CFO VANESSA HUDSON TO REPLACE JOYCE AS QANTAS CEO

[Jerry_Atrick]

The reality is, the airline business seems to have been a race to the bottom for a long time; I think you can thank another Irishman for that one - Michael O'Leary. Ex-KPMG, he was recruited to Ryan-scare after consulting to them . It was all about cost reduction and fare competition; get the prices cheap and the customers will take it over being shafted when things don't quite go right. I don't know about today, but back in the day, their business model lost money on ticket sales; they often sold for the prices of taxes and charges only. They made money on other things, like stiffing customers when things went wrong.

 

People will take a significant cost saving where they can, and Ryanscare made it their mantra. They started taking market share in Europe, and then airlines had to react, but they had to cut corners and were not adept at running the low cost operation that Ryanscare was. Then it builds into the international space, and suddenly load factors are decreasing for the more branded airlines, and as Kev notes, you don't want a plane flying half full.

 

Sadly, I guess it cares little to be one of the world's most celebrated airlines when the bottom line isn't where it should be. Better to be just another in the pack but making more money that revered but losing it.

 

That sort of is how the punches roll in the airline business as far as I can tell.

Edited May 4, 2023 by Jerry_Atrick

[onetrack]

I enjoy flying with the Middle Eastern airlines, where the aircraft aren't full, and the Middle Easterners are happy to keep funding their loss-making flying.

My partner and I once flew business-class Doha to Perth with Qatar in a beautiful B777-300ER - complete with lay-flat seats, with inbuilt massager!

There were only 9 people in the 34 seat business class cabin, and we got the seats for the princely sum of $1700 each on special.

That was 10H and 55mins of the most enjoyable commercial flying I have ever done - even the meals were cooked for you, to order.

[facthunter]

Reputation counts for something but maybe not much with people who just go the cheapest FLIGHTS when they don't apply that to shoes. cars , seats in a theatre or the suburbs they live in. Jetstar and Qantas compete against each other but one was not much like the other. Joyce put more Dreamliners earlier on into $#1tstar but the service was much inferior. and obviously so. People paid a bit extra to fly Qantas but what now?  Nev

[danny_galaga]

Singapore Airlines is my go to

[kgwilson]

Back in 73 I went to Bransons Virgin Record shop in London. He'd organised some event for a record release & was there. He looked exactly the same as he does today, just younger. I have to admire his enthusiasm, tenacity, entrepneurial skill and consideration for his employees. Fast forward to 2007 and my aluminium fabrication business did some work on his Island in the |Noosa River. He purchased it as retreat for his employees. Not all people who become billionaires are complete arxeholes. I don't think he has much if any actual shareholder interest in the airlines that bear his Virgin brand today.

[old man emu]

7 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

He didn't have experience in those things. He surrounded himself with people who did.

The Henry Ford School of Business approach.

[Jerry_Atrick]

1 hour ago, kgwilson said:

Back in 73 I went to Bransons Virgin Record shop in London. He'd organised some event for a record release & was there. He looked exactly the same as he does today, just younger. I have to admire his enthusiasm, tenacity, entrepneurial skill and consideration for his employees. Fast forward to 2007 and my aluminium fabrication business did some work on his Island in the |Noosa River. He purchased it as retreat for his employees. Not all people who become billionaires are complete arxeholes. I don't think he has much if any actual shareholder interest in the airlines that bear his Virgin brand today.

He certainly has had his fair share of issues lately, but he soldiers on and appears still have that same optimistic approach he has always had:

https://news.sky.com/topic/richard-branson-7594

 

(Sky News UK has nothing to do with Murdoch anymore)

 

[danny_galaga]

8 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

He certainly has had his fair share of issues lately, but he soldiers on and appears still have that same optimistic approach he has always had:

https://news.sky.com/topic/richard-branson-7594

 

(Sky News UK has nothing to do with Murdoch anymore)

 

Tell me about it. The UK branch even has a climate change desk!

[planedriver]

13 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Tell me about it. The UK branch even has a climate change desk!

But they didn't mention about rising sea levels presumably.

 

[danny_galaga]

40 minutes ago, planedriver said:

But they didn't mention about rising sea levels presumably.

 

You aren't that simple, surely...

[turboplanner]

11 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

You aren't that simple, surely...

Why would he be simple?

[danny_galaga]

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

Why would he be simple?

Because he is making an utterly simple and trite argument about climate change (although no doubt will pretend otherwise). But if it's not obvious, I'll explain - how can just two photos, one of which we have no tide information, trump 100+ years of data, which in digital form would probably be in terrabytes of storage? 

 

All those really simple arguments echo Homer Simpsons level of reasoning (say it in a Homer Simpson voice)

 

"Sure, of course atoms COULD consist of a cloud of electrons around a nucleus of protons and neutrons, but if so wouldn't we look fuzzier? "

[facthunter]

You can see right through Glass and thin gold sheet .. Nev

[turboplanner]

2 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

Because he is making an utterly simple and trite argument about climate change (although no doubt will pretend otherwise). But if it's not obvious, I'll explain - how can just two photos, one of which we have no tide information, trump 100+ years of data, which in digital form would probably be in terrabytes of storage? 

 

All those really simple arguments echo Homer Simpsons level of reasoning (say it in a Homer Simpson voice)

 

"Sure, of course atoms COULD consist of a cloud of electrons around a nucleus of protons and neutrons, but if so wouldn't we look fuzzier? "

Certainly the photos aren't accomanied by the data or the source, and that's the usual way people these days dismiss something they've already formed an opinion on, but that argument carries no weight either.

 

However the tidal gauges of Australia are showing the same thing at the high tide mark.

And that's without modelling.

 

Back when the CSIRO was makning comments about global warming, in the 1990's, they were very specific that one effect of global warming would be warming of the sea which would then expand in its basins and rise, drowning coastal communities.

 

 

 

[danny_galaga]

28 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

Certainly the photos aren't accomanied by the data or the source, and that's the usual way people these days dismiss something they've already formed an opinion on, but that argument carries no weight either.

 

However the tidal gauges of Australia are showing the same thing at the high tide mark.

And that's without modelling.

 

Back when the CSIRO was makning comments about global warming, in the 1990's, they were very specific that one effect of global warming would be warming of the sea which would then expand in its basins and rise, drowning coastal communities.

 

 

 

You know the sea level isn't the same everywhere at the same time, right? What the concern is is about the net level rise. It's beyond dispute, except by what The Economist politely term 'mischievous' sources.

I would trust anything Scientific American says over shouty talking heads like Alan Jones

 

"The latest study, led by Dangendorf, analyzed 66 TIDE GAUGE records up and down the East and Gulf coasts, alongside satellite observations and model simulations for a closer examination. The researchers separated out the extra influence of sinking land, a notable issue in some parts of Texas and Louisiana.

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/southeastern-u-s-seas-are-rising-at-triple-the-global-average/

Edited May 6, 2023 by danny_galaga

[kgwilson]

Tell the inhabitants of Tuvalu that the sea levels aren't rising.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_in_Tuvalu

 

https://world.350.org/pacific/files/2014/01/4_PCCSP_Tuvalu_8pp.pdf

 

https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/tuvalu-turns-metaverse-rising-seas-threaten-existence-2022-11-15/

[turboplanner]

5 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

You know the sea level isn't the same everywhere at the same time, right? What the concern is is about the net level rise. It's beyond dispute, except by what The Economist politely term 'mischievous' sources.

I would trust anything Scientific American says over shouty talking heads like Alan Jones

 

"The latest study, led by Dangendorf, analyzed 66 TIDE GAUGE records up and down the East and Gulf coasts, alongside satellite observations and model simulations for a closer examination. The researchers separated out the extra influence of sinking land, a notable issue in some parts of Texas and Louisiana.

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/southeastern-u-s-seas-are-rising-at-triple-the-global-average/

This story was written by a journalist with the subject matter "rising sea levels" on a small part of the US coast where any hydrologist wil be able to explain to you how "changing the way masses of water flow up to the US coastlines" will naturally increase seal level in those areas; so logically you wouldn't be looking at tidal gauges there.

 

NOAA is included as a source of information in this story; The NOAA Observatory which tells us all over the world the level of CO2 in our atmosphere is infamouslt built on the Maauna Loa active volcano, but NOAA reassures us they "model" the CO2 figures to allow for the volcanic emissions.

 

This is the information you're using to label a fellow member simple.

 

 

[danny_galaga]

If I implied he was simple, I apologise. Planedriver, I apologise. I only mean that your reasoning is simple. It's how the deniers work their magic. Watch the witch burning scene in Monty Python and the search for the holy grail. its the same sort of mentality. Just because shouty talking heads demonise institutions like NOAA, doesn't make all the science and research on the subject wrong. You have a typo or two towards the end so I'm not sure what you are implying with volcanoes, but humans produce magnitudes more greenhouse gases than volcanoes do. Again, this is something that is beyond dispute. To argue otherwise, well you might as well argue that the earth is flat. I can't stop you believing it...

 

The only way to refute science, is with better science.

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-is-worldwide-sea-level-rise-driven-by-melting-arctic-ice/

 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-data-reveal-stunning-acceleration-of-sea-level-rise/

 

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/sea-level-rise-1

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-021-01127-1

 

https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/projects/climate-change-evidence-causes/question-14/

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

 

I know this all pales in comparison to the infinite wisdom of that master scientist and engineer- Alan Jones, but still worth considering 😄

 

Anyway, I seem to have successfully derailed this thread. My work here is done!

Edited May 6, 2023 by danny_galaga

[turboplanner]

6 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

You have a typo or two towards the end so I'm not sure what you are implying with volcanoes, but humans produce magnitudes more greenhouse gases than volcanoes do. 

Just a single volcano.

NOAA supplies the measure for CO2 in the world atmosphere from their Observatory on an active volcano, and models the figure to allow for the volcanic influence.

[danny_galaga]

https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/about/co2_measurements.html#:~:text=We have confidence that the,representative of very large areas.

 

I guess you know better than all those researchers *shrugs*

[red750]

Found on Facebook...

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Blimey.. all this debate about climate change on a change of CEOs in an airline; thought you chaps were onto how airliners are a contributor to climate change..

 

BTW, on climate change, opinion is often mistakely claimed as fact. But one of my favourite quotes is "Facts don't give a sh!t what poeople think".

 

Back to the matter at hand

53 minutes ago, red750 said:

Found on Facebook...

 

 

 

I can only respond in this way:

 

 

[onetrack]

One small consolation is that Vanessa Hudson is going to be paid less than Joyce. However, no doubt her total renumeration will be vastly increased by bonuses, the same as Joyces income was.

 

https://www.afr.com/companies/transport/new-qantas-boss-to-be-paid-up-to-5-8m-in-first-year-20230505-p5d5wq#:~:text=Incoming Qantas chief executive Vanessa,his first year in charge.

[red750]

I see this morning that Alan Joyce has been given a retirement bonus of $10 million in Qantas shares. And the airline is facing legal action by the ACCC for selling seats on already cancelled flights. 

[facthunter]

The ENTIRE BOARD should be reviewed and possibly replaced. While it's unlikely they could have strongly influenced Joyce, they can't get away without explaining WHY they didn't at least put an opinion out now and again. The cancelled flights thing will probably be tested in Court..  Nev