Of all the media commentary on the QAN result, some of which was...

Of all the media commentary on the QAN result, some of which was glowing, I only saw one mention of how incoming CEO Ms Vanessa Hudson has been left with an alleged A$14.8 billion capital expenditure bill for new aircraft. This assumes no further falls in the A$.

The 120 aircraft in the Qantas so-called "mainline" fleet (Boeing 737-800 and above in size to the massive Airbus 380-800s) have a median age of a shocking 14.2 years, even though QAN has in recent months had three new Boeing 787-900 aircraft delivered and placed in revenue passenger service.

Jetstar (Australia) has 79 planes with a median age of 10.8 years, older than I'd thought.

The 18 National Jet System Boeing 717 aircraft used for Qantas flights have a median age of 21.5 years.

Jetstar Asia's Airbus A320 aircraft have a median age of 11.6 years. There are seven planes.

Jetstar Japan's A320 and A321 planes (21 in total) are younger, having a median age of 8.9 years, but QAN from memory only owns 40 per cent of this carrier.

That the mainstream media doesn't often highlight how Alan Joyce has made a "net profit" in FY 23 but throughout the last decade has neglected fleet replacement is another fail by media, and a troublesome legacy for the replacement CEO who must be very annoyed at how Joyce (the man with an answer for everything) keeps hogging the media limelight as he laps up undeserved adulation.

Joyce claims that aircraft should have a normal life of 21 years. Not the case with competitors who keep investing in newbies!

I don't want to be simplistic, but surely it's "easier" to record a net profit after tax in the short (and perhaps medium) term if a Board and CEO let capex float away?