N844AA From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 6313 times:
This thread made me nostalgic for the late '90s, so I went to go look up some of AMR's old annual reports. Man, those guys were printing money back then. With fuel prices being what they are, I'm not sure when -- or if -- they'll get back to billion-dollar profits, but at least they have the rest of their costs under control.
New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
Pavlin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 6271 times:
Air France-KLM as one airline. But still nice profit
Singapore airlines also, why is there not Lufthansa.
Normal airlines should make loses wright now, it is just the way it is
Mindscape From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 314 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 6027 times:
Antares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 41 Reply 9, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5853 times:
To really rank profitability and mask differences in tax, depreciating and accounting rules, the best way is to calculate the margin calculated on gross turnover and pretax profits before abnormals.
That pushes everyone into a similar situation, where net margins pull in local factors.
And use a common currency.
I'm not even going to bother trying, since on a global scale, you get too many qualifications and the comparison is largely symbolic or pointless at a personal investor level.
And of course some of the more profitable players on that basis will be freight lines and the likes of Ryanair, and good on them too.
D L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 10554 posts, RR: 53 Reply 10, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5838 times:
Jacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 61 Reply 11, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5829 times:
Kaitak744 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2208 posts, RR: 3 Reply 14, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5665 times:
By the way, notice on a side note that all the highly profitable airlines now days (besides FedEx which should not be on this list) all are major fliers of the 777. Looks like the aircraft which Airbus describes as being too expensive to buy is making good returns.
KLMCedric From Belgium, joined Dec 2003, 794 posts, RR: 24 Reply 15, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5560 times:
Quoting Mindscape (Reply 7): Is it possible to have the breakdown between AF and KL ?
Thank you
We as employees got the separate numbers not to long ago. I do not have
the exact numbers right now but I remember that out of the net 913M Euro
profit KLM made 500+ millions and AF 400+ millions. Considering the individual
size of the two companies I think it's fair to say KLM is doing an exceptional
job here!!!
Pihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 3489 posts, RR: 72 Reply 16, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5494 times:
Quoting KLMCedric (Reply 15): Considering the individual
size of the two companies I think it's fair to say KLM is doing an exceptional
job here!!!
Sorry, but you can't use these computations that way. The KLM part of the airline is making a lot of money mainly because of the group effect in terms of network, procurements...
By the same token, AF's margin seems low compared to BA's, for instance. It is due to the network system on which the European feeder flights have a tarification program that is meant to just break even . The money comes mostly from the long range flights.( BA has just about given up on Europe).
That said, your performance is a credit to your dedication.
NYCFlyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1381 posts, RR: 11 Reply 19, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5302 times:
Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 13): So you are telling me the most profitable airlines made ~ US$1m for the whole of 2005? It's complete BS there -
Pihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 3489 posts, RR: 72 Reply 20, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5278 times:
Quoting Cloudyapple (Reply 17): Sounds like the french boss talking to the dutch worker~
No. Respect for what colleagues have achieved.And, because I work with them, I should know.
What a lot of A.netters, especially the other side of the Manche fail to understand is how much the two operations have been integrated without any component having the right to say they.ve been cheated by the new network system. If anything, the KLM people seem to be more optimistic than the AF ground staff, probably because working in CDG at the moment is very hard. AMS has a very smooth operation, compared.
Do I smell some sour grapes here in your comment ?
Cornish From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 8187 posts, RR: 56 Reply 22, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 5263 times:
Quoting Kaitak744 (Reply 14): By the way, notice on a side note that all the highly profitable airlines now days (besides FedEx which should not be on this list) all are major fliers of the 777. Looks like the aircraft which Airbus describes as being too expensive to buy is making good returns.
And 3 of the 5 have A340 fleets too.....
Actually using your logic it should be pointed out that the Top 2 airline groupings have sizeable fleets of MD-11s - perhaps more airlines should have seen the value of these
I think you'll find that its not their aircraft choices that are the reason these airlines are at the top of the profitability rankings right now....
For the record, other notable 777 operators include: UA, DL, AA, CO, OS, MH, RG......
Just when I thought I could see light at the end of the tunnel, it was some B*****d with a torch bringing me more work
Pihero From France, joined Jan 2005, 3489 posts, RR: 72 Reply 24, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4876 times:
Quoting VV701 (Reply 23): So which is it? Have they 'just about given up on Europe' or is there 'still much work to be done' on their shorthaul business?
In 2004, BA was the most profitable airline in the world, and that sums pretty much the BA management strategy : go for profit instead of growth.
The quote from Broughton's report hides the fact that BA has lost more than 30% of short haul revenue in the last five years.
On the long haul - and it has to be noted that BA, contrary to LH or AF/KL has a point to point structure, vs hub,-BA has lost 10 % of its revenues during which time LH increased theirs by 50 % and AF by 45 %.
Please understand that I am not making a judgement of value, here, merely stating numbers and at the same time acknowledging the difficulty BA would have setting up a hub at LHR.
One has also to remark that BA is the legacy airline the hardest hit by the LCC phenomenon.
That BA is going all out on prime high end services is quite clever and probably the only winning strategy they have available.
But it's quite risky as a further glance on BA revenue structure shows a whopping 70 % of business revenues realised on the North Atlantic, a sort of exposure which is unknown both at LH and AF/KL.
Richierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4022 posts, RR: 6 Reply 25, posted (6 years 10 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 4812 times:
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Mexico, joined Jul 2003, 1788 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2006, 500 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1352 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 1161 posts, 
From Hong Kong, joined Jul 2005, 2425 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Dec 2003, 794 posts, 
From France, joined Jan 2005, 3489 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
