Joyce and his faulty calculator at it AGAIN

[speeeedy]

From this Australian article (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/joyce-opts-for-a-cyclical-response-as-the-turbulence-keeps-coming/story-e6frg9lx-1226075938898)

I extract the following paragraph (my bolding) where Alan Joyce comments on costs:

Asked yesterday how he measures this productivity gap against other airlines, he said: "I look at the relationship between our yield premium for Qantas brand and the cost differential against other carriers. The product premium here offsets cost advantages of other carriers. The Qantas' yield premium in Australia is 35 per cent while the cost disadvantage domestically is just over 20 per cent. Internationally, the cost differential is a lot bigger, way over 30 per cent, but the yield differential generated by brand Qantas is not as great. This is a fundamental problem and that is why the leverage to improve productivity is such an issue."

The 2010 annual report page 47 reveals that Manpower and staff related costs are $3,405 Million which is 25.2% of a total expenditure of $13,519 Million.

So Joyce and his faulty calculator reveals that if everyone in Qantas works for FREE the airline will STILL be at least 5% more expensive than our competitors.

Some questions for Joyce:

Do your competitors pay staff nothing? I don't think so.

Do your competitors pay nothing for fuel? I don't think so.

Do they pay no aircraft operating costs? I don't think so.

and the list goes on, this guy is less believable by the day.

The only real difference in costs between airlines which have similar level of product delivery is staff. If staff make up 25% of your costs than it is impossible for there to be a 30% differential in costs.

For a mathematician he is dreadful at maths. In fact for a primary school student he is dreadful at maths.

The airline is failing due to atrocious management. Wrong routes, wrong frequencies, wrong aircraft with the wrong configuration, confused branding with a very wrong two brand strategy, wrong board, wrong management.

About the only thing Qantas had going for it was the right maintenance with the right pilots and therefore the right safety culture which led to a much better than right BRAND.

It is all almost completely gone now due to nothing more than unbelievable incompetence. :ugh: :ugh: :mad: :mad:

[QFinsider]

And totally unregulated self interest...

He is merely a symptom..

Watch out for Clifford, with his huge ego. The board composition is of immense concern.

[Ero-plano]

More Joyce Lies.

I wonder if all the Guns N Roses albums in the 80's were named after his work ethic and public bull****ery?
-Appetite for Destruction
-Lies
-Use your Illusions I & II

[VBPCGUY]

I wonder if all the Guns N Roses albums in the 80's were named after his work ethic and public bull****ery?
-Appetite for Destruction
-Lies
-Use your Illusions I & I

I think a few would like to get in the ring with him:ok:

[The The]

I actually agree with him.

The board and senior executives are paid at least 30% more than comparable competitors, yet they yield very little!

['holic]

Just out of interest, from the relevant annual reports :

CASK
Qantas 5.5c
Singair 6.6c
Cathay 8.3c

To me that doesn't look like Qantas is doing too bad. What exactly is the real problem here? Cathay has the highest CASK, yet they posted a profit of $1.35B. Maybe it's because they actually fly somewhere using reasonable equipment.

Have a look at Air Asia. Their CASK is 3.1c, which is a pretty big difference. The thing is the Qantas Group has a fleet of about 200 aircraft and employs 35000 staff - Air Asia has a fleet of about 100 aircraft and employs 8000 staff. Which is because it's a bare bones LCC with no yield margin. Which is why its CEO Tony Fernandes stated recently that the company only made profit from its ancillary charges. Is this really the direction the current management want to take Qantas?

[Captain Gidday]

Yes, that is exactly the direction they want to take Qantas, and that is quite obvious.

[Des Dimona]

I think you will also find that Jetstar's "non airfare" charges contribute significantly to any profit.

[Mr. Hat]

Over at Virgin we'd be dancing in the streets if we had a profit announcement of $500,000,000.

Where's my dividend Joyce?

Me thinks Mr Joyce needs to have a hard look at himself and his team for the poor performance on international. Poor fleet planning, fines for cartels, fiasco routes, 787s plus more. Last time I checked the QF international guys/gals were doing a pretty good job. How many non normals have they handled in the last two years? The biggest non normal is Alan Joyce. There isn't a checklist to cover that one.

[speeeedy]

MORE LIES AND FAULTY CALCULATIONS

At the press club Mr Joyce told a big fat lie:

He said that the AIPA are demanding that Jetstar pilots to be paid the same as Qantas pilots.

Out and Out Bulls&#T.

In addition he said that if this (completely false) claim was allowed that Jetstars unit costs would increase by 50%.

What is wrong with this bloke?

If the claim was true (which it isn't) then jetstar pilots would get about 30% more. Pilots wages presently make up about 4% of the total costs of Jetstar, therefore using a non-faulty calculator a pay rise of such magnitude would increase costs by 1.2%.

A far cry from 50%.

But remember he lied about the claim anyway... There is no such claim, nor can there be, legally AIPA cannot negotiate terms of a separate agreement within the negotiations for the long haul one.

The facts are that the claim whilst a little complicated, essentially asks for Qantas brand flying to be on terms and conditions no less than Qantas.

Mr Joyce - Please:

a) Stop lying

b) Buy a new calculator.

c) Leave and take Clifford with you.