Note that the article specifies this leasing scenario as a 'medium term' proposition, as opposed to a 'short' term fix to cover the hideously delayed Boeing B787's :

Qantas Web Site



This move by Qantas is exactly as I had previously forecast. The company is simply not prepared to sit by and see Jetstar's international expansion torpedoed by late frame deliveries.

Fairly obvious that the Boeing B787 delays are impacting Qantas .. and pushing Jetstar towards Airbus. Boeing might need to be very careful in this regard. It has not gone unnoticed in the raft of Press Releases from the Qantas Group today .. that additional A320's are being ordered as well.

^

Thats not quite fair or strictly correct Kim, particulary when it was QF that wanted to defer 787's despite the program delay:

http://www.qantas.com.au/regions/dyn/au/pu...2009/jun09/3936







Certainly nothing that prohibited JQ from getting cheap 777's to use if it going global was the ambition.

Out of interest, who is leasing the A330's to JQ?

JQ changes their mind like a model changes outfits during a fashion show.

Seriously, JQ has already decided (or had the decision made for them by QF Group management) to drop the 787-8 and move to the larger 787-9. Since that plane is not due for some three years at the minimum, of course this is a "medium-term" investment for JQ just because of how long they're going to need to wait. QF might very well take the first 787-9s for themselves, pushing back JQ's deliveries even farther.

The QF Group has bet big on the 787. They could have walked away and bet equally big on the A350XWB, but they didn't. The only 787-8 class aircraft currently in service is the A330-200, so is it really a surprise they chose it? And that it's a lease, as opposed to a buy, doesn't exactly make me believe that the QF Group has suddenly decided that Airbus is the right make for JQ's long-term (10-20 year) fleet.

Also, since the QF Group have already admitted the QF fleet is "ill-configured" for the current environment, they need to depend on the "properly configured" JQ fleet to drive traffic and revenue until they can adjust the QF fleet as well as leverage the public perception that JQ is the "low price division" of QF to keep customers flying QF Group metal and not moving to competitor LCCs.

Thanks for your commentary, Stitch. Although I can see where some would be tempted to read all sorts of things into this move, the very fact that it is a lease speaks for itself.

I, too, would be curious to know the identity of the lessor.

These are supposed to be the new 238t MTOW A330-200IGWs, so that means they have to come with RR or PW power, since GE's CF6-80 can't handle the extra TOW.

My guess is these will come with RR power and a "Power by the Hour" deal so JQ doesn't need to create an RR support infrastructure. RR is also the most popular engine choice for the A332 as of late, so that should make it easier for the lessor to place the frames with a new customer when JQ gets their 787-9s mid-next-decade and sends these back.

.. and the reason for that, is the need / ability of the additional TOW benefits permit greater penetration into Southern Europe ie: the required Jetstar International expansion we are discussing.

I think it is fairly clear that the Qantas Group is not interested in acquiring B777's (whether lease or purchase, or even .. 'cheap') at this late stage. That point has been made - a number of times - by Qantas management.



Precisely the same point I also commented on, when the idea of the QF Group discussion on B787 program delays was being discussed.



I wouldn't be quite so ready to dismiss the A350XWB at Qantas, just yet. While Qantas holds the keys to orders / options on 115 B787's, only 50 (down from 65) are genuinely firm. There are all sorts of possibilities here. Since the first 15 were originally the (only) 'Jetstar' B787-8's, one could ask the ultimate question on the fate of the B787-8 at the QF Group. Since Jetstar is now 'passing' on the -8, will QF still choose to opt for a mixed -8 and -9 'family' ? Isn't it highly possible that QF could, in fact, decide to standardise totally on the B787-9 and bypass the -8 altogether ? Yes, I'm sure that Boeing would allow conversion of the -8 contracts to the -9's.

Somewhat rhetorically, with Jetstar growing like 'topsy', the larger B787-9 might even be a better fit (than the -8's) .. allowing JQ to grow into the larger B787-9's over the coming years.

And of course, with such a large number of 'options' (with unconfirmed delivery dates - but slot ownership) Qantas is currently sitting 'pretty' with Boeing for future deliveries (once the program / problem is sorted out at Boeing).

However, should the A350XWB prove to be a better / more appropriate frame down the track .. then there is nothing to prevent Qantas walking away from some of these Boeing 'commitments'. Remember, QF is already in the contract 'walk-away without penalty' zone .. with continued delivery delays on the B787 program.

And should Boeing continue to drag it's heels on announcement / specifications for the B787-10/10X/11, then it is entirely possible that the A350-1000 (which has, so far, been favourably received at QF) could walk right over the Boeing equivalent.



We are, of course, talking configuration breakdown on % of premium vs economy seats here, rather than 'frames'. Just to clarify, in order that certain Fleetbuzzards don't jump on this sentence .. as a further justification for why (in their opinion) QF 'needs' B777's !

There were a lot of rumours last year of QF pilots/management heading over to SEA with QF possibly purchasing a bunch of B777's....well, there was definitely some merit to it...

To say that QF believe that the B777's won't work in the fleet is lets just say..."off"....

While I don't think QF will be getting B777s....unlike the B748I, they haven't taken the possibility off the table yet..

"LA, London routes spell trouble for Qantas"

"He said the Los Angeles and London routes were “the biggest issue” and were suffering significant losses at the moment as a result of a high level of competition, a high level of discounting and a drop in business traffic."

"Key components of the cost cutting plan include reconfiguring aircraft, including the superjumbo A380, technology advancements and fuel conservation."

http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,27...1-31037,00.html

Oh, so what happened to the concept "the A380 would "lure" every carrier and their Grandpa" and the A380 with its superiour CASM will be able to still make a profit even if it has to lower prices against the competition.....

The only two Whale routes for QF and both are losing money..go figure..

The bottom line is the Big Beast works well only when it can fill the seats up with decent yields and amount of pax.

Once again, as I stated 3-4 years ago, when every carrier and their grandpa start flying the Roo' Route with the Big Beast, look out for yields and profitability. This is only with 3 carriers..wait until we see the likes of QR, EY, etc. come on board....yields will get killed even more..

Reconfiguring the A380's. That would no doubt mean more economy and premium economy and less business and first. Many have considered the 450-500 A380s would be temporary. 600-650 Seat configurations could lead to a significant price battles on some routes (without given in on product specs of premium classes, just seat counts). And a A380 economy seat is wider and more silent then a similar one on 747-400 or Boeing 777-300ER. And generally are more up to date on entertainment too.

But that doesn't help the airlines, does it?

Those "old fashioned" 747s and 777s might become the "better option" because their lower capacity would constrain supply (compared to the A380s) and could push yields into the black.

We've seen with airlines like UA that passengers are still price- and alliance-sensitive even when offered a superior product (hard and soft, airside and groundside).