Beano

https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/qantas-gives-chairman-s-membership-to-some-of-its-big-investors-20231018-p5edcd.html


Looks like you can get free membership if you own a couple of million Qantas shares

SW7London

Great way to keep large investors on side so they don't ask too many pesky questions of senior management!

Of course, these investors arent investing with their money, merely superannuation funds which probably explains the poor performance of most Aussie super funds compared to the broader market.

Do you own SMSF and buy a tracker, better performance and you wont be contributing to soft corruption like this

Koru Flyer

Given the reasonably poor performance of ASX:QAN as a long term investment (https://www.asx.com.au/markets/company/QAN) it is probably the least they can do. Now checking super fund to ensure it has no QAN shares ;-)

og

It may just be a good time to buy. “Rush, rush, rush” to borrow the words of a billionaire retailer..

Dave Noble

Not sure how this is really news. People with influence on large scale spending are normal targets for offering membership

Given that the membership is disclosed to the company, I cannot see how a claim of corruption can be made

SW7London

These people are not large scale spenders with Qantas though.

Why would Qantas offer Chairman's Lounge membership to investors? It has no large scale impact on spending for fares/revenue etc.

Similarly, Qantas offer membership to judges and regulators who have no large scale spending influence. Why?

djsflynn

Because CL criteria is not solely based on spend. And before one asks what it is based on, the fact that the membership criteria is unpublished, piecing together what's known (indeed, CL has probably never received such sustained public exposure as in recent months criteria), it is very broad and also at C-level discretion.

SW7London

Indeed. So Qantas offers membership to judges and regulators not because QF is generous or charitable but because they want something in return.

Similarly, to large investors, Qantas wants something in return.

DownUnderFlyer

In our business we put rules in place that if you get any benefit like this you would have to declare a conflict of interest and this will lead to you not being involved in an decision with regards to (in this case) QF.

Dave Noble

Which would be pretty much the same for any major company - claims of corruption seem to be quite unfounded

Koru Flyer

I doubt it, my experience of C-level of several ASX listed companies (and OS listed) that absolutely the CEO and many/several direct reports were CL members and were key decision makers of travel policy and airline selection. There is no COI here. Also it is opaque to gift policy as it has no actual sellable value, should a company start trying to work out value of status gained from flying for the company. Certainly Scandinavia tries with little success.

Corporate travel, like any supply agreement, goes out for tender and as part of the package looks at discounts, set fares, inclusions (e.g. Bags, CIP, lounge access), free status, route network, partnerships, CL or other airline equivalents. It is all part of the negotiation.

I do agree there is no “corruption” here as it is part of the overall negotiation. Based on price and corporate value. I doubt any CEO is going to look down the lens of the CFO and select a poor deal so he/she can get CL membership. Just does not happen. Esp as VA have their CL-like lounges anyway.

and I would probably expect that most ASX-100 CEOs are high net worth that would have it anyway irrespective of travel policy.

KF

djsflynn

Or Qantas is simply looking after the people who are its biggest backers. I see no 'conflict' there.

SW7London

Why do people think Qantas gives CL membership to regulators, all high court judges and major investors? For charity ?

Its for influence otherwise known as soft corruption. There would be no hard cash or obvious decisions benefiting QF being done, but rather more nuanced events.

Good example is the CL given to many politicians and look at what QF has gotten away with for years...nothing illegal, just a peddling a lot of influence.

Koru Flyer

I think there is some mixing up here. Public companies have (generally) robust policies around gifts, influence, and sharehoder value - and I use the words "generally", and the CEO, chair etc are often doing business meetings etc in places like CL's, so that it is not actually all that special end of the day and they certainly are not getting to the airport 3-4 hours before a flight to "enjoy the lounge". Highest value is the ability to have flexibility to get on and change flights. And the little bit more privacy to work, take calls etc. The wine and food selection is just not a huge value. You can expense a sandwich.

Then you have the bucket for high net worth, influencers, sports people, shareholders etc.

The final bucket, as you rightly point out is public servants, politicians, and the like where there is some obvious "soft corruption". Even the simple stuff. If you were to always calling HBA to make changes, request FF seats, sort out when things went wrong etc etc, you would have no clue that they have outsourced the majority of calls to South Africa, and Fiji - with long wait times, shockingly low training, and poor overall skills that people are jus frustrated. So you have a tin ear to what the "real Qantas" is like for Australians and honestly do not understand the frustration of the everyday traveller and readily believe the previous CEO when he says travellers are not "match fit".

(although I do note that today the APS did update its gift rules to include lounge membership - note just a disclosure)

And the optics which is very different to where say QF invites CLs out to a dinner somewhere, versus putting on a whole dinner for your workplace (QF dinner this year at Parliament House).

That said, despite everything, you do not see the pollies giving it up. If I were leader of the opposition I would be making it very clear than none of my people should go into the CLs and should be very visible in and around the airport. Of course wind it back later - but there is some generally poor optics, poor advice and continual special place for QF in CBR.

KF

Beano

While the updated APSC advice applies to government agency heads, a number of MPs and senators have in recent months handed back their Chairman’s Lounge access.

Two senators, the independent senator David Pocock and the Greens’ Barbara Pocock, updated their registers of interest to reveal they were no longer members of the invite-only airport lounge.

Greens MPs Stephen Bates and Elizabeth Watson-Brown have also relinquished their memberships, as has the independent MP Monique Ryan.

The Labor senator Tony Sheldon, a former chief of the Transport Workers Union and fierce critic of Qantas, is also not a member; nor is Greens MP Max Chandler-Mather.