A Travel and vacations forum. TravelBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » TravelBanter forum » Travel Regions » Australia & New Zealand
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Qantas Web Fare Specials to Australia & NZ from US.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old October 22nd, 2003, 06:04 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Qantas Web Fare Specials to Australia & NZ from US.

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 13:11:07 +1000, Dave Proctor
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 11:52:08 +0930, "Freda"
wrote:

Then perhaps you are NOT the right person for the job????????????????


I have been reading this group for about two years now - rarely
contribute, but have been reading for that long - and have NEVER
thought that Cath was the appropriate person.


It's a free world and you are entitled to your opinion Dave.
Rarely contribute? Dave, you have been quite a contributor over the
past 3 years. Even before you started replying using "Whilst
undoubtedly under the effects of alcohol" which I note you have now
stopped using.

As you have not been around since the ng's inception, the first RFD
was made on 12/Sept/1995 by Bill Rogers, then you are not familiar
with what happened to this newsgroup in the past and the reasons why
this newsgroup lost so many excellent contributors.

If you want to change the wording of the Charter/FAQ, then you are
welcome to go through the Usenet protocol to do enable a vote to be
taken.

Don't forget, some people have to pay to receive Usenet!
Usenet is *not* the internet. If I had to pay additional charges to
receive Usenet, you bet I'd be a pretty peeved off person if I was
having to download advertising!


Earlier this year, there was a query about how I became Keeper of the
Charter/FAQ, which I answered publicly on the newsgroup.
I have checked that thread and do not find any objections from you.

I can recall another instance earlier this year when you had every
opportunity to voice your opinions against me but you did not bother
to do so.

You do not realise just the diversity of the email I receive from
people who lurk on this newsgrup. In most cases, I can only guide
them to either watchng the threads, posting to the ng, finding an
archived thread that may be of interest to them or sometimes, I post a
request on their behalf.
I have been [pleasantly] surprised at the number of 'lurker's of this
group.

I would NOT hestitate to do what we did in the above case if a similar
posting appeared again.

Frankly I don't give a dam what you think of me, publicly or
privately.
I doubt if you would likely find, in your eyes, anyone would be
appropriate.

Try and be a little less pedantic and be lighter in your assessing.


Anyway, this is not a moderated group. Sure, she can forward
complaints to ISP's, but considering the level of disagreement that
this thread has generated, it is clear there is no consensus as to
where the line should be drawn, and any such complaints will be
dismissed.

Dave


The first RFD posted on 12 Sept 1995 clearly stated:

"All advertising is inappropriate and should be directed to the group
rec.travel.marketplace." which is still in force to this day.

Again, if you wish to have the wording changed, then you are welcome
to go for it.

Usually, one or two adverts get overlooked however when someone
continues or there is a blantant disregard for Usenet ie:
posted/spammed to several ng's, then it is a different matter.

Believe me, ISP's *do* take Usenet abuse whether it be a posting on
the newsgroup or an email to me, very seriously.
Many have specific reference to Usenet in their TOS.

Australia does have an Internet Code [though off hand, I cannot
remember the actual name of it but sure you are aware of it].


Cath






  #22  
Old October 22nd, 2003, 06:47 AM
Tony Bailey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Qantas Web Fare Specials to Australia & NZ from US.

wrote in message
...
My sister-in-law recently flew Singapore Airlines from Heathrow to
Singapore then Qantas to Australia and onto NZ. I believe the
Singapore flight was a QF code share.



Doesn't happen Cath,

--
Tony Bailey
Mercury Travel Books


  #23  
Old October 22nd, 2003, 07:38 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Qantas Web Fare Specials to Australia & NZ from US.

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:47:52 +1000, "Tony Bailey"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
My sister-in-law recently flew Singapore Airlines from Heathrow to
Singapore then Qantas to Australia and onto NZ. I believe the
Singapore flight was a QF code share.



Doesn't happen Cath,


Thanks for that info Tony.
I was under the impression from what she said, it was a codeshare.

Went back and found the following which makes sense now and which you
are probably very aware of.

Cath

Qantas wants to lock up LA route by Scott Rochfort

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...478064455.html

September 15, 2003 Qantas is pushing the Federal Government to "ring
fence" its golden Los Angeles route from increased competition for at
least another two years as fresh talks about an open-sky agreement
between Australia and Singapore get under way next week.

Just six days after a proposed $NZ550 million ($490 million) alliance
with Air New Zealand was shot down by the competition watchdog, Qantas
is pushing for any open-sky agreement to bar Singapore Airlines flying
from Australia to the US.

Federal Transport Minister John Anderson is due to meet his Singapore
counterpart, Yeo Cheow Tong, next Monday.

Qantas public affairs manager Michael Sharp said the talks should "let
the time-frame take into consideration the crisis that we're
recovering from". Qantas has warned several times this year of
weakening demand caused by the SARS outbreak and Iraq invasion, which,
if anything, hit Singapore Airlines harder.

"It's a timing issue, not a blanket ban," Mr Sharp said, adding that
Qantas was "one of the few airlines that is having to compete [with
government-owned airlines] while delivering a return to shareholders".

With only one direct competitor to the US - the financially strapped
United - Qantas enjoyed load factors of up to 90 per cent on the route
even at the height of the SARS crisis.

Analysts estimate the Flying Kangaroo makes about one-third of its
profits from the route.

Qantas is able to tightly control capacity from the US.

The Australian Tourism Commission blamed a lack of capacity on the
route in May, June and July for a fall in tourist numbers.

Under the current air-services agreement between Singapore and
Australia, Singapore Airlines only has "through rights" to fly from
Australia to New Zealand.

Australian airlines can operate beyond Singapore to not more than two
of Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea and the Philippines and any one
point in Japan.

Meanwhile, analysts say it could take until early next year for the
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to decide whether to
renew Qantas's eight-year-old joint-services agreement (JSA) with
major shareholder British Airways.

With Qantas and British Airways competing with another 20 airlines on
the so-called kangaroo route, Macquarie Equities analyst Ian Myles
said: "It's a highly competitive route. It's very hard to sit there
and say [the JSA] is going to be rejected."

If the JSA is renewed, British Airways and Qantas expect to save a
collective $43 million in "real terms" in the next five years.

In a joint submission to the ACCC, Qantas and British Airways said
rejection of the JSA would cut the number of foreigners carried by
Qantas and cost Australia $418 million in lost exports over five
years.

The only airline to lodge a submission against the JSA is Sir Richard
Branson's Virgin Atlantic, which says it is a barrier to entry for
European airlines hoping to fly the kangaroo route.

Talk of Virgin Atlantic commencing services to Australia has been
reignited with the UK and Hong Kong governments set to discuss their
respective air-services agreements this month.

The tough trading conditions took a toll not only on Qantas's profits
in the year to June 30 but also management pay packets. No executives
received a bonus.

The annual report said CEO Geoff Dixon was paid $1.6 million and CFO
Peter Gregg almost $1 million. ####
  #24  
Old October 22nd, 2003, 07:49 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Qantas Web Fare Specials to Australia & NZ from US.

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:47:52 +1000, "Tony Bailey"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
My sister-in-law recently flew Singapore Airlines from Heathrow to
Singapore then Qantas to Australia and onto NZ. I believe the
Singapore flight was a QF code share.



Doesn't happen Cath,


My apologies - does British Airways sound better?


Cath
  #25  
Old October 22nd, 2003, 08:30 AM
Jason
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Qantas Web Fare Specials to Australia & NZ from US.

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:44:17 -0500, pinkbikin wrote:

Well you've certainly been busy. You've also been somewhat economical with
the truth.

Fact: your website does contain self advertising ie:
for your own softwear development company.
Quotes from your website:
"All the photographs were taken by Jason Poynting and it's obvious why
he's a professional programmer and not a photographer."
"In this time our clients have included EDS, Deloitte & Touche and
British Telecom."
"This means that you only pay to upload your images once, giving big
savings on costly mobile phone data calls."


None of the above quotes appear on the Scuba Addict website, which is the
site with my trip reports and other scuba information on. They do appear
on a separate site that I also have. There is a link from a handful of
pages from one site to the other. These links are obvious that you are
going from one site to another. They're not blind links. There's no sneaky
redirects or use of frames. I have links to many commercial sites on my
pages.

I have never posted the url of my other site to a non-commercial Usenet
group and never will.

And quite how the first quote is a self advert, I don't know. It's meant
to be a slightly humourous explanation for the amateur nature of my
photographs.

"A commercial posting account costs 35."


This is on the Scuba Addict site. I added it last week. It's a database
for UK dive boat skippers to advertise their free spaces on their boats.
Again, I have not posted an advert for this commercial service on any
Usenet group. I fail to see how my postings to this newsgroup could
remotely constitute an advert for this. It is very unlikely to be of any
interest to anyone on here at all.

I have never advertised a product or service in which I have any
interest on this newsgroup. All I do is include a short randomly generated
byline in my signature pointing to my trip reports which I have been doing
for years. And over the years, many people have thanked me for writing
them. On my last trip to the Maldives, I actually met some people who
chose the island based on my report. It was a bit scary really,
fortunately they appeared to be enjoying themselves.

The more people that read my reports, the more money it costs me in
bandwidth. This is not a business. It's about sharing my experiences and
getting to publish my own articles.

Of course they are not on your front page but one does not have to dig
deep to spot them.


On the contrary, for most of them you have to click on a link to a
completely different website. And about one person a month actually does
this.

Would you perhaps like to explain why you need this on your site?


Certainly. Valueclick provide code which I include on my website. It
generates adverts. If someone clicks on the advert, I get 15p. When the
amount I've made reaches 30, I get paid. I'm in for a very long wait.

Valueclick use cookies which are small pieces of information that are
stored by the browser. The contents are only accessible by the site that
put them there, which is Valueclick, and not myself.

Most banner ad companies use cookies. If you want more details, I suggest
you go to media.valueclick.com and click on the Privacy link. You do of
course have the option to block cookies.

I personally use cookies to handle login and passwords. There is no other
practical way of doing it.

Do you still have a copy of the snotty email you sent me?


Yes thanks. And I'll explain why it was so annoying. You forged your email
headers. When the mail gets delivered to my machine, it does what's called
a DNS lookup to check that the host exists. Yours didn't. So every ten
minutes the email started to get delivered and was then bounced. It sat
there chewing up my bandwidth for about a week before I had to manually
clear it.

Jason

--
http://www.scuba-addict.co.uk/ for Maldivian trip reports including Kuredu,
Fesdu, Meedhupparu, Summer Island Village and Velidhu

  #26  
Old October 22nd, 2003, 04:19 PM
Dave Proctor
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Qantas Web Fare Specials to Australia & NZ from US.

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:04:05 -0500,
wrote:

It's a free world and you are entitled to your opinion Dave.
Rarely contribute? Dave, you have been quite a contributor over the
past 3 years. Even before you started replying using "Whilst
undoubtedly under the effects of alcohol" which I note you have now
stopped using.


System crashed, had to reload Agent (paid version) and I haven't
bothered to set it up again with intro's and sig's.

[...snipped...]

Don't forget, some people have to pay to receive Usenet!
Usenet is *not* the internet. If I had to pay additional charges to
receive Usenet, you bet I'd be a pretty peeved off person if I was
having to download advertising!


Posts which are nothing more than advertising yes. Posts which are
directly relevant to what is being discussed and have a URL in a sig
file is a bit extreme though.

FWIW, I did once pay for Usenet, through GigaNews. I go pretty close
to my download limit with my current provider, and have had my
downloads shaped (meaning I have gone over my quota). So I effectively
am still paying for Usenet, if I didn't use it I would not go anywhere
near my quota.

Yet one extra line on the end of a post giving a URL, even if it is a
commercial URL, doesn't worry me, it adds bugger all to my download.

Earlier this year, there was a query about how I became Keeper of the
Charter/FAQ, which I answered publicly on the newsgroup.
I have checked that thread and do not find any objections from you.


I subscribe to 49 newsgroups, ALL of them non-binary (just to assuage
those who would accuse me of being a warez freak or a kiddie porn
addict).

I am very selective about what I read, mainly because it would be
utterly impossible for me to read each and every post in each and
every group that I subscribe to.

I look at the subject and if it appears that the thread will be
something I can contribut to, then I read the thread, otherwise I
ignore the thread.

I can recall another instance earlier this year when you had every
opportunity to voice your opinions against me but you did not bother
to do so.


See above.

You do not realise just the diversity of the email I receive from
people who lurk on this newsgrup. In most cases, I can only guide
them to either watchng the threads, posting to the ng, finding an
archived thread that may be of interest to them or sometimes, I post a
request on their behalf.
I have been [pleasantly] surprised at the number of 'lurker's of this
group.

I would NOT hestitate to do what we did in the above case if a similar
posting appeared again.


And I will not hesitate to accuse you of being totally and utterly
unreasonable.

Frankly I don't give a dam what you think of me, publicly or
privately.
I doubt if you would likely find, in your eyes, anyone would be
appropriate.


Given the nature of Usenet, I doubt ANYONE would be appropriate.

"All advertising is inappropriate and should be directed to the group
rec.travel.marketplace." which is still in force to this day.


And including a URL in a sig at the end of a post which is completely
on topic to what is being discussed and answers the posters question
is NOT advertising.

Again, if you wish to have the wording changed, then you are welcome
to go for it.

Usually, one or two adverts get overlooked however when someone
continues or there is a blantant disregard for Usenet ie:
posted/spammed to several ng's, then it is a different matter.

Believe me, ISP's *do* take Usenet abuse whether it be a posting on
the newsgroup or an email to me, very seriously.
Many have specific reference to Usenet in their TOS.


I know they take it seriously, I use to work for one.

But they also look at what is considered appropriate in the group, and
they don't just look at the Charter, they also look at what is going
on in the group to see if the Charter is outdated and so on.

In this case, given the large amount of dissent as to what is
appropriate and what isn't, they would tend to form the view that it
isn't readily apparent as to what is acceptable, and therefore take no
action.


Dave
  #27  
Old October 22nd, 2003, 08:33 PM
Tony Bailey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Qantas Web Fare Specials to Australia & NZ from US.

wrote in message
...

My apologies - does British Airways sound better?



Much more likely, in fact BOTH QF and BA codeshare on the whole route.

--
Tony Bailey
Mercury Travel Books


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 April 17th, 2004 12:28 PM
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 March 18th, 2004 10:16 AM
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 January 16th, 2004 10:20 AM
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 December 15th, 2003 10:48 AM
Airline Ticket Consolidators and Bucket Shops FAQ Edward Hasbrouck Air travel 0 October 10th, 2003 09:44 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:34 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 TravelBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.