If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
"Blue Lagoon" wrote You don't know what you are talking about. In plain view of the media, Air New Zealand was taking parts from a 767 of Ansett airlines just when the company decide liquidate in September 2001. It took the unions to shove Air New Zealand crew away from that 767 but like scavengers, they came back later. What about New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark had to go out of view from union protesters after landing in Melbourne Airport (timeline was September / October 2001). Helen Clark had to be taken on a helicopter (I think it was a police helicopter) to sale air base for an arriving jet. Can you please refute them? I think you are confusing a couple of issues here. I don't remember the 767 incident you mention above, but my understanding of the situation was: Air New Zealand bought into Ansett on the understanding that it would have access to Australian air routes, and would be able to bring Singapore Airlines on board as a partner later. The Australian government reneged on its agreement with Air New Zealand (for political reasons) meaning the funds Air NZ needed to keep Ansett viable were no longer available. Air NZ then started stripping assets from Ansett, to keep the planes it had travelling into Australia in the air. Air NZ nearly went belly up over the deal, and the NZ government prepared a bail out package for the company. At about the same time, unionists looking for a video bite blockaded an Air NZ jet - which just happened to have Helen Clark as a passenger. She couldn't get out of the country, so the Australian govt. organised a chopper to get her to Sale Airbase so she could get a ride back to NZ on a NZ military plane - I thought it was a Herc, but it may have been a jet. So yes, Air NZ screwed up. But it didn't do it by itself. The Australian govt must shoulder some of the blame for what happened. Air NZ tried to build an empire, and it failed with the help of John Howard's govt. Have I missed anything or misrepresented the situation? I am an Australian living in NZ, btw... Cheers, Brenton |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:35:10 +1100, "Blue Lagoon"
wrote: "JD" wrote in message ... LDL wrote: Qantas may not be perfect but after what Air New Zealand did to Ansett Australia, I will never take then by principle. You don't know what you are talking about. In plain view of the media, Air New Zealand was taking parts from a 767 of Ansett airlines just when the company decide liquidate in September 2001. It took the unions to shove Air New Zealand crew away from that 767 but like scavengers, they came back later. What about New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark had to go out of view from union protesters after landing in Melbourne Airport (timeline was September / October 2001). Helen Clark had to be taken on a helicopter (I think it was a police helicopter) to sale air base for an arriving jet. Can you please refute them? Yep. We refute them. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
What about the purchase of Hazelton Airline between Qantas and Ansett where
after Ansett purchased Hazelton? "BTMO" wrote in message ... "Blue Lagoon" wrote You don't know what you are talking about. In plain view of the media, Air New Zealand was taking parts from a 767 of Ansett airlines just when the company decide liquidate in September 2001. It took the unions to shove Air New Zealand crew away from that 767 but like scavengers, they came back later. What about New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark had to go out of view from union protesters after landing in Melbourne Airport (timeline was September / October 2001). Helen Clark had to be taken on a helicopter (I think it was a police helicopter) to sale air base for an arriving jet. Can you please refute them? I think you are confusing a couple of issues here. I don't remember the 767 incident you mention above, but my understanding of the situation was: Air New Zealand bought into Ansett on the understanding that it would have access to Australian air routes, and would be able to bring Singapore Airlines on board as a partner later. What about Qantas' willingness to purchase Air New Zealand? Air New Zealand would have Australian access. The Australian government reneged on its agreement with Air New Zealand (for political reasons) meaning the funds Air NZ needed to keep Ansett viable were no longer available. Air NZ then started stripping assets from Ansett, to keep the planes it had travelling into Australia in the air. Air NZ nearly went belly up over the deal, and the NZ government prepared a bail out package for the company. At about the same time, unionists looking for a video bite blockaded an Air NZ jet - which just happened to have Helen Clark as a passenger. She couldn't get out of the country, so the Australian govt. organised a chopper to get her to Sale Airbase so she could get a ride back to NZ on a NZ military plane - I thought it was a Herc, but it may have been a jet. So yes, Air NZ screwed up. But it didn't do it by itself. The Australian govt must shoulder some of the blame for what happened. Air NZ tried to build an empire, and it failed with the help of John Howard's govt. Have I missed anything or misrepresented the situation? I am an Australian living in NZ, btw... Cheers, Brenton |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
"Blue Lagoon" wrote What about the purchase of Hazelton Airline between Qantas and Ansett where after Ansett purchased Hazelton? No idea. Don't remember that one. However, it is worth remembering that businesses do fail. And it shouldn't be the job of goverments to prop them up. Cheers, Brenton |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
Hilary wrote:
Ansett *was* in Star Alliance. Ansett's entry into Star Alliance was a defacto membership due it it being wholly owned by Air New Zealand. Its is Air NZ that had done all the leg work to get its admission into Star. Had Ansett not been under the Air NZ umbrella, it is unclear if it would have been admitted or not. Even Air NZ had to do a lot of hand waiving, even spill some blood to get Star's attention. (Well before it got accepted, NZ cannabalised it canadian routes when it broke off relationship with a carrier that competed against a star alliance member) I personally think that Ansett should have been in Star whether by itself or due to Air NZ. It was logical for Star to have a domestic network in Australia, even if Ansett contributed little to Star's international routes. But I am not sure that Ansett would have been a good business case for Star alliance (woudl it have drawn more resources than it put in ?) |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:40:11 +1300, steve wrote:
james_anatidae wrote: All other things being equal (price, time, route) which would you prefer to fly? Air NZ. We own it. I presume from you must be Singapore Airlines? Cheeers Alan, Oz. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
Alan wrote:
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:40:11 +1300, steve wrote: james_anatidae wrote: All other things being equal (price, time, route) which would you prefer to fly? Air NZ. We own it. I presume from you must be Singapore Airlines? Cheeers Alan, Oz. They own a tiny share. The NZ Govt owns over 80%. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
"BTMO" wrote in message
news "Blue Lagoon" wrote What about the purchase of Hazelton Airline between Qantas and Ansett where after Ansett purchased Hazelton? No idea. Don't remember that one. However, it is worth remembering that businesses do fail. And it shouldn't be the job of goverments to prop them up. It should be if it's in the public good. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 20:16:25 +1100, Alan
wrote: On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:40:11 +1300, steve wrote: james_anatidae wrote: All other things being equal (price, time, route) which would you prefer to fly? Air NZ. We own it. I presume from you must be Singapore Airlines? Cheeers Alan, Oz. The New Zealand government is the majority shareholder |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Air New Zealand vs. Qantas
"BTMO" wrote in message ... "Blue Lagoon" wrote Can you please refute them? I think you are confusing a couple of issues here. I don't remember the 767 incident you mention above, but my understanding of the situation was: Air New Zealand bought into Ansett on the understanding that it would have access to Australian air routes, snipped And more to the point, ANZ would not have been in the market for Ansett, had the Aus govt not reneged on the "Open Skies" agreement. Currently we have Qantas and other Aus airlines who can and do enter our domestic market at will while NZ carriers are shut out of Australia's, which unfortunately has become quite typical of the way Australia does business with nZ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
QFA (Qantas) to invade Asia | A Guy Called Tyketto | Air travel | 13 | April 10th, 2004 10:08 PM |
Qantas to Fly Brisbane-LAX direct | [email protected] | Australia & New Zealand | 0 | February 12th, 2004 04:44 PM |
Qantas Cabin Crew or Pampered Celebrities? | zxc | Air travel | 51 | February 12th, 2004 04:10 PM |
Qantas Warning on Websites | [email protected] | Australia & New Zealand | 23 | January 3rd, 2004 04:16 PM |
Qantas announce new low-fare carrier | Boxall's Accommodation | Air travel | 0 | December 2nd, 2003 12:55 PM |