world of aviation logo

Qantas turns up the heat with online petition

written by WOFA | November 19, 2013

The Qantas petition website.
The Qantas petition website.

Qantas has launched an aggressive online petition as it ratchets up its campaign to get the federal government to block Air New Zealand, Etihad Airways and Singapore Airlines taking increased stakes in Virgin Australia via the latter’s $350 million rights issue.

The website fairgo4qantas.nationbuilder.com went live on Tuesday morning and uses unprecedentedly strong language in arguing Qantas’s case in what is becoming an increasingly strident and public argument over foreign ownership of Australian airlines.

“Virgin has raised over $300 million in capital from Etihad, Singapore and Air New Zealand. This will result in Virgin being over 80 per cent foreign owned. We can’t let them wreck this industry by running up huge losses to try and put Qantas out of business,” the petition reads.

“We must not let three foreign government backed airlines take control of Virgin and ruin the Australian aviation industry for which we have fought so hard. Make your voice heard and sign the petition below to the federal government.”

But early responses to the campaign on social media platform Twitter have not been universally positive in response to the call to arms.

“@QantasAirways: After just telling another 300 at Avalon they are to be sacked is this a joke #fairgo4qantas get real,” writes Twitter user David Edmunds.

Another user, ‘Bad Motivator’, writes: “Please help Qantas keep price gouging Australians by preventing competition from efficient international airlines.” 



  • David VG


    Why should we support Qantas here in Adelaide, they have abandoned international flights from South Australia, we can only fly direct utilising “Foreign Airlines”!

  • Shane


    But David, that is the whole point. Because Qantas is currently having to battle Virgin domestically it cannot expand internationally, purchase new aircraft and grow its business. Virgin does not need to make a profit because it can just get more funding from its foreign owners. These foreign airlines can easily recoup the cost through taking over the routes that Qantas can no longer afford to fly. I cannot see how it is gouging to expect passengers to at least cover the cost of the flight but that is what a lot of people think is happening. Flying in Australia has never been cheaper and that needs to change.

  • Robert


    I remember a time when both Qantas and TAA / Australian Airlines made no money, and the Government of the day just kept picking up the bill, what’s the difference now? Oh that’s right, it’s Qantas and NOT Ansett that had to try and survive. Well, we know what happened to Ansett, don’t we.

  • Jim


    Shane – are you serious?

    Firstly, I hardly think $100 million is hardly a large loss. And secondly, Qantas began pulling out of routes way before Virgin had any investment whatsoever from SQ, NZ, or EY.

    I remember two years ago I would pay $1200 return from Brisbane to Mount Isa. This was BEFORE and of these “foreign” airlines invested in Virgin.

    Now I am paying a third of that to get to Mount Isa now that it has competition.

    You sound like someone from inside Qantas with sour grapes and jealousy.

    Whilst Qantas is crying wolf, I do agree the Qantas sales act needs to be dismantled. It is out dated.

  • Stan


    Touché Jim, touché

  • Dianne


    Competition is one thing but manipulation of the industry is another. These airlines that are buying into Virgin are funded by their own governments and Qantas is not funded or supported by our government. The Flying Kangaroo has been synonymous with the Australian Spirit for a long time and if we think of only ourselves and the cheapest flight then that is what we will end up with! Cattle class and owned by other countries who bring in their own employees. There is a bigger picture here than the cost of an occasional flight. Where has the Aussie Spirit gone??

  • Stacey


    I really hope that Australian’s will be able to look big picture this time rather than small petty picture bickering and nit picking. Come on Australia and Australian’s, enough of the tall Poppy slagging. This is serious and we should all stop, think and consider what this will mean to not only us now, but our children and grandchildren in the future.

  • Robert


    Dianne, manipulation of the industry? Why did Qantas set up JetStar then? Obviously, they set up JetStar to compete as a low cost carrier. Why did they do that? To get the low paying airfare passenger that Virgin had aimed for. Ansett, for many years, had provided for both first class, business and economy successfully, but failed under the ownership of Murdoch, and later, by Air New Zealand.

    Qantas Domestic makes a profit, so does JetStar. Qantas isn’t, soley based on it’s business model which is not sustainable in the market of today, that of low airfares.

    Dianne, you talk about the Australian Spirit, as if the airline ‘is’ Australia. It’s not, and never has been. Qantas has always maintained its’ dominance of the Business and First Class passenger market. Ansett, whilst it did have a decent take of this market, was more successful providing economy air travel.

    The Spirit of Australia was marketing, pure and simple. It touches the heart of people, and they hand over 3x the price of a ticket, that their competitors do. Cattle Class? JetStar, now correct me if I’m wrong, set about offering low airfares with a ‘no frills service’ before Virgin matched them. Competition has been pretty strong between the two, but, as you know, Virgin has ‘lifted’ its’ offerings to provide (in some ways) a better service than JetStar does, but the tickets do cost that little bit more.

    You have asked about the Spirit, and I put to you, that Qantas started JetStar. With the approval of the Qantas board and shareholders, they attempted to ‘destroy’ the startup that was and still is Virgin. JetStar set about lowering airfares to ‘destroy’ Virgin. Where’s the ‘Spirit’ in that? Constantly lowering airfares, knowing that is was ‘also damaging’ their bottom line, was not sustainable and they know it. Because they can no longer afford to continue on that path, and Virgin has taken the hits, they cry poor-mouth.

    As I said earlier, apparently it was ok when the government owned Qantas and picked up it’s bills from its’ loss making business model. Only when Qantas was listed and subsequently had a large shareholder (British Airways), did it find the need to start making money.

    I could probably go on and on, but I’m tired. I think people need to do some research into the history (and I’m not talking 12 months here), of the airline industry in Australia.

    I’ve been active in the aviation industry for over 25 years, and behind that, there’s a little understanding of how things work. If you’re a Qantas employee, you probably don’t share my thoughts but that is fine with me. The facts are the facts. Look into it.

    Goodnight 🙂

  • Bev Gigney


    oh well…. lets just let another Aussie icon go down the drain…… No! a resounding no!.. I think some things are worth fighting for, regardless of the cost.

  • JS


    Pretty naive to generalise and say that foreign airlines bring on their own employees? Does that suggest that they aren’t Australian citizens?

    Who do you think would be checking in passengers for these services? Ground handling? Catering services? Landing charges that go to the Airport etc. and to expand even further with jobs in the tourism sectors of the destinations flown.

    Increasing competition is healthy for the Australian Aviation Industry. It is just frustrating to see this fair go 4 Qantas scheme, get real and suck it up.

  • Paul


    This isn’t about Qantas V Virgin Australia. This is about allowing them to compete on a level playing field. I am not an employee of either, but I do think the Qantas Sales Act needs to be looked at so the ongoing success of Qantas is not jeopardised. Yes we can go back over decades re the industry, which was regulated, that doesn’t solve the situation that we have now. This needs to be addressed by parliament and changes need to be made so we continue to have competition and not one airline such as Virgin have a monopoly.

  • John Harrison


    Where do I start on this subject. I’ve read all the above “entries” and they all have their pro’s and con’s. Yes its funny that Alan Joyce of all people should be crying poor etc. As Robert said, Jetstar was set up to combat Virgin in its early days, among other reasons. In the end lets face it if Qantas had been “taken over” awhile ago, it wouldn’t be here now. So let’s see how things pan out, Virgin will go on, Jetstar will get more and more work
    from Qantas (look at giving the Boeing 787’s to Jetstar 1st !!) and Tigairair will be there to annoy the other two majors. I guess in the end its the paying public who win of sorts. As sad as it is, The Qantas everyone knows and remembers isn’t that Airline anymore. All we can hope is it does keep going, as I feel it will, albeit a shadow of its former self.

  • Jed


    Well said Robert.
    Dianne. You’re either a sheep distributing the ‘message’ of your ‘dear leader’ Alan Joyce to the public or you just lack the research. You talk about Australian jobs.

    As Robert said Qantas started Jetstar to push Virgin out. Nothing ‘fair’ about that.

    Australians have already lost jobs purely because of the decisions of Qantas. Majority of all of Jetstars international flights – Cairns to Tokyo, Sydney to Honolulu, are all operated by Thai or Singapore crew (with the exception of the pilots). You are lucky to see one australian flight attendant on a Jetstar international flight these days.

    You will find Jetstar also class flights such as Cairns to Darwin as an “international” flight as it then goes onto Vietnam, Singapore etc. Again with either Thai or Singaporean crew.

    Qantas is acting like a spoiled brat. It has, since the creation of Jetstar, tried to force virgin into a corner, and with it, has already replaced plenty of Australian crew with Thai or Singaporean ones.

  • Karen


    Qantas and it’s employees screaming foul. How ironic. Qantas employees just thinking of themselves yet again. Overpaid and underworked

  • Red Barron


    Its pretty easy people, Just pick your side you want to fly with. I for one am not keen for my money to head offshore to a foreign Government. Where is Mr Dick Smith, look forward to reading his comments…..

  • Ante C


    Bev’s right- we can’t let another Australian icon- one of the most important, go.

  • DB


    Wow, don’t we love to bash Qantas?

    Come on, this is one of the most successful airlines and the second oldest in the World. We should have some pride in our airline.

    Sure, there are many things that they could do better but on the whole their strategy is working.

    Look at what Jetstar has achieved in its short life. It complements the main airline in a tough market. If QF did not have JQ, then what?

    I agree, QF does need to open up more international services with its own metal / plastic and I guess that will come as the profits start to return. Bringing in 787-9’s could open up a heap of opportunities.

    The best thing to happen to Qantas domestic was Virgin Australia lifting the game. I have noticed a marked improvement in service and attitude with QF and that is what makes a big difference.

    We can’t have it all really can we?

  • Dianne


    I would like to state clearly I am not an employee of any airline and have never been involved in the aviation industry. True my knowledge of the background of airlines over the decades is limited to media. What I am saying is as an Australian Citizen I believe in giving all Australian companies the right to operate on an equal playing field and that is not only Aviation. I personally do not want to see another Australian company go by the wayside and more jobs be lost due to overseas intervention. Marketing or not the red emblem of the Flying Kangaroo evokes national pride and I personally do not want to see this company go down. As an individual I will encourage all passengers to choose wisely and also to lobby their member for a fair go, because that is my right!!

  • Big Red


    I don’t recall the last time Qantas received a handout from the government unlike our struggling car industry. Are 30,000 airline jobs ranked below automotive jobs?
    All I see Qantas asking for is a level playing field and no subsidy. It’s very disappointing to see a slow reaction on this matter by Federal government.

  • Robert


    Yes Dianne, the emblem invokes pride. Qantas should be praised on making the red kangaroo globally known, and respected.

    I would like to say Dianne, I did not ‘state my case’ to offend nor negate things you said. The problem with aviation in Australia is a varied one. There are a lot of people who, from the outside, like to comment on the industry, but unfortunately lack any understanding of the industry.

    Would it be sad for more people to lose their jobs, from Qantas? Naturally yes. What would be worse though, Qantas sacking another ‘1000’ workers, or would it be better for the entire Virgin group to collapse? Personally, I was saddened when Ansett collapsed. Why? Because I held a very high respect for the Airline. It was a ‘national treasure’ of sorts, in my mind, and the mind of many other Australians that also hold Qantas in this high regard.

    What is known, industry wide – and publicly, is that Qantas has a business model that is not, and has not, been sustainable in the global marketplace. Aviation operates in a global marketplace. That is unavoidable. The airline industry ‘globally’ has changed so much – just like manufacturing has changed (don’t get me started there!)

    It is sad that people don’t want to pay a lot for air travel. It can quite literally cost more for a taxi ride to the airport, than it does to travel nowadays – although nobody complains. Aeroplanes are not cheap, not to buy, and certainly not to operate. I believe there should be higher ticket prices, but who is brave enough to implement that? Certainly not me, nor anyone I know.

    It is unfortunate, but it’s a reality in today’s ‘global economy’. Beat, or be beaten. I don’t like it any more than you, but that’s how it is.

  • NJP


    Poor Qantas – I have three points:
    1. JQ’s set-up in Singapore, HK & Japan = QF’s foreign ownership in overseas airlines & HK are trying to block them due to foreign ownership so QF need to stop being hypocritical.
    2. JQ was launched to save QF’s wage cost whilst flying the same routes – wage cost is the key variable as planes & fuel cost the same for QF/JQ -so stop moaning about cheap overseas labour & look closer to home @ greedy wage deals – same fate as Ford otherwise.
    3. Emirates have just bought another 50 A380’s & 150 B777x’s – expansion is the key to strong growth and fortunes – QF instead cut back on routes & service.

  • Malster


    What an odd discussion and reaction. The real point is Virgin needs the extra cash. Ask yourself – Why? Because it is bleeding, it is making losses. Qantas is only losing money internationally not domestically, not is JQ, nor is frequent flyer. The conversation here should really be about making sure a Virgin remains viable commercial entity. All Qantas are really doing is giving Virgin a kicking andusing politics to change the Qantas Sale Act.

  • Overload


    Just so I understand this clearly: Qantas want to stop their only competitor and a much smaller one at that, from getting access to the funds they require to compete against their much larger competitor.

    Ok, so lets stop the funds Virgin needs to sure up their position, because Virgin after all made such a huge profit last financial year and obviously does not need the money to stay strong. Seriously, are you kidding me. Do we live in a country that believes that we should protect Qantas by stoping it’s only competitor stay solvent foreign owned or otherwise.

    It’s clear to me that this is not about stopping Virgin getting access to the funds it obviously needs because this is just plain absurd. This is more about getting Qantas on the same foreign investment terms as Virgin. And I have no problem with this….But do not be blinded by the ridiculous notion that somehow Qantas has a divine right to air transport in this country. And if you still don’t get it and think that the only way forward is as a nationalist, then have a bit of a read up on Argentina’s economic history and see what that gets you.

    You do not end up with a strong economy by holding another company back. If Qantas was to have two options on the table, ” Stop Virgin’s funding” or ” Have their foreign investment limits lifted” I’m pretty sure I know what they would go for, exactly what they are trying to stop. But hay, if they don’t get what they want they could always just shut the airline down for a few days, that seems to work!

  • Chris


    I love Qantas as a great Australian airline but the management team and particularly the marketing and PR team are doing their level best to destroy the airline. Amazing that they make crazy and daft decision after crazy daft decision. To set up this website and start this fight, diverting resources away from the service and amenity standards that have meant that Virgin have easily eclipsed them. Meanwhile, Jetstar much? Foreign owned airlines masquerading as Australian invading other countries airspace diverting funds and attention away from fixing Qantas. What a joke. These clowns have to go!

  • Brett Wiley


    Shut qantas down full stop. Joyce ruined the airline in the first place.

  • dave



    “It is unfortunate, but it’s a reality in today’s ‘global economy’. Beat, or be beaten. I don’t like it any more than you, but that’s how it is.”

    I agree with this statement and am all for fair competition but ONLY if the same rules apply to both companies. I would love to see both Virgin and Qantas survive and promote Australian aviation and create jobs, whether that strategy if funded by foreign shareholders or self created cash from sustainable business models, but what is happening is that one company is able to access money to fund a loss making strategy (Virgin reported a loss last year and is expected to do so again this year therefore its own current business model is not sustainable) with the intent of weakening Qantas. This is not fair competition. Should it not only be fair that if Qantas wants to it can also access the foreign funds to match that strategy ?

    We don’t apply one set of rules for large banks, mining companies, Woolworths/Coles etc and another set of rules for their smaller competitors – so why should Qantas now have to be restricted by a set of rules that don’t apply to its competitors.

    No other marketplace or industry provides regulatory favour to one company over another due to size. Free and equal competition should be based on business model and approach. New entrants and smaller companies can often access other forms of incentives (such as start up grants, tax breaks, employee incentives etc) which are designed to help support the company’s cashflow during periods of start up and growth to allow effective competition.

    I want both airlines to survive for the greater good of the thousands of jobs they provide and for the broader economic benefits they both bring to the Australian economy. In this global market place it only seems natural that foreign investment will be an increasing form of capital for businesses to access and use to compete but the playing field in any industry must be level and both players subject to the same rules by which to play.


  • Steve


    QANTAS has INVESTED in FOREIGN airlines. Jetstar Japan, Hong Kong, etc
    So why are they now crying foul?

    Quite simply Joyce has been able to use his staff as pawn in a fight against the government to repeal the Qantas Sales Act.

  • Robert


    Hi Dave,

    Yes, I do believe the Qantas sales act needs to be amended / ripped up. My argument, based on the history of the airline industry, is that for decades, Qantas was able to access basically unlimited funds through the backing of our governments of the day, giving it an unfair advantage over Ansett, although I cannot remember Ansett ever complaining about that – correct me if I’m wrong.

    The reality of this $300 million dollars is that in the scheme of things, it’s not that great an amount in relation to the capital required to run an airline.

    Also, we need to remember, Virgin is not that old. Naturally, as the business grows – as it has over the past dozen years, an enormous amount of capital has been required to continue funding this growth. One needs to look at the underlying operating profit, before the costs for rolling out expansion of fleet and other capital requirements. This does not mean that the Virgin business model is unsustainable, it means it is growing and needs financial assistance to do that. Much like a restaurant for example, that borrows $100k to renovate its premise, it doesn’t mean the restaurant is a bad, unsustainable business model, the fact that an organisation/s are willing to boost the coffers to build the business actually shows the model is working.

    The very fact that both Qantas domestic and jetstar are making profits, proves that it’s not the low cost market that is the problem, it is the international arm of Qantas that cannot compete, not domestically, but internationally, amongst bigger players.

    The blame for this lay in many areas, Qantas management, the federal government, and unions. I’m not going to Union bash here, but the realities are Qantas is competing in a market where wages are a lot lower overseas – something we can do nothing about.

    As people have also commented on here and elsewhere, one needs to look at the fact that Qantas, well it’s wholly owned subsidiary, jetstar, employs foreign workers. Is that not an unfair advantage?

    The crux of the argument lay in the fact that both jetstar and Qantas domestic make a profit. Qantas does not due to its’ cost structure. That needs to change. Regardless of how much people want to claim unfair advantage, Qantas allows its’ subsidiaries to play the game as well.

    The economy, and more so the market, will dictate airfares in this country. The more the airlines want to play the low airfare game, the more the public will lap it up, regardless of the damage it is causing the airline industry. People don’t want to spend money, simple.

    It is time the government did allow for a more level playing field, but I feel it’s going to be at the cost of Australian jobs.

  • Dave


    Hi Steve – agree yes Qantas has invested in foreign airlines and from my limited knowledge of the situation I understand that this has been done in line with the rules and regulations of those foreign countries where any local national carrier in that country also has the ability to receive foreign investment – ie there is no difference between the rules of investment for airlines of that country

    I think the point here is not that Qantas is anti foreign investment more it is anti foreign investment when it is not allowed the option to seek the same investment as there is a rule which prohibits it from doing so.

    Hi Robert – thanks for your reply. I agree with a lot of your points and recognise the history and the growth phase Virgin is in and its need for capital. I don’t believe we have seen enough ‘sustainable’ competition between the two domestic carriers as yet to determine whether their strategies are sustainable given price and capacity have been the principle levers used to date.

    Perhaps if Ansett had complained its outcome may have been different. While history is important I believe it should not set the requirement for future behaviour or unlevel playing fields of the past mean they continue for the future. The global market place and particularly aviation has radically evolved since those days – we need to consider both sides points on the basis of the current situation (of which history has of course played a part in forming) and context.

    With respect to Jetstar I believe the majority of its employees are Australian nationals, while the foreign nationals are mainly employed by the Jetstar foreign franchises all of which have been set up under the rules of those countries and where Qantas is a minority investor and local investors are majority shareholders – this view is based on my review of the Qantas annual reports and annual shareholder information released over the years. Would be great to know and understand if you have any information, facts or references indicating how many foreign workers Jestar the Australian business employs?

    I completely agree that cost transformation is needed by Qantas and also needed by Virgin – John B announced last year the commencement of a multi year cost transformation programme.

    I also agree with you on the fear for Australian jobs – I think regardless there will be a loss of Australian jobs naturally as globalisation matures and companies continually seek for lower cost providers. Both Qantas and Virgin do this today – for example Virgin’s maintance is undertaken offshore whilst Qantas has obviously recently closed one maintenance base as well as both airlines using many suppliers from overseas.

    What is different between the two is that Qantas is by far the larger Australian employer of the two and these jobs need to be protected – as do the Australian jobs created by Virgin. Without the level playing field or the ability to amend industrial legislation I feel that the potential for Australian job loses in total is far greater than with it – particularly if the largest employer is substantially weakened.

    Many aspects and views to this complex debate – it will be interesting to see if the Government does act – I doubt it though.

    If there is no change then I fear the pressure on Qantas to reduce its cost base will result in greater job losses than any of us anticipate when it is not able to seek capital in the way its competitors can. I doubt the Government would allow Qantas to fail but I doubt a downsized Qantas and the associated job losses will be matched by growth in Virgin and the creation of jobs to equal those lost.Therefore a net overall loss of Australian jobs. N

    Lets hope for an outcome where job losses are minimsed and companies are provided the same regulatory environment to compete with. Competition can then be fairly based around who has the better competitive differentiation, ability to continually transform and customer offering and loyalty.


  • Rob


    What a great debate this is!

    I do feel that one day, hopefully soon, the government will repeal the Qantas sales act.

    It will be interesting how things pan out though, as investors will not be keen investing in a high cost base airline, so there will inevitably be a change there somewhere. Yes, there will be job losses, as there are currently in other industries. Eventually though, the workforce will increase as more people travel.

    I’ve enjoyed this debate thus far, and look forward to how it all pans out.


  • Craig


    Im sick of listening to joyce jestar was set up to save qantas from competition using a lot of cheap labour for international flights qantas didnt care about those who coudnt afford to fly before virgin came to australia

  • Ned Kelly


    Poor little Alan Joyce from Qantas on his $2m+ annual salary. Asking the Government to help stop Virgin Airlines taking his market share and trying to play the “Loyal Aussie’ card to garner public sympathy. He should look in the mirror and see the low staff morale created by him reflects in their appalling service. Virgin leaves Qantas for dead when it comes to service and customer care. With Qantas (and its subsidiary Jetstar) it starts with overpriced fares (and extras), then gruff, unhelpful check-in staff, then the arrogant cabin crew prancing around while speaking with their fake lisps and throwing disgraceful food at you. Any wonder Virgin with their fun, customer-friendly attitude is blowing QF out of the water – or should I say air.

  • John


    Ned Kelly – having flown on both carriers a lot over the last year I can assure you that Virgin have their equal share of ‘gruff unhelpful staff’ – both airlines have good and bad staff. No need to get personal on individuals either- keep the debate professional please.

    If Virgin was blowing QF out of the water then they wouldn’t need $350million in cash from their airline shareholders to keep going they would be earning enough themselves – I suspect that both airlines will be running at a loss – just one can have those losses supported by a majority of foreign investors while the other can’t – not exactly fair competition.

    Both need to make changes and both need to improve in a number of areas. But give both the same rules to play by.

  • Dane


    If an airline wants to be known as Australian, it should have at least 60% local ownership. The airlines backing VA are far too financially powerful for Qantas compete with. That theory in mind, VA could operate at a huge loss because of that backing provided by non-Australian entities. By running VA at a loss, you could gain a huge domestic market share with low price fares, and force Qantas to lower their prices, thus driving them into the ground when they
    run out of money.

  • Stan


    Each time youbuy a Virgin ticket you send money to the governments of NZ and Singapore. That’s bad enough, but to send 22% of my airline ticket $$ straight to the government of the United Arab Emirates (100% owners of Etihad) is unforgiveable. That government’s treatment of women, gays and foreign workers is appalling. It was also one of the first governments on earth to recognise the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

  • Rob


    Hi Stan,

    To begin with, every time you buy a Virgin ticket, you do not send money to the governments of NZ and Singapore.

    Yet another person who has no idea, no offence. To assume that 22% of your $$ goes straight to the United Arab Emirates, is pure fantasy. You assume that because they own a certain %, then that ‘%’ goes straight from you to them?

    How do you figure that? To send ANY money to its’ shareholders, A – it needs to make a profit, and B – the Virgin board needs to approve a dividend.

    I’m sorry, but it does appear that this is a little out of your depth. Ok, its ok to try and make a point, like I have and others have here, but your comments are just being laughed at, really.

    75% of your comment is about a governments’ treatment of its’ people, being women, gays and foreign workers, along with their acknowledgement of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

    Do you have a mortgage? Where are these funds backed? Japan, China, god help me – the Middle East? Those shoes you are wearing, the socks, T-shirt, the television you watch, the device you use to make your comments – where were they all made? Once again, I apologise, but are you aware of how these items are manufactured?

    If your argument against foreign ownership and investment is based purely on what you stated in your comment, you have just joined them, but as a racist.

    Airlines do not make much, if any profit. First, look at HOW MUCH has been invested, then look at the return that investment makes. Singapore Airlines could own 100% of Virgin, but if it makes no $$, what is 100% of nothing?

    Their investment has created, and continues to create jobs in THIS country.

    How much Australian made, do you support by way of purchases? Just keep buying goods made in China, Stan. You’re saving money, aren’t you? At what cost though – oh, that’s right, Australian jobs. Yes Stan, keep supporting a country who is known for human rights violations, the very human rights that people are denied, simply to make those shoes and socks, and everything else you wear and use. I know what I smell.

    If you are offended by my remarks, how do you think people feel when you comment as you did? It’s not nice.

    Just remember Stan, not every cent you pay someone, goes into their pocket. You need to make a profit first. That’s not science, and I really don’t think you need to be very intelligent to understand that.

    Next…. 😉

    PS. I’m sincere in my comments Stan, and aim not to offend, but to educate the uneducated in basics, at a very low level.

  • Dante Perth


    Maybe the solution is that Qantas needs to be back in government hands since the airline is complaining their main competition is government back. As it is in Adelaide, here in Perth Qantas is a domestic airline only, apart from a daily flight to Singapore. Maybe the Qantas act needs to be amended but to force the airline to provide a minimum number of international flights from each major city. When I moved to Australia in 1990 Qantas only flew international flights. Poor management under Dixon then Joyce are to blame for the airline’s demise with continuing shrinking market share. Singapore Airlines, Emirates and Cathay could have easily have been swamped by foreign airlines at the their home bases but they have continued to expand investing in the latest fuel efficient jet and excellent cabin products in all classes. I think the solution is to sack the entire Qantas board and employ some people with vision who are prepared to take a risk.

  • Ante C


    Actually Steve, the Qantas Group is the parent company of Jetstar Japan, Asia and Hong Kong.

  • Ben R


    Rob, that is the most level headed come back I’ve ever read. I completely agree.

  • James from Sydney


    Many years ago the decision was made to deregulate the Australian aviation industry in order to reduce the cost of travel. Competing against foreign airlines with lower operating costs was the obvious consequence to this decision. You can’t deregulate the industry and at the same time introduce an Act that prevents an airline from doing exactly that. You can’t have it both ways. If deregulation is good, then we need to let go of the idea of Qantas being Australian owned employing soley Australian workers.

    At the end of the day, Australians can’t choose cheaper foreign airlines when they fly then expect Australian airlines to employ Australians and maintain local ownership.

  • Freddie


    Boo Hoo!!!! Qantas – you have always had the backing of Government as being an Australian icon. It is a huge pity that Ansett isn’t still around as it also was a remarkable Australian icon. If Mr Howard ex PM hadn’t buckled and allowed Ansett to be totally owned by a foreign Company – as he did with Shell trying to buy Woodside – then Ansett would have still been here. Surprisingly he stopped Singapore Airlines from buying Ansett at the time because Qantas wouldn’t have received a ‘fair go’……and……..here we are again with Qantas crying foul yet again. Honestly if they can’t defend their business model and make it a profitable airline in their own right – then I wonder if they really should continue to exist. Their whinging is becoming rather tiresome. At the same time Jetstar – a Qantas subsidiary is not adverse to operating their overseas section into Australia using foreign labour, overnight them and then have them operate domestic sectors within Australia before sending them back out of the Country. Qantas if the hat fits wear it…toughen up if you want to stay in existence. Stop crying ‘foul’ every time the ball isn’t in your playing field.

Comments are closed.


Each day, our subscribers are more informed with the right information.

SIGN UP to the Australian Aviation magazine for high-quality news and features for just $99.95 per year