#FairGo4Qantas - Your Thoughts?

#FairGo4Qantas - Your Thoughts?

With Qantas commencing a campaign to stop Virgin from 'wrecking the airline industy' and trying to 'put Qantas out of business', I wondered if anyone has an opinion on their argument and strategy behind this?

http://fairgo4qantas.nationbuilder.com/

I can see the point Qantas want to make, about the Qantas Sales Act - but how much does this actually limit them in the modern market? (Jetstar operations, Emirates tie-up, etc.)

I probably don't know the full picture here, but it seems a lot like sour grapes. Would be intersted to hear your opinions!

I do think that the Qantas Sale Act should either be amended or should apply across the board so that it is an even playing field. As much as I don't want to see Qantas becoming foreign owned, I do see a disadvantage there. It's not that it limits them when it comes to partnerships etc but with these three government owned airlines owning such a big stake in Virgin "Australia" means that they have a bigger financial stake as opposed to having a partnership like Qantas has with Emirates. It might well be the way of the future and we may have to accept that without the riches of foreign ownership, an airline will not survive in Australia.

Having said that... the more Virgin "Australia" sells its soul to foreign airlines, the less I am inclined to fly with them. It's not necessarily just to support Qantas but is also a matter of national pride and responsibility to ensure that Australian stays Australian. The biggest hurdle is if Qantas is outpriced by a big enough margin to make me think twice... and that is the problem with the foreign government airline ownership of Virgin "Australia" because it will enable them to offer better fares than Qantas.

The federal government should call Joyce's bluff and ditch the QF Sale Act and introduce a policy of open skies in Australia leaving the market driven by market forces.

Joyce's pitch is specious and the so-called facts require scrutiny - one example, surely the claims on the website about the losses at VA need to be qualified by the extraordinary items of purchasing SkyWest, launch of new IT system, etc.

I'm struggling to understand how a capital cash injection can be interpreted by Joyce as an increase in ownership - aren't the shares owned by the respective parties within the limits set? Perhaps if we have any CFO savvy readers, one could provide insights on this - isn't this Joyce at his most deceiving and if so, isn't the whole pitch of the campaign is based on smoke and mirrors (like so much in current politics and corporate PR)?

Isn't it ironic that Joyce seeks the support of the very staff he regularly whines about publicly?

I'm sorry, but sticking a "#" before anything immediately makes me want to strangle whoever is involved, therefore I don't think I can get behind this at all.

I would tend to agree Hugo - and given their previous success with social media (#QantasLuxury anyone?) I thought it was a brave/naive choice!

#fairgo4qantas #aussiepride #redroo #redhot #love #swag #yolo

How is a capital injection an uneven playing feel? The net effect of it is that there will be a better virgin product which primarily australians will loose.

Qantas, does not actually make the nation that much revenue, and it is due to their product which is not properly marketted. The main thing qantas banks on is their history, and how they are australian owned, and operated. Slowly as the next generation trickles in, that will become increasingly less important to them.

So I think that Virgin should be allowed to continue to recieve capital injections, because what they will do with those capital injections will make aviation better in australia. Eventually they will open up more routes, have inflight internet, and better terminals.

Hang on you guys...are you telling me that we have two different sets of rules at play?????

WTF???!!!! I'm at a loss for words at how F up that is!

Who is responsible for enforcing the Air Navigation Act 1920?

On one side Joyce moans about foreign investment into VA, and on the other side he funnels more and more QF paassengers onto EK. 

Babushka, according to the Air Navigation Act, from what I could gather the minister is responsible for enforcing. Also under both the Qantas Sale Act and the Air Navigation Act all Australian international airlines are restricted to a foreign owenership level of no more than 49%. This should be noted in their constitution. The meaning of an Australian international airline under the act is an airtransport enterprise offering or operating an international air service. Now I am no lawyer but to me that would include both Qantas and Virgin, so I am not sure how Virgin can have the 3 foreign airlines owning around 66% currently. Maybe there is something additional in their constitution to allow them to do this, I just don't know.

Whilst I can understand Joyce's point of view if the 49% does apply to both, he really only has himself (and Dixon before him) to blame for the state of qantas - stuffing up make up of fleet, stuffing up orders, executive remuneration, alienating the workforce. He claims that Australia wil lose out if Virgin is allowed to get all this capital, what about his offshoring of heavy maintenance etc. From what I hear, the work offshore still has to be checked by an aussie engineer to make sure it has been done to our regulations - why not just do it here and know that it has been done right?

I believe that Virgin Australia is an Australian Domestic airline and is such not restricted by the 49% foreign ownership rules, and John Borghetti being the smart man that he is would know this!