned subsidiary- separate financials don't exist
b) all of JQ's maintenance and other bills, etc are paid by QF
c) how do you compensate QF shareholders if part of their investment is cast off?
d) Imagine the optics of the Aussie Govt. giving money to foreigners (NZ) to run a competitor against an Australian company
e) Corporate Australia will give their business to whichever company offers them the best deal- they don't care about aviation rivalry.

I see Branson is pumping GBP215m into VS- what's he done for VA?

Incorrect. The ACCC does not have the power to split a company.

Apologies. I misspoke. No ACCC doesn’t have the power to force a company to divest, but misuse of market power and anti-competitive behaviour.

The ACCC has campaigned in the past to have the power to force companies to divest.

Yeah and its track record of late has been abysmal - how many times has it lost in court? And, of course, you'd need a willing investor. Who exactly do you think would want to invest in an airline right now? Or at all in the next 5 years? In a market dominated by one carrier at the bottom of the world?

Comparing QF or VA to NZ and the government reaction there is pointless - NZ is already 52% owned by the New Zealand government.

Had VA collapsed well before this virus, sure, all bets on a new carrier entering the market. When we emerge from this, we will be in a different era of aviation. It will bounce back, sure, but the risk profile of aviation, already high, has just gone stratospheric. If corporate Australia isn't savvy enough to recognise that and support two carriers, then they'll pay the price. As will we all.

qf002 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:30 pm

Does anybody know what QF6034 HNL-SYD was for tonight? Some sort of repatriation flight?

Scratch that - QF source lists it as a charter, I'm guessing probably cruise related.

Aviator34ID · Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:34 pm

"If corporate Australia isn't savvy enough to recognise that and support two carriers, then they'll pay the price. As will we all."

I suspect that what's left of corporate Australia will be interested in the cheapest, most efficient airline, rather than any philosophical embrace of supporting two carriers.

moa999 · Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:59 pm

qf002 wrote:
Does anybody know what QF6034 HNL-SYD was for tonight? Some sort of repatriation flight?

Scratch that - QF source lists it as a charter, I'm guessing probably cruise related.

Norwegian Jewel
bunch of charters out of HNL as a result

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net