Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
JetBlue Posts $22 Million Loss For Q1  
User currently offlineCrogalski From United States of America, joined May 2005, 514 posts, RR: 3
Posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4851 times:

http://www.primenewswire.com/newsroom/news.html?d=117984

Quote:
NEW YORK, April 24, 2007 (PRIME NEWSWIRE) -- JetBlue Airways Corporation (Nasdaq:JBLU) today reported its results for the first quarter 2007:



* Operating revenues for the quarter totaled $608 million,
representing growth of 24.0% over operating revenues of
$490 million in the first quarter of 2006.

* Operating loss for the quarter was $13 million, resulting
in a negative 2.2% operating margin, compared to an operating
loss of $25 million and a negative 5.2% operating margin in
the first quarter of 2006.

* Pre-tax loss for the quarter was $45 million, resulting in
a negative 7.3% pre-tax margin, compared with a pre-tax loss
of $47 million and a negative 9.7% pre-tax margin in the
year-ago period.

* Net loss for the quarter was $22 million, representing a loss
of $0.12 per diluted share, compared with first quarter 2006
net loss of $32 million, or a loss of $0.18 per diluted share.




A319 A320 B717 B727 B737 B747 B757 B767 C152 C172 DC9 E145 E190 MD88 PA28 | B6 CO DL FL NK NW LO TW
39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 4731 times:

Hmmmm....that's not good, especially give that AA, CO, and DL all posted operating profits for the first quarter. Also, the release states that they expect their CASM to increase 6-8% in the second quarter, independent of fuel costs. What the heck is going on there that their non-fuel costs would go up so much?

Anyone from B6 care to comment?


User currently offlineAarbee From India, joined Aug 2005, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4682 times:

If one believes in the company, then good time to buy the stock.


Love the AIXes
User currently offlineJetJock22 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4647 times:

Quoting Cory6188 (Reply 1):
What the heck is going on there that their non-fuel costs would go up so much?

You can pin almost that entire loss on the Valentines Day massacre. I believe it was estimated that that single storm alone cost us in the neighborhood of $30 million.


User currently offlineAirlineFanatic From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 222 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4616 times:

they spoke to this on the call - reduced stage length and reduced seats on the A320.

User currently onlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13252 posts, RR: 62
Reply 5, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4582 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

No loss is good, but B6 narrowed their net losses from the same quarter last year - AND, as was mentioned, a good part of the Q1 loss can be placed squarely on the Valentine's Day Massacre they experienced.

So again - no loss is good, but B6 did manage to make a substantial improvement from last year's Q1 net figures.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineF9Animal From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4947 posts, RR: 28
Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4570 times:

Oh no!!! B6 is close to shutting doors! Oh no! The sky is falling!

Oh well. This is the industry, and losses are to be expected. B6 had a rough quarter with weather and publicity issues. Next quarter will be fine. I just wish these darned fuel prices would come down! There is no doubt in my mind that B6 is here to stay, and even the non believers better start believing!  Wink



I Am A Different Animal!!
User currently offlineRichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4199 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4559 times:

Quoting JetJock22 (Reply 3):
You can pin almost that entire loss on the Valentines Day massacre. I believe it was estimated that that single storm alone cost us in the neighborhood of $30 million.

Clearly the storm played a big part in the financials, but it wouldn't have been a great quarter anyway by the looks of it. AFAIK, Q1 is traditionally one of JetBlue's worst quarters.



None shall pass!!!!
User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6573 posts, RR: 32
Reply 8, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4500 times:

Quoting Richierich (Reply 7):
Q1 is traditionally one of JetBlue's worst quarters.

Q1 is typically one of the worst quarters in the industry in general. Q2 and Q3 are when most airlines will post consistent profits. Passenger traffic typically craters from a few days after New Year's until mid-February.


User currently offlineRichierich From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 4199 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4468 times:

Quoting ScottB (Reply 8):
Q1 is typically one of the worst quarters in the industry in general. Q2 and Q3 are when most airlines will post consistent profits. Passenger traffic typically craters from a few days after New Year's until mid-February.

I believe you are correct, Sir. I am pretty sure this is the case for B6 and I know it is true for a number of other carriers, but I didn't want to generalize a statement for all carriers.



None shall pass!!!!
User currently offlineJBLUA320 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 3175 posts, RR: 19
Reply 10, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4455 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JetJock22 (Reply 3):
You can pin almost that entire loss on the Valentines Day massacre. I believe it was estimated that that single storm alone cost us in the neighborhood of $30 million.

Definitely true-- I heard the damages were well over $40 million, in fact.

JBLU


User currently offlineJetJock22 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 4455 times:

Quoting Richierich (Reply 7):
Clearly the storm played a big part in the financials, but it wouldn't have been a great quarter anyway by the looks of it. AFAIK, Q1 is traditionally one of JetBlue's worst quarters.

Good point. If I remember right, they had predicted a 1st Q loss before Valentines day


User currently offlineDeltaDAWG From United States of America, joined May 2006, 742 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4435 times:

Quoting Aarbee (Reply 2):
If one believes in the company, then good time to buy the stock.

Exactly what I was thinking. At around $10.70 today it's starting to get close to it's 52 week low. Good time to buy considering. It will be back up around $16-17 I be around June/July.

Got to go over to Scottrade.



GO Dawgs, Sic' em, woof woof woof
User currently offlineCory6188 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2686 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4374 times:

Quoting JetJock22 (Reply 3):
You can pin almost that entire loss on the Valentines Day massacre. I believe it was estimated that that single storm alone cost us in the neighborhood of $30 million.

I'm sure that the Valentine's Day masscre was definitely a factor for this past quarter, but I'm talking about their predictions for the rest of the year. The release says that their fuel-excluded CASM is going to increase 6-8% for the upcoming quarters. That's what I was wondering about...


User currently offlineJetBluefan1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2937 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4150 times:

Quoting Cory6188 (Reply 13):
The release says that their fuel-excluded CASM is going to increase 6-8% for the upcoming quarters. That's what I was wondering about...

This has to do with reduced stage length and the removal of one row of seats. Fuel-neutral and stage length-adjusted CASM will be up be only 1% over last year, which is good news.

JetBluefan1



Most people on a.net hate JetBlue. Get used to it.
User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 17
Reply 15, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4127 times:

But....I thought TV sets insured profitablity.

User currently offlineSpencerII From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4112 times:

I thought they raised their fares across the board on the last quarter to assist in returning the company to profitability.
Interesting that the legacies posted nice profits and the Bloo Darling posted a loss. Other airlines were effected by that JFK snowstorm too, but if B6 is involved I guess that doesn't count.


User currently offlineJetBlueAUS From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 1145 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4104 times:

Quoting SpencerII (Reply 16):
Other airlines were effected by that JFK snowstorm too, but if B6 is involved I guess that doesn't count.

However, most of JetBlue's operations are based at JFK. CO and DL can rely on other hubs to bring in income.



Not all of us can be heroes, some of us can only stand on the sidewalk and clap as they go by.
User currently offlineTornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4047 times:

They didn't remove 6-8% of their seats, and the missing seats should be partially offset by the lack of a 4th crew member... they did reduce the crews to 3 FA/plane, right? If so, that excuse smells a little fishy.

User currently offlinePPVRA From Brazil, joined Nov 2004, 8872 posts, RR: 40
Reply 19, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4021 times:

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 18):
They didn't remove 6-8% of their seats, and the missing seats should be partially offset by the lack of a 4th crew member... they did reduce the crews to 3 FA/plane, right? If so, that excuse smells a little fishy.

That's what I was thinking.

Are they planning any significant pay raises? Pilots/FAs? Any major checks for the A320s coming online?

Of course its warmer (summer) = more fuel. . . but that shouldn't be that huge, no?



"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
User currently offlineJetBluefan1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2937 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4008 times:

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 18):
They didn't remove 6-8% of their seats, and the missing seats should be partially offset by the lack of a 4th crew member... they did reduce the crews to 3 FA/plane, right? If so, that excuse smells a little fishy.

The actual cost of the flight may be less, but CASM isn't a fair indicator of this because it relates the cost to the amount of seats that can be sold. Taking 6 seats out was a reduction of nearly 4%, which means that there are 4% seats LESS to spread those costs over. While there are savings for reduced crew and fuel burn costs, they aren't noticeable since the reduction in seats more than offsets those savings - but strictly from a CASM point of view.

Nonetheless, as I said before, stage length decreased too. CASM naturally increases with decreased stage length. And, once again - as I said before - on a fuel neutral and stage length-adjusted rate, CASM increased only 1%.

Those costs are certainly under control. Now let's see that revenue number go up...

JetBluefan1



Most people on a.net hate JetBlue. Get used to it.
User currently offlineTornado82 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3969 times:

Quoting JetBluefan1 (Reply 20):
Taking 6 seats out was a reduction of nearly 4%, which means that there are 4% seats LESS to spread those costs over. While there are savings for reduced crew and fuel burn costs, they aren't noticeable since the reduction in seats more than offsets those savings - but strictly from a CASM point of view.

I would think a 4% seating reduction is damn near offset by a 25% reduction in FA's, statistically speaking.

Irrelevant to the statistic of CASM, it's not like B6 is the LF champ of the aviation industry. The law of averages says those 6 now-missing seats were empty 90% of the time or more anyways. Therefore the loss of revenue from them is moot. and with yield management meaning if you sold 120 seats before and after the 6 seat reduction... the 120 sold AFTER the reduction SHOULD have brought in MORE revenue.

Stage lengths decreasing would indeed have added to CASM... so I'll buy that. But they're most likely going to keep decreasing for the rest of B6's existance... so if that's a problem now it's not going to get any better.

That snow/ice storm affected CLE, PIT, PHL, EWR, LGA, and the other airlines at JFK. Continental had 2 of their 3 hubs hit by that snowstorm. They're not in the red right now. US was hit up and down the coast... they didn't seem to take a bath either. Delta has heavy ops at LGA and JFK too.

So it comes down to what's an excuse vs a fact from the B6 camp?


User currently offlineJetBluefan1 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2937 posts, RR: 14
Reply 22, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3812 times:

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 21):
I would think a 4% seating reduction is damn near offset by a 25% reduction in FA's, statistically speaking.

It does - cew costs are reduced - but because CASM is dealing strictly with the amount of seats on an airplane, it's not the best way to look at this effect.

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 21):
But they're most likely going to keep decreasing for the rest of B6's existance... so if that's a problem now it's not going to get any better.

Who knows? But I still think CASM is an unfair way to measure a company's health. What REALLY needs to be measured is PRASM compared to CASM.

Quoting Tornado82 (Reply 21):
That snow/ice storm affected CLE, PIT, PHL, EWR, LGA, and the other airlines at JFK. Continental had 2 of their 3 hubs hit by that snowstorm. They're not in the red right now. US was hit up and down the coast... they didn't seem to take a bath either. Delta has heavy ops at LGA and JFK too.

So it comes down to what's an excuse vs a fact from the B6 camp?

The fact is that the vast majority of JetBlue's flights touch JFK/LGA/EWR/SWF (and now HPN) on a daily basis. JetBlue's reliance on the New York City market is much great than any other airline in the U.S. Therefore, a major ice storm there will have a much, much greater affect on JetBlue than any other airline.

JetBluefan1



Most people on a.net hate JetBlue. Get used to it.
User currently offlineDsa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3775 times:

This is not a particularly bad result considering the storms and other episodes that B6 has had to deal with. Yes they have posted a loss but they have become a stronger company because of this quarters events, they are putting more plans and back up plans to deal with such events. Over this year we're going to see some great advancements and changes for the airline, including new routes and attractive fares from the airline we all love.  Wink

All I can say is that JetBlue is on the right road to profitability and becoming a strong airline, if the storm hadn't have happened on Valentines Day it would have happened on another occasion.

Well Done, JetBlue! Let's see a profit for next quarter!


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Licko



DSA


User currently offlineLowecur From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 585 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3747 times:

Jetblue still trades at well over 30 times projected earnings. This is too high for a company with many question marks going into the future. Neeleman has gone from a visionist to a reactionist, and in my opinion is one step away from being booted out the door by the board.

Many think Soros was looking for a short term profit when he bought more share last week. For an insider, he sure doesn't look all that smart at this point. Me thinks he may have other things in mind.......like being part of taking the company private in the near future.


25 Logos : This is hardly a surprise, is it? We all saw with our own eyes how much worse jetBlue dealt with that storm than any of these players, so it stands t
26 Flybyguy : This is true. However, I'm not sure if jetblue or others can gain substantial profits over the high season summer months... especially if fuel prices
27 Richierich : Interesting take on this. I was not aware that Soros had been purchasing B6 stock lately, but I really doubt it is because he wants to make JetBlue p
28 Richierich : I tend to agree with this. Airline stocks are usually poor performers anyway, and I don't have any reason to believe they are going to be bleeding th
29 JetBluefan1 : I think Neeleman did a great job starting the company and promoting it - he must be a PR genius - but I do agree to an extent that JetBlue is in need
30 JetBlueAUS : He sort of has to do something different. JetBlue is completely maxed out at JFK and BOS. At least, JetBlue will be getting 5 new BOS gates this summ
31 Tommytoyz : I have to compliment Jetblue on stating their financial figures according to GAAP and not like UA, DL and most others based on home grown accounting s
32 BrianDromey : The interesthing thing is that revenues increased by a quarter, but jetBlue still lost a comparible amount of money 2007Vs 2006. Id like to know where
33 Richierich : JetBlue gets a lot of hours out of their A320s and E190s, especially the former. I don't know about the last year or two, but their A320s were among
34 DeltaGuy : Sounds like the next People Express to me!
35 Post contains images Lightsaber : Exactly. I'm a B6 fan, but I'm not seeing RASM go up as much as it should have when they turned on the yeild optimization routine on the route planni
36 Gnomon : I agree that it's not particularly bad, but it's not particularly good, either, at a time when legacy carriers facing similar operational problems du
37 Post contains images NASBWI : Really? I suppose you thought wrong, didn't you?
38 JetBluefan1 : During the construction period, JetBlue pays $3M/quarter for the construction of the JFK terminal. I'm assuming that this will help keep lease costs
39 Post contains images Halcyon : When I talked to Robyn Killian, she mentioned that the Embraers are quite the money sinks at the moment. However, the delays and cancellations really
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Delta Posts $300 Million Loss For January 2006 posted Fri Mar 3 2006 04:16:02 by Nycfly75
UAL Corp Posts US$459M Loss For Q1 posted Thu Apr 29 2004 20:57:03 by Singapore_Air
JetBlue Posts 7.7 Percent Operating Margin For Q2 posted Tue Jul 25 2006 13:58:58 by SKYYBLUE
CO Reports $66 Million Loss For 1Q posted Thu Apr 20 2006 13:03:57 by Cory6188
ATA Posts $100.8 Million Loss In '04..(fuel Costs) posted Sat Feb 19 2005 16:57:51 by Jacobin777
UAL Post 87 Million Loss For November posted Tue Dec 21 2004 21:04:28 by Psa53
EasyJet Posts £46.9 Million Loss posted Wed May 7 2003 12:24:50 by Singapore_Air
Northwest Posts $46 Million Loss posted Thu Oct 17 2002 18:52:51 by Keesje
Hawaiin Posts $18 Million Loss posted Thu May 16 2002 00:51:56 by Penguinflies
MAS Post 108.9M USD Loss For Q1 posted Thu Aug 30 2001 11:04:13 by OdiE