The paper "Qantas Bailout Debate" is a great example of a business case study. Qantas Airline went into financial instability and later indicated the reasons behind it to the government. The management engaged in intensive with the government to ascertain the uneven playing field as the sole cause of its mysteries. This paper presents an argument for the Qantas airline as well as the government in relation to the theories of the role of the state in the intervention. Qantas Airline Debate Side: First, the company’ s management argued that Qantas was not Holden signifying that despite it helping to create billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money over a significant number of years within the car industry it has continued to operate without any form of taxpayer subsidies or even any form of tax concessions (Joyce 1-2).
The company has never enjoyed any form of preferential treatment on any form of airport access or government based travel. It has, in fact, continued to compete in each of its daily operations in both the Australian and the international markets while at the behest of the Qantas Sale Act, which prevented it from accessing any form of foreign capital (Joyce 1-2).
Secondly, the management team argued that it was never focused on seeking protection from the aspect of the free-market mechanism. In fact, the team argued that the firm continued to suffer at the helm of an absent free and fair market, which promoted 2012 restructure of Virgin Australia. The restructuring of this airline was followed by intensive saturation of the Australian market with money resources in order to weaken Qantas operations. Third, the management of Qantas argued that it was never focused on seeking for any form of anti-competitive bailout from the government rather it was bringing into the limelight the fact that legislation and regulatory decisions reached due to the bogus Qantas Sale Act, the Air Navigation Act as well as the Foreign Investment Review Board had resulted to an uneven and unfair operational environment (Joyce 2).
Following this development, the airline argues that it has resulted in requesting the Australian government to make timely interventions and thus, allow the easier transformation of the business. Fourth, the management argued that it was not in any way reluctant to engage in making challenging decisions in order to succeed but the efforts were downtrodden when Virgin adopted the new restructure hence allowing it access substantial levels of cash resources from its foreign investors and owners in order to cover up for its loss-making approach (Joyce 3).
In its efforts to succeed despite the uneven and unfair operations of Virgin, Qantas management ascertains that is engaged in cutting down its unit costs by at least 19% but hardly managed to engage in any form of heavy maintenance activities.
In essence, the firm reduced its loss-making global routes, eliminated its current staff personnel and even went ahead to develop newer gateway partnerships in order to facilitate the maintenance of its’ global market access (Joyce 3). Subsequently, the airline focused on improving its fleet investment so that now it enjoys a substantial amount of modernised as well as fuel-efficient aircraft with minimal aircraft age since the privatisation process. Notably, the senior executives and the airline board embarked on a decision to engage in the partial sale of some of the company’ s fundamental assets as a section of its recently formulated strategic review process.
Joyce, A. Some myths in the level playing field debate. The Australian. (2013). Retrieved from http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/fairgo4qantas/pages/30/attachments/original/1386885123/The_Australian_-_Op-Ed_by_Alan_Joyce__CEO_Qantas.pdf?1386885123
Tătulescu, A. An Overview of the main theories regarding the Role of the State. Economic Insights – Trends and Challenge, vol. II, no.4. (2013).p.73-82