Newsstand - Air NZ polls Biased? QF vs SQ

Public opinion polls are the latest twist in the Air New Zealand foreign investment saga -- however the two polls published so far paint rather different picutres. Air New Zealand's research (undertaken by UMR) suggests 55% of the 500 New Zealanders it polled were 'for' a legislative change to allow greater Singapore Airlines investment in Air New Zealand, and 39% of those polled were 'against' the deal. The Air New Zealand research also showed that the respondents prefered Singapore Airlines investment over Qantas. Meanwhile, a National Business Review Compaq poll found 63% of those surveyed were 'against' the government lifting foreign ownership cap to 49%. Qantas also emerged as the favoured investor with 49% preferring Qantas and only 30% favouring Singapore airlines in the NBR poll.


Has Air NZ been using "selective" sample?

The way a question is phrased has a huge impact on the way people respond to it. In my work we do a lot of interviews. At the end of each one we ask if we can associate the respondent's name with what he/she said. If we ask "Would you like your comments to be anonymous?" most say "yes." If we ask "Have you said anything you want us to take your name off?" most say "no" and let us use it.

Anyone with an ax to grind can design a survey to support his/her case. Consider:

"Do you have a problem with Singapore Airlines buying Air New Zealand shares on the market?"

versus

"Would it bother you if an Asian airline got control of our national carrier?"

I'm surprised the difference in results wasn't greater.