qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2546
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:44 pm

Virgin Australia will announce their 2016/2017 results on the 10th August with it predicted a another loss to be announced

Virgin Australia is all but certain to report yet another underlying loss for the year ended 30 June, as it continues to struggle against its high-flying competitor Qantas.

That is little comfort to the airline’s long-suffering shareholders, which have seen profits fall – or turn to losses – during the previous three quarters. Thus, it appears a full-year operating loss is all but inevitable.


https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... in-439802/

Other items that could be announced on the day could include

Possibility to convert some 737MAX to 737MAX10

Possible route announcement to China

Virgin Australia aims to add two routes to mainland China to tap into the Chinese backer’s aviation hubs and the record flow of visitors heading Down Under.


Virgin is also looking at adding another route to Asia, previously been suggested that VA could start SYD-HKG and/or BNE-HKG

https://www.ausbt.com.au/virgin-austral ... ing-streak

More information on plans to upgrade meal and drink service on domestic flights, launch expected late August

Virgin Australia is revamping the meal and drink service across its domestic flights as the airline attempts to gain altitude against a resurgent Qantas.
Australian Business Traveller understands that several changes are being considered for both the business class and economy cabins, with the relaunch expected to take place before the end of August.

Virgin Australia is revamping the meal and drink service across its domestic flights as the airline attempts to gain altitude against a resurgent Qantas.
Australian Business Traveller understands that several changes are being considered for both the business class and economy cabins, with the relaunch expected to take place before the end of August.

One of the airline's suggestions during those workshops was that economy class passengers might buy their meals and snacks from trolleys or kiosks at the departure gate.


https://www.ausbt.com.au/virgin-austral ... als-drinks

More on WIFI rollout on domestic fleet and expanding to international fleet

Virgin Australia aims to expand its inflight Internet service to cover the USA and Asia while also building up its domestic fleet of WiFi-equipped jets.
The airline, which is nearing the end of a three-month trial, has just upgraded its second Boeing 737 with Gogo’s 2Ku technology.


https://www.ausbt.com.au/virgin-austral ... oming-soon

More on a new generation business class on 737's as A332's move to international

Virgin Australia will reveal a next generation of its Boeing 737 business class seats before the end of this year as the airline continues to battle Qantas for the hearts and wallets of corporate travellers.
The seats will be dedicated to transcontinental flights running between Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth, but will be fitted to the single-aisle Boeing 737 jets as Virgin shifts its larger Airbus A330s onto Asian routes into Hong Kong and mainland China.


https://www.ausbt.com.au/virgin-austral ... ness-class
Last edited by qf789 on Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: updated title
Forum Moderator
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2546
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia to announce full year results 10th August, another loss expected

Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:24 pm

WIFI to be rolled out on 77Ws by the end of 2018 and A332s by mid 2019

https://www.ausbt.com.au/virgin-austral ... -then-asia
Forum Moderator
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2546
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia to announce full year results 10th August, another loss expected

Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:40 pm

Final results released, as expected another loss

Group Underlying Loss Before Tax of $3.7 million – with a significant improvement in performance in Q4 FY17, up $38.4 million on Q4 FY16
• Group Statutory Loss After Tax of $185.8 million – an improvement of $38.9 million on FY16, impacted by restructuring charges predominantly from the Better Business program
• Positive Free Cash Flow of $34.3 million – an improvement of $126.4 million on FY16
• Closing total cash balance of $1,396.1 million as at 30 June – an improvement of $272.3 million on end of FY16
• Net Debt reduction of $839.0 million – including $260.0 million in accelerated debt repayments
• Financial Leverage improvement of 14.1 per cent on 30 June 2016 to 4.5x at 30 June 2017
• Better Business program implementation ahead of schedule. Savings target increased to $350 million per annum in annualised net free cash flow savings by the end of FY19
• Outlook for FY18: Given underlying performance improvement in Q4 and based on current market conditions, the positive momentum seen in Q4 FY17 is expected to continue and underlying performance for Q1 FY18 is expected to improve compared to Q1 FY17. The Group also expects the Better Business program to continue to track ahead of schedule in implementation and expects further balance sheet improvements to be delivered.


http://newsroom.virginaustralia.com/rel ... 17-results
Forum Moderator
 
pusserchef
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 9:25 am

Re: Virgin Australia to announce full year results 10th August, another loss expected

Wed Aug 09, 2017 11:42 pm

if this trend continues, how much longer will VA still be flying? The investors will wont action against/from the Board if things do not improve. I personally don't believe that QF is as big of a reason as they say. Are flight to China a great idea? there is an influx of new flights from China based airlines already.
Regards
James Smith

Flown in A300B4, A310, A320, A321, A332, A346, B717, B722, B733, B734, B737, B738, B743, B744, B762, B763, B77W, B788, F27, F70, F100, S360, B212, AS-350B, S-61, C152, C172, A22LS.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7828
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:58 am

The problem is that the board won't fire Borghetti, even when his leadership questioned by former Board member and CEO of NZ Luxon several years ago. I hope this might be a tipping point, and that a struggling EY might divest their 21% shareholding and wake this board up that a more drastic change at the top is required..
Flying to China will result in competing for bargain bucket fares in all classes. MU/QF et all are competing in the 250-500AUD rtn market for a Y 12-13h flight and shorter domestic sector, so I don't see how VA expects to find a niche. I think they are better to focus on a market where there is growth and the benefit of a good exchange to AUD right now. Let's say HNL,SFO or IAH. They did well to restart MEL-LAX, but their fleet development needs to be more proactive. Their competitors all have larger fleets capable of growth, and all have fleets that are flexible.
ie:has the range, payload and operating costs capable of any of their routes. It is high time they ordered a fleet that also can cope with this demand. an A350/789 is that kind of aircraft, heck even if they got more second hand 77Ws at least they would have a fleet capable of low CASM and growth. I bet they rue the day they ordered the 77W with the basic hold door dimensions that restricts uplift of cargo.
Flown to 126 Airports in 47 Countries on 80 Operators. Visited 56 Countries and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
xiaotung
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:58 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 1:29 am

aerorobnz wrote:
The problem is that the board won't fire Borghetti, even when his leadership questioned by former Board member and CEO of NZ Luxon several years ago. I hope this might be a tipping point, and that a struggling EY might divest their 21% shareholding and wake this board up that a more drastic change at the top is required..
Flying to China will result in competing for bargain bucket fares in all classes. MU/QF et all are competing in the 250-500AUD rtn market for a Y 12-13h flight and shorter domestic sector, so I don't see how VA expects to find a niche. I think they are better to focus on a market where there is growth and the benefit of a good exchange to AUD right now. Let's say HNL,SFO or IAH. They did well to restart MEL-LAX, but their fleet development needs to be more proactive. Their competitors all have larger fleets capable of growth, and all have fleets that are flexible.
ie:has the range, payload and operating costs capable of any of their routes. It is high time they ordered a fleet that also can cope with this demand. an A350/789 is that kind of aircraft, heck even if they got more second hand 77Ws at least they would have a fleet capable of low CASM and growth. I bet they rue the day they ordered the 77W with the basic hold door dimensions that restricts uplift of cargo.


I suspect Borghetti was well aware of the low yield he would be facing into China but he simply did not have another option when no one else would inject cash into his airline when he needed it other than HNA. He probably also thought HNA would be happy to lease them some long haul aircraft they didn't have the money to buy and even wear the loss on these China routes.

But when fares like $500 in Economy and $2000 in Business are the norm, you don't need to be a genius to figure out there is no money to be made. When you look at the low end market the HNA Group typically chases and where ever they fly to they typically have the lowest fares, HNA's customer base is not going to help VA.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:24 am

VA is going down a very slippery slope. They need a Reg Ansett-level leader, and better network planning, rather than a mixed bag of codeshares and frames.
Last edited by WPvsMW on Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
QANTAS747-438
Posts: 1701
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2001 7:01 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:29 am

What's a brief explanation as to the main factors why Virgin Australia is not very profitable?
My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
 
WPvsMW
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:44 am

My read: more CASM than RASM ... mismatch of equipment and stages, confusion about how to balance domestic and international.
 
sq256
Posts: 117
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 10:37 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:08 am

Putting on my armchair CEO hat, whilst it's too easy to say VA should pull out of almost all international routes and focus mostly being on a AU/NZ Domestic & Trans-Tasman carrier, I personally do think they have a place on the international stage, if managed carefully (which is no where near the case from both a observer and armchair CEO perspective). Without the financials for specific international routes it can be hard to identify which routes are loss-making and which are making profits (e.g the SYD-LAX partnership with Delta).

However, the mish-mash of routes to/from low yielding Pacific destinations (along with a mish-mash of departure times) is also frustrating for frequent flyers. If I got to play the armchair CEO role of VA, I'd reduce NZ flying to BNE/SYD/MEL-AKL, SYD/BNE-CHC & BNE-WLG (monopoly route). I'd also keep the small AKL scissor hub for RAR/APW flying (whilst withdrawing the infrequent SYD/BNE-APW & SYD-RAR routes in favour of feeding through AKL).

Out of the other short-haul international destinations. DPS & NAN would be the only ones worth keeping, perhaps using the future Perth configured (with lie-flats in J) 737s on the SYD/BNE-DPS routes.

All other short-haul international flying not mentioned would be withdrawn. (Unless if there are Pacific Island contracts on certain routes I'm not aware of).

Long-haul would be a tricky one with the Delta & HNA group partnerships to LAX and HKG respectively. They'd need to replace both the A330 and 77Ws with one common type (either a A350 or a 787 type). The current widebody fleet of 11 aircraft (5x 77W & 6x A332) could be replaced with 5x 789 and 6x 788 to name an example.
 
waoz1
Posts: 100
Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 7:31 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 6:28 am

I think there is not a coherent message coming out

ditch international routes for others, cancel others before they start. Then try to fly to China and the expenses of domestic traffic (i.e. swapping A330s for 737s).

Seems to be a merry go round waiting for people to get off. I wonder how many more losses they can take in a row before it become dire.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18837
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:17 am

sq256 wrote:
Putting on my armchair CEO hat, whilst it's too easy to say VA should pull out of almost all international routes and focus mostly being on a AU/NZ Domestic & Trans-Tasman carrier, I personally do think they have a place on the international stage, if managed carefully (which is no where near the case from both a observer and armchair CEO perspective). Without the financials for specific international routes it can be hard to identify which routes are loss-making and which are making profits (e.g the SYD-LAX partnership with Delta).


For the longest time we were e told that "international" was not profitable. Given that "international" consisted basically of DPS (and a bit of HKT) - which went to Tiger - and AUH (wet lease for Etihad) and LAX it's tough to think that LAX was profitable - break-even perhaps, and so perhaps worth it to Delta for their frequent fliers.

sq256 wrote:
I'd also keep the small AKL scissor hub for RAR/APW flying (whilst withdrawing the infrequent SYD/BNE-APW & SYD-RAR routes in favour of feeding through AKL).


Things are changing in the Pacific. Samoa has given Virgin the push in order to bring back its own state-owned airline - Polynesian - and while Virgin plans to continue APW flying, there's no indication yet (that I've heard) how the Samoans will react and if they agree it will add a bunch of capacity on the APW routes. This capacity may be sustainable in winter - high season - but I doubt it will be in summer.

sq256 wrote:
Out of the other short-haul international destinations. DPS & NAN would be the only ones worth keeping, perhaps using the future Perth configured (with lie-flats in J) 737s on the SYD/BNE-DPS routes.


If they had to transfer DPS to low cost Tiger, I'd be surprised if they would make money with lie-flats on main line.

sq256 wrote:
All other short-haul international flying not mentioned would be withdrawn. (Unless if there are Pacific Island contracts on certain routes I'm not aware of).


I'm not sure what other short haul international you mean, unless you're thinking of New Zealand.

As to long haul international, I don't think anyone should imagine that Virgin is flying to China as its own airline. As I see it, it will be effectively a wet-lease carrier for its Chinese owners, with Singapore picking up some slack and Etihad - well, who knows what Etihad is up to other than losing a couple of billion bucks.

John Borghesi should feel right at home in the Etihad boardroom. LOL.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
User avatar
Rajahdhani
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2016 3:13 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:18 am

aerorobnz wrote:
The problem is that the board won't fire Borghetti, even when his leadership questioned by former Board member and CEO of NZ Luxon several years ago. I hope this might be a tipping point, and that a struggling EY might divest their 21% shareholding and wake this board up that a more drastic change at the top is required.


Surely, EY might be struggling amid all that is happening in the World right now - but it does have key advantages (as a partner, to VA).

Consider what EK and QF achieved via their partnership:

https://www.qantas.com/travel/airlines/qantas-emirates/global/en
"Qantas and Emirates fly 13 times a day from Australia to Dubai, and provide 'one-stop' access to destinations across Europe, the Middle East and North Africa.
We offer the largest shared A380 network, exceptional lounges here and abroad and award-winning service - a truly aligned travel experience.


Thus, now under the reformative pressures of consolidation, could not EY and VA ease each other's ailements by even better aligning now, and benefiting from further access to a World Network?
They do this now, however - certainly not nearly enough to see the proper benefit of even a remotely as successful relationship as EK/QF. As is, EY could find slack in the fleet, and perhaps use feed to fatten 'one-stop' connections to Australia via their own planes/better access to VA's customer base/banks/operations. Later, if/when possible - let VA up their contribution. That said, EY should/could be stronger to Australia, and this would be one fantastic way of accomplishing that.

aerorobnz wrote:
Flying to China will result in competing for bargain bucket fares in all classes. MU/QF et all are competing in the 250-500AUD rtn market for a Y 12-13h flight and shorter domestic sector, so I don't see how VA expects to find a niche. I think they are better to focus on a market where there is growth and the benefit of a good exchange to AUD right now. Let's say HNL,SFO or IAH. They did well to restart MEL-LAX, but their fleet development needs to be more proactive.


Interestingly, Argentina is looking up - and their local aviation market is looking to boom/bloom soon. VA, with a decent code-sharing agreement with AR (or, perhaps SkyTeam Membership) - could tap into SYD-EZE, with the competitive advantage on the SYD side. AR's help, and knowledge on the market - could help some.

aerorobnz wrote:
Their competitors all have larger fleets capable of growth, and all have fleets that are flexible. ie:has the range, payload and operating costs capable of any of their routes. It is high time they ordered a fleet that also can cope with this demand. an A350/789 is that kind of aircraft, heck even if they got more second hand 77Ws at least they would have a fleet capable of low CASM and growth. I bet they rue the day they ordered the 77W with the basic hold door dimensions that restricts uplift of cargo.


But that presents a bit of a 'Catch 22', no? I mean, if the airline cannot make money to begin with (and with all of today's advantages presented) - then why should they 'reward' themselves with further debt and burden - that they were ill equipped to handle the first time around, and are, still - demonstratively. I mean, sure - the 77Ws (as they ordered them) was problematic in that perhaps it did not properly match what/where best the passengers/demands were - however, the 77W is a mightily capable aircraft. After having had them incorporated into the fleet, for quite some time - two truths are prescient;
1). They could/should/do/are change(ing). This is beneficial because it allows the company to 'right size' the approach. That said, this leadership seems incapable of properly managing that, much less their own finances, and vice versa. That said, too many, and/or too long a 'transitional period' and the consumers do flee the fickleness.
2). There is no CTRL+Z for these kinds of decisions. I mean, wanting something new is great - but they have not yet proven to be capable of working with what they have had. Those leases cannot be overly so high, by now - as there are many other 77Ws on the market today (and a glut of them in the upcoming years as EK rids theirs).

So, going back to it - I like your 'second hand 77Ws; at least they would have a fleet capable of low CASM and growth' - idea for those same reasons. That said, they need to work on getting back to sustainability, and now. They don't have the money (or perhaps the fools) to continue burning cash. Before they get more, they should earn what they have, first.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18837
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:31 am

mariner wrote:
mariner wrote:
sq256 wrote:
Putting on my armchair CEO hat, whilst it's too easy to say VA should pull out of almost all international routes and focus mostly being on a AU/NZ Domestic & Trans-Tasman carrier, I personally do think they have a place on the international stage, if managed carefully (which is no where near the case from both a observer and armchair CEO perspective). Without the financials for specific international routes it can be hard to identify which routes are loss-making and which are making profits (e.g the SYD-LAX partnership with Delta).


That post - #14 - is attributed to me, but I didn't write it.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
zkncj
Posts: 2359
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:50 am

I would go as far as saying they should also end than Trans-Tasman service, and just keep coding sharing with VA for the Tasman feed.

With NZ using additional 787/777 services on the Tasman/Pacific ex-AKL it could free up some A320s to release VA from the remaining Tasman Network.

Surely after losing money for so many years in an row, needs some legal action just think how much tax revnue that must be missed by VA writing off its loses.
 
GW54
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 3:05 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:18 am

I'm hearing very strong rumours Air NZ will be using there own metal on the WLG-BNE-WLG sectors. Currently a code share using VA 738'S however the VA inflight experience falls short of what you get on Air NZ's A320's
 
dubaiamman243
Posts: 994
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:36 am

This is not good for Qantas, as it will open the door for a new competitor to enter the market.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:43 am

dubaiamman243 wrote:
This is not good for Qantas, as it will open the door for a new competitor to enter the market.


What will?
 
dubaiamman243
Posts: 994
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2015 8:00 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:53 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
dubaiamman243 wrote:
This is not good for Qantas, as it will open the door for a new competitor to enter the market.


What will?

VA poor financials
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:57 am

dubaiamman243 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
dubaiamman243 wrote:
This is not good for Qantas, as it will open the door for a new competitor to enter the market.


What will?

VA poor financials


2 full service airlines have often struggled to make money in Australia let alone 3. Or are you saying VA will cease to exist?
 
Flyingsottsman
Posts: 640
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:32 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:14 am

I guess need to know what they are, are they a legacy carrier or are they a LCC, that has to be the biggest problem. Its like they are a budget carrier within Australia and a legacy on international routes, I didn't think an airline can be both. To me they are very confusing because on one hand how many airlines own Virgin Australia and on the other hand Virgin Australia own how much of Tiger? And they merged SkyWest into their operations its hard to know who is running who.
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2546
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:18 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
dubaiamman243 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:

What will?

VA poor financials


2 full service airlines have often struggled to make money in Australia let alone 3. Or are you saying VA will cease to exist?


Who says it has to be a full service airline. At the CAPA summit in Sydney last week there was discussions of a true ULCC entering the market or an operation backed by Chinese interests

http://www.airlineratings.com/news/1378 ... ence-told-
Forum Moderator
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2546
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:52 am

QANTAS747-438 wrote:
What's a brief explanation as to the main factors why Virgin Australia is not very profitable?


While there are many factors in play, I consider this one as one of the main ones. When Borghetti joined Virgin they went from LCC Virgin Blue to a full service carrier in Virgin Australia or what they call themselves a new world carrier. During the past few years they have been more focused on the corporate business and have abandoned their base being what was the loyal customers that flew Virgin Blue. Some of those customers have now moved over to Jetstar. In typical Virgin style they are very good at talking themselves up but fail to deliver. Examples of this include promoting that you get food and drink on your flight but that could mean a biscuit and a cup of coffee/tea or water, anything else you have to pay for where as on the same sector with Qantas you get a full meal service. Another is example is both carries are currently putting WIFI on their aircraft, Virgin is saying one thing by saying that they will match Qantas by offering free WIFI on domestic flights however the truth is they will offer a 2 tier system free and for a fee with the free being a basic offering. Virgin has a identity issue, either your a LCC or a full service airline you cant be both. Virgin also flip flop quite a bit. Just 4 weeks ago we were hearing that after the launch of MEL-HKG that both SYD and BNE to HKG would be next, now we are hearing that its 2 routes to China and another to somewhere into Asia.
Forum Moderator
 
sq256
Posts: 117
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 10:37 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:40 pm

zkncj wrote:
I would go as far as saying they should also end than Trans-Tasman service, and just keep coding sharing with VA for the Tasman feed.

With NZ using additional 787/777 services on the Tasman/Pacific ex-AKL it could free up some A320s to release VA from the remaining Tasman Network.

Surely after losing money for so many years in an row, needs some legal action just think how much tax revnue that must be missed by VA writing off its loses.


Most likely they'll would keep SYD/MEL-AKL flights retimed to connect to/from VA/DL's joint-venture MEL/SYD-LAX flights at the minimum, should VA and NZ decide to call it a day on their Alliance.

NZ services would be reduced to East Coast-AKL/CHC & BNE-WLG in that scenario with DL joining VA's other partners on the codeshare list to AKL/CHC.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 2867
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Thu Aug 10, 2017 12:59 pm

VA's strategy has been misguided for sometime, but the steps taken to rectify the issues do not appear to be implemented with any real confidence either.

From a fleet perspective:

- Their 77W fleet really does not suit their needs but there is little chance of making any steps to fix that until their leases expire and it can find favourable terms on some 789 or A359's.
- Focusing on the 738 for both VA and TT is a solid move, but will take time to achieve benefits given the transition plan and costs associated with the change
- Pushiing back the 737MAX as much as it can is wise given the lack of growth and a need to consolidate its operational model first

From a Destinations perspective:

- Needs to better leverage TT into primarily leisure markets. VA's business class isn't needed on some of their routes but it still seems to persist at this point using VA aircraft on those services

From a service perspective:

- Find an consistent onboard service level (i.e. Catering) and stick with it. It just seems far to ad hoc at this stage, which may appear to be agile to VA's management but customers aren't so impressed
 
AirNiugini
Posts: 277
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:41 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:31 am

xiaotung wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
The problem is that the board won't fire Borghetti, even when his leadership questioned by former Board member and CEO of NZ Luxon several years ago. I hope this might be a tipping point, and that a struggling EY might divest their 21% shareholding and wake this board up that a more drastic change at the top is required..
Flying to China will result in competing for bargain bucket fares in all classes. MU/QF et all are competing in the 250-500AUD rtn market for a Y 12-13h flight and shorter domestic sector, so I don't see how VA expects to find a niche. I think they are better to focus on a market where there is growth and the benefit of a good exchange to AUD right now. Let's say HNL,SFO or IAH. They did well to restart MEL-LAX, but their fleet development needs to be more proactive. Their competitors all have larger fleets capable of growth, and all have fleets that are flexible.
ie:has the range, payload and operating costs capable of any of their routes. It is high time they ordered a fleet that also can cope with this demand. an A350/789 is that kind of aircraft, heck even if they got more second hand 77Ws at least they would have a fleet capable of low CASM and growth. I bet they rue the day they ordered the 77W with the basic hold door dimensions that restricts uplift of cargo.


I suspect Borghetti was well aware of the low yield he would be facing into China but he simply did not have another option when no one else would inject cash into his airline when he needed it other than HNA. He probably also thought HNA would be happy to lease them some long haul aircraft they didn't have the money to buy and even wear the loss on these China routes.

But when fares like $500 in Economy and $2000 in Business are the norm, you don't need to be a genius to figure out there is no money to be made. When you look at the low end market the HNA Group typically chases and where ever they fly to they typically have the lowest fares, HNA's customer base is not going to help VA.


What rubbish - When talking about VA and China, it is important to remember that VA is predominately an airline that serves domestic Australia, Trans Tasman and the South Pacific.The Chinese inbound market are quite mobile when they land, so I think it is important to not only be in the market bringing tourist to Australia, but also to move them around the country/region when they are here.
Its time to fly!
 
zkncj
Posts: 2359
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:48 am

sq256 wrote:

Most likely they'll would keep SYD/MEL-AKL flights retimed to connect to/from VA/DL's joint-venture MEL/SYD-LAX flights at the minimum, should VA and NZ decide to call it a day on their Alliance.

NZ services would be reduced to East Coast-AKL/CHC & BNE-WLG in that scenario with DL joining VA's other partners on the codeshare list to AKL/CHC.


Is VA's market of NZ-US via SYD/MEL really that big? Surely with the $799 return ex-AKL on non-stop services on NZ/UA/AA it has sucked up most of VA traffic for NZ-US. Currently if VA wanted to pick up any of the AKL-US market it would have to be very cheap (low yielding) to make up for the additional 5-6hours over to the direct flights.

If NZ was to drop that VA Alliance they would still have:

AKL-CNS,MCY,BNE,OOL,SYD,MEL,ADL,PER
WLG-SYD,MEL
CHC-SYD,MEL,BNE,OOL
ZQN-SYD,MEL,BNE

The only route that NZ would really lose access to on the Tasman would be DUD-BNE (which they could simply restart).

ex-AKL VA pretty much got all of the flights that NZ didn't want e.g. the 6am departures or late night e.g. the 9pm to BNE.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 7:50 am

AirNiugini wrote:
xiaotung wrote:
aerorobnz wrote:
The problem is that the board won't fire Borghetti, even when his leadership questioned by former Board member and CEO of NZ Luxon several years ago. I hope this might be a tipping point, and that a struggling EY might divest their 21% shareholding and wake this board up that a more drastic change at the top is required..
Flying to China will result in competing for bargain bucket fares in all classes. MU/QF et all are competing in the 250-500AUD rtn market for a Y 12-13h flight and shorter domestic sector, so I don't see how VA expects to find a niche. I think they are better to focus on a market where there is growth and the benefit of a good exchange to AUD right now. Let's say HNL,SFO or IAH. They did well to restart MEL-LAX, but their fleet development needs to be more proactive. Their competitors all have larger fleets capable of growth, and all have fleets that are flexible.
ie:has the range, payload and operating costs capable of any of their routes. It is high time they ordered a fleet that also can cope with this demand. an A350/789 is that kind of aircraft, heck even if they got more second hand 77Ws at least they would have a fleet capable of low CASM and growth. I bet they rue the day they ordered the 77W with the basic hold door dimensions that restricts uplift of cargo.


I suspect Borghetti was well aware of the low yield he would be facing into China but he simply did not have another option when no one else would inject cash into his airline when he needed it other than HNA. He probably also thought HNA would be happy to lease them some long haul aircraft they didn't have the money to buy and even wear the loss on these China routes.

But when fares like $500 in Economy and $2000 in Business are the norm, you don't need to be a genius to figure out there is no money to be made. When you look at the low end market the HNA Group typically chases and where ever they fly to they typically have the lowest fares, HNA's customer base is not going to help VA.


What rubbish - When talking about VA and China, it is important to remember that VA is predominately an airline that serves domestic Australia, Trans Tasman and the South Pacific.The Chinese inbound market are quite mobile when they land, so I think it is important to not only be in the market bringing tourist to Australia, but also to move them around the country/region when they are here.


So why fly there yourself and lose even more when your partner airlines can do it and then VA can fly these pax domestically?
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:00 am

zkncj wrote:
sq256 wrote:

Most likely they'll would keep SYD/MEL-AKL flights retimed to connect to/from VA/DL's joint-venture MEL/SYD-LAX flights at the minimum, should VA and NZ decide to call it a day on their Alliance.

NZ services would be reduced to East Coast-AKL/CHC & BNE-WLG in that scenario with DL joining VA's other partners on the codeshare list to AKL/CHC.


Is VA's market of NZ-US via SYD/MEL really that big? Surely with the $799 return ex-AKL on non-stop services on NZ/UA/AA it has sucked up most of VA traffic for NZ-US. Currently if VA wanted to pick up any of the AKL-US market it would have to be very cheap (low yielding) to make up for the additional 5-6hours over to the direct flights.

If NZ was to drop that VA Alliance they would still have:

AKL-CNS,MCY,BNE,OOL,SYD,MEL,ADL,PER
WLG-SYD,MEL
CHC-SYD,MEL,BNE,OOL
ZQN-SYD,MEL,BNE

The only route that NZ would really lose access to on the Tasman would be DUD-BNE (which they could simply restart).

ex-AKL VA pretty much got all of the flights that NZ didn't want e.g. the 6am departures or late night e.g. the 9pm to BNE.


Yes sure but for VA on the Tasman it comes down to how many rotations per day the aircraft can do, they need to do 2 rotations ideally so they have to do an early am flight from either end which results in a late evening departure.

NZ do overnight aircraft in Australia SYD/MEL/BNE but those flights leave at 1830/1930 and head back at 0830/0900. NZ have added an 1100 SYD departure with VA doing the 1300 flight with an aircraft that does a very early MEL/BNE departure. There will be a 6 weekly 1245 MEL departure on NZ aswell this summer currently 1 weekly. VA have increased the early flight ex MEL and late flight ex AKL aswell to MEL.

I'm not sure NZ would be worried about DUD-BNE but WLG-BNE would be added, whatever happened to ROT-SYD? It went seasonal and was quietly dropped? Or is it still around?
 
zkncj
Posts: 2359
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:08 am

ZK-NBT wrote:

The only route that NZ would really lose access to on the Tasman would be DUD-BNE (which they could simply restart).

ex-AKL VA pretty much got all of the flights that NZ didn't want e.g. the 6am departures or late night e.g. the 9pm to BNE.


Yes sure but for VA on the Tasman it comes down to how many rotations per day the aircraft can do, they need to do 2 rotations ideally so they have to do an early am flight from either end which results in a late evening departure.

NZ do overnight aircraft in Australia SYD/MEL/BNE but those flights leave at 1830/1930 and head back at 0830/0900. NZ have added an 1100 SYD departure with VA doing the 1300 flight with an aircraft that does a very early MEL/BNE departure. There will be a 6 weekly 1245 MEL departure on NZ aswell this summer currently 1 weekly. VA have increased the early flight ex MEL and late flight ex AKL aswell to MEL.
[/quote]

I guess it apart of the benefit NZ has using the 777/787, which lets them do an 9am and a early afternoon bank which still allow the aircarft to do an long-haul flight the same day.

ZK-NBT wrote:
I'm not sure NZ would be worried about DUD-BNE but WLG-BNE would be added, whatever happened to ROT-SYD? It went seasonal and was quietly dropped? Or is it still around?


ROT-SYD was dropped an few years back, it happened very quietly.

BNE-DUD is an funny one - the BNE lounge is always an zoo before that flight is called to board, so many how many are NZ's own status pax vs VA's.
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7828
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:12 am

AirNiugini wrote:

What rubbish - When talking about VA and China, it is important to remember that VA is predominately an airline that serves domestic Australia, Trans Tasman and the South Pacific.The Chinese inbound market are quite mobile when they land, so I think it is important to not only be in the market bringing tourist to Australia, but also to move them around the country/region when they are here.


There is no point operating a route unless you can at least cover costs and this arrangement will be all about HNA's benefit not VAs . It took a profitable airline like NZ 10 years to make PVG pay off for them, and NZ is well run and with deeper pockets, not willfully mismanaged like VA. It will be a real struggle for them to make an impact on the Chinese market as capacity ex China to Australia and New Zealand is saturated and with dozens of airlines.. When you are competing against the myriad of airlines there are you have to be on your game and VA isn't astutely aligning themselves with the best airline for their needs, it has partnered up with the only airline prepared to invest in them at the 11th hour - there is a difference.
Flown to 126 Airports in 47 Countries on 80 Operators. Visited 56 Countries and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
b747400erf
Posts: 2921
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:54 am

IndianicWorld wrote:
- Focusing on the 738 for both VA and TT is a solid move, but will take time to achieve benefits given the transition plan and costs associated with the change


According to anonymous pilots on other forums that has been a big disaster and they are burning money for months paying pilots to sit around and do nothing. The fleet change has been mismanaged for months.
 
ZK-NBT
Posts: 5452
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2000 5:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:32 am

zkncj wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:

The only route that NZ would really lose access to on the Tasman would be DUD-BNE (which they could simply restart).

ex-AKL VA pretty much got all of the flights that NZ didn't want e.g. the 6am departures or late night e.g. the 9pm to BNE.


Yes sure but for VA on the Tasman it comes down to how many rotations per day the aircraft can do, they need to do 2 rotations ideally so they have to do an early am flight from either end which results in a late evening departure.

NZ do overnight aircraft in Australia SYD/MEL/BNE but those flights leave at 1830/1930 and head back at 0830/0900. NZ have added an 1100 SYD departure with VA doing the 1300 flight with an aircraft that does a very early MEL/BNE departure. There will be a 6 weekly 1245 MEL departure on NZ aswell this summer currently 1 weekly. VA have increased the early flight ex MEL and late flight ex AKL aswell to MEL.


I guess it apart of the benefit NZ has using the 777/787, which lets them do an 9am and a early afternoon bank which still allow the aircarft to do an long-haul flight the same day.

ZK-NBT wrote:
I'm not sure NZ would be worried about DUD-BNE but WLG-BNE would be added, whatever happened to ROT-SYD? It went seasonal and was quietly dropped? Or is it still around?


ROT-SYD was dropped an few years back, it happened very quietly.

BNE-DUD is an funny one - the BNE lounge is always an zoo before that flight is called to board, so many how many are NZ's own status pax vs VA's.[/quote]


It makes it easier to have aircraft start their day in NZ for Tasman ops, the time difference means NZ/QF/VA can do a 0700 departure ex AKL that gets back at 1500 and turns for a 1600 departure arriving back at midnight and the timings are good ex Australia with an 0930 departure and 1830 in the evening.

Ex OZ to do 2 Rotations it means leaving at
OZ 0630 NZ 1145
NZ 1230 OZ 1415
OZ 1515 NZ 2030
NZ 2115 OZ 2300

QF used to use 747 2-3 daily SYD-AKL back in the day same with NZ but they used to QF used to do

SYD 0700AKL 1200
AKL 1330SYD 1445

SYD 1045 AKL 1545
AKL 1730 SYD 1845

Connected to different flights and used otherwise idle 747's between Long haul. They went with more frequency and 763's then 738's, but have also tightened how their wide body fleet is used and have different banks to what NZ do. Anyway.
 
sq256
Posts: 117
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 10:37 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:23 am

ZK-NBT wrote:
AirNiugini wrote:
xiaotung wrote:

I suspect Borghetti was well aware of the low yield he would be facing into China but he simply did not have another option when no one else would inject cash into his airline when he needed it other than HNA. He probably also thought HNA would be happy to lease them some long haul aircraft they didn't have the money to buy and even wear the loss on these China routes.

But when fares like $500 in Economy and $2000 in Business are the norm, you don't need to be a genius to figure out there is no money to be made. When you look at the low end market the HNA Group typically chases and where ever they fly to they typically have the lowest fares, HNA's customer base is not going to help VA.


What rubbish - When talking about VA and China, it is important to remember that VA is predominately an airline that serves domestic Australia, Trans Tasman and the South Pacific.The Chinese inbound market are quite mobile when they land, so I think it is important to not only be in the market bringing tourist to Australia, but also to move them around the country/region when they are here.


So why fly there yourself and lose even more when your partner airlines can do it and then VA can fly these pax domestically?


HKG bilateral to/from the larger AU ports IIRC is maxed out on the HKG end, thus VA flying the HKG-AU routes on behalf of part-owner/shareholder HNA.

Not sure about the China end, the issues at the larger ports is slots regardless of carrier flying the route.
 
Ryanair01
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 9:27 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 12:39 pm

QANTAS747-438 wrote:
What's a brief explanation as to the main factors why Virgin Australia is not very profitable?


In so far as I can see, in changing to become Virgin Australia from Virgin Blue they increased costs by more than they increased revenues. However, I may be wrong.

Looking at their pricing strategy VA seems to believe people will only fly with them if they are cheaper than Qantas. The problem I see is that if you want to pay for perks, Qantas have better perks, if you just want cheap and reliable a to b transportation, the LCCs are cheaper. I just don't think their business model gives many reasons to fly VA. From what I can see it appears fundamentally flawed, even if at the time Qantas had enjoyed a near monopoly in corporate traffic, so entering that market might have appeared an attractive opportunity.

At the time of the shift I wondered why Virgin didn't use JetBlue as a possible template, in other words many LCC behind the scenes efficiencies, but with a noticeably better inflight experience to the legacies. VA would always struggle to match QFs global reach when competing for corporates, just as AN did post 1992, but Jetblue seem to have found a good middle ground in a way no one else I can think of has.

In terms of Asian expansion, I read a lot of comments about low yield in China. That maybe true, but not in the case of Hong Kong. Hong Kong has notoriously good yields and backed by connecting traffic via HNA this looks a sensible strategy for VA imho.
 
xiaotung
Posts: 847
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:58 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:34 pm

Ryanair01 wrote:
QANTAS747-438 wrote:
What's a brief explanation as to the main factors why Virgin Australia is not very profitable?


In so far as I can see, in changing to become Virgin Australia from Virgin Blue they increased costs by more than they increased revenues. However, I may be wrong.

Looking at their pricing strategy VA seems to believe people will only fly with them if they are cheaper than Qantas. The problem I see is that if you want to pay for perks, Qantas have better perks, if you just want cheap and reliable a to b transportation, the LCCs are cheaper. I just don't think their business model gives many reasons to fly VA. From what I can see it appears fundamentally flawed, even if at the time Qantas had enjoyed a near monopoly in corporate traffic, so entering that market might have appeared an attractive opportunity.

At the time of the shift I wondered why Virgin didn't use JetBlue as a possible template, in other words many LCC behind the scenes efficiencies, but with a noticeably better inflight experience to the legacies. VA would always struggle to match QFs global reach when competing for corporates, just as AN did post 1992, but Jetblue seem to have found a good middle ground in a way no one else I can think of has.

In terms of Asian expansion, I read a lot of comments about low yield in China. That maybe true, but not in the case of Hong Kong. Hong Kong has notoriously good yields and backed by connecting traffic via HNA this looks a sensible strategy for VA imho.


Yes, people have no reason to be loyal to VA other than the repeating status match promotions. VA had the opportunity to give themselves an edge when they could join Star Alliance, a rare global advantage over QF when 11 Star carriers fly to Australia, the most of 3 alliances. I have lost count of how many times their frequent flyers have asked if they would join Star. And yet, they seem to think their adhoc partnerships serve better purpose.

Regarding HKG, it has lost its status as a premium transit hub due to competition from both Chinese carriers and local LLC's. Just look at CX's financial figures. And VA's new partners, Hong Kong Airlines and HK Express are hardly premium carriers and usually offer the lowest fares on the routes they serve. I don't know where VA would find the good yields from HKG.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 2826
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:41 pm

Has VA ever shown a profit?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
sq256
Posts: 117
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 10:37 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 1:56 pm

VA has never made a full financial year profit since their days as DJ the LCC.

There has been the occasional "quarterly" profit from VA, but that counts for nothing when the full financial year ends in a loss.
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2546
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:02 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Has VA ever shown a profit?


Virgin Australia has not made a profit since it rebranded from Virgin Blue since 2011. The last time the airline made a profit was under Virgin Blue
Forum Moderator
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2546
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:06 pm

Ryanair01 wrote:
In terms of Asian expansion, I read a lot of comments about low yield in China. That maybe true, but not in the case of Hong Kong. Hong Kong has notoriously good yields and backed by connecting traffic via HNA this looks a sensible strategy for VA imho.


With VA selling return tickets to HKG for under $400 notoriously good yields wont happen. Qantas stated last October that SYD-HKG was the worst performer out of all their international routes for October 2016
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 2826
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:08 pm

Thanks, qf589

Their current fleet:
6 Airbus A330-200
14 ATR-72
2 Boeing 737-700
74 Boeing 737-800
5 Boeing 777-300ER
14 Embraer 190

Couldn't that be simplified and thus reduce cost?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2546
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:17 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Thanks, qf589

Their current fleet:
6 Airbus A330-200
14 ATR-72
2 Boeing 737-700
74 Boeing 737-800
5 Boeing 777-300ER
14 Embraer 190

Couldn't that be simplified and thus reduce cost?


The Embraer 190 will be retired by the end of the year and 8 ATR's are to be withdrawn from service. VARA also operates 2 x A320 and 15 F100's

There is currently a rumour going around the Australian thread that VA is looking at the A350-1000 to replace the 77W's however many have argues that is too big and VA should go for either the 789 or A359 and just have one widebody type instead of 2
Forum Moderator
 
decry
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2016 9:26 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:20 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Thanks, qf589

Their current fleet:
6 Airbus A330-200
14 ATR-72
2 Boeing 737-700
74 Boeing 737-800
5 Boeing 777-300ER
14 Embraer 190

Couldn't that be simplified and thus reduce cost?


Currently VA is down to 4 190's with all to be gone by early next year.

2 ATR-500's have left with 12 still active.
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:30 pm

Does anyone have the breakdown of aircraft leases versus outright owned ones?

The statement to me does look like an airline living in lean times, but the snapshot look at their figures shows a carrier paying down its debt and reducing leverage over assets. There is also another increase in the cash position (always good as lack of cash is what makes carriers fail).

So the contrary argument could be that VA is increasing its value overall instead of slowing debt payments, cutting back on cash on hand and booking a visible profit.

John Borghetti has frequently mentioned the 773ER is too big for their needs and the A350 looks like a better fit. Whether anything comes of this I have no idea, but those 773ERs have been around for a while now so maybe something could be done over their leases if they have a compliant lessor. There's a decent aftermarket for used 773ERs which is the important factor, and several lessors have both the big Boeings and A350s on their books.
 
DL747400
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 4:04 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:31 pm

WPvsMW wrote:
VA is going down a very slippery slope. They need a Reg Ansett-level leader, and better network planning, rather than a mixed bag of codeshares and frames.


Sounds like it may be time for another carrier to make a significant equity investment, replace the management/network/revenue management teams, and reorganize the business so that it has a sustainable position over the long term.
From First to Worst: The history of Airliners.net.

All posts reflect my opinions, not those of my employer or any other company.
 
calt03
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 2:38 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:47 pm

mariner wrote:

For the longest time we were e told that "international" was not profitable. Given that "international" consisted basically of DPS (and a bit of HKT) - which went to Tiger - and AUH (wet lease for Etihad) and LAX it's tough to think that LAX was profitable - break-even perhaps, and so perhaps worth it to Delta for their frequent fliers.



It's not profitable unless the PRC bankrolls you :P
 
calt03
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 2:38 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 2:50 pm

qf789 wrote:
ZK-NBT wrote:
dubaiamman243 wrote:
VA poor financials


2 full service airlines have often struggled to make money in Australia let alone 3. Or are you saying VA will cease to exist?


Who says it has to be a full service airline. At the CAPA summit in Sydney last week there was discussions of a true ULCC entering the market or an operation backed by Chinese interests

http://www.airlineratings.com/news/1378 ... ence-told-


Something Spring airlines would do.
 
qf789
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 2546
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:42 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 3:07 pm

Channex757 wrote:
Does anyone have the breakdown of aircraft leases versus outright owned ones?

The statement to me does look like an airline living in lean times, but the snapshot look at their figures shows a carrier paying down its debt and reducing leverage over assets. There is also another increase in the cash position (always good as lack of cash is what makes carriers fail).

So the contrary argument could be that VA is increasing its value overall instead of slowing debt payments, cutting back on cash on hand and booking a visible profit.

John Borghetti has frequently mentioned the 773ER is too big for their needs and the A350 looks like a better fit. Whether anything comes of this I have no idea, but those 773ERs have been around for a while now so maybe something could be done over their leases if they have a compliant lessor. There's a decent aftermarket for used 773ERs which is the important factor, and several lessors have both the big Boeings and A350s on their books.


Of the aircraft owned are 4 x 77W's, 2 x 73G's and just over half of the 738's the rest of the fleet is leased

VARA fleet includes both A320's leased and 2 F100's leased the rest are owned
Forum Moderator
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:24 pm

qf789 wrote:
Of the aircraft owned are 4 x 77W's, 2 x 73G's and just over half of the 738's the rest of the fleet is leased

VARA fleet includes both A320's leased and 2 F100's leased the rest are owned

That's a fairly typical balance. I assume from that their debt levels are for instruments related to fleet purchasing and other capital spends.

Everyone is concentrating on the bottom line. To me it looks like a tax-efficient statement. Their 'profit' is going into paying down debt levels, which makes them more financially stable. If they have owners who can accept this policy then great. Tesla is the same; they have a decent margin but all their operating profits on Model S and Model X is going into capital spending. If they suddenly stopped this then they would be a profitable auto maker with over 20% margin per vehicle.

VA have declared a small operating profit. That to me points to tax-efficiency and not a failing operation. The money is just going elsewhere and the proof of it is a fleet with the ownership you indicate. If they were on their arse everything would be sold and leased back!
 
jbs2886
Posts: 970
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Virgin Australia announces a net loss of $185 million for FY16/17

Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:42 pm

Channex757 wrote:
qf789 wrote:
Of the aircraft owned are 4 x 77W's, 2 x 73G's and just over half of the 738's the rest of the fleet is leased

VARA fleet includes both A320's leased and 2 F100's leased the rest are owned

That's a fairly typical balance. I assume from that their debt levels are for instruments related to fleet purchasing and other capital spends.

Everyone is concentrating on the bottom line. To me it looks like a tax-efficient statement. Their 'profit' is going into paying down debt levels, which makes them more financially stable. If they have owners who can accept this policy then great. Tesla is the same; they have a decent margin but all their operating profits on Model S and Model X is going into capital spending. If they suddenly stopped this then they would be a profitable auto maker with over 20% margin per vehicle.

VA have declared a small operating profit. That to me points to tax-efficiency and not a failing operation. The money is just going elsewhere and the proof of it is a fleet with the ownership you indicate. If they were on their arse everything would be sold and leased back!


:checkmark: :checkmark: this is what everyone missed. There is operating positive cash flow. No, the airline isn't doing great, and has a lot of recovery still ahead...but its not doomsday as most posting above would have everyone believe reading this thread.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos