mixed thoughts about the Qantas sick roo logo

[Wheredidgogogo]

Hi Guys,

I'm in Melbourne tonight after flying to Singapore on the weekend for a few meetings then flying back to Sydney this morning and then Melbourne this afternoon.

I feel very uneasy about the Qantas sick roo logo that I had the kids in the office design.

I had an excellent flight to Singapore on Thursday night. The same guy as always was at the door of the Qantas first class lounge in Sydney and we had a good chat as we often do. Then on the flight up I had the warm feeling of the cabin manager walking down the isle with his print out to greet me at the back of the plane. I love that. Mr gh-rer-ge-t-t-a?

Then I flew back this morning on BA15 and was upgraded from my discount economy yet again. What is it with the floor space on the BA 777 - 70% of the plane is first and business and the remaining 30% is economy? If you want a guaranteed upgrade and you're a Platinum flyer always choose the BA 777 over any Qantas flight.

Then this afternoon I flew to Melbourne on the 5pm flight and had the greatest flight crew who had a good yak with me and gave me too much wine for a Monday night.

Now I'm a bit lagged from very little sleep on the BA flight, a full day of work and then a flight to Melbourne with plenty of plonk.

After that experience I regret designing the sad roo logo

Cheers,

Anthony

 

[markis10]

Maybe hold off judgement for a few months, given the announcement by the long haul pilots of industrial action, you are more in touch with whats happening than management, its the people on the front line that make the difference, the sick roo is in the boardroom!

 

[Wheredidgogogo]

and here's the logo again...

it' may still help jolt the senior management of Qantas in to realising that the company should be run by an energetic visionary, not an accountant

 

[rechoboam]

You didn't shoot the roo , you love the roo and want to nurture it. Good luck

 

[Robert K]

if it wasn't run an accountant, QF would have to change their logo to this

 

[Wheredidgogogo]

oh my!

That is sad!

The most frustrating thing is watching Qantas follow the path of the US heritage carriers.

Qantas needs to innovate the product - like Jetblue, Virgin America and, god forbid, Southwest - the only airline that doesn't charge baggage.

Watching what Alan Joyce is doing you can see Qantas charging baggage fees for a quick revenue hit.

Southwest is cool again! They've done this by saying no, we're not going there, no baggage fees. Stick your bag in the trunk.

I still fly Qantas to the US but as soon as I get there I'm on Jetblue, Virgin or South West

Cheers,

Anthony

 

[Wheredidgogogo]

oh my....

I just realised that that is what Mr Joyce wants to do with Jetstar in Australia.

make Jetstar the funky carrier at the expense of Qantas

bugger

it's all making sense now

but why does he have to crush Qantas to make Jetstar cool? Why can't he have two vibrant brands?

 

[Globetrotter]

Approx. 15 years ago when I studied International Fares & Ticketing I and II, my lecturer predicted that in 20 years time Qantas wouldn't fly to Europe. He predicted that Qantas would fly as far as Asia and BA would take over from there. That might end up being part of the future changes as mentioned earlier in this thread.

 

[Wheredidgogogo]

I do want to make one point to Pu before going to bed

Unlike many people on this forum, I have never called for the sacking of Alan Joyce. I have always said he should go back to the accounting office. And that is not an insult. Alan Joyce is an accountant and he's obviously very good at that. But Qantas needs a CEO a few steps above a cost control accountant. A CEO that is a forward looking visionary - exactly what Qantas needs. John Borghetti might have been good for the job but chances are if he stayed at Qantas he would have been stale and past his use by.

 

[Robert K]

i guess with technology these days (skype, teleconfrence, online presentations), there's less business travelers and more leisure travelers. If there's more money to be made in the leisure market, that's where QF will go.

Your lecturer is very smart! Where did you do the course? Do you know if it's still available? very interested in doing some courses on travel.

I do want to make one point to Pu before going to bed

Unlike many people on this forum, I have never called for the sacking of Alan Joyce. I have always said he should go back to the accounting office. And that is not an insult. Alan Joyce is an accountant and he's obviously very good at that. But Qantas needs a CEO a few steps above a cost control accountant. A CEO that is a forward looking visionary - exactly what Qantas needs. John Borghetti might have been good for the job but chances are if he stayed at Qantas he would have been stale and past his use by.

I don't see AJ staying at the top for too long. I believe he was bought in to restructure Qantas, and get it to a good financial place.

I had the same thing happen at my work place. We were spending too much money, so parent company bought in a new director to shape up the company. It wasn't a great time while the new director was there, lots of redundancies, no more weekly friday drink etc etc. When the books was in the black again, a new director was bought in to take the company in an exciting direction.

I'm guessing JB didn't get the top job because he was a bit too good at spending money

 

[Flying mermaid]

I was reading an article in BRW on value of brands and big losers and winners. Qantas was rated as having lost a huge amount of Brand Value - 43%. I would call myself a very dedicated Qantas flyer, but with all the changes that are coming in and more to follow in August I am starting to wonder if I should be. Mr FM and I will be lifetime silver by July next year, but if Joyce is getting rid of half the routes and First class etc etc, maybe it is time to start allocating to a variety of carriers. We fly F or J overseas, so many of the status benefits don't matter to us.

 

[Wheredidgogogo]

I disagree with your thoughts

You are assuming that the board is more thoughtful and above Alan Joyce.

This board didn't put Alan Joyce in the position as a strategic move - boards don't do that. Boards appoint people to get things right. In this case they did wrong.

There was no discussion at the board level to bring Alan Joyce in to shake things up - they appointed Alan Joyce because they believed he would drive the business forward

 

[Noob]

Sadly, many CEO's and other executives are more interested in the short term profits which mean a bonus than the hard long term investments which mean less short term return.

This is a massive fault in the way senior executives and CEOs are paid within a company.

I really wish Qantas mainline was given a massive overhaul...

 

[oz_mark]

This board didn't put Alan Joyce in the position as a strategic move - boards don't do that. Boards appoint people to get things right. In this case they did wrong.

You do need to remember that this appointment came shortly after the buyout attempt. IMHO, some of the internal candidates were tainted by that as they were standing to gain from that succeeding.

 

[harvyk]

I both like and hate the logo...

I like the logo because it perfectly represents what is happening to QF with Joyce at the helm...
I hate the logo because it perfectly represents what is happening to QF with Joyce at the helm...

QF needs someone who understands branding (and understands that branding is more than slapping some paint onto planes and putting up some posters). Who realises that the ONLY way QF will keep going is by attracting people who want to fly QF specifically, and who realises that QF can never be a discount brand as there is always someone who is willing to go cheaper to the point that big compromises are made (eg Tiger).

Sadly this concept is beyond current corporate thinking, where anything which doesn't have an immediate positive effect on the bottom line is obviously no good.

 

[rechoboam]

You do need to remember that this appointment came shortly after the buyout attempt. IMHO, some of the internal candidates were tainted by that as they were standing to gain from that succeeding.

I think its a bit rough to blame AJ for jstarisation and route changes. The board is making these decisions and it's his job to execute them profitably. Whether he is doing that is the question.

 

[medhead]

I think its a bit rough to blame AJ for jstarisation and route changes. The board is making these decisions and it's his job to execute them profitably. Whether he is doing that is the question.

I would think the board either approves or disapproves the recommendations from the CEO. Jetstar would have been a CEO initiative that the board would have approved. I doubt any board would get involved in day to day running of the company matters like route changes.

 

[oz_mark]

I think its a bit rough to blame AJ for jstarisation and route changes. The board is making these decisions and it's his job to execute them profitably. Whether he is doing that is the question.

I'm not blaming AJ for that. WHat I am saying is that some of the other internal candidates had aligned themselves with, and stood to personally gain, from the buyout attempt. To an extent, I think the board wanted that boys club broken up.

 

[rechoboam]

I would think the board either approves or disapproves the recommendations from the CEO. Jetstar would have been a CEO initiative that the board would have approved. I doubt any board would get involved in day to day running of the company matters like route changes.

It may have been the CEOs idea but the plan would have been examined by the board together with dedicated subcommittees and expert advice including the CEO.

Once the board decides to Jetstarize everything except the 'flagship' routes, the CEO would be responsible for strategic thinking to the level of "do we keep flying to NYC or FRA". My point is that the CEO wouldn't have the authority to make QF a budget carrier or pull it out of Europe or the USA. Of course the CEO would usually be part of the board in his own right and shares board responsibility too.

 

[medhead]

It may have been the CEOs idea but the plan would have been examined by the board together with dedicated subcommittees and expert advice including the CEO.

Once the board decides to Jetstarize everything except the 'flagship' routes, the CEO would be responsible for strategic thinking to the level of "do we keep flying to NYC or FRA". My point is that the CEO wouldn't have the authority to make QF a budget carrier or pull it out of Europe or the USA. Of course the CEO would usually be part of the board in his own right and shares board responsibility too.

What I'm saying is that you are giving the board to much credit. The CEO would have fully developed the jetstar plan and presented to the board. The board might have got some advice, but at the end of the day they would have approved it and told the CEO to do it.

The CEO then runs the plan. The plan might have been as broad as jetstar does leisure routes. So switching holiday routes to jetstar might fall entirely with the CEO. Even if the board what to know about route changes it might be as simple as the CEO saying "you know that Jetstar plan? Well it requires us to switch FRA to jetstar". Board rubber stamp.