Has Qantas got its "mojo" back?

[mannej]

Medhead, there is no mention of Gate to Gate IFE in relation to the 330.

It has reference Gate to Gate on 737, selected 747 and all 380 services.

 

[eastwest101]

If mojo is measured in share price performance it looks like it will take another 9 months to get back around $1.50 where it was before June 2012...

 

[trippin_the_rift]

I'm sure QF are working their butts off behind the scenes, however it's just not showing yet. Too early to make any Mojo calls!

 

[medhead]

Medhead, there is no mention of Gate to Gate IFE in relation to the 330.

It has reference Gate to Gate on 737, selected 747 and all 380 services.

Maybe so. But one person in my group of six had IFE until after landing. 2 had no IFE for the whole flight and the rest of us had it turn off before landing without warning. On take off some screens had IFE, mine didn't until it suddenly kicked in. So my comment wasn't about what is the published benefit but about what I assume is some random system fault for whatever reason. On the same flight number recently I had gate to gate IFE.


Sent from the Throne

 

[BD1959]

QF are not dropping routes that are profitable. If the dropped BOM it's because it was draining resources.,

And herein lies the core issue for me.

SIN-BOM was dropped less than 3 years after it was instigated. Either the economics change drastically or the measure by which QF Management gage the potential profitability of a particular route are flawed. For QF's sake I hope that the Business Case which supports the "return to profitability" proposed by the EK tie-up eventuates. Funny how the distributed model of using DXB as a hub was basically the same as that used to sell SIN-BOM in the first place - that the SIN hub effectively had Mumbai accessible from 7 Australian cities (have a look at QF's statements back when the route was first launched).

Arguably though, the changes will create a more effective distribution of capacity throughout the network. Routing QF flights via DXB plus the EK partnership probably means more QF seats are available to London itself now than via SIN (given O+D demand of SIN and DXB out of Australia).

1. QF - hopefully - have something more than "Arguably", something more concrete than the RedQ - which was to be QFi's saviour.
2. I understand the potential benefits of being able to code-share on a greater number of destinations which the EK partnership *may* bring. I also understand - to various points on here - the fact that alliances (whether inside or outside of oneWorld) mean that neither the airline has to, nor should the customer expect, to be able to fly the one airline anywhere in the world. This - of course - has always been the case ... although traditionally, of course separate tickets, no interlining of baggage etc were the norm. What I fail to understand is an approach where you actively encourage your customers to sample the opposition where the choice exists to use either QF or the competitor.

Rather than an airline which has recovered its mojo, I see one which is on the back-foot, taking a huge gamble on a new partnership which may - or may not - work. One which has probably been further rocked this week with the announcements from Virgin ... which certainly does appear to have its mojo up.

That won't stop me hoping - desperately - that QF does manage to turn things around, and quickly.

Regards,

BD

 

[cmon0005]

SIN-BOM was dropped less than 3 years after it was instigated. Either the economics change drastically or the measure by which QF Management gage the potential profitability of a particular route are flawed. For QF's sake I hope that the Business Case which supports the "return to profitability" proposed by the EK tie-up eventuates. Funny how the distributed model of using DXB as a hub was basically the same as that used to sell SIN-BOM in the first place - that the SIN hub effectively had Mumbai accessible from 7 Australian cities (have a look at QF's statements back when the route was first launched).

I used to be a frequent traveller on SIN-BOM in my old job and mostly in J, I've said it time and time again to QF via feedback, its not the route itself that makes it unprofitable, it was the frequency (they only offered 1 flight every 2nd day pretty much), the timing of the flights were not good, morning 10am departure from BOM and 2am arrival into BOM.
Maybe for leisure pax this is ok but for business travellers these are not ok, eg. I used to do 1-2 week visits for work arrive on Sunday leave friday night, it was impossible to do this on QF51/52, so most of the time work had us booked on SQ J as their 3x flights per day catered for business people finishing a day at work then straight to the airport and arrival times around 10pm at night so you could get a nights rest before going into the office.

These 2 things are the main factors that kept business people away from QF51/52, any time I was casually chatting with others at the hotel I was staying at they all said the same thing, frequency and timing are what made them fly SQ.

If QF had of timed these flights correctly this route could be a business gold mine (with so many companies with operations there and IT hubs, travel there is huge)
however when you have lots of competitors with better pricing, timing, frequency the choice is a no brainer.
Virgin Atlantic left BOM only to come back after a few years (actually they just launched again a few days ago on Sun 28th Oct).
Singapore flies there 3 times daily, one service has F cabin too.
Malaysia flies there twice daily.
Cathay Pacific files there twice daily.
British Airways flies there twice daily from London.

So there is obviously a market, and you can see all the carriers above have one thing in common, daily frequency and a morning flight and evening flight to cater for business people and connections.etc.
I'm not saying that 2 daily flights for QF would have been a saviour for them but at very least 1 daily flight appropriately timed for evening depature would have kept them in the game.

 

[The Rok]

I used to be a frequent traveller on SIN-BOM in my old job and mostly in J, I've said it time and time again to QF via feedback, its not the route itself that makes it unprofitable, it was the frequency (they only offered 1 flight every 2nd day pretty much), the timing of the flights were not good, morning 10am departure from BOM and 2am arrival into BOM.
Maybe for leisure pax this is ok but for business travellers these are not ok, eg. I used to do 1-2 week visits for work arrive on Sunday leave friday night, it was impossible to do this on QF51/52, so most of the time work had us booked on SQ J as their 3x flights per day catered for business people finishing a day at work then straight to the airport and arrival times around 10pm at night so you could get a nights rest before going into the office.

These 2 things are the main factors that kept business people away from QF51/52, any time I was casually chatting with others at the hotel I was staying at they all said the same thing, frequency and timing are what made them fly SQ.

If QF had of timed these flights correctly this route could be a business gold mine (with so many companies with operations there and IT hubs, travel there is huge)
however when you have lots of competitors with better pricing, timing, frequency the choice is a no brainer.
Virgin Atlantic left BOM only to come back after a few years (actually they just launched again a few days ago on Sun 28th Oct).
Singapore flies there 3 times daily, one service has F cabin too.
Malaysia flies there twice daily.
Cathay Pacific files there twice daily.
British Airways flies there twice daily from London.

So there is obviously a market, and you can see all the carriers above have one thing in common, daily frequency and a morning flight and evening flight to cater for business people and connections.etc.
I'm not saying that 2 daily flights for QF would have been a saviour for them but at very least 1 daily flight appropriately timed for evening depature would have kept them in the game.

But none of them fly there daily from Australia? They are all closer to BOM so timings & aircraft allocation are easier.

Given that IMO there are more Indians then Brits in London it is not too hard to understand why BA fly twice daily.

The simple fact is there are a multitude of ways that you can get from amy Australian city to BOM, why do QF also have to do it? If the one flight QF did every second day was not enough and the timings didn't suit then clearly QF thought it would be better to not tie up additional aircraft on an already saturated route and instead concentrate on expanding existing profitable routes.

I keep saying it, QF cannot fly to every city in the world 7 times a day on 4 class A380's whole holding the worlds best lounges in every city and offering the cheapest ticket cost…. Just to please a handful of Aussies who think they should. It doesn't work that way. That's why they have alliances. Fly Cathy, or soon EK…..

QF cannot own the world…

 

[Mal Ware]

Rather than an airline which has recovered its mojo, I see one which is on the back-foot, taking a huge gamble on a new partnership which may - or may not - work. One which has probably been further rocked this week with the announcements from Virgin ... which certainly does appear to have its mojo up.

That won't stop me hoping - desperately - that QF does manage to turn things around, and quickly.

I agree.

QF cannot own the world…

But they did used to "own" Australia, that is now slipping through their tired old hands.

 

[JohnK]

The staff appear to be trying harder.

As for the Qantas the company, including senior management, they have a long way to go. That is if Qantas is still around....

 

[jetlagger]

But they did used to "own" Australia, that is now slipping through their tired old hands.

But mostly through ignorance, complacency & illogical adaptability to changes in aviation & the modern world. Sadly so.

 

[Pilbaracommuter]

Currently QF platinum one & moved a significant portion of my flights to Virgin in last 2 months.

Noted when I do fly QF, staff seem to be more attentive and often offer additional freebies (to me, not generally). I have had a J meal in a Y seat, additional snacks/soft drinks/tea/coffee and today a free wine in Y (on a discount fare).

Wondering if this is a general change in service, improvements targeted to higher status customers, or targeted to higher status customers whose activity has dropped off.

Anyone else observed this?

 

[Mal Ware]

Joyce reached into his bag of tricks today and sacked a heap of workers. That should see all Qantas workers getting on with the job at hand rather than watching their back wondering who is to be next.

One thing Qantas did have for so many years was stability, since Joyce has arrived that is slowly being eroded.

They are in the headlines for all the wrong reasons with that incompetent fool in charge.

 

[Must...Fly!]

They are in the headlines for all the wrong reasons with that incompetent fool in charge.

An incompetent fool would leave the group losing hundreds of millions without making a change

The crusade on here at times is astounding

 

[opusman]

Anyone else observed this?

I got a $1 discount on the wine on a recent flight HBA/MEL, but I think that was more likely due to lack of change than my status...

 

[nlagalle]

Joyce reached into his bag of tricks today and sacked a heap of workers. That should see all Qantas workers getting on with the job at hand rather than watching their back wondering who is to be next.

One thing Qantas did have for so many years was stability, since Joyce has arrived that is slowly being eroded.

They are in the headlines for all the wrong reasons with that incompetent fool in charge.

I'm astounded at how many people here are solely blaming AJ for Qantas's current woes. How about his predecessors? The issues Qantas face today are also a result of mistakes made years ago.

I can relate to the massive changes at QF simply because exactly the same thing is happening in my workplace. Changes that should have happened 6 years ago are only happening now and at an accelerated pace. No company around is immune from changes. And in todays climate there is no job for life either.

 

[burmans]

I'm astounded at how many people here are solely blaming AJ for Qantas's current woes. How about his predecessors? The issues Qantas face today are also a result of mistakes made years ago.

For a second there I thought we were going back to the US election. I agree with this comment, Qantas's cost structure base just doesn't cut it in the current environment and wishful thinking about going back in the past won't cut it. That's the reality of the airline world and Qantas is far from alone in having workers who struggle with the concept, in fact many have gone broke before they got their workers to accept wage decreases. In my opinion AJ is only doing what has to be done, absolutely that is hard on those affected. But the alternative (more of the same) was never going to work.

 

[medhead]

An incompetent fool would leave the group losing hundreds of millions without making a change

The crusade on here at times is astounding

If that was true you might have a point. Trouble is that qantas group has been making profits each and every year. The loss this past year could be attributed to the cost of the grounding and the cost of the changes in QFi.


Sent from the Throne

 

[serfty]

If that was true you might have a point. Trouble is that qantas group has been making profits each and every year. The loss this past year could be attributed to the cost of the grounding and the cost of the changes in QFi.


Sent from the Throne

eh?

QFi was losing $$. QFd was making enough to cover QFi losses

The grounding was in response to industrial action - chick 'n egg situation as to what was costing what.

The QFi changes were to reduce losses.

 

[oz_mark]

I'm astounded at how many people here are solely blaming AJ for Qantas's current woes. How about his predecessors? The issues Qantas face today are also a result of mistakes made years ago.

Probably because once you've been in a job for a few years, somewhere along the line you have to stop blaming those that came before. He's predecessors were perhaps lucky that they were able to milk the SYD-LAX route to keep things afloat. That nasty thing called competition has now come along, and it is AJ that has to deal with the fact they can no longer use the route as a cash cow. Six years ago it was not such a problem.

Pretty tough to blame his predecessors for the lack of competition on a route!

 

[markis10]

I dont think they have their mojo back, things like opening under two hours before the first check in is permitted for a flight leaving at noon, then having a QP that wont open until 10.30 reinforce the lack of customer centric actions that still seem to dominate QF.