Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 15277 posts, RR: 58 Posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3119 times:
I found an article today about WN's fuel hedging strategy.....they've done a good job, where as the legacies (because of bankruptcies, bad judegement, etc) have not..
i would be curious about the other LCC's..
"Solid Southwest can afford to stay the hedging course. It already has hedged more than 80% of its fuel needs for next year with prices capped at the equivalent of $25 per barrel of crude, 60% in 2006 at $31 a barrel, and over 40% in 2007 at $30 a barrel. That's far below where the market is betting that oil prices will be. "
RoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 10902 posts, RR: 52
Reply 2, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3060 times:
Some airlines have done a much better job blunting the impact of higher jet fuel prices by hedging those costs with futures contracts that allow them to buy fuel at below market rates.
Percent of fuel costs hedged in 2004.
Burnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7862 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2941 times:
Wow NW at 0% and yet they are really in second place to losing less money shortly behind CO. I dont think all the reasons why airlines are in trouble was because of fuel, granted it is a large part, but NW shows that you dont need fuel hedging to do a good job.
Jonnyboymia From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 6 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2831 times:
Good topic, Hedging as we all know is like betting -and yes betting in your favour -South W have so far done a good job with this -yes it runs in there favour due to spiralling fuel costs -long term hedging again can go against you if the price of barrrels indeed falls -so yes at this point in time it does indeed look like a pretty picture. Again in their favour they are a domestic US carrier -so with good fuel experts can indeed "worst case scenario" future forecasts knowing what could or might put the price of keresene up -Now for an Intl carrier flying all over the world you will see less of a hedging habit, due to the fact foreign markets are slightly more volitile be it politcial or other influences etc etc....
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 15277 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2812 times:
Jonnyboymia........welcome to airliners.net board......
Yes, hedging can be a bad thing......but good technical and good fundemental analysis can be used to guage future oil prices pretty accuartely, and thats why its good to hedge not a 100%, but maybe 50-75% of oil.........
as I mentioned in a previous disucssion and as 7E72004 mentioned above, if WN wasn't hedged, they would have been losing money also........
I wish I got to buy a few thousand barrels of oil at $25 right now, heck I'd be happy to sell it for $45-$50 and undercut everyone else........just call me J.R. Ewing.......
Dutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 55
Reply 7, posted (11 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2797 times:
Its very difficult to hedge fuel costs for an airline that is in poor financial condition - good credit is required and good financial resources are required, that reason alone could explain why some the US carriers have not hedged their fuel costs.