Needed to be said….Mentour Pilot discusses the fall of QF

[justinbrett]

Actually pretty disappointed in this MN video. I've been a fan for quite a while as he always has a measured, rational approach and shows all the facts.

This video lacked a lot of context, to the point (at times) of being misleading. There's nothing he said that wasn't true but a lot he didn't say that completely changed the arguments (eg mentioning VA supporting QR, without mentioning that QR is a close partner of VA, so of course they would).

He could have made the same video from a neutral point of view, but it just seems like he googled "why do people hate Qantas" and went over those talking points, which is why many here will love the video. That's fine and it will get clicks, but not really telling the whole story to an outsider that doesn't know the context.

Qantas made some terrible decisions during covid, there's no argument about that. So did many others, and they're not here today. If AN was back as a *A member I'd definitely be flying them but they're not, and until VA joins an alliance I'm not interested. So I choose QF, and by that I mean I choose oneworld and the QFF program (because of WR and credit cards), I only have to fly 4 QF flights a year. That works for me. I never got why people get so evangelical about airlines. Just fly with whoever you want.

 

[9171]

I agree with moa999 - for some reason it is an absolute sport to challenge anything Qantas. I personally think that it is a company, as any other, that is merciless in securing profit over anything else. Profit is their reason to exist. I am OK with this, this is capitalism. Virgin or REX is no different. To the people that claim "gouging" every second moment, "gouging" can only occur when a clientele is ok with that. They have other options...

 

[Quickstatus]

Appears to me to be reasonable and accurate re-telling of the recent history of the company.

 

[RooFlyer]

I personally think that it is a company, as any other, that is merciless in securing profit over anything else. Profit is their reason to exist.

Sure, they can do that, but as with other companies, there can be consequences. And there have been. A Qantas investor is more likely to be satisfied with a good, even profit through the years (and therefore a steady dividend) rather than gouging the max one year and diving the next, with reputational damage that may last for years.

 

[levelnine]

There are way more overseas QFF members than most people think.

The Qantas multi-city tool is the very best way to search for oneworld availability (it used to be AA, but AA now gets so little availability from some partners that it is borderline useless) and you need to be a member to use it.

Also, Qantas is now broadly on par with Avios as the best way to book AA award flights, meaning it is becoming the most valuable transferable currency for AA bookings to a market that is 10 times the size of Australia.

 

[Gold Member]

Has anyone defended the corporate culture? Engineers, crews, operational and front line staff, yes. But i don’t think that’s extended to the leadership?

I don’t think anyone is confusing the Senior Leadership Team and the rest of the staff. I think we all have a lot of time and respect for the non-SLT staff at Qantas.

The point is that if everyone agrees that Qantas Management is evil and should be treated with the same level of disdain and contempt that they show us, then why reward their behaviour by spending more money with them? I realise that it’s not that simple though. For some, their status, travel habits and Oneworld engagement “prevents” them, and others may not have a choice for many different reasons. But for the rest of us, choosing not to spend with Qantas is one way of protesting against Management’s appalling behaviour. If enough of us change our spending habits with Qantas it might just force a change. In fact, as a result of recent customer backlash and changed spending habits, we’ve already seen some very small changes from VH to unwind a couple of AJ’s enhancements.

It’s also interesting to note that we have some members who are highly vocal about other Airlines’ poor treatment of passengers. As a matter of principle, many of those people have now boycotted those Airlines. If these same people with a moral compass believe we shouldn’t support Airlines that treat their customers poorly, then the same logic should apply to Qantas and the way they treat their costumers. But that doesn’t seem to be the case for some. It all seems a bit too hypocritical and biased.

Ultimately, Airlines are no different to any other company whose highest priority is financial performance. That’s just a matter of fact for the Capitalist world we live in. But this is a question of ethics; what is right, and what is wrong behaviour for a company. If you can objectively make that determination without bias, then you’re in a position to choose whether you reward or punish this behaviour with your wallet. Many of us already have.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

I don’t think anyone is confusing the Senior Leadership Team and the rest of the staff. I think we all have a lot of time and respect for the non-SLT staff at Qantas.

The point is that if everyone agrees that Qantas Management is evil and should be treated with the same level of disdain and contempt that they show us, then why reward their behaviour by spending more money with them? I realise that it’s not that simple though. For some, their status, travel habits and Oneworld engagement “prevents” them, and others may not have a choice for many different reasons. But for the rest of us, choosing not to spend with Qantas is one way of protesting against Management’s appalling behaviour. If enough of us change our spending habits with Qantas it might just force a change. In fact, as a result of recent customer backlash and changed spending habits, we’ve already seen some very small changes from VH to unwind a couple of AJ’s enhancements.

It’s also interesting to note that we have some members who are highly vocal about other Airlines’ poor treatment of passengers. As a matter of principle, many of those people have now boycotted those Airlines. If these same people with a moral compass believe we shouldn’t support Airlines that treat their customers poorly, then the same logic should apply to Qantas and the way they treat their costumers. But that doesn’t seem to be the case for some. It all seems a bit too hypocritical and biased.

Ultimately, Airlines are no different to any other company whose highest priority is financial performance. That’s just a matter of fact for the Capitalist world we live in. But this is a question of ethics; what is right, and what is wrong behaviour for a company. If you can objectively make that determination without bias, then you’re in a position to choose whether you reward or punish this behaviour with your wallet. Many of us already have.

I don’t think - as a concept - passengers are giving money to the leadership team… we’re giving money because we like the crews, the product offering is solid, and we know we are going to arrive safely.

Too often it’s the staff that bear the brunt of airline mismanagement.. Ansett, Rex, Bonza… that’s really not fair. If we all stopped flying Qantas… who are the ones that lose out? The staff

 

[Gold Member]

I don’t think - as a concept - passengers are giving money to the leadership team… we’re giving money because we like the crews, the product offering is solid, and we know we are going to arrive safely.

Too often it’s the staff that bear the brunt of airline mismanagement.. Ansett, Rex, Bonza… that’s really not fair. If we all stopped flying Qantas… who are the ones that lose out? The staff

Of course people don’t buy a plane ticket thinking they’ll give their hard earned to the Senior Leadership Team. There are many components to the business that people would realise is eating up that ticket price. But in reality, a huge proportion of your ticket is indeed going to the CEO, SLT (including all their associated equity, bonuses and incentives) and Senior management, compared to all the other staff.

I don’t disagree that good (and bad) staff are let go in every company all the time as they battle the realities of running a financially successful business. That’s just the price of doing business, and every employee, including the SLT, are dispensable. I know that from experience from both sides of the ledger. No one is arguing the harsh realities of running a business here.

So if your point is that we should continue to support Qantas’ appalling behaviour and customer service by spending money with them for the sake of their employees’ welfare and employment status, then I think you’ve missed the point of my original argument.

 

[jb747]

The saddest part of all is that if the public do (and I expect they already are) avoid QF, the only response from management will be more beatings. I can think of very little that has happened in more than a decade that wasn't in some way, an attack on the staff. Massive outsourcing, of literally everything, was just the start.

 

[p--and--t]

But for the rest of us, choosing not to spend with Qantas is one way of protesting against Management’s appalling behaviour. If enough of us change our spending habits with Qantas it might just force a change.

Well despite many similar posts across this site, to my untrained eye it doesn't seem to bear out in the market. QF can't service any more routes due to slow deliveries of new aircraft and extremely high utilisation of their fleet and often doesn't have seats for even paying passengers let alone rewards even when they charge more than the competition.

In fact, as a result of recent customer backlash and changed spending habits, we’ve already seen some very small changes from VH to unwind a couple of AJ’s enhancements.

My observation, and could be wrong, is that it has nothing to do with a major drop in passengers flying or revenue but more to quieten down the incessant banging on by certain elements of the media who seem to have nothing better.to do on a slow news day.

 

[Quickstatus]

quieten down the incessant banging on by certain elements of the media who seem to have nothing better.to do on a slow news day.

Are we saying that business as usual should be the order of the day?.
Come back AJ and RG, its not you, its the public that are wrong.
ACCC and Federal court - we only agreed to settle just to make you go away.
1700 workers - sue us if you like , we aint paying anything.
Albo, you got any other kids, there is space in CL.
Covid credits, sorry none of youse deserve it.

 

[p--and--t]

Are we saying that business as usual should be the order of the day?.

Not at all.

Improvement is needed, but that applies to all carriers to varying extents. None of them are faultless.

Not sure why a technical delayed departure in QF requires a bold headline starting with Qantas in caps and multiple runs and commentary but a similar incident with VA or Rex (or some other int carriers) either is not reported or the name of the carrier is not in the headline and only mentioned further down the article. There is a definite bias in reporting in some media.

 

[Quickstatus]

There is a definite bias in reporting in some media.

But thats nothing new. Its the major carrier with deep connections into many corners of Australian life. Its tentacles extend into government influencing politicians to protect its business (QR)

OK, but with that comes a certain degree of public expectation. It is not all about the P&L or the Balance sheet. Even Qantas itself recognises it - having inserted itself into political , social and cultural aspects of Australia. It seeks and is happy with a social license from certain parts of Australia, but does not like to seek similar from the rest of Australia.

 

[harvyk]

QF bashing is almost a national sport, but there are likely to be very few people outside Aus who would care to participate. People outside Aus would know of Qantas due to their reputation of safety thanks to movies like Rain Man, and some may have even seen a Qantas plane, but that's it, and are unlikely to hold a negative enough opinion of them to want to get onboard with bad mouthing them.

So with such a large public downfall of such a high profile CEO in such a short amount of time, Qantas management probably does deserve a closer look, and I thought the video was pretty on the mark.

Qantas themselves have admitted that they have made some major wrongs, and they are now needing to rebuild trust with the public.

 

[Gold Member]

Well despite many similar posts across this site, to my untrained eye it doesn't seem to bear out in the market. QF can't service any more routes due to slow deliveries of new aircraft and extremely high utilisation of their fleet and often doesn't have seats for even paying passengers let alone rewards even when they charge more than the competition.

Agreed. It highlights the success Qantas has enjoyed with QFF engagement and branding to the average punter who is proud of (yet evidently highly distrusting as well) their "National Carrier". It's also a symptom of the current post-Covid era of pent up demand for premium cabins (newly found YOLO outlook), which I believe will last for a while longer.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't stand up for what is right. Voting with our wallets is just one way we can have our say.

My observation, and could be wrong, is that it has nothing to do with a major drop in passengers flying or revenue but more to quieten down the incessant banging on by certain elements of the media who seem to have nothing better.to do on a slow news day.

A lot of the media and online bashing of Qantas has merit. In lieu of boycotting Qantas, the awareness and influence exerted by these players is arguably aligned with the severity of Qantas' misbehaviour. Trust is hard to earn, but even harder to earn back once lost, and the media is playing to this fact.

I'm in two minds whether VH's moves are sincere and honest, or whether they're just a smokescreen to cover up the pressing need to re-establish credibility and trust with band aid fixes. We have to remember that VH was Qantas ex-CFO so financial performance will be forefront of mind as opposed to Customer Satisfaction metrics. We can speculate that she was mostly aligned with AJ's direction as well. So, on balance, the pessimist (realist) in me fears the latter.

 

[elanshin]

Agreed. It highlights the success Qantas has enjoyed with QFF engagement and branding to the average punter who is proud of (yet evidently highly distrusting as well) their "National Carrier". It's also a symptom of the current post-Covid era of pent up demand for premium cabins (newly found YOLO outlook), which I believe will last for a while longer.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't stand up for what is right. Voting with our wallets is just one way we can have our say.


A lot of the media and online bashing of Qantas has merit. In lieu of boycotting Qantas, the awareness and influence exerted by these players is arguably aligned with the severity of Qantas' misbehaviour. Trust is hard to earn, but even harder to earn back once lost, and the media is playing to this fact.

I'm in two minds whether VH's moves are sincere and honest, or whether they're just a smokescreen to cover up the pressing need to re-establish credibility and trust with band aid fixes. We have to remember that VH was Qantas ex-CFO so financial performance will be forefront of mind as opposed to Customer Satisfaction metrics. We can speculate that she was mostly aligned with AJ's direction as well. So, on balance, the pessimist (realist) in me fears the latter.

I think there's always a fine balance between keeping your shareholders happy, keeping your customers happy and keeping your employees hapoy.

I think years ago when someone was analysing JB Hi Fi they said this: it started out being great for employees and customers but not necessarily for the shareholders. Over time it morphed and isn't as great for customers anymore. It's hard to do more than 2/3 of those groups.

Qantas has gone with 1/3 and thus reaping what they sowed now.

There's always room to turn a new leaf and we'll see how they move forward. There's room to be optimistic right now depending on the type of person you are, but so far it's just been stem the bleeding and throw some candy. Nothing I would say is overtly a definitive change for the better yet. That said, VH hasn't had too many major decisions yet that wasn't already in motion with AJ.

 

[9171]

Having re-heard the video at the start, just cant get past the ridiculousness of the host saying that Qantas has fallen from grace... He says it like there has been some shift in the universe. No, no, no. Sure, some people were peeved at some lack on the part of QF, but nothing knew - this happens frequently. But it also happens with any of the ostensible competition.

I liked the three-way perspective of elanshin: that a company has to keep shareholders/customers/staff happy. Virgin and Qantas face the same difficulties with these three issues. I suspect that both suffer the same challenges with staff and shareholders. So it gets back to customers. I think the combo that Qantas has with full-service QF and low-cost Jetstar is a perfect market thing. I have for years tried to find a reason to justify a flight on Virgin - no success.

 

[OATEK]

My biggest peeve with QF, apart from not being able to afford them, is how they have got involved in so many extraneous issues. In the end, AJ left with the airline at the bottom of the league tables, with huge effort expended towards non-flying stuff. They now stand condemned for not doing the one thing that is at the core - running an airline that is safe, that people respect and trust, and choose first.

 

[RooFlyer]

Having re-heard the video at the start, just cant get past the ridiculousness of the host saying that Qantas has fallen from grace... He says it like there has been some shift in the universe. No, no, no. Sure, some people were peeved at some lack on the part of QF, but nothing knew - this happens frequently. But it also happens with any of the ostensible competition.

You really don't think the last year of Joyce's tenure was out of the ordinary? A couple of lost and very expensive court cases, wall to wall negative headlines because of the company's actions? Both the CEO and Chair forced out early? What other airlines have had that run of 'ordinariness'? You could only compare it to Boeing in the industry broadly (compare, not equate mind you).

I have for years tried to find a reason to justify a flight on Virgin - no success.

Try this. I went to buy business tickets HBA-SYD-HBA next week. I'm plat on both QF and VA and don't care who I fly on day to day.

QF was about $1,000 each way. VA was about $550. Both running B737s, and similar service in most respects. A QP at HBA would be the major difference.

As an example, would you see no attraction in choosing VA in this case?

 

[Forg]

Having re-heard the video at the start, just cant get past the ridiculousness of the host saying that Qantas has fallen from grace... He says it like there has been some shift in the universe. No, no, no. Sure, some people were peeved at some lack on the part of QF, but nothing knew - this happens frequently. But it also happens with any of the ostensible competition.

I don't know how much one should read into what the media says, but if the media were to be believed then QF has taken a massive nose-drive in terms of reputation.
That's been happening for ... I reckon at least 5 years, and when people casually encounter the same message without really having any opinion otherwise, it's easy to just accept it as fact. I mean your opinion might change if you properly thought about it or looked into it, but if everything you're encountering says "Australians don't trust Qantas anymore and they used to" then it's easy to just accept.

And the media in Australia isn't going to talk about how, for example, Turks have fallen out of love with Turkish Airlines.

I have zero idea of how much it affects sales; and I have had zero experience with any change in service from Qantas myself. But apart from people 'round here with actual experience, I'm not seeing praises from anyone anywhere.

Short version ... I think the general perception of Qantas within Australia marries with that Mentour video.
But then they used to focus a lot harder on the high-value fare customers, and AFAIK a decade ago their sales/marketing/pricing/availability/booking engine was the envy of the rest of the airline world in terms of maximising profit. So would how much does the general perception of the company affect profit, if (and that is an "if" which is guessing) the majority of The Grumpy are only buying discounted economy fares?