People are getting a bit carried away with saying "Qantas is doomed" and "that's the end of Qantas.

People are getting a bit carried away with saying "Qantas is doomed" and "that's the end of Qantas." No? Sure, it's not doing all that well but the balance sheet is strong enough absorb these losses for quite some time. Of course losses are not sustainable indefinitely but the shrinking of the balance sheet should go some way towards returning the company back to profitability in the short to medium term hopefully. As long as management implements a strategy that will help foster a profitable environment, it should be okay? Of course, easier said than done given the competitive nature of the industry and the, at times, rather confused management. Thoughts?

Granted, people are after more than a merely profitable company. Rather they are after an airline that will serve them well in terms of desired routes as well as the hard product.

Trevor,

Pax actually do not care at all if carrier profitable or not – they want price and service. State supported freighter can afford to be in red in hope that state itself pick up something from the situation, like more jobs for example. But public company MUST be profitable, otherwise it became bankrupt. So unprofitable Qantas will not survive. Fate was sealed when Qantas was sold and tomb was prepared with aviation deregulation.

I wouldn't say Qantas is doomed, they still have $2 billion in cash in the bank, it's all about the management of the business. Sure, they have issues and made a significant loss but so did Virgin.

Competition and low airfares are great for the consumer in the short term, but for the long term survival of any business you need good management.  

Some good points made and a very timely thread to start. I agree with your sentiments unfortunately journalism itself relies on sensationalising stories to capture an audience who most of the time can't read through the persuasive devices used and therefore the reader often interprets the perspective of the writer far too often as being the actual state of normality (I'm not having at shot at Aust BT either). I love how so many think they know the strategy to follow and how wrong the current management is but it must be asked this is based on what (somehow I don't think too many high performing CEO's sit and write or respond to forums)?? QANTAS has not been able to compete on any sort of level playing field and sadly the true 'high yeild' customer wouldn't be resorting to venting their complaints regarding customer service or product dissatisfaction on these or any other forums using their FF 'status' as the caveat of 'contextual understanding' they don't beat to others drums or whims they just choose the product that best meets their needs at the time of their choosing. No product or service is infallable eventually cracks and faults appear especially if you're out to find them and moreso when a human element is involved. We are slaves to our own subjectivity, desires and inflated degree of self importance.

dazzzredroo, what's your point?

Are you suggesting non-high yield customers of Qantas should just be quiet because only the high-yield customers know best? And since high-yield customers are probably to busy to write in this forum, therefore this forum, filled with the chatter of insignificant customers, is inconsequential?

Have you not considered that some acts of folly are self-evident to the common man? To suggest these voices be muted undoubtedly opens up the argument that the common man should not be allowed to vote because they are not career politicians or public administration experts.

While it's true 'high yield' customers would just walk away and find something better, Qantas is not just about them. I think the talk of gloom and the demise of Qantas is a reflection of the public angst and a sense of helplessness at the sight of a beloved icon being whittled down.

Nationalism is a double edged sword. To have linked Qantas so closely to the identity of Australia also create deep feelings within the public, when they see a train wreck, which they have no power to affect.

Hello Babs its the old adage what is said to what is heard. I am responding based on what you have replied.

First prargraph-  no I'm not saying what you think i've said.... I'm suggesting that a few FF 'high status' contributors give an impression they believe that they are the  'high yeild'  mainstay and that they aren't being looked after. I am also saying that their chatter alone isnt the most important or neccessary the most knowledgeable.

Second paragraph- Yes I do consider social justice and equity issues quite significantly, empowerment of the masses is close to my roots. I think you missed my point as you have judged me in the same manner that you suggest my comments have judged others... which is actually what my statement in my conclusion is referring to.

Third Paragraph- My point about journalism precisely, perception is reality because human emotion and not logic make it so.

Fourth paragraph- As stated in para 3 above but also with the comment that we always can do something about anything it just depends on how much we choose to do and the motivation that compels us to do it. I'll keep flying QANTAS for all the reasons you mention and because I love the significance of the brand beyond its commercial incarnations (Branson doesn't care about anything other than Branson and will drop something and walk away if it doesn't increase his coffers). We often forget that once something is gone then its gone for good. All we'll have left are memories at longreach if we're lucky.

Hi dazza,

Yes it would appear that I have misunderstood you. My apologies for that - Thank you for clarifying!

And yes I agree, Branson is nauseatingly only about Branson. It is a shame the might and will of Borghetti is propping up Virgin. It truly is...

If nothing changes (fail to see that anything will change) and everything will go as it going Qantas IS doomed as global airline (probably already has). We simply cannot compete with state backed airlines on service and with airlines from cheap countries on labor price. As simple as that. My prediction that Qantas at the best finished as Air NZ – will serve London for prestige and LAX for money. And this is it. No dedicated lounges, ho first class. And perhaps feeding JQ with new fleet (instead of QF itself) is not a mistake, but strategy – make as least one arm of group profitable and survivable.

Yeah, you see my vision for Qantas is not a Deathstarisation of the business because that arm is profitable and mainline isn't. I want to see a stronger Qantas, a better Qantas through making the mainline business more efficient and effective.

What do I want? I want to see a good carrier with good products running good schedules that makes money. Essentially, a good business where we all win.

How do we get that? I rather think the answer is a QFi operation with JQ costs. (Or less.)

I love to see Qantas in its former glory when it was number one airline for number of years, but unfortunately it is no more than a dream.

I prefer Qantas over most airlines and will continue to support it , as it is still one off the safest airlines in the world I would give preference to the safest over the cheapest any day