Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Skybus Closes Additional Financing  
User currently offlineItsnotfinals From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3821 times:

http://columbus.bizjournals.com/colu...07/11/12/daily18.html?surround=lfn


"Skybus Airlines Inc. has closed a financing agreement for 13 airliners set for delivery to the Columbus carrier in 2009 and 2010.

The discount airline said Wednesday it has finalized an agreement with Singapore-based BOC Aviation, an aircraft leasing business and subsidiary of the Bank of China, to finance the Airbus A319 planes that carry a list price of more than $750 million combined.

Privately held Skybus earlier in the year struck a similar agreement with BOC to finance four airliners that are scheduled to join the company's seven-plane fleet by year-end.

Skybus spokesman Bob Tenenbaum wouldn't disclose the terms of either deal, but said the latest accord covers financing for all aircraft set to arrive through spring 2010.

The airliners set to join Skybus' fleet in the next three years are a small piece of the carrier's plans heading into the next decade. The company intends to add 67 planes over the next five years. "

44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12150 posts, RR: 49
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3747 times:



Quoting Itsnotfinals (Thread starter):
The airliners set to join Skybus' fleet in the next three years are a small piece of the carrier's plans heading into the next decade. The company intends to add 67 planes over the next five years. "

The second Braniff was receiving planes as it was shutting down flights, intentions and reality are usually two different things.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineB757capt From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1421 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3731 times:



Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 1):
The second Braniff was receiving planes as it was shutting down flights, intentions and reality are usually two different things.

It all depends how you look at it. There was a thread about 2 years ago when WN was sending planes from BFI directly to the desert for short term storage. In the thread people went nuts talking about WN and problems......

I have no vested interest in SkyBus, all im saying is lets not write them off completely.



The views written by this user are in no manner the views of my employer and should not be thought as such.
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12150 posts, RR: 49
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3734 times:



Quoting B757capt (Reply 2):
It all depends how you look at it. There was a thread about 2 years ago when WN was sending planes from BFI directly to the desert for short term storage. In the thread people went nuts talking about WN and problems......

I have no vested interest in SkyBus, all im saying is lets not write them off completely.

I agree with you, though trying to give both sides of the story is all.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33289 posts, RR: 71
Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3687 times:

I'm glad they secured financing for planes they will likely never take delivery of. Good for them.


a.
User currently offlineItsnotfinals From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3619 times:

According to the article SX will have 24 aircraft by spring of 2010, that is very measured growth compared to B6's ramp up, and SX has the same amount of start up capitol (Adjusted for inflation) that B6 did.

User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12150 posts, RR: 49
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3456 times:



Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 5):
According to the article SX will have 24 aircraft by spring of 2010, that is very measured growth compared to B6's ramp up, and SX has the same amount of start up capitol (Adjusted for inflation) that B6 did.

That "might" be true. Though oil was not as high priced as it is now, that is fact. Also B6 did not drop routes so early in its first months like SX has already done.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineItsnotfinals From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3445 times:



Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 6):
Also B6 did not drop routes so early

Like ATL ?


Adjusting to business drivers is the right thing to do, whether it's UA adding PS, B6 pulling out of BNA and CMH, or WN adding several Saturday only flights and scaling back many Trans Cons.

Change in and of itself is good in business.


User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12150 posts, RR: 49
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3417 times:



Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 7):
Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 6):
Also B6 did not drop routes so early

Like ATL ?

Yeah ATL come into the route network in 2003 a whole 4 years after they took to the skies! Next!



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineItsnotfinals From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3402 times:



Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 8):
years after they took to the skies! Next!

but they weren't even in the city for 7 months. the time in business really has no bearing.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_07/b3870109.htm

"Neeleman admits that it was his miscalculation that led to JetBlue's ill-fated foray into Atlanta. Delta's fares to Los Angeles were so high that about half of the passengers chose to suffer layovers to get a reasonably priced ticket. And Neeleman figured that low-cost rival AirTran Airways (AAI ), which also has a hub in Atlanta, wouldn't have a plane capable of making the long trip for at least a year.

He figured wrong. AirTran quickly leased planes and crews to fly the route. Then Delta increased the number of flights by 50% and slashed fares. When Neeleman couldn't make enough money on the route, he pulled out after seven months. Some rivals and analysts read an ominous message into the airline's re- treat. "It seems pretty evident that JetBlue's growth prospects have dimmed considerably," says one competitor. "

Looking back at that quote from February of 2004 is kind of funny since B6 has gone on to grow quite a bit.


User currently offlineDTWAGENT From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1283 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3390 times:

Does Skybus have a permanent schedule yet? They keep adding and droping cities like crazy.

Chuck


User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12150 posts, RR: 49
Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3389 times:



Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 9):
but they weren't even in the city for 7 months. the time in business really has no bearing.

Yes it does as they obviously put some thought in its routes as the early ones are still being operated and none of them were dropped in the first year of flying, unlike another new carrier that I can think of.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineItsnotfinals From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 3382 times:



Quoting DTWAGENT (Reply 10):
They keep adding and droping cities like crazy

Dropping 2 cities in their history is just crazy isn't it?

They are adding cities "like crazy" becuase they are doing this thing called "growing".


User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12150 posts, RR: 49
Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3375 times:



Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 12):
Quoting DTWAGENT (Reply 10):
They keep adding and droping cities like crazy

Dropping 2 cities in their history is just crazy isn't it?

It makes you stop and ask yourself how much thought went into these cities and what they are smoking at the corporate office of SX.

Since we were all told just how "profitable" these cities were.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineItsnotfinals From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3367 times:



Quoting Luv2fly (Reply 13):
It makes you stop and ask yourself how much thought went into these cities and what they are smoking at the corporate office of SX

there aren't any posts saying any city was profitable, that is one of those Anet rumors that certain people love to perpetuate.

Maybe because Oil jumped 20 dollars a barrel they decided to adjust some things?


User currently offlineScottB From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 6828 posts, RR: 32
Reply 15, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3303 times:



Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 9):
Looking back at that quote from February of 2004 is kind of funny since B6 has gone on to grow quite a bit.

The airline has grown but its margins and profits sure haven't. They went from $103 million in net profit in 2003 to $46 million in 2004 -- then a net loss of $20 million in 2005 and another net loss of $1 million in 2006. Operating margins went from 17% in 2003 to 9% in 2004 to 3% in 2005 and 5% in 2006. Would you care to comment on their share price performance?

Quoting B757capt (Reply 2):
There was a thread about 2 years ago when WN was sending planes from BFI directly to the desert for short term storage.

The new 737-700's were going from BFI to the desert back in late 2001 and early 2002 -- because they couldn't exactly put the brakes on the deliveries from Boeing overnight and the state of the industry was in flux in the wake of 9/11. It was a response to a more-or-less unprecedented shock to the industry.

Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 14):
there aren't any posts saying any city was profitable

No, but there were posts claiming that Skybus was doing "very well at CMH."

Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 12):
Dropping 2 cities in their history is just crazy isn't it?

In a history of six months, that's quite a few. In a history of about 93 months, B6 has dropped about five. In a history of about 430 months, WN has dropped five airports (though only three cities, two of which were subsequently re-added).


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21590 posts, RR: 59
Reply 16, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3242 times:

It's low risk to finance A319/A320s for any airline. If something goes wrong, it's easy to re-place them elsewhere. Just as VX. They placed them with SX, which now they can't get back!  Smile


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineItsnotfinals From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3125 times:



Quoting ScottB (Reply 15):
No, but there were posts claiming that Skybus was doing "very well at CMH."

All the indcators would say they are doing wel at CMH.

All that matters in this stage of a start up is managing burn rate to plan. It's pretty obvious that is happening.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 16):
Just as VX. They placed them with SX, which now they can't get back!

Actually the leasing company leased them to SX, VX does not own them.

Quoting ScottB (Reply 15):
The airline has grown but its margins and profits sure haven't.

thanks to their massive growth, and introduction of another fleet type which SX doens't seem to be doing.


User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12150 posts, RR: 49
Reply 18, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3110 times:



Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 17):
thanks to their massive growth, and introduction of another fleet type which SX doens't seem to be doing.

Massive growth yet did not cut routes in its first year of service like another start up I know. Also the introduction allowed them to grow smaller stations, and serve routes more than once a day.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineCitrusCritter From United States of America, joined May 2007, 1131 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3098 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 4):
I'm glad they secured financing for planes they will likely never take delivery of. Good for them.

So if SX is still around in two years, or even a year given your predictions in other threads, can we expect you to admit you were wrong? I have no interest in SX succeeding or failing, but it sure seems like some of you will have an aneurysm if they survive long-term.


User currently offlineLexy From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 2515 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3084 times:



Quoting Itsnotfinals (Reply 12):
They are adding cities "like crazy" becuase they are doing this thing called "growing".

They fly to cities?? LOL!!

Just kidding. But I stand by what I have said all along, they have to start flying to larger markets at some point.



Nashville, Tennessee KBNA
User currently offlineLuv2fly From United States of America, joined May 2003, 12150 posts, RR: 49
Reply 21, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3084 times:



Quoting CitrusCritter (Reply 19):
So if SX is still around in two years, or even a year given your predictions in other threads, can we expect you to admit you were wrong? I have no interest in SX succeeding or failing, but it sure seems like some of you will have an aneurysm if they survive long-term.

Sure I'll admit it, if it ends up being in the sky two years from now.



You can cut the irony with a knife
User currently offlineB757capt From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 1421 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3084 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 4):
I'm glad they secured financing for planes they will likely never take delivery of. Good for them.

HAHAHA

Quoting ScottB (Reply 15):

The new 737-700's were going from BFI to the desert back in late 2001 and early 2002 -- because they couldn't exactly put the brakes on the deliveries from Boeing overnight and the state of the industry was in flux in the wake of 9/11. It was a response to a more-or-less unprecedented shock to the industry.

Yah, I understand that, I was very involved in that process at the time. All i was stating is the wonderful speculation that occurred in the threads after 9/11 about other airlines that were being written off....



The views written by this user are in no manner the views of my employer and should not be thought as such.
User currently offlineMAH4546 From Sweden, joined Jan 2001, 33289 posts, RR: 71
Reply 23, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3068 times:

Quoting CitrusCritter (Reply 19):

So if SX is still around in two years, or even a year given your predictions in other threads, can we expect you to admit you were wrong? I have no interest in SX succeeding or failing, but it sure seems like some of you will have an aneurysm if they survive long-term.

Of course I'll admit I'm wrong. I have nothing against doing so. I'm already wrong because I never though Skybus would ever launch their first flights, and they did. have nothing against Skybus, but I do think they will fail, as I think ExpressJet will as well. There are too many problems with their business plans, and they are already showing signs of weak starts.

[Edited 2007-11-14 19:48:15]


a.
User currently offlineItsnotfinals From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3004 times:



Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 23):
There are too many problems with their business plans,

You haven't ever seen SX's business plan so it's hard to make that kind of statement. Time will tell that is for sure.


25 MAH4546 : Unlike you apparently, I can read between the lines. Quit with that argument already. It's getting old. Using that logic, you can't make a statement
26 Post contains links Itsnotfinals : Quoting MAH4546 (Reply 25): Quit with that argument already That argument is logical. Considering you are supposedly a lawyer or a JD degree (but perh
27 EA CO AS : So? No one here was privy to Independence Air's business plans - just their publicly stated financials - and yet that was more than enough for everyo
28 Panaman : Yes it does but as anyone seen red ink on SX yet???????? Well maybe MAH4546 since he seems to be sooooo important
29 Luv2fly : I have to agree as Itsnotfinals you always stick up for them for some reason or another, yet you are no more in the know then the rest of us! So with
30 Itsnotfinals : I post links to real facts, MAH just uses his opinion as fact. That is a big difference.
31 Luv2fly : The links even though useful still do not prove anything more! A newspaper article touting 80% load factor still does not tell us what amount of reve
32 Post contains links Itsnotfinals : if you posts the facts then you don't have to worry about opinion. the facts are the facts, here are a few more tidbits. USA Today had a nice article
33 Luv2fly : Again it tells us nothing, the ironic thing is your attacking MAH for the same thing your doing, having a opinion. 80% of there seats sold, GREAT, at
34 Panaman : Thats the great thing. Its none of our business how much SX is making. (Unless we are one of the investors)
35 Itsnotfinals : how is posting facts from official sources an opinion?
36 MUWarriors : The only facts in that article are an 80% load factor, less than $100 per seat and how much things cost. The "people are actually buying stuff" is an
37 Post contains images Flyinryan99 : I have no feelings towards Skybus either (unless they were to fly to TOL ), but I have to disagree with you on this one. The ones they dropped were l
38 Luv2fly : Devils advocate, long haul flights you can charge more than short haul....
39 Itsnotfinals : Ironically this whole thread is about a lender financing 4, then an additional 13 A319's they must feel just fine investing. not in the SX model, or
40 Luv2fly : Last I looked WN wanted more to fly me CLE to PHX then they want to fly me CLE to MDW. B6 wants more to fly me JFK to LGB then to fly me BUF to JFK.
41 MUWarriors : Financing is different than investing. The lender in this case will get something regardless of whether or not SX ever actually pays for them because
42 Flyinryan99 : This is totally my opinion, but I think they A: wanted to serve destinations Columbus didn't have service to nonstop which they knew they could fill
43 Post contains links Itsnotfinals : Quoting MUWarriors (Reply 41): Financing is different than investing. The lender in this case will get something regardless of whether or not SX ever
44 Gregarious119 : This is not necessarily fact, but I do believe they were given incentives to start west coast service from CMH. The cost of fuel/lack of revenue on t
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...
Skybus "divert" To BOS? posted Fri Oct 19 2007 11:00:14 by BA747400
Skybus Vs. Other Carriers Ontime posted Wed Oct 17 2007 14:36:13 by UnknownUser
Will Skybus Adjust It's Model Before Failure? posted Tue Oct 16 2007 19:51:56 by BillReid
SkyWest To Acquire 22 Additional RJ's posted Fri Oct 12 2007 16:29:35 by Phelpsie87
Skybus.com Showing Multiple Spring Changes posted Fri Oct 12 2007 08:11:30 by Cmhsrq
US Wants 5 Additional A332, A318 Still On Books posted Wed Oct 10 2007 19:24:21 by Clipper136
DOJ Requests Additional Info On YX/TPG Merger posted Fri Oct 5 2007 06:18:31 by Mainland
The Next Round Of Skybus Destinations? posted Thu Oct 4 2007 18:04:05 by FWAERJ
Skybus Effect Gains Momentum posted Thu Oct 4 2007 07:33:52 by Itsnotfinals
GSO Pitch For Focus City For SkyBus posted Wed Sep 26 2007 13:30:26 by Panaman