Qantas On Virgin Australian Ownership

[JamesL]

You mean never give a leprechaun a man's job!

[NathanJ]

Originally Posted by Brad Myer

If you agree you can sign the QF petition:

http://fairgo4qantas.nationbuilder.com

Boggles the mind to think how many ill informed mongoloids are "signing" this petition.

[NathanJ]

Qantas re Virgin Australia. "this has led to a tangible change in the carrier's behaviour. It lost $100m last year. It is no longer seeking to maximise profit. It is determined to run at a loss in the knowledge that its sovereign shareholders will bail it out, and it's looking to drag Australian aviation down with it"

:facepalm:

[JamesL]

IF people would actually look at the figures VA is actually not really a huge loss making machine, you would see that the airline made upwards of $105 million one off payments (ie TT/XR)

[Ash W]

To all the people complaining about Qantas complaining, I have a simple question. Why should there not be a level playing field? If Qantas is limited, (not excluded hence why BA was allowed to have 20%) in what overseas money can be put into it , due to a sales act that has outlived its usefullness, then why is Virgin Australia not also limited?

Would have thought the best thing for the industry as a whole is to have the same rules apply to both, which would be best acheived through removing the limits imposed by the sales act, which is what I beleive Qantas is really after.

[Mick F]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Virgin have to be at least 50% (or 51%?) Australian owned to be able to fly internationally from Australia? I'm assuming they are at least 50% Australian owned if those rights haven't been taken away from them.

Therefore I'm struggling to see what Qantas are whinging about, apart from maybe crying like a kid that they're getting their backside whipped by Virgin. If they want to increase their foreign ownership to 49% (if they could find anyone), then go for it.

Just like if foreign airlines want to throw their own hard earned money at Virgin in the hope of getting a return on it, then go for it. They're still only owning a percentage of the value of Virgin.

Time to quit whinging about your own inadequacies Qantas and compete.

Mick

[Dave C]

Virgin Australia is split in 2. The international Arm is less than 50% foreign owned (so their international arm complies with the 50% rule that you speak of), Virgin Australia Domestic will be 80% foreign owned. That is what they are whinging about. Not only that, they will be 80% owned by foreign Governments (Etihad, Singapore and NZ are all Government owned airlines), therefore are not subject to the same rules as Qantas.

I'm no fan of Joyce, but he is 100% correct about this. It's a disgrace that 2 businesses doing exactly the same thing should be subject to different rules. Borgetti knows this is hot too, considering his response vaguely addressed something about monopolies, which of course has nothing to do with this. Now he is threatening to sue. He's getting worried his unfair advantage may be pipped at the post.
I believe Virgin Australia should be required to be 50% max Foreign owned, not that Qantas should be allowed to increase it's foreign ownership, but that's just me.

[Ash W]

You are correct kinda anyway. The corportate structure of Virgin Australia is such that the international ops are seperate and technically not foreign owned thus getting around the 49% rule for foreign investors. Ansett did pretty much the same thing with their international arm.

Virgin Australia the company however can go futher than 49% and with the planned investment will be over 70% foreign owned. Personally I have no issue with this.

But Qantas on the other hand can have a max if I recall of 49% foreign ownership with foreign airlines not being allowed to own more than 35% (collectively) and no one company owning more than 25%, this is due to the Qantas sales act, not traffic rights. So massive difference and this I do have issue with and agree with them.

So in short there is a massive difference. Does Qantas have a gripe, sure, are they going about airing it the right way, well no. The real issue isn't what Virgin is allowed but what Qantas aren't allowed to do. It should be the same rules for both.

[Bradley Porter]

I find it very amusing that Joyce wants the workforce to now unite with him on this issue.

The only reason he cares about the longevity of QANTAS is because he hasn't sucked the place dry enough to bail just yet.

If QANTAS is to move forward and become a force again in the Airline industry the first thing that needs to happen is to get rid of Joyce and the board and put someone in their place that wants to re-build an airline rather than a personal fortune at the expense of a once great australian icon !

[Ash W]

So I take it you have shares in Qantas and that you are going to make your feelings known and vote at the AGM. It is afterall a private company who's role it is is to make money for their shareholders.