Investment bank says QF to make half of its staff redundant

Status
Not open for further replies.

Melburnian1

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Posts
25,330
I'd never heard of 'investment bank Jeffries' but this is a brief cut and paste from some 'The Australian' article that appeared an hour ago (Tuesday 9 June 2020):

'...Qantas is expected to emerge from the COVID-19 crisis a much leaner operation with about half of its current workforce and a greatly reduced cost base in response to much weaker demand.
Detailed equity research by investment bank Jefferies forecast staff costs for the Qantas Group to shrink to just over $2bn in the 2021 financial year, from $4.2bn in 2019.

Expenditure on fuel, aircraft and marketing were also tipped to be slashed in a move that could see Qantas return to profit in 2021 after a net loss of around $200m in 2020...'

Then later the article says, quoting a better known investment bank:

'...Another report by Merrill Lynch research analysts Meredith Baxter and Kevin Wu, looked at the extent to which Qantas could discount airfares to stimulate demand without incurring further losses.

“Given fuel and staff cost saving, we expect ticket prices can be cut by up to 30 to 35 per cent in the first half of the 2021 financial year and still be cash flow neutral,” said the analysts.

“These discounts can be larger in the first quarter of the 2021 financial year, up to 40 per cent, given staff costs will in part be offset by Jobkeeper payments.

The Merrill Lynch report estimated the total cash burn by Qantas since the COVID-19 crisis forced aircraft to be grounded and workers to be stood down, was in the vicinity of $1.5bn...'

------------

If first prediction is anything near reality (by no means certain), that'd mean 15000 staff receiving redundancy. A large number, although QF is a far smaller employer than companies like Woolworths and Coles. From memory Woolworths had about 180000 staff prior to COVID-19, although not all would be full time. I don't know what the FTE headcounts would be but the grocery retailers would still be hugely ahead of Qantas under that metric.

The claimed 'cash burn' of $1.5 billion to date is more than what another analyst (I forget from where) said. His claim of two or three weeks ago was that the weekly cash burn by the QF Group was $90m (with the much publicised aim of Alan Joyce, CEO to bring that down to $40m per week by the close of June 2020).

23 March was probably when any cash burn intensified. If one assumes that it's all occurred in the c.11 weeks since then, that comes to about $140 million a week, an enormous amount. Perhaps there was some cash bleeding prior to 23 March given that the Federal Government shut off flights from mainland China at the start of February 2020.

One thing's for sure: all these airlines would have some 'costs' that travellers like me would be unaware of. Perhaps not surprising QF has tried to defer payment of some bills, and has done the same with its shareholder dividend, deferred until September 2020.

In the 'Will QF enter administration?' thread, AFFer RAM said:

"I'm not so sure it is actually in such a good way. More than 60% of their fleet is grounded by number, and by value its >80%. Q has massive staff entitlements to pay out when it starts laying staff off - by law it has to offer redundancies (2 weeks pay per year of service) plus accrued leave & other entitlements such as long service..." and went on to make many other assertions.

We'll have to wait and see whether RAM is proven correct.
 
Last edited:
I'd never heard of 'investment bank Jeffries' but this is a brief cut and paste from some 'The Australian' article that appeared an hour ago (Tuesday 9 June 2020):

Never heard of them either. Looked up their web site and capabilities - transport not mentioned. Sector Expertise in Restructuring | Jefferies

Honestly, having worked in M&A Investment Banking for 10 years I suggest you can't believe anything they say in public. It would either be for the consumption or rather the reflection of their corporate clients (positive or negative depending where the major client sat) or for some other strategic reason. Or just said to a media person to get the name of the bank mentioned, if not too greater risk of embarrassment. Bankers Trust Australia used to have a squadron of them - and that was a long time ago!

The good stuff - advice, opinion,strategy - is very much private advice/report, for which the client pays a lot to get, together with the analysis behind it.
 
Never heard of them either. Looked up their web site and capabilities - transport not mentioned. Sector Expertise in Restructuring | Jefferies...The good stuff - advice, opinion,strategy - is very much private advice/report, for which the client pays a lot to get, together with the analysis behind it.

Good point, so really, where's the incentive to 'go public' in commentary when there is as you say some (huge) risk of losing face if their public predictions are way off the mark?

Is this a case of the investment bank believing that its name is not widely known in the corporate world so sentiments like this regarding large companies are a way to get it 'free' media, and to do that it has to be controversial?
 
I think the question is not if QF and JQ and VA2 cuts staff, it’s by how much unfortunately

Absolutely. Every airline around the world that has made media announcement that I have read in the last couple months have talked about forecast cuts from 25-50% (I take them with a grain of salt).

However, over the last 2+ decades I have learned to ignore forecasts from so called "economists" looking for their 15 minutes of fame in the media about the stock market, market segments, housing and others. If I'm not mistaken, the market economists and the gov have got the forecast price of iron ore very wrong every year for the last dozen years.

I have a newspaper cutting somewhere from 6-8 decades ago with the same headline as printed a couple times in the last year or two professing the AU property market will drop by 20+% because housing is unaffordable.
 
“These discounts can be larger in the first quarter of the 2021 financial year, up to 40 per cent, given staff costs will in part be offset by Jobkeeper payments.

That's a fairly big assumption they're making that Jobkeeper will a) still be around in 2021 Q1 and b) at the current level.
 
That's a fairly big assumption they're making that Jobkeeper will a) still be around in 2021 Q1 and b) at the current level.

Indeed. Sounds like a mistake by this US investment bank as ScoMo has been clear that JobKeeper will be finishing in September. Sector-based continuation is possible but there'd be a lot of concern among the Coalition backbench, and economic commentators, that the Federal (and State) government(s)' debt(s) are already at a high level so why increase this further?
 
Good point, so really, where's the incentive to 'go public' in commentary when there is as you say some (huge) risk of losing face if their public predictions are way off the mark?

Is this a case of the investment bank believing that its name is not widely known in the corporate world so sentiments like this regarding large companies are a way to get it 'free' media, and to do that it has to be controversial?

I just found the article in the Oz. Its an equities (stockbroker) report that's been quoted. Basically a share analyst with a model of the company that they have put out to the media, and/or the public. Any decent outfit would release it to their clients a day or three beforehand.

There might be a dozen or more equities firms (stockbroking) with their own models and predictions. Jeffries probably just sent theirs to the Oz who jumped on it. In volatile times, like now, there's not much downside in getting things into the public sphere - things change so quickly. Any 'model' is reliant on the inputs into it - fuel cost/ FX / growth % out of the lock-down / conditions of flight / whether there will be competition or govt subsidies. With reasonable assumptions right now, you could put Qantas into 'crash-and-burn' loss or complete domination of the skies, by tweaking just a couple of assumptions by just a % or two each.

Meh.
 
Absolutely. Every airline around the world that has made media announcement that I have read in the last couple months have talked about forecast cuts from 25-50% (I take them with a grain of salt).

However, over the last 2+ decades I have learned to ignore forecasts from so called "economists" looking for their 15 minutes of fame in the media about the stock market, market segments, housing and others. If I'm not mistaken, the market economists and the gov have got the forecast price of iron ore very wrong every year for the last dozen years.

I have a newspaper cutting somewhere from 6-8 decades ago with the same headline as printed a couple times in the last year or two professing the AU property market will drop by 20+% because housing is unaffordable.

Agreed don’t get me started on housing price predictions! Literally the same people for 35 years straight predict a correction - get it wrong for 34 years then 1 year they act like they foresaw the second coming ;)
 
Agreed don’t get me started on housing price predictions! Literally the same people for 35 years straight predict a correction - get it wrong for 34 years then 1 year they act like they foresaw the second coming ;)
House prices have an inherent protection - unless absolutely necessary, people won't (can't) sell them for less than they owe .
 
Jefferies increased their presence in Australia when a large contingent of staff defected from CLSA. Prior to that they had quite a small presence.
 
Last edited:
Q has massive staff entitlements to pay out when it starts laying staff off

Yes, but does it actually have to lay off staff. Wouldn't it simply leave them "stood down" indefinitely?
 
Yes, but does it actually have to lay off staff. Wouldn't it simply leave them "stood down" indefinitely?

It must be difficult working in personnel for tourism and airline companies with COVID-19, given the impossibility of forecasting demand.

Revenue analysts cannot rely on historic data that in the past would in most years have been a fairly good guide to demand if an increment was added for annual growth.

The only result that many agree on is that there'll be 'some' reduction in demand. But what does this mean, and will it be different between domestic (where in most years QF, for instance, has made the bulk of its profits) and international?

And what of the World Health Organisation suggesting today, 20 June 2020, that coronavirus is 'worsening?' (This may be mostly in destinations to which Qantas has not recently, or ever, had own metal flights, but USA, Canada, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore and South Africa where it does fly remain trouble spots).

The negative headlines may inhibit the less adventurous from venturing beyond Australia. Will Bali, even if not as badly affected as some other Indonesian islands, remain out of bounds despite being a playground for so many Aussies? Will we not be able to travel to the USA until late in 2021 (not that one wants to be pessimistic).

Being 'stood down' in seeming eternity may not suit all employees. Some may have been close to retirement and may prefer a payout of accrued recreation, long service leave and other entitlements plus in time their superannuation.

Others may have found a job elsewhere and considered that they don't want to return to their previous airline position. Perhaps the spouse and any children 'welcome' the change in lifestyle?
 
Last edited:
Whilst I’m sure it could reach the point that people may prefer being retrenched, rather than stood down, the costs of doing so are quite high. It’s worth noting that this is a very long standing part of the employment contract, and it was renewed, post CV19, after QF became quite belligerent about getting the contract signed off. Perhaps they should have waited.
 
EXCLUSIVE OFFER - Offer expires: 20 Feb 2025

- Earn up to 200,000 bonus Velocity Points*
- Enjoy unlimited complimentary access to Priority Pass lounges worldwide
- Earn up to 3 Citi reward Points per dollar uncapped

*Terms And Conditions Apply

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

Status
Not open for further replies.

Become an AFF member!

Join Australian Frequent Flyer (AFF) for free and unlock insider tips, exclusive deals, and global meetups with 65,000+ frequent flyers.

AFF members can also access our Frequent Flyer Training courses, and upgrade to Fast-track your way to expert traveller status and unlock even more exclusive discounts!

AFF forum abbreviations

Wondering about Y, J or any of the other abbreviations used on our forum?

Check out our guide to common AFF acronyms & abbreviations.
Back
Top