sharetrader
Page 84 of 174 FirstFirst ... 347480818283848586878894134 ... LastLast
Results 831 to 840 of 1740
  1. #831
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    , New Zealand.
    Posts
    526

    Default

    [QUOTE=Snoopy;292106]

    Perhaps the baggage handling delays I experienced were nothing to do with AIA? Perhaps it is because they are now X-raying every suitcase that come off all jets even on domestic flights, because some of those passengers might be transferring to international? Perhaps the delay was due to a one off equipment break down? Perhaps if I post here I will find out if my experience was atypical or not?

    Over the last two years I have used AIA baggage services on numerous occasions and nearly always have experienced delays. On the 3 occasions I have enquired as to the reason I was told that other aircraft had recently arrived.

    Real answer is I guess, we are a monopoly, therefore what are you going to do about it!!

  2. #832
    Legend minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,502

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snoopy View Post
    Peat, I posted my experience because I have seen many examples of New Zealand companies going to Australia (as AIA has now done with their Queensland Airport partial purchases), while neglecting their core businesses at home. I think it is a fair -underlying- question to ask whether AIA are really on their game at home, before that export their management expertise to Australia.
    Snoopy. As Macduffy has pointed out AIA is essentially a property management company. Its got 1500 hectares of land which its making money from - most of it a monopolistic environment.

    Your bagage handling woes might be down to AIA infrastructure problems (like bad conveyor belts) or it might be down to Customs department problems, security problems or baggage handling problems - all of which are done by someone else.


    AIA doesn't provide food - it provides space for food sellers to set up shop and sell their grub to you. Ideally AIA need food sellers who can sell you food - that way they stay at the airport paying their concession / rental. But even if they can't sell you food AIA still gets its rental.


    AIA don't provide taxi services. They tender this out and the companies pay AIA for the privilege of parking a cab at the terminal doors. Their doesn't seem to be a shortage of companies wanting that space so AIA will keep hauling in the dollars there. Taxi fares are expensive because its the taxi companies that have an effective oligopoly. Who would be prepared to walk to the airports boundary to pick up a cheaper cab?

    Airports, by the simple nature of their function are not a destination - they are a place you have to go through. Though AIA is trying to turn it into a destination with the retail shops outside the terminals being set up - that makes good use of their surplus land. There’s nearly 20,000 people work out at the airport and very few of them are AIA.

    I suspect your gripe is really with the airline and taxis. From experience I know AIR are just shockers at letting their customers know about delays - when it comes to handling a problem like delayed flight due to weather they couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery. The people to really blame are the Americans and the FAA. Its them that keeps imposing stricter restrictions on baggage (either cabin or hold/freight) that is creating the problems – and every time they just keep pandering to the terrorists. These people don’t blow up a federal building every day why the tight security with flights?

  3. #833
    On the doghouse
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    , , New Zealand.
    Posts
    9,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minimoke View Post
    Snoopy.
    I suspect your gripe is really with the airline and taxis. From experience I know AIR are just shockers at letting their customers know about delays - when it comes to handling a problem like delayed flight due to weather they couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery.
    Jetstar arrived dead on time Minimoke. If you walked outside the Jetstar/Pacific Blue terminal you could see the tail of the aircraft just 50m away. There was no problem with the conveyor belt. It was moving but no more luggage was being put on it. My (and half the passenger's) delay was caused entirely due to baggage handling. I don't think Jetstar engineer the conveyor belts. Anna N has since commented on baggage handling delays at AIA, so it appears my experience was not totally unique. Maybe Aucklanders who only use Auckland Airport don't have the experience to know that things can be better?

    My best ever experience with luggage goes back to Ansett and the Whisper Jet days. There you would regularly get off the plane in Christchurch and Wellington to find your luggage had beaten you to the carousel. I don't expect that kind of service again. But half an hour (literally) waiting just to pick up your bag from a national flight is just way too long.

    Your baggage handling woes might be down to AIA infrastructure problems (like bad conveyor belts) or it might be down to Customs department problems, security problems or baggage handling problems - all of which are done by someone else.

    AIA don't provide taxi services. They tender this out and the companies pay AIA for the privilege of parking a cab at the terminal doors. Their doesn't seem to be a shortage of companies wanting that space so AIA will keep hauling in the dollars there. Taxi fares are expensive because its the taxi companies that have an effective oligopoly. Who would be prepared to walk to the airports boundary to pick up a cheaper cab?
    I don't go for absolving yourself of responsibility by outsourcing. It is the company AIA that sets the performance parameters that the contractors must meet. AIA carries ultimate performance responsibility.

    As Macduffy has pointed out AIA is essentially a property management company. Its got 1500 hectares of land which its making money from - most of it a monopolistic environment.

    AIA doesn't provide food - it provides space for food sellers to set up shop and sell their grub to you. Ideally AIA need food sellers who can sell you food - that way they stay at the airport paying their concession / rental. But even if they can't sell you food AIA still gets its rental.
    The key word is "food sellers" (plural). If you the consumer don't like what one AIA cafe operator serves up, you can check out the results of a rival kitchen. There is little such choice at AIA if you don't like the baggage handling or taxi service.

    The people to really blame are the Americans and the FAA. Its them that keeps imposing stricter restrictions on baggage (either cabin or hold/freight) that is creating the problems – and every time they just keep pandering to the terrorists. These people don’t blow up a federal building every day why the tight security with flights?
    The answer of course is that although the chance of a terroist attack is slight, the consequences could be catastrophic. You can't ignore a small risk if the costs of an adverse event are very high.

    Yes perhaps the FAA are to blame. But what extra requirements have come in since the last terroist scare? I don't know what the new requirements are. But wouldn't it make sense do any extra checking on the baggage *before* it goes on the plane rather than after it comes off?

    SNOOPY
    Watch out for the most persistent and dangerous version of Covid-19: B.S.24/7

  4. #834
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    1,473

    Default

    Well, I am dumbfounded! The global markets are in a significant crisis of confidence, investors on ST and all over the place are flaying around for guidance as to appropriate strategies to apply in the current climate, and here we have two pages of chatter about someone experiencing a bit of a delay at an airport (what's new about that!) It all reminds me of Nero fiddling while Rome burnt.

    But, on second thoughts, perhaps it is a coping strategy - a sedative to deaden the pain of having to face up to wealth depletion. So, keep it up chaps!

  5. #835
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    880

    Default

    A bit of a storm in a teacup but an interesting discussion as it gets to the heart of both AIA's and the airline business.

    Last time I asked, individual taxi drivers had to pay $4,000 a year to be able to pick up passengers from AIA (anyone can drop off), have cars of a certain standard (ford/holden basically - which is silly as AIA should be trying to reduce carbon emissions wherever possible to reassure environmentally conscious Europeans) and follow a set of rules designed to maximise AIA's profit. Thus no cheap cabs or economy taxis in the ranks. So, don't blame the taxi drivers for the $30 fee, its an AIA racket.

    As a monopoly AIA can get away with this stuff for quite a while but NOT for ever. I see the situation as similar to Telecom where the poor cow was milked so hard the government had to intervene. The obvious threat to AIA is the Whenuapai airport but just as dangerous would be a modern electrified rail link.

    As for the baggage handling issue, this one has history and is entirely Jetstar's fault. Qantas domestic used to use Air NZ's baggage handlers and still do internationally however Jetstar deemed these too expensive and outsourced their services to a completely new crowd with no prior presence in Auckland. This caused many of the debacles during Jetstar's first few weeks as the new staff learned on the job. It would be safe to assume that this new crowd is cheaper because they cut corners in staff numbers/training/pay/conditions etc and hence your delays which are quite common for Jetstar flights. Otherwise Air NZ's economies of scale would have given them an advantage.

    If you value your time, fly Air NZ. From check-in to baggage collection you will save time as they do everything they can to manage the whole experience. Jetstar doesn't and it shows.

  6. #836
    Legend peat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Whanganui, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,435

    Default

    read the NBR in the weekend... this company has a P/E of 58!!!

    from what I know thats meant to imply massive growth expectations , or of course just utter pie in the sky territory.

    again I guess it has something to do with it being a property company in that expected profits will be revals rather than cash flow profits.
    For clarity, nothing I say is advice....

  7. #837
    Veteran novice
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    7,289

    Default

    I think the market's looking beyond NBR's number based on last year's NPAT of $41.7m divided by the number of shares, post the current issue, of around 1,298m.

    Last year's NPAT was after a downward revaluation of property of $64.5m, which arguably won't be repeated this year. A "normalised" profit of around $106m - it was $123m the previous year - would indicate a prospective P/E of around 20. A modest upward revaluation of property, not out of the question, would obviously reduce the P/E further.

  8. #838
    On the doghouse
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    , , New Zealand.
    Posts
    9,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peat View Post
    read the NBR in the weekend... this company has a P/E of 58!!!

    from what I know thats meant to imply massive growth expectations , or of course just utter pie in the sky territory.

    again I guess it has something to do with it being a property company in that expected profits will be revals rather than cash flow profits.
    Peat, that historical PE of 58 probably reflects the one off credit crunch 2009 property portfolio write down of $64.2m. The operational profit for AIA was $105.9m for FY2009. That equates to earnings per share, taking into account the current 1:16 share issue of:

    ($105.9m)/[ 1,225m (17/16)] = 8.14cps

    Based on a share price of $1.93, that gives an historical PE ratio of 23.7. That is still high, but not quite the 'pie in the sky' high 58 that is the spreadsheet generated figure quoted in the NBR.

    In the past land and property revaluations have not been included in the accounted for profit. However, the internatioanl accounting standards now used mean that in the future (and in FY2009) property gains and losses do need to be brought through to the bottom line. But since AIA is not planning to sell their development property all this does is distort the bottom line reported profit and make year by year profit comparisons difficult.

    SNOOPY
    Watch out for the most persistent and dangerous version of Covid-19: B.S.24/7

  9. #839
    Legend peat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Whanganui, New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,435

    Default

    thanks guys for those excellent explanations....
    For clarity, nothing I say is advice....

  10. #840
    On the doghouse
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    , , New Zealand.
    Posts
    9,221

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaa View Post
    A bit of a storm in a teacup but an interesting discussion as it gets to the heart of both AIA's and the airline business.

    Last time I asked, individual taxi drivers had to pay $4,000 a year to be able to pick up passengers from AIA (anyone can drop off), have cars of a certain standard (ford/holden basically - which is silly as AIA should be trying to reduce carbon emissions wherever possible to reassure environmentally conscious Europeans) and follow a set of rules designed to maximise AIA's profit. Thus no cheap cabs or economy taxis in the ranks. So, don't blame the taxi drivers for the $30 fee, its an AIA racket.
    $4,000 a year as pick up fee licence!!!! That makes me almost feel sorry for the taxi driver hanging out for his $30 minimum fare. I guess the driver could make sure he has an LPG cab to satisfy those Europeans' environmental consciousness.

    As for the baggage handling issue, this one has history and is entirely Jetstar's fault. Qantas domestic used to use Air NZ's baggage handlers and still do internationally however Jetstar deemed these too expensive and outsourced their services to a completely new crowd with no prior presence in Auckland. This caused many of the debacles during Jetstar's first few weeks as the new staff learned on the job. It would be safe to assume that this new crowd is cheaper because they cut corners in staff numbers/training/pay/conditions etc and hence your delays which are quite common for Jetstar flights. Otherwise Air NZ's economies of scale would have given them an advantage.
    Somewhere in the back of my mind I did know that the airlines were responsible for their own baggage handling. Looks like AIA is off the hook for that one. Thanks for the info Jaa.

    SNOOPY
    Watch out for the most persistent and dangerous version of Covid-19: B.S.24/7

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •