Vulindlela744 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 517 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4406 times:
Airtran just reported a first quarter profit of almost 29 million. A record earning for first quarter. Way to go Airtran. Hopefully we are "back on track"!!!!
Legacytravel From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1067 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4412 times:
Vulindlela744 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 517 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4388 times:
Go to airtran.com then click on investor relations at the bottom of page to listen to webcast. It is live right now.
Legacytravel From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1067 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4350 times:
Quoting Vulindlela744 (Reply 2): Go to airtran.com then click on investor relations at the bottom of page to listen to webcast. It is live right now.
RL757PVD From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4537 posts, RR: 13 Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4330 times:
I'd have to argue that FL is probably one of the best managed airlines in the business right now. They have a consistent product, good value, and can deliver the financial results of a viable business.
... this coming from a loyal Delta flier!
Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
LoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3643 posts, RR: 38 Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4310 times:
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4217 times:
Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 4): I'd have to argue that FL is probably one of the best managed airlines in the business right now. They have a consistent product, good value, and can deliver the financial results of a viable business.
And, despite making a tidy sum this quarter, they're trying something new (less than daily flights to smaller cities). Perhaps this means that, after 4 attempts, they've given up on the whole midwest hub thing.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
JA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 513 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4193 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 6): Perhaps this means that, after 4 attempts, they've given up on the whole midwest hub thing.
It means they are chasing the only yield left for Florida...small markets. I am sure that D1's expansion is causing more problems as they have no CASM advantage over any of their peers and they are still making money. Perhaps FL wants to get in on the action. If they had asked me, I would have told them to stay away from G4 and it would have been a slam dunk.
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 10, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3961 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 9): There's a difference between a bunch of seasonal p2p flying and a real effort to make something work year-round (a la IND and MDW).
They did announce that some of the MKE routes are going year round. Bottomline is that FL relies heavily on leisure traffic which tends to plunge during the fall and winter (except for the holidays and Florida). Therefore, building up a hub like MKE is going to take time and some routes will be seasonal for a long time.
I'll be the first to admit that I don't know if FL can be successful at MKE, but bleeding red-ink flying MKE-STL in January isn't going to help much.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 12, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3924 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 10): I'll be the first to admit that I don't know if FL can be successful at MKE, but bleeding red-ink flying MKE-STL in January isn't going to help much.
...which is precisely their problem. They won't trade the short-term losses for longer-term gains of not taking a bath on the yields of their summer routes (and AA will get better yields than them on this route, just as DL gets better yields on almost every competitive route ex-ATL). I've said numerous times that this strategy is great for shareholders in the short term, but it may not be in the long term.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3904 times:
It is good to see any airline making money but keep in mind that domestic has done fairly well for all of the airlines due to the capacity that has been reduced, including the 7% that FL pulled. It is the int'l networks that have been so difficult for the network carriers; FL has benefited by being largely domestic.
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 14, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3887 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 12): They won't trade the short-term losses for longer-term gains of not taking a bath on the yields of their summer routes (and AA will get better yields than them on this route, just as DL gets better yields on almost every competitive route ex-ATL).
But what are the long-term gains? What does AA have to show for flying many of these routes year-round....perpetual losses? Hubs at STL and ORD that are dead or dying?
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 12): I've said numerous times that this strategy is great for shareholders in the short term, but it may not be in the long term.
But what intelligent shareholder holds onto to airline stocks in the long-term anyway? I'll admit to dabbling in airline stocks short-term, but I would NEVER just sit on airline stocks for the long-haul.
And I might note, that FL produces a stage-length adjusted RASM that is only slightly lower than WN. That's not bad considering WN is a much more entrenched carrier that flies tons of short-haul business routes while FL flies a lot of Florida flights and has its one main hub up against the largest (and lowest cost) legacy in America.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 15, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3874 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 14): But what are the long-term gains?
If they got yields commensurate with what their competitors get with their cost structure, they'd consistently be profitable.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 16, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3864 times:
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 13): It is the int'l networks that have been so difficult for the network carriers; FL has benefited by being largely domestic.
What you say is absolutely true, but keep in mind that FL was just as domestic a few years ago when domestic was in the toilet and everyone wanted international.
Not to mention that part of the international downturn the legacies brought upon themselves. There was too much capacity being added...particularly in the transatlantic market.
LipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11201 posts, RR: 61 Reply 18, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3810 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 13): It is good to see any airline making money but keep in mind that domestic has done fairly well for all of the airlines due to the capacity that has been reduced, including the 7% that FL pulled. It is the int'l networks that have been so difficult for the network carriers; FL has benefited by being largely domestic.
I would say that one interesting point is that FL is not with a position on hedge derivatives, so they take full advantage of the better fuel prices on Q1. They in fact posted a gain of less than US$ 1 million.
Of course, helps a lot that the airline has reduced more capacity than actually the demand has fallen.
I wouldn't say the international market is a problem, but the real problem is that on the competitive environment we see today, the big airlines pay the price of the hub structure (they have to alocate costs for both international and domestic networks) while the ones that deals only with domestic, or international point-to-point or small countries, will do better (if they do not venture on fuel hedge)
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 19, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3786 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 15): If they got yields commensurate with what their competitors get with their cost structure, they'd consistently be profitable.
IIRC, FL has been profitable every year this decade except for last year. I think that's pretty consistent particularly for the airline industry.
WorldTraveler From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3766 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 14): But what are the long-term gains? What does AA have to show for flying many of these routes year-round....perpetual losses? Hubs at STL and ORD that are dead or dying?
AA's problem is not revenues but costs. However, many of the network carriers don't have the flexibility in scheduling they should.
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 16): What you say is absolutely true, but keep in mind that FL was just as domestic a few years ago when domestic was in the toilet and everyone wanted international.
Absolutely true.. the reason domestic is doing well is because the domestic market is disciplined for the first time since 1978 when the market was deregulated. Thinking about where to move planes might change in the next downturn.
Quoting Travatl (Reply 17): Isn't WN largely domestic and yet posted a record 1Q loss?
WN has lost much of its original cost advantage relative to network carriers and also was very slow in going into big markets like NYC and BOS that FL has been in for some time. It's no surprise that WN is going into market after seeing other LFCs succeed there.
Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 18): I would say that one interesting point is that FL is not with a position on hedge derivatives,
FL didn't bet on fuel the way the network carriers did but they also were forced to get costs down quickly which allowed them to maintain a strong cost advantage.
Quoting LipeGIG (Reply 18): the big airlines pay the price of the hub structure (they have to alocate costs for both international and domestic networks)
FL is very much of a hub and spoke airline; the largest amount of their revenues are from ATL which is run very much like DL's ATL hub in terms of connectivity and DOT stats show FL gets a substantial part of their revenue from hubbing.
Int'l hubbing makes far more economic sense than domestic hubbing. Fares are higher; competition is less. Whether FL or DL hubs wasn't a factor in their 1Q performance; it had to do with basic costs, the competitiveness of the int'l market, and bad fuel hedges. On a domestic comparision basis, the network airlines would have made money.
Cubsrule From United States of America, joined May 2004, 21245 posts, RR: 19 Reply 21, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3715 times:
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 19): IIRC, FL has been profitable every year this decade except for last year. I think that's pretty consistent particularly for the airline industry.
Right. Again, the question isn't whether they do well (they do). It's whether they could do better, and you haven't yet argued that they can't.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
LipeGIG From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11201 posts, RR: 61 Reply 22, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3631 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting WorldTraveler (Reply 20): FL is very much of a hub and spoke airline; the largest amount of their revenues are from ATL which is run very much like DL's ATL hub in terms of connectivity and DOT stats show FL gets a substantial part of their revenue from hubbing.
Yes, but it's not international plus domestic. It's domestic only. My point, if i was not clear, was about when you have to deal with domestic + international. It's like DL trying to manage ATL for international flights, for sure they have strong market, but when you calculate the actual return of the connections, your international flight could not be as good as it seems.
For sure if VS offer JFK-LHR, they got all passengers O&D while BA, AA, DL and others will always face the cost of connections.
New York + Rio de Janeiro = One of the best combinations !
JA From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 513 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3628 times:
Quoting Kcrwflyer (Reply 11): That said, I'm thrilled they didn't ask you. It would have canned the whole plan. You can only be so far from G4 out of Orlando these days.
LOL. You still would have gotten them anyway.
G4 is a specialist. It is why they are making cartoonish profit. The airline industry is very capital intensive and a 31% operating margin as the economy crumbles is very other worldly. FL is doing fairly well, but I think they'll get an education from G4.
FlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6049 posts, RR: 25 Reply 24, posted (4 years 1 month 3 days ago) and read 3498 times:
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 21): It's whether they could do better, and you haven't yet argued that they can't.
True, but you haven't shown any evidence that running these routes year round will produce better results either. In fact, as you mentioned FL is at a decent revenue disadvantage to DL even though most routes out of ATL run year round and have been run for years. So, even though FL is year round at ATL, it still doesn't produce a big revenue premium for them.
Of course, I don't expect FL to have revenue numbers like DL at ATL, but apparently you do.
25 Cubsrule: No, I don't. They SHOULD be at a revenue disadvantage for all passengers somewhere like ATL because DL can (and does) charge astronomical fares to ti
26 FlyPNS1: But what are all these p2p routes? MKE is still a hub (albeit a smaller one) for YX and they can still offer higher yield connections FL can't. Looki
28 FlyPNS1: But what you leave out is that for most of those routes (except LGA), last year was the first year FL ever flew them nonstop. In fact, some of those
29 Cubsrule: There's an important difference between a hub like ATL and a hub like MKE. Both FL and DL should get better yields on ATL-LGA than either YX or FL on
30 FlyPNS1: But if you come to this conclusion, then EVERY LCC has a revenue problem. Adjusting for stage length, FL's RASM numbers run only about 10% below WN.
31 Cubsrule: Price is a (the?) primary reason that people fly all carriers-- LCCs and not. Research and experience both consistently show this. Are you suggesting
32 MSPNWA: Good job, AirTran! I was impressed with their product last December when I flew them for the first time. Nice to see that they're doing well! I know I
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 517 posts, 
And, despite making a tidy sum this quarter, they're trying something new (less than daily flights to smaller cities). Perhaps this means that, after 4 attempts, they've given up on the whole midwest hub thing.
From Brazil, joined May 2005, 11201 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
