Qantas results 28Aug .

[harvyk]

Have you seen a CEO that doesn't talk up their brand and share price.

Yes AJ... In many a speech he would talk down QFi. It was really quite weird....

But PLEASE not for the sake of spin.

I'd prefer some positive spin than constant negativity. To be honest I tend to just tune out (as I suspect most people do) when companies put on all positive spin. That said it's not unexpected when a company director / CEO stands up and tell everyone how rosey the world is.

 

[amaroo]

Why Qantas is keeping its frequent flyer scheme

 

[moa999]

Share price closed at $1.52 today - big rise since results

 

[RAM]

Yes AJ... In many a speech he would talk down QFi. It was really quite weird....


I'd prefer some positive spin than constant negativity. To be honest I tend to just tune out (as I suspect most people do) when companies put on all positive spin. That said it's not unexpected when a company director / CEO stands up and tell everyone how rosey the world is.

Almost make you think that AJ & Board have a hidden agenda.

Trash QI's name, give them hand-me-down JetStar planes and use B787s for JetStar, use 25 yr old 747s against competitors with new B777s. Hard to rationalise.

AJ & co have been caught out cost-shifting fuel surcharges from Jetstar to Qantas (always a problem one a media release has gone out) - yet nothing ever happened with ACCC nor Govt questioning why Jetstar has lower fuel surcharges (1/3 to 1/4) than QI for routes where fuel use/passenger are identical? Why surcharges were raised for all QI routes but only a couple of Jetstar?

If fuel surcharge increase was to reflect increased costs then Jetstar's fuel cost per journey went up y the same amount as it did for QI but all they did was load QI fares with higher surcharges and push Y traffic to Jetstar.

Not-so-hidden agenda!

 

[RAM]

They are flying Qantas flights with a Qantas flight number so are they not new aircraft to the Qantas fleet? Yep. But even if you take them out Qantas still had more new aircraft over that time.

No not true - neither by number of planes and especially by proportion of fleet. When you then reduce it to QI's fleet the comparison looks even worse.

AJ does not include the NZ aircraft so how can you throw them into the mix? The same with the charter business - it is not counted in the Qantas mainline fleet.

Using AJ's own figures from results shows less than 36 aircraft into Q mainline fleet over last 5 years of which the bulk went to QD not QI. As a proportion of the Q mainline fleet it was less than 28% of the fleet replaced.

With Jetstar is was nearly 70% replaced and on absolute actual number of planes - Jetstar was a greater figure.

The QI fleet is suffering a high rate of 'breakdowns' (many discussed AFF threads). One of their 747s only had 91 operational days out of 181 from Jan 1, 14 to June 30. Twice another plane had to fly its return journey. That hits the bottom line vs Jetstar getting aircraft that have fuel efficiency improvements of between 18 and 31% vs QI metal.

The ratio of Jetstar's fleet age to QI to 1:3 - QI is set up to fail. WHY?

 

[ajw373]

No not true - neither by number of planes and especially by proportion of fleet. When you then reduce it to QI's fleet the comparison looks even worse.

AJ does not include the NZ aircraft so how can you throw them intho the mix? The same with the charter business - it is not counted in the Qantas mainline fleet.

Using AJ's own figures from results shows less than 36 aircraft into Q mainline fleet over last 5 years of which the bulk went to QD not QI. As a proportion of the Q mainline fleet it was less than 28% of the fleet replaced.

With Jetstar is was nearly 70% replaced and on absolute actual number of planes - Jetstar was a greater figure.

The QI fleet is suffering a high rate of 'breakdowns' (many discussed AFF threads). One of their 747s only had 91 operational days out of 181 from Jan 1, 14 to June 30. Twice another plane had to fly its return journey. That hits the bottom line vs Jetstar getting aircraft that have fuel efficiency improvements of between 18 and 31% vs QI metal.

The ratio of Jetstar's fleet age to QI to 1:3 - QI is set up to fail. WHY?

Yet again changing the metrics to suit what is very clear to be your bitter agenda. The talk was about new aircraft for Qantas vs Jetstar. I have proved above with a line by line breakdown that over the past 5 complete FY's Qantas had had many more aircraft. I am not interested in proportions after all what exactly does that prove? Nor am I interested specifically in QFi or mainline the discussion was absolute numbers where again I repeat I have shown with FACTS that Qantas have had more new a/c.

But as for your last comment the board made it clear that until QFi turned around they would waste money investing in them. May well be an agenda but if that agenda keeps the company in business then that is hardly a bad thing.

 

[moa999]

I don't think AJ has ever talked down QIs product, just its factual (or at least semi-factual depending on your beliefs of Qantas accounting) results.

He has talked down its profit and yield, and made statements such as we won't invest further capex (ie aircraft) unless it turns a profit -- which based on the most recent outlook as more likely.

But certainly has talked up its lounges, food, the new J seats etc.

--

RAM as for fleet age.
- That is somewhat a function of startup date and growth - a more quickly growing airline will naturally have a lower fleet age.
- A more relevant comparison would be Virgin to Jetstar

 

[Mr_Orange]

Share price closed at $1.52 today - big rise since results

Indeed. I am somewhat annoyed that I did not take a punt earlier in the year when they were $1.08 .

 

[TheRealTMA]

Share price closed at $1.52 today - big rise since results

I'll sell at $1.60!

 

[RAM]

Yet again changing the metrics to suit what is very clear to be your bitter agenda. The talk was about new aircraft for Qantas vs Jetstar. I have proved above with a line by line breakdown that over the past 5 complete FY's Qantas had had many more aircraft. I am not interested in proportions after all what exactly does that prove? Nor am I interested specifically in QFi or mainline the discussion was absolute numbers where again I repeat I have shown with FACTS that Qantas have had more new a/c.

But as for your last comment the board made it clear that until QFi turned around they would waste money investing in them. May well be an agenda but if that agenda keeps the company in business then that is hardly a bad thing.

There is no changing of metrics - on outright number of planes Q has a lower number of "new" planes from 1.7.09 to 30.6.14 - that is straight from Q's accounts.

You are the one who is 'manipulating' the figures to 'create' a fallacious result. AJ does not use your 'metrics', no fund manager uses your metric and no financial analyst uses your metrics.

Does that not suggest you are out-of-step and should not create your own self-described metrics?

If you want to make outlandish claims please use facts and figures not resort to such 'spin'.

I will even correct your mistakes for you (I am interested in the plain truth not unsupported bias).

You had incorrectly listed 4 A380s as being received in the last 5 years.

The correct number is 9.

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]22-Aug-09
[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active
[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]19-Dec-09[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]7-Jan-10[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]16-Dec-10[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]31-Jan-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]13-Jan-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]8-Apr-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]25-Nov-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]15-Dec-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

Total Fleet Age QI & QD = 9.2 years

 

[RAM]

Which "20+ year old aircraft" did you have in mind?

QF has very few aircraft of that age (mainly 767s, and only a few of them at that - which I'm pretty sure were already fully depreciated anyway).

Well apparently they were not fully depreciated as the notes to account state that clearly. And it is worth noting that they have been written down to NEAR market value not market value.

On the fleet age Q is somewhat older than you realise. Partly it may be due to looking at the aircraft as Q likes to show them (which for example has one shown as entering the Q fleet in 2006 but it originally entered service in 1991).

This table is as of yesterday. The age has fallen due to several B767s being cut post 30.6.14 - even so look at the average for them.

Aircraft

[TD="width: 15%, align: center"]Number[/TD]
[TD="width: 15%"]Age[/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"]Rank for the age by aircraft type[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]Airbus A330[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"] 22 [/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]6.8 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]On 108 airlines operating this type of aircraft Qantas ranks 52[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]Airbus A380[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"] 12 [/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]4.8 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]On 12 airlines operating this type of aircraft Qantas ranks 9[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]Boeing 737 Next Gen[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"] 62 [/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]6.9 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]On 205 airlines operating this type of aircraft Qantas ranks 77[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]Boeing 747[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"] 14 [/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]16.2 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]On 90 airlines operating this type of aircraft Qantas ranks 28[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]Boeing 767[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"] 14 [/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]19.5 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]On 105 airlines operating this type of aircraft Qantas ranks 61[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]TOTAL[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"]124[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]9.2 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"] The calculation of the fleet age can be approximated because it is only based on the supported aircraft
[/TD]

BTW Q purchased a number of 10yr old planes from BA.

The table below shows 4 of Q's B767s. The first column is the age sometimes given to the planes that have been acquired 2nd hand the 2nd column is the 'delivered' age (available for service) and the 3rd is date of first flight. Boeing has historically been able to minimise the time between first flight and service delivery (as low as 8 days for Q at times). Airbus' best is around 3 weeks. For the initial A380s the delay was up to 9 months.

[TD="class: xl24"]Age[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 90"]Delivered Age[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 86"]True Age[/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]8.12[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.84[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.88[/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]8.13[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.70[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.74[/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]8.11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.61[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.65[/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]21.82[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]21.82[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]21.86[/TD]

 

[TheRealTMA]

Indeed. I am somewhat annoyed that I did not take a punt earlier in the year when they $1.08 ;(.

Yes 1.90 to 0.97c to $1.60 in 12 months. It's difficult to stick to your guns and buy on bad news and sell on good.

 

[amaroo]

Yes 1.90 to 0.97c to $1.60 in 12 months months. It's difficult to stick to your guns and buy on bad news and sell on good.

Reminds me of the heady days of 2009 - it was lovelly buying when everyone else was selling (or being forced to sell) :mrgreen:

 

[mannej]

[TD="align: center"][/TD]
[TD="width: 15%"][/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"][/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"][/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"][/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"][/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"][/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"][/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"][/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]
[/TD]

BTW Q purchased a number of 10yr old planes from BA.

The table below shows 4 of Q's B767s. The first column is the age sometimes given to the planes that have been acquired 2nd hand the 2nd column is the 'delivered' age (available for service) and the 3rd is date of first flight. Boeing has historically been able to minimise the time between first flight and service delivery (as low as 8 days for Q at times). Airbus' best is around 3 weeks. For the initial A380s the delay was up to 9 months.

[TD="class: xl24"]Age[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24"]Delivered Age[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 86"]True Age[/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]8.12[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.84[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.88[/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]8.13[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.70[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.74[/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]8.11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.61[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]22.65
[/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]21.82[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]21.82[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25"]21.86[/TD]

But the age of the ZX's aren't relevant though to this topic, as they are long gone from the QF fleet.
If you were using the A330's as an example (i.e likes of EBB etc), different story.

 

[RAM]

RAM as for fleet age.
- That is somewhat a function of startup date and growth - a more quickly growing airline will naturally have a lower fleet age.
- A more relevant comparison would be Virgin to Jetstar

What you say is true - ceteris paribus. Which basically means not really in the business world. For example Air NZ will shortly see its fleet age fall to 6.7 years as the B787-9s replace the B767s as well Air NZ also has replaced all but 2 B747s with B777s. In a week's time the last B747 will be replaced with new B777.

"Air New Zealand talks of the Dreamliner as a game-changer. The same, of course, was very much true of the Boeing 747s, which the Dreamliner and additional Boeing 777s will supplant. The last flight of an Air New Zealand jumbo jet will be to San Francisco on September 10, returning to Auckland two days later."

The new codeshare agreement ANZ & SIA will also cramp Q's pitch somewhat. At the same time Q's best friend, Emirates, continues to offer flights from Aust to EUR via BKK, SIN etc (the routes that Q said were not able to generate profits) using B777s mostly. I suppose a 20+% saving on fuel consumption per flight as well as a near trebling of other cargo can make those routes profitable.

What about long established competitor airline, Singapore Airlines for that matter:

[TD="width: 20%"]Aircraft[/TD]
[TD="width: 15%, align: center"]Number[/TD]
[TD="width: 15%"]Age[/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"]Rank for the age by aircraft type[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]Airbus A330[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"] 26 [/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]3.5 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]On 108 airlines operating this type of aircraft Singapore Airlines ranks 22[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]Airbus A380[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"] 19 [/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]4.9 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]On 12 airlines operating this type of aircraft Singapore Airlines ranks 10[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]Boeing 747[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"] 9 [/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]12.4 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]On 90 airlines operating this type of aircraft Singapore Airlines ranks 15[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]Boeing 777[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"] 59 [/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]9.5 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"]On 65 airlines operating this type of aircraft Singapore Airlines ranks 38[/TD]

[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 20%"]TOTAL[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%, align: center"]113[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 15%"]7.6 years[/TD]
[TD="class: tdtexten, width: 50%"] The calculation of the fleet age can be approximated because it is only based on the supported aircraft [/TD]

However all is not as it seems. The 9 B747s are actually all freighters - B747-412F.
Take them out of the fleet age and you get a fleet age of 7.2 years.

The average age of QI's fleet is actually older than the oldest plane in service with SIA's passenger operations.

That comparison illustrates why QI finds it hard to make money and doubly so with the 'fuel surcharges' loaded onto it while Jetstar's I flights miss the punitive pricing.

 

[RAM]

But the age of the ZX's aren't relevant though to this topic, as they are long gone from the QF fleet.
If you were using the A330's as an example (i.e likes of EBB etc), different story.

They were not long gone when the write-down was done at 30.6.14 - they were included in the write-down that was announced on 28.8.14 relating to the 2013/14 accounts. They are not long gone but still in service as I type.

The 4 B767 planes detailed above are all still in service. They are:

Named City Of Port Macquarie

Named City of Wangaratta

Named Bundaberg

[TD="class: xl25, width: 86"]22.88[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 84"] VH-OGI [/TD]
[TD="width: 268"]Named City of Port Augusta
[/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]22.74[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24"] VH-OGJ [/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]22.65[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24"] VH-OGL [/TD]

[TD="class: xl25"]21.86[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24"] VH-OGM [/TD]

 

[RAM]

Indeed. I am somewhat annoyed that I did not take a punt earlier in the year when they $1.08 ;(.

But was that $1.08 heading down to $0.97?

Is this a 'dead cat bounce'? (Origin - take a dead cat, drop it from the top of the Empire State building and it bounces the first few times it hits the side walk).

 

[Mr_Orange]

But was that $1.08 heading down to $0.97?

No, the value had come up to $1.08.

Is this a 'dead cat bounce'? (Origin - take a dead cat, drop it from the top of the Empire State building and it bounces the first few times it hits the side walk).

Thanks, I'm well aware of the 'dead cat bounce' in trading. Even if it is, who cares. If I had bought at $1.08, I would have sold at $1.52 and been happy. I would never view any airline as a long term hold these days. They are all too volatile and in the case of QAN don't pay dividends (or rather haven't for many years). Best to dip in and out, taking small profits, IMO.

 

[RAM]

No, the value had come up to $1.08.

Thanks, I'm well aware of the 'dead cat bounce' in trading. Even if it is, who cares. If I had bought at $1.08, I would have sold at $1.52 and been happy. I would never view any airline as a long term hold these days. They are all too volatile and in the case of QAN don't pay dividends (or rather haven't for many years). Best to dip in and out, taking small profits, IMO.

Airlines - the story of how to become a multi-millionaire - start as a billionaire and buy an airline!

If you can, graph BA's share price against any of the bulge bracket US Financials over a 10-15 year time frame. Very revealing.

 

[ajw373]

There is no changing of metrics - on outright number of planes Q has a lower number of "new" planes from 1.7.09 to 30.6.14 - that is straight from Q's accounts.

You are the one who is 'manipulating' the figures to 'create' a fallacious result. AJ does not use your 'metrics', no fund manager uses your metric and no financial analyst uses your metrics.

Does that not suggest you are out-of-step and should not create your own self-described metrics?

If you want to make outlandish claims please use facts and figures not resort to such 'spin'.

I will even correct your mistakes for you (I am interested in the plain truth not unsupported bias).

You had incorrectly listed 4 A380s as being received in the last 5 years.

The correct number is 9.

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]22-Aug-09
[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active
[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]19-Dec-09[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]7-Jan-10[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]16-Dec-10[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]31-Jan-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]13-Jan-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]8-Apr-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]25-Nov-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

[TD="class: xl24, width: 113"]F14C64W35Y371[/TD]
[TD="class: xl25, width: 70, align: right"]15-Dec-11[/TD]
[TD="class: xl24, width: 64"]Active[/TD]

Total Fleet Age QI & QD = 9.2 years

So add 5 more to my total. Care to point any others errors in my figures. They are still higher than Jetstar by a long shot.

As for the metric what was being discussed here, not in Qantas fiscal reports is how many aircraft they have received in the past 5 complete fiscal years.

I stand by my figures with maybe a few minor mistakes (I am using an iphone at present internet access). They may not be what is in fiscal reports however the Qantas finances are so complicated you can read what you like into them and selectively quote what you like to suit your argument which is what you seem to have done.

My figures are from fleet lists and include Qantas link which is 100% part of QantS an of course jetconnect who again are 100% Qantas especially from an aircraft ownership perspective. My metric and the metric of the conversation has not changed and the fleet list quite clearly show Qantas has received more new a/c over the past 5 financial years.