Important Notice:
We regret to inform you that our free phpBB forum hosting service will be discontinued by the end of June 30, 2024.
If you wish to migrate to our paid hosting service, please contact billing@hostonnet.com.
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
me111993
Member
Joined: 04 Sep 2009
Posts: 3225
Location: MAA/AMD
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:47 pm Post subject: Legacy Carriers Raking in the Moolah |
 |
|
This is one trend that has looked very encouraging, regardless of the Indian (Struggling) Aviation Industry, its very heart warming to see major carriers back into black and in style,
Leading the pack is DL at $1.4 billion in Q3 (US) alone!
BA/IB - $923 million Q3
JAL - 1H profit $840 million
AC - $365 million Q3
UA - $379 million Q3
EK $425 million 1H
LH - $340 million 9 months
TK - $360 million 1H 2013
However, East Asian Carriers continued struggling
CX - $3 million 1H 2013 (what a 9W esqe result).
SQ - ($30.6 million) LOSS, accounting in the money from the VS stake sale, essentially would have been a $214 million loss.
Asiana / KE both reported losses of $37/38 millon resp.
TG - ($268 million) 1H 2013 LOSS
MH - ($108 million) Q2 2013 LOSS
Chinese continued their strong show
CZ $385 million Q3 2013
CA $190 million Q3 2013
_________________
Causal Determinism : We are hardwired to need answers. The Caveman who heard a rustle in the bushes and checked out to see what it was, lived longer than the guy, who assumed it was just a breeze.
- Greg House |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jasepl
Member
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Posts: 4257
Location: bund-bay
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cathay's results are worse than Jet's, in my opinion, because they have far more going for them and they've shown the capability of doing much, much better in the past.
As for SQ, I think it's a sign of the times and an indication of SIN's diminishing importance as an aviation hub.
MH & TG have the state meddling all the time, so no surprises there.
Delta's results are good, but are certainly helped by the bankruptcy protection and the ability to restructure under favourable conditions. The more impressive part is that they've managed to continually improve on nearly all measures (quantity and quality), which is no easy feat. Of course, they wouldn't have been in this position without Chapter 11 - that goes without saying.
THY too are looking good. Their expansion does seem overly aggressive, but they seem to be managing just fine financially.
I'm actually most impressed by BA's results. I'm not a BA fan from any angle, but it is commendable for them to have produced such strong numbers, given the competition, constraints and costs they operate under and the fact that they didn't have (and didn't need) bankruptcy protection. Their results are majority a result of hard work and taking the most advantage of their strengths.
_________________
four years free of jetya punti! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
me111993
Member
Joined: 04 Sep 2009
Posts: 3225
Location: MAA/AMD
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Cathay's results are worse than Jet's, in my opinion, because they have far more going for them and they've shown the capability of doing much, much better in the past. |
common, you mis-understood my point, however pro 9W I am, theres no frekkin way i was comparing 9Ws and CXs results. all along late 2011 early 2012. 9W showed profits of 8 crores, 12 crores, 25 crores, essentially scrape all you want to show something that is not red. This particular result resembles those results.
_________________
Causal Determinism : We are hardwired to need answers. The Caveman who heard a rustle in the bushes and checked out to see what it was, lived longer than the guy, who assumed it was just a breeze.
- Greg House |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jasepl
Member
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Posts: 4257
Location: bund-bay
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 11:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not comparing Cathay and Jet. Rather Cathay's own current performance against their own recent past. YoY they improved, but it's basically break even compared to billions of dollars a couple of years ago.
_________________
four years free of jetya punti! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nimish
Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 9757
Location: Bangalore, India
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 2:48 am Post subject: Re: Legacy Carriers Raking in the Moolah |
|
|
| me111993 wrote: | very heart warming to see major carriers back into black and in style,
Leading the pack is DL at $1.4 billion in Q3 (US) alone!
BA/IB - $923 million Q3
JAL - 1H profit $840 million
AC - $365 million Q3
UA - $379 million Q3
EK $425 million 1H
LH - $340 million 9 months
TK - $360 million 1H 2013
|
Capacity discipline and massive ancillary revenues going a long way IMO.
In addition, UA is adding a revenue requirement for frequent flier status for 2015 (DL already has this) - which will lead to at least 20-30% trimming in the Frequent flier ranks - as most folks fly the cheapest tickets. Luckily it won't impact UA FFPs in India as it's only for those with US addresses for now.
_________________
We miss you Nalini! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sshank
Member
Joined: 16 May 2007
Posts: 377
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:10 pm Post subject: Re: Legacy Carriers Raking in the Moolah |
|
|
| Nimish wrote: | | me111993 wrote: | very heart warming to see major carriers back into black and in style,
Leading the pack is DL at $1.4 billion in Q3 (US) alone!
BA/IB - $923 million Q3
JAL - 1H profit $840 million
AC - $365 million Q3
UA - $379 million Q3
EK $425 million 1H
LH - $340 million 9 months
TK - $360 million 1H 2013
|
Capacity discipline and massive ancillary revenues going a long way IMO.
In addition, UA is adding a revenue requirement for frequent flier status for 2015 (DL already has this) - which will lead to at least 20-30% trimming in the Frequent flier ranks - as most folks fly the cheapest tickets. Luckily it won't impact UA FFPs in India as it's only for those with US addresses for now. |
Its not surprising - when you go from six legacies to 4 (now to 3), the market dynamics does shift. Business travel has rebounded in the US, and the US legacies have improved the hard product upfront to a point that people dont flock to the Asian/EU carriers like they used to. Also now the FFPs significantly penalizes straying from the cartel carriers (i.e flying a *A partner who is not part of the JV).
And UA is following the DL playbook to a T. While the revenue requirements were expected, and in itself not particularly onerous if you have some business travel, it will make it harder for those who get there purely on personal travel. Also the hitch is that the spend needs to be on 016 stock (so LH and other *A tickets, unless issued as UA code shares will likely not count).
What is more distressing than the revenue requirement is the gutting of of mileage plus award chart and especially the dramatic increases in miles needed for partner awards in Business and First. The 120K BLR-FRA-NYC award has been the main use my UA miles (I have redeemed ~15 of those in the past 4-5 years for myself and my parents). That will now cost 160K - and that really sucks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nimish
Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 9757
Location: Bangalore, India
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:30 pm Post subject: Re: Legacy Carriers Raking in the Moolah |
|
|
| sshank wrote: | | The 120K BLR-FRA-NYC award has been the main use my UA miles (I have redeemed ~15 of those in the past 4-5 years for myself and my parents). That will now cost 160K - and that really sucks. |
While it definitely sucks, I think UA/ *A FFPs have had it really really good so far. I mean - one can earn up to 2X the miles on UA (1.5X as a Gold, 2X as a 1K member), which means 40K miles for 1 return Y ticket BLR-SFO. This is at the cheapest fares - which would earn only half miles with the MEB3 carriers. Based on this earning rate, 2 paid return tickets in Y => 1 free return ticket in Y - an unheard of conversion ratio. Even for that 160K J return ticket - it only takes 4 Y return tickets - still an amazing bang for your buck.
I've not done the math, but I bet it takes at least 10 discount economy tickets on EK to get 1 J return ticket.
So while the changes do hurt, remember you're still getting a super duper sweet deal here, and it might change for the worse in the years to come.
_________________
We miss you Nalini! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iah87
Member
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 2567
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The UA revenue requirment will now hurt anyone flying other Star Carriers, including LH, which is a JV partner. I am not still not sure why LH was not included in the revenue arrangement, they share the revenues on TATL flights. And if you try to ticket on UA stock, the price on LH flights are higher (lowest fare is in W class).
Still UA FFP is one of the best, you get 100% + miles on any ticket and they do fly to India, the reward travel availability is good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sshank
Member
Joined: 16 May 2007
Posts: 377
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:03 pm Post subject: Re: Legacy Carriers Raking in the Moolah |
|
|
| Nimish wrote: | | sshank wrote: | | The 120K BLR-FRA-NYC award has been the main use my UA miles (I have redeemed ~15 of those in the past 4-5 years for myself and my parents). That will now cost 160K - and that really sucks. |
While it definitely sucks, I think UA/ *A FFPs have had it really really good so far. I mean - one can earn up to 2X the miles on UA (1.5X as a Gold, 2X as a 1K member), which means 40K miles for 1 return Y ticket BLR-SFO. This is at the cheapest fares - which would earn only half miles with the MEB3 carriers. Based on this earning rate, 2 paid return tickets in Y => 1 free return ticket in Y - an unheard of conversion ratio. Even for that 160K J return ticket - it only takes 4 Y return tickets - still an amazing bang for your buck.
I've not done the math, but I bet it takes at least 10 discount economy tickets on EK to get 1 J return ticket.
So while the changes do hurt, remember you're still getting a super duper sweet deal here, and it might change for the worse in the years to come. |
Oh, I agree and that's the reason I have not ever seen the insides of the much vaunted MEB3 and will stay clear of them as long as I can.
The new bilateral being discussed with QR is a concern because if QR goes 3x daily to BLR/MAA you can say buh bye to LH. While these ME carriers may provide a 'good product' in an absolute sense, they are totally useless to me . Well I suppose they do help by dumping enough capacity in the market to keep LH pricing sane, so there is that, but I do not want GOI to dole out huge increases in bilateral allocation to these disruptive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sshank
Member
Joined: 16 May 2007
Posts: 377
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| iah87 wrote: | The UA revenue requirment will now hurt anyone flying other Star Carriers, including LH, which is a JV partner. I am not still not sure why LH was not included in the revenue arrangement, they share the revenues on TATL flights. And if you try to ticket on UA stock, the price on LH flights are higher (lowest fare is in W class).
Still UA FFP is one of the best, you get 100% + miles on any ticket and they do fly to India, the reward travel availability is good. |
IAH, the final details are not out yet, so lets wait and see if they carve out an exception for the cartel carriers.
Award availability on UA metal to India is actually abysmal, the availability on LH however is great, especially to BLR and MAA. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iah87
Member
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 2567
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 5:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yes on UA metal it is not good, but mileage plus on other carriers is quite good, especially LH, AC, TK, and sometimes on UA upto Europe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nimish
Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 9757
Location: Bangalore, India
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| iah87 wrote: | | And if you try to ticket on UA stock, the price on LH flights are higher (lowest fare is in W class). |
Surprising you say that, I just returned from a UA stock ticket (016), but with 2 LH sectors on L class - which is the cheapest 100% miles earning fare.
_________________
We miss you Nalini! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nimish
Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 9757
Location: Bangalore, India
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2013 4:38 pm Post subject: Re: Legacy Carriers Raking in the Moolah |
|
|
| sshank wrote: | | The new bilateral being discussed with QR is a concern because if QR goes 3x daily to BLR/MAA you can say buh bye to LH. While these ME carriers may provide a 'good product' in an absolute sense, they are totally useless to me . Well I suppose they do help by dumping enough capacity in the market to keep LH pricing sane, so there is that, but I do not want GOI to dole out huge increases in bilateral allocation to these disruptive. |
QR is consistently the cheapest on the BLR-US market - no matter if weekend or not, even when LH is pimping 1.5L return economy tickets, QR will dutifully offer their 78K fares  . Mid weeks has a much lower price difference (which is why I now travel mid-weeks, so my company does not have to pay much more than QR).
With the LH metal earning rules on UA FFP possibly changing next year (not sure of the details yet), it's quite possible that the lower LH fares will be 50% miles only on UA. Which will hurt a lot for lowest fare economy pax like me.
_________________
We miss you Nalini! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sshank
Member
Joined: 16 May 2007
Posts: 377
Location: NYC
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Nimish wrote: | | iah87 wrote: | | And if you try to ticket on UA stock, the price on LH flights are higher (lowest fare is in W class). |
Surprising you say that, I just returned from a UA stock ticket (016), but with 2 LH sectors on L class - which is the cheapest 100% miles earning fare. |
The transatlantic sectors should price identically, the beyond segments are hit or miss, often those booked as UA code shares will be priced higher.
Nimish - your ticket has the LH segments booked as straight LH flights and not UA code shares, eventhough everything is issued on 016 stock. We will have to wait and see if those will count towards the PQD requirements starting next year ( I hope so!). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iah87
Member
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 2567
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mine was W class on UA stock (BOM-FRA-IAH), on UA code shared flight. Tried to get a lower class, but could not, as the customer service rep mentioned that this was lowest class, may be she was mistaken. According to PQD rules, all 016 UA stock will county regardless of the airline in the itinerary (even non Star carriers can be listed). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nimish
Member
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Posts: 9757
Location: Bangalore, India
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 26, 2013 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| iah87 wrote: | | Mine was W class on UA stock (BOM-FRA-IAH), on UA code shared flight. Tried to get a lower class, but could not, as the customer service rep mentioned that this was lowest class, may be she was mistaken. According to PQD rules, all 016 UA stock will county regardless of the airline in the itinerary (even non Star carriers can be listed). |
I had originally asked for the code shared UA flight numbers (which were only available on a much higher class), but my agent came through and proved her worth, she managed to get the same flights but with LH flight numbers on L class and still issue the ticket on UA.
_________________
We miss you Nalini! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
