QFs strategy: discussion thread for customers, investors, consultants & armchair CEOs
Aug 23, 2014, 1:37 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 965
QFs strategy: discussion thread for customers, investors, consultants & armchair CEOs
A lot has been said in recent years as to the performance of Qantas; however I feel one issue is strongly overlooked - their excessive use of consultants.
It was only a few years ago that Joyce said the international division was strong, it seems both The Board and Bain failed to see this.
They have provided significant bias towards cost cutting but have failed to address the most important issue for any business to survive, the necessity for sustainable and growing revenue.
They have rolled out things that are absolute rubbish like uber premium wine bars in their lounges, while you may see that as a drop in the ocean - it illustrates a sad state of affairs and thinking that they concern themselves with such frivolous things when they have real problems which require more urgent attention.
They seem to have believed that by not modernising their fleet but rather spending money and time on new lounges, uniforms and other 'rubbish' it will provide them with a sustainable platform. A uniform and cosmetic makeover is a feel good factor but rather irrelevant when building the bedrock of what the airline needs to survive. Qantas are hoping the A330's they receive from Jetstar will bring them to profitability while other airlines are at the stage of phasing A330s out to replace them with 787's and A350's. They are essentially bringing a knife to a gun fight.
Their conceited opinion of themselves with JetStar Hong Kong. For them to believe that Cathay Pacific are going to simply roll over and allow Qantas and their subsidiaries to play in their own backyard smacks of the highest degree's of arrogance and complacency. I'm sure it looked great on paper, the ability to on sell flights into China from Hong Kong, maybe even work in conjunction with the QF and one day JQ arrivals from Aus. Now they are paying finance costs on dead weight sitting in Tolouse in the form of A320's.
Their partnership with Emirates is another one. I would have gone to Cathay and made peace. I would have said let's work together on flights to and from Australia/Hong Kong/Europe/Middle East, we'll bring JQ Asia and you bring Dragonair and we can make a truly powerful Asian airline. One that would cover every aspect of Asia. It would have also helped with the issue of Qantas getting to Europe, the timing's would have also been better than the over night 6.5 hour flight LHR - DXB.
I realise nothing I say here will change what Qantas does. I feel it is death by a thousand cuts at Qantas. Who knows when Johannesburg and other cities will be cut from the network only to be replaced by JQ, if they are replaced at all.
In summation my frustration is that they are unable to appreciate that they don't know. Instead they believe their previous ideas failed because they didn't do them 'hard enough' previously.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...3/1325668.html
http://online.wsj.com/articles/jetst...sts-1408692068
It was only a few years ago that Joyce said the international division was strong, it seems both The Board and Bain failed to see this.
They have provided significant bias towards cost cutting but have failed to address the most important issue for any business to survive, the necessity for sustainable and growing revenue.
They have rolled out things that are absolute rubbish like uber premium wine bars in their lounges, while you may see that as a drop in the ocean - it illustrates a sad state of affairs and thinking that they concern themselves with such frivolous things when they have real problems which require more urgent attention.
They seem to have believed that by not modernising their fleet but rather spending money and time on new lounges, uniforms and other 'rubbish' it will provide them with a sustainable platform. A uniform and cosmetic makeover is a feel good factor but rather irrelevant when building the bedrock of what the airline needs to survive. Qantas are hoping the A330's they receive from Jetstar will bring them to profitability while other airlines are at the stage of phasing A330s out to replace them with 787's and A350's. They are essentially bringing a knife to a gun fight.
Their conceited opinion of themselves with JetStar Hong Kong. For them to believe that Cathay Pacific are going to simply roll over and allow Qantas and their subsidiaries to play in their own backyard smacks of the highest degree's of arrogance and complacency. I'm sure it looked great on paper, the ability to on sell flights into China from Hong Kong, maybe even work in conjunction with the QF and one day JQ arrivals from Aus. Now they are paying finance costs on dead weight sitting in Tolouse in the form of A320's.
Their partnership with Emirates is another one. I would have gone to Cathay and made peace. I would have said let's work together on flights to and from Australia/Hong Kong/Europe/Middle East, we'll bring JQ Asia and you bring Dragonair and we can make a truly powerful Asian airline. One that would cover every aspect of Asia. It would have also helped with the issue of Qantas getting to Europe, the timing's would have also been better than the over night 6.5 hour flight LHR - DXB.
I realise nothing I say here will change what Qantas does. I feel it is death by a thousand cuts at Qantas. Who knows when Johannesburg and other cities will be cut from the network only to be replaced by JQ, if they are replaced at all.
In summation my frustration is that they are unable to appreciate that they don't know. Instead they believe their previous ideas failed because they didn't do them 'hard enough' previously.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...3/1325668.html
http://online.wsj.com/articles/jetst...sts-1408692068
Aug 23, 2014, 2:57 am
#3
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,530
Terminating the Board will probably mean huge payouts ...
I assume the consultants are more knowledgeable than the Board and senior staff, so what's wrong with engaging them? Who else is there to guide this seemingly rudderless ship?
I assume the consultants are more knowledgeable than the Board and senior staff, so what's wrong with engaging them? Who else is there to guide this seemingly rudderless ship?
Aug 23, 2014, 3:49 am
#4
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 965
Find competent management who have decades of experience in the industry.
Finally, paying out the board; or terminating their employment for poor performance is ultimately cheaper than the destruction of a multi billion company.
Aug 23, 2014, 3:51 am
#5
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 965
What I find so funny is your blind faith in them, you don't know my background.
Aug 23, 2014, 4:48 am
#7
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 44,574
A competent corner shop owner would understand the necessity for revenue, cost control, product placement and economic cycles better than any one of the MBA's who have never spent a day in the real world.
What I find so funny is your blind faith in them, you don't know my background.
What I find so funny is your blind faith in them, you don't know my background.
Aug 23, 2014, 4:56 am
#8
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,477
A competent corner shop owner would understand the necessity for revenue, cost control, product placement and economic cycles better than any one of the MBA's who have never spent a day in the real world.
What I find so funny is your blind faith in them, you don't know my background.
What I find so funny is your blind faith in them, you don't know my background.
Aug 23, 2014, 8:54 am
#9
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: London, UK
Programs: BA Gold(OWE), QF LTG, MR Plat, IHG Spire, Hertz PC
Posts: 8,156
A lot has been said in recent years as to the performance of Qantas; however I feel one issue is strongly overlooked - their excessive use of consultants.
It was only a few years ago that Joyce said the international division was strong, it seems both The Board and Bain failed to see this.
They have provided significant bias towards cost cutting but have failed to address the most important issue for any business to survive, the necessity for sustainable and growing revenue.
They have rolled out things that are absolute rubbish like uber premium wine bars in their lounges, while you may see that as a drop in the ocean - it illustrates a sad state of affairs and thinking that they concern themselves with such frivolous things when they have real problems which require more urgent attention.
They seem to have believed that by not modernising their fleet but rather spending money and time on new lounges, uniforms and other 'rubbish' it will provide them with a sustainable platform. A uniform and cosmetic makeover is a feel good factor but rather irrelevant when building the bedrock of what the airline needs to survive. Qantas are hoping the A330's they receive from Jetstar will bring them to profitability while other airlines are at the stage of phasing A330s out to replace them with 787's and A350's. They are essentially bringing a knife to a gun fight.
Their conceited opinion of themselves with JetStar Hong Kong. For them to believe that Cathay Pacific are going to simply roll over and allow Qantas and their subsidiaries to play in their own backyard smacks of the highest degree's of arrogance and complacency. I'm sure it looked great on paper, the ability to on sell flights into China from Hong Kong, maybe even work in conjunction with the QF and one day JQ arrivals from Aus. Now they are paying finance costs on dead weight sitting in Tolouse in the form of A320's.
Their partnership with Emirates is another one. I would have gone to Cathay and made peace. I would have said let's work together on flights to and from Australia/Hong Kong/Europe/Middle East, we'll bring JQ Asia and you bring Dragonair and we can make a truly powerful Asian airline. One that would cover every aspect of Asia. It would have also helped with the issue of Qantas getting to Europe, the timing's would have also been better than the over night 6.5 hour flight LHR - DXB.
I realise nothing I say here will change what Qantas does. I feel it is death by a thousand cuts at Qantas. Who knows when Johannesburg and other cities will be cut from the network only to be replaced by JQ, if they are replaced at all.
In summation my frustration is that they are unable to appreciate that they don't know. Instead they believe their previous ideas failed because they didn't do them 'hard enough' previously.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...3/1325668.html
http://online.wsj.com/articles/jetst...sts-1408692068
It was only a few years ago that Joyce said the international division was strong, it seems both The Board and Bain failed to see this.
They have provided significant bias towards cost cutting but have failed to address the most important issue for any business to survive, the necessity for sustainable and growing revenue.
They have rolled out things that are absolute rubbish like uber premium wine bars in their lounges, while you may see that as a drop in the ocean - it illustrates a sad state of affairs and thinking that they concern themselves with such frivolous things when they have real problems which require more urgent attention.
They seem to have believed that by not modernising their fleet but rather spending money and time on new lounges, uniforms and other 'rubbish' it will provide them with a sustainable platform. A uniform and cosmetic makeover is a feel good factor but rather irrelevant when building the bedrock of what the airline needs to survive. Qantas are hoping the A330's they receive from Jetstar will bring them to profitability while other airlines are at the stage of phasing A330s out to replace them with 787's and A350's. They are essentially bringing a knife to a gun fight.
Their conceited opinion of themselves with JetStar Hong Kong. For them to believe that Cathay Pacific are going to simply roll over and allow Qantas and their subsidiaries to play in their own backyard smacks of the highest degree's of arrogance and complacency. I'm sure it looked great on paper, the ability to on sell flights into China from Hong Kong, maybe even work in conjunction with the QF and one day JQ arrivals from Aus. Now they are paying finance costs on dead weight sitting in Tolouse in the form of A320's.
Their partnership with Emirates is another one. I would have gone to Cathay and made peace. I would have said let's work together on flights to and from Australia/Hong Kong/Europe/Middle East, we'll bring JQ Asia and you bring Dragonair and we can make a truly powerful Asian airline. One that would cover every aspect of Asia. It would have also helped with the issue of Qantas getting to Europe, the timing's would have also been better than the over night 6.5 hour flight LHR - DXB.
I realise nothing I say here will change what Qantas does. I feel it is death by a thousand cuts at Qantas. Who knows when Johannesburg and other cities will be cut from the network only to be replaced by JQ, if they are replaced at all.
In summation my frustration is that they are unable to appreciate that they don't know. Instead they believe their previous ideas failed because they didn't do them 'hard enough' previously.
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...3/1325668.html
http://online.wsj.com/articles/jetst...sts-1408692068
Aug 23, 2014, 9:00 am
#10
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,916
or maybe like Gordon Bethune (no experience running a major airline) went to CO?
or perhaps Colin Marshall (no experience running a major airline) went to BA?
Aug 23, 2014, 9:14 am
#11
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 965
I have to agree with much stated in this post. My only comment however is that I am not sure the ACCC would have seen a CX-QF tie up so favourably. Also QF don't have the same amount of traffic rights into HKG as they do to either SIN or DXB. This therefore complicates what QF can and can't do. I do however agree that CX would have made a better (theoretical) partner.
I also feel the ACCC is a toothless tiger who are more concerned with personal vendettas than protecting the consumer.
Aug 23, 2014, 9:26 am
#12
Moderator: Asiana & Qantas Frequent Flyer
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: STR/SYD/SMF
Programs: QF Lifetime SG, LH HON, OZ Lifetime Diamond +, HH Diamond, Marriott Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 14,372
[mod hat] I edited the thread title to follow the example of the LH board. Lets have a master thread where we can all play CEO and discuss what's is wrong and right about QF strategy. [/mod hat]
Aug 23, 2014, 11:38 am
#13
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: SYD
Programs: QF WP/LTG | UA P
Posts: 13,530
Aug 23, 2014, 5:13 pm
#15
Join Date: Jul 2007
Programs: QFF
Posts: 5,304
SIN: unlimited, 500 seats/week CMB/SIN
UAE: To/from SYD, MEL/AVV, BNE, PER 123 flights/week (137/week from March), +21/week To/from SYD, MEL/AVV, BNE, PER via another Australian port. To/from other then SYD, MEL/AVV, BNE, PER - unlimited
HKG: to/from SYD, MEL, BNE, PER, 45 flights/week, other then To/from SYD, MEL/AVV, BNE, PER - unlimited.
5th Freedom rights
HKG
Fifth freedom rights are available for a maximum of 50% of the capacity of the aircraft operated, or up to 200 passengers per flight, whichever is higher.
Capacity may be used via points in Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand to Hong Kong on up to 7 round trip frequencies per week on each city pair.
Capacity may be used beyond Hong Kong to points in Thailand, Singapore, Japan, Republic of Korea and one point in Europe and one point in the United Kingdom on up to 8 round trip frequencies in total per week.
Of these, if a European point is selected, up to 3 round trip frequencies per week may
be operated. The European point may be selected from points in Germany, France,
Scandinavia, Italy, the Netherlands or Switzerland. Currently there are 7 round trip
frequencies per week available beyond Hong Kong to the United Kingdom.
Capacity may be used via points in Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand to Hong Kong on up to 7 round trip frequencies per week on each city pair.
Capacity may be used beyond Hong Kong to points in Thailand, Singapore, Japan, Republic of Korea and one point in Europe and one point in the United Kingdom on up to 8 round trip frequencies in total per week.
Of these, if a European point is selected, up to 3 round trip frequencies per week may
be operated. The European point may be selected from points in Germany, France,
Scandinavia, Italy, the Netherlands or Switzerland. Currently there are 7 round trip
frequencies per week available beyond Hong Kong to the United Kingdom.
(numbers don't count flights currently in operation by QF, JQ or VA)