iscover
Air New Zealand and Qantas are the two most reputable businesses in Australia, according to the latest release of a long-standing survey.
The RepTrak Company’s annual report measures the sentiment towards brands, and this year questioned more than 10,000 people. The results place ANZ first, Qantas second and Virgin Australia 12th.
The survey was, however, conducted before the coronavirus crisis took hold, between 18 February–11 March 2020.
The RepTrak Company’s senior vice president, Oliver Freedman, said, “We cannot say with certainty what the impact of the crisis will be on perceptions of corporates in Australia and New Zealand, but the results of this year’s study serve as a useful reminder of the companies that entered this crisis with the highest levels of trust, admiration and respect among the general public.”
The result marks the fourth time in a row that the Kiwi-based business has topped the list in Australia.
The 60 companies used in the study were drawn from the IBISWorld Top 2,000 Company list, which ranks businesses by revenue.
Air New Zealand chief marketing officer Mike Tod said, “While we’re down to a handful of international services and a fraction of our domestic flying for essential travel and cargo, we’ve been overwhelmed by messages of support and care from customers. Thank you Australia, and New Zealand, for continuing to put your faith in us.”
Earlier this month, Australian Aviation reported that Air New Zealand had appointed one of the country’s most high-profile former union leaders to advise its board as it prepares for the exit of 3,500 employees.
Former Council of Trade Unions (CTU) president Ross Wilson is tasked with providing an independent workforce perspective, the business said, as it prepares to downsize and rebuild following the coronavirus crisis.
The RepTrak Company’s Australia Rankings
Linda Weaving
says:That’s why airlines that try to take on Qantas in this country will inevitably fail. TAA, Ansett, now Virgin all collapsed whilst Qantas continues forging ahead. They might as well give up. Once high speed rail is built – and it will be – 50% of the East coast goldmine route demand will disappear. Investors would be much wiser to go for rail or Qantas. Who wants to fight a losing battle?
PT
says:Really? High speed rail between cities 1200km apart? Passenger High Speed Rail would be a complete waste of money. We have 3 of the busiest domestic air routes in the world between Sydney. Melbourne & Brisbane. We need far more money spent on rail – that’s urban rail to make cities more livable and national freight rail. We are not Europe – neither in population density nor size. Competition – frequency; choice and cost – not a 4 hour rail journey is what’s needed.
Rais
says:Australia with its widely separated cities would be served better and more flexibly by fast buses running at speeds well above the regular speed limit in dedicated lanes on the existing highways rather than expensive, permanently loss making railways. Not as fast as high speed rail but a fractìon of the cost.
Evan
says:Even if medium-fast rail could be instituted between MEL and SYD, say a 6-hr trip, it has to compare favourably (CBD-to-CBD) with the current 2-hr flight PLUS the time/traffic risk of getting to the airport–at least an hour pre-flight–and getting out at the other end, PLUS any weather-related delays. Don’t make the mistake of an unsophisticated and simplistic comparison.
Andrew Harrison
says:Are you serious? TAA didn’t collapse – it became Qantas’ domestic network!
Mark
says:@Linda
TAA changed its name to Australian Airlines in 1986 and being a government owned airline was sold/merged with Qantas which was also a government owned airline. So the Qantas domestic that you see today was born from Australian Airlines. It never took on Qantas and collapsed, it became the domestic arm of Qantas.
Julian Klan
says:Why do people continue to put TAA in a list of failed airlines? Domestic airline TAA amalgamated with International airline Qantas to form the present Qantas in about 1993.
David E
says:There was an excellent documentary on high speed rail:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3169344/
Tony W
says:Just a point of order Linda, I believe that TAA didn’t fail. Like Qantas, TAA was a federal government-owned airline. The federal government sold TAA to Qantas.
Warwick
says:More correctly, TAA became Australian Airlines, which was sold to QANTAS in 1992.
Mike Borgelt
says:High speed rail will likely never be built but if it is it will be like our French subs and the NBN. Not required, over priced and a total loss overall to the taxpayers.
To increase air traffic between a city pair you need a couple of 3km runways instead of 1000 or so kilometers of precise double track, fenced (can’t have cattle, kangaroos etc on the track) guarded (you think airline security is a pain?) and frequently track inspected. Rail lines are almost living things.
TAA got melded into Qantas by the owner of both. Ansett was lazy with a high cost base so failed. Virgin did OK as a low cost airline until they tried to be a Qantas clone. The end was coming regardless of the ChiCom 19 virus.
Grahame Cross
says:Re the Ansett comment being lazy this is to an extent true
What has been forgotten is thst Air New Zealand stripped Ansett through bad management.
PB
says:Linda, that’s untrue. Qantas is a high cost carrier with extraordinarily high head office costs. You should look at the management salaries and divide the dollars by the seat miles flown and you’ll be amazed at what you directly pay to the managing director and the chairman every time you fly on Qantas. It’s unsustainable when compared to other carriers.
Qantas has the advantage of having “domestic feed” in the Australian market, and a healthy marketing agreement with American Airlines which feeds Qantas in North America. It’s also worth understanding that 75% of the travelers across the Pacific are originating in Australia, surprising considering the modest size of the population. Catering to the travel needs of Australians assures full planes and profits. However, even Qantas is a basket case due to the lock down.
Qantas would disappear if airlines like Singapore and Cathay could fly domestically within Australia, or American Airlines. Take an example – if American could pick up passengers and carry them within Australia it would not need feed from Qantas, so Qantas would lose feed from within North America. Could Qantas sustain itself by just being a domestic carrier? Unlikely.
As for high speed rail — you’ve seen the cost projections. It won’t be cheap and will require a huge subsidy if it ever gets built. The concept of having one government form of subsidized travel competing with unsubsidized air travel is politically unthinkable, so if high speed rail has to stand alone the ticket cost will be massive and people won’t pay it, choosing airlines again.
Government privitisation has made general aviation unaffordable and there are insufficient airports, so it is clear that the government wants everyone to travel on airlines by not providing choices. Sydney has one general aviation airport for almost five million people, which is ridiculous.
Alan Ward
says:Perhaps the first task is to dispense with the archaic State Government system. It was developed in another era. Roads were non-existent, Rail was as well developed as it is today and the mode of transport was horse and cart or horse. That era has gone….and so should the State Governments. Australians are so over governed.
When the country becomes one country, one set of rules regardless of where you live, one driving licence etc.etc. Then and only then can the collective country look at fast rail transport systems. I live in Albury, NSW. A train to Melbourne takes over 4 hours on average and to Sydney 11+ hours. In 1934 steam trains did the run to Albury in 4 hours 40 minutes. 86 years later the time improvement is less than 15 minutes.
A national rail and freight service is the way to go as is a national rail system utilising the same gauge track . At present we have standard gauge, Victorian gauge, Queensland gauge and WA gauge for Christ sake! Get a grip Australia.
chris robey
says:Good point Tony. You beat me by half an hour. Trans Australia Airlines was Federal government owned.
DAVID SINGE
says:I guess rail support is unlikely to be found in an aviation arena. Its convenient. Say, CBD then 15 mins pre departure spent there, then 300kmh , then cbd arrival. It works. Rome to Naples for instance.
Compare door to door times.
Yes. Every rail system is subsidised ..urban and distance.
Environmental costs ….not for here but has positives.
Regardless of our views someone will make a major decision about our aviation services. As AirNZ is so popular lets wish for it and Qantas to run the two countries’ services….in a better model. We cant fix it though it is fun to debate.
Maybe Uncle Alan might stop pocketing the extra legroom charges when mass cancellations happen. ? Nope. Not likely. Would AirNZ change that? Probably not.
Oh well. Back to social prison to cancel more tickets.
Michael Andrew
says:Remember what TAA and Ansett did to Compass Airlines, they made sure the two bays Compass were given to operate from in Sydney were at either end of the concourse. This just to frustrate the passengers, TAA and Ansett killed it in the end and partied hard in celebration! Surly Australia can build an elevated very fast train, this would greatly support the Australian economy, airlines would have a spillover freight service. Qantas currently use a trucking company (Jets Transport) which they own to service Sydney/Melbourne freight, and vise versa.
Tim
says:Unfortunately no Michael, we can’t build a high speed rail for the distances involved (golden triangle) with our GDP and population density. This is not Europe or Japan. Why do you think the US doesn’t have high speed rail with a population nearly 15times ours. China and India with a ridiculous population don’t even have any “longhaul” high speed rail. It is ridiculously expensive and just not suitable for long haul distances.
Tim
says:Sorry my mistake, china have just built 1 long distance highspeed link between Shanghai ang Beijing each city having a population of our entire country. The countries GDP just doesnt compare to ours either.
Neil
says:Australia Post @ #4??
Totally unbelievable.
Stewart Lowe
says:As for high speed travel between let’s say Sydney and Melbourne, the British lost out again. They had the perfect aircraft and it just became lost in the political shuffle. I refer to the Rotodyne; the combination aeroplane helicopter. The Rotodyne had stubby wings twin turboprop engines and a gyrocopter wing that when turning took 55% 0f the aircraft’s weight.
The difference was that unlike a helicopter its blades rotated by the forward motion of the aircraft; they were not attached to an engine. However the tips of the blades had small rocket motors to facilitate take-offs and landings.
They had only 10% of a helicopter’s running costs.
Imagine seventy commercial passengers flying from a flat roof on a Melbourne skyscraper to the flat roof of a Sydney skyscraper and home agian in normal business hours without bothering with early morning commutes to airports.
Oh Well.
Tim
says:Sorry my mistake, china have just built 1 long distance highspeed link between Shanghai ang Beijing each city having a population of our entire country. The countries GDP just doesnt compare to ours either.
Kim
says:I found Virgin better than Qantas – travelling economy between capitals. It took previous CEO Borghetti to destroy Virgin by trying to take on Qantas, and leasing 330’s at incredible expense. The Chairman of Virgin and major shareholders should have seen what was happening 5 years ago, but they were all chummy. How did Australia Post ever get into the list? Mazda is curious as they did not answer recall requests for faulty vehicles. Trust -no.