Yabby;
"Democracy still rules, last time I checked."
I don't recall a referendum on the issue; or even an election promise to sell Qantas. And to answer your question I DO blame the politicians who voted to sell it off, and stopped trusting every individual one of them who did. In fact, I'm quite certain that the Democrats lost all their votes at that point.

And your interesting take on Qantas prices is interesting if it weren't the exact opposite; Qantas flights used to be cheap as chips- especially with the Frequent Flier program; but they became so expensive I ended my subscription. Not to mention that the airline is worse managed now- in the past I never had a problem when catching a Qantas flight- my last flight however was a fiasco.
For that matter, I don't see how being in charge of JetStar, an even worse airline than Qantas is now- is a virtue of Joyce- especially as the deterioration of Qantas over the years is evident.

And Rehctub- I answered that exact same question last time, and you never answered it.
Nobody is forced to see Hugh Jackman's movies, and Hugh Jackman isn't mismanaging a former Australian asset.
People are forced to rely on airlines to get around the country, and as Qantas has a government-established monopoly, people are thus likely forced to do business with Qantas or one of their branch airlines for domestic flights.

In other words, people are angry at Joyce for abusing a former public asset for personal gain.
People are only rightfully angry at Jackman for being stupid enough to pay to see one of his movies.
The only exception is taking part in Baz Lurhman's "Australia" flop- getting a huge tax donation.

*I don't recall a referendum on the issue*

No need to Bazz, we don't hold referdums on most Govt decisions.
That is not how our particular form of democracy works. You'd have
to move to Switzerland for that, about the only country in the world
that I can think of.

*Qantas flights used to be cheap as chips*

Not so Bazz. You can fly to Europe now for less money then you
paid 20 years ago. Flights between Perth-Sydney in the bad old
days were around 1500$, nearly as much as European flights. Now
they are at bargain prices.

Qantas has no monopoly. Anyone can start an airline in Australia
and fly it where they want. Just yesterday we had another startup
on the news, with 7 planes. Problem is, its not so easy running
airlines, so many close down again. If your particular regional
branch is not well serviced, its perhaps because they can't make
any money out of it, so companies don't bother to fly those routes.

* For that matter, I don't see how being in charge of JetStar, an even worse airline than Qantas is now- is a virtue of Joyce*

Ah but Jetstar is highly profitable, so clearly other consumers
disagree with you, for it operates in Asia and has plenty of
competition there. So the bigger picture says that Joyce does
in fact have the runs on the board, even if you, a single individual
happen to disagree.

Most Australians are clearly happy that in real terms, airtickets have
become cheaper and cheaper over the years, so people are flying alot
more then they ever did

"No need to Bazz, we don't hold referdums on most Govt decisions."
Obviously there IS a need, if this kind of travesty occurs when we sell something.

"Not so Bazz."
Actually yes they were. Especially if you used FF (which you were supposed to). In the years immediately before the selloffs I could easily afford business class seats with my FF points every few months. Of course, the upkeep costs sky-rocketed, and the value of what I placed went down, and the whole deal became so extortionate I had to drop it and terminate my business with Qantas entirely.

"Qantas has no monopoly. Anyone can start an airline in Australia "
Excellent- in that case, my earlier point that Qantas was replacable if it did go offshore was indeed correct.

"Ah but Jetstar is highly profitable, so clearly other consumers
disagree with you, "
Hardly; Jetstar are simply the only airline available in many domestic routes, are an airline that Qantas offsets passengers to (Despite buying a Qantas ticket) and likely they are the only 'familiar' airline going to overseas countries in a post-Garuda climate where Australian passengers have an aversion to foreign airlines.
And for that matter, how many airlines do we have running domestically in Australia? About four- Qantas and Virgin which are extremely expensive, Tiger which is garbage and has been slammed by the media, and Jetstar which is merely not as bad as Tiger, but not as expensive as the other two. Simply put, people are simply forced to use it if they are to fly to a certain destination at all, and are simply faced with a cheap but crap airline that hasn't had as much negative coverage as Tiger.

As for cheaper- considering the gigantic drop in quality of the service and the low probability that booking a Qantas ticket will result in a Qantas flight, I now pay even cheaper for foreign airlines, who provide all services. So in short, I personally will stand to lose nothing if Qantas floundered like Ansett did, and some real competition filled its place.

Fair enough Hazza, as a typical consumer, you want a Rolls Royce
service at a "Great Wall of China" price. I remind you however
that the airline business is one of the most competitive businesses
on the planet, with an average margin of 1.2%. You might be waiting
a long time.

Neither I nor anyone else has complained about Qantas going offshore.
Its the unions which are fighting it all the way, its the very reason
why they held the company to ransom. They want guarantees for their
35'000 jobs, something which no company in a free market can provide.

*a post-Garuda climate where Australian passengers have an aversion to foreign airlines.*

They do? You could have fooled me lol. Only 20% of international
flights are now Qantas, as people fly SQ, Emirates, Etihad, Cathay,
and all the rest. These airlines have new planes, the latest in
technology to entertain passengers, low costs, they are creaming it.
Qantas simply can't compete, with their high cost base. That is
why the company has to restructure, which is what these strikes are
all about.

Air travel costs have indeed dropped dramatically, since the bad old
days of Govt ownership and regulation. But people have short memories
and your quibble seems to be about frequent flyer points, rather then
the big picture facts. Like many, you want something for nothing.
It doesent work that way, I am afraid.

The unions still don't get it. Their intention might be to preserve
jobs, but the reality is that they are destroying jobs. If Qantas
goes under, the employees have the most to lose. The shareholders
have already lost their shirts.

Sadly few of our union leaders have the foggiest about actually
running a business.

No YAbby, I don't want "something for nothing" as I was paying for my FFs and tickets, I specifically want something without being ripped off, or offset to something I did not pay for. That is Qantas of today.

Yet somehow, both with FF AND direct ticket sales, I always managed to afford Qantas tickets on a frequent basis back when it was nationalized, but now do not. Not to mention I got far better service and more reliable flights in the 'bad old days' than the last few times I have flown with them.

Nowadays, plenty of other airlines (not Australian) can provide that kind of service for a better price; and if that's too hard for Qantas' management to handle (especially now we know how much revenue they personally claim before deciding where cost-cutting occurs- mostly in their service)- then that is their own problem for not being competitive, and accepting that as a private entity the free market leaves me better options.
And the fact that 20% of international flights are with Qantas shows that there is still a 20% aversion to other (better) airlines.

As for the 'going offshore'- you should ask Rehctub, as he is making quite a strong point about why this needs to be averted, and I was referring to him of why it was inconsequential for Australia- including pointing out the same point as you that another airline will take its place.

Again, all I'm pointing out that Joyce is as much- if not even more guilty as the unions for both trying to sabotage Qantas for their personal gains, and this wouldn't have happened at all (Along with the extortionate practices we have seen in the past few years) had we not have sold the airline.

Hazza, Rehctub is simply pointing out that Australians claim to
want jobs. Those jobs might not matter to you, for its not your
job thats on the line, but they matter to those Australians affected.

Rehtub points out that they won't keep their jobs unless unions
change their ways. He makes a valid point.

As to the FF programme, Qantas runs it because it makes them money
and attracts far more lucrative passengers then it scares away.
Qantas dominates the business travel section. Business pays higher
rates then bargain seeking holiday makers. So people gain FF points
on their business trips, use them for their personal travel. But
at the end of the day, the FF has to be factored into the price
of tickets. Qantas might lose your business, but they gain the
business of all those big corporate customers, which is where their
profits are.

So fly Virgin.

What you could or could not afford 20 years ago hardly matters, for
other variables in your life might have changed to affect your
financial position. What cannot be denied however is that since
deregulation, air travel in real terms has become dramatically
cheaper for all air travellers.

If the Govt had not sold the airline and deregulated the skies,
you would now be paying substantially more for airline travel then
you do now.