EK006
Topic Author
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 8:34 am

Cathay Pacific report $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 6:57 am

'Too many empty seats and increasing competition from mainland Chinese carriers contributed to the poor results, the airline said.'

This is Cathay's third loss ever since it was in in 1946. Connections from China have been key for CX and as the Chinese carriers become more efficient and open more direct routes especially from secondary cities, less people will connect on CX. What will Cathay do to fight against the severe competition?

Source:
[url]Cathay Pacific sees first annual loss in eight years - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39276306/[url]
 
User avatar
hongkongflyer
Posts: 709
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 8:23 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:09 am

They lost a huge amount of money from fuel hedging.
But no doubt they got hurt from the declining quality in services as well.
 
User avatar
N14AZ
Posts: 3841
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:11 am

Wow, as the traditional Chinese curse says: "May you live in interesting times" ... and with all the competition from Mainland China, adding almost every month one additional Dreamliner to their fleets, these are "interesting times"...
 
kriskim
Posts: 387
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:44 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:01 am

CX will need to be more innovative, I feel like management wants change but is doing nothing about it or is doing the total opposite - heading in the wrong direction.

It's bread and butter routes are becoming more competitive, the feed that it use to get isn't as strong as it use to be.

- HKG-Taiwan market is not as strong as it was before, airlines can fly between Mainland China and Taiwan Island, avoiding the HKG stopover.
- CX is becoming less prevalent on the Kangaroo route, pax now use CX to transfer onwards to other Asian cities more instead of going to Europe.
- Mainland carriers are opening up secondary mainland cities up to the world, these flights are heavily subsidised, pulling down yield and price, you can get a ticket from Australia to Xi'an for as little as $250 return.
- More point to point flights within Asia, no need for a HKG stop over, especially with A320NEO and 737MAX families coming online, these aircraft will allow thinner routes to open up.

One of its strengths is still the US market, even that market isn't safe, with mainland carriers flying all over the place. I think the same situation is also happening at SQ, both airlines are trying to figure out where they lie in the market now, there has been a dramatic market shift and they need to find their place.
A world built upon connectivity.
 
LHRFlyer
Posts: 1021
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:50 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:33 am

CX is facing the same challenges that European legacies have been dealing with for more than 15 years.

They have to pursue structural change with vigour and determination and work much better with partners.

Whether there is the will to do this is another matter.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12592
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:35 am

But but but, if they just up their SERVICE, all will be automatically okay!

Oh well, at least we can rest assured that they'll never go 10abreast in Y, no matter how desperate they get!
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/econ ... 10-abreast
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
behramjee
Posts: 4980
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 4:56 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:48 am

If fuel hedging losses were not taken into account, what would be the net profit ?
 
wedgetail737
Posts: 5010
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 8:44 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 9:08 am

So much for any chance of expansion and opening SEA.
 
yonahleung
Posts: 32
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:55 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 10:09 am

behramjee wrote:
If fuel hedging losses were not taken into account, what would be the net profit ?

That would be about US$1 Billion
Basically CX gambled its life away on the oil market. If they haven't hedged at all, they would be doing really fine.
 
TC957
Posts: 3535
Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:09 am

Yet, contrary to a-net myth, operating a big fleet of 77W's isn't the automatic route to success. QF are doing just fine without them.
A quick check on availability LHR - HKG next few days confirms tons of seat availability, but with premium cabins doing well. So perhaps they could save something by cutting LHR down to 4 a day, at least seasonally, especially now LGW is up & running.
 
BestWestern
Posts: 8336
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2000 8:46 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:44 am

CX have improved significantly over the past six months. I fly with them regularly.

Punctuality has dramatically improved. The whole ops crew seem to have this as their #1 focus.

Inflight service has also improved - food has got better, and service is more focussed.

IT is still poor, but so much better than before.
Greetings from Hong Kong.... a subsidiary of China Inc.
 
raylee67
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:06 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:37 pm

The most direct cause of the loss is loss from oil hedging though, meaning that the airline had purchased futures contracts to take oil or jetfuel delivery at fixed price. But unfortunately the oil price dropped and the airline is stuck with the higher price it agreed years before. Thus the loss is on paper only and is accounting loss. It does not affect cash flow. It does affect the airline's ability to lower its fare to compete with competitors which are buying fuel at spot price, since now CX de-facto has a higher overall cost due to its fuel coming in at higher cost. So it hits CX's yield (profit margin) and competitiveness. But it doesn't affect its survival since it's not a cash flow play. Once the hedging hangover passes, it will be at a better shape.
319/20/21 332/33 342/43/45 359/51 388 707 717 732/36/3G/38/39 74R/42/43/44/4E/48 757 762/63 772/7L/73/7W 788/89 D10 M80 135/40/45 175/90 DH1/4 CRJ/R7 L10
AY LH OU SR BA FI
AA DL UA NW AC CP WS FL NK PD
CI NH SQ KA CX JL BR OZ TG KE CA CZ NZ JQ RS
 
CX Flyboy
Posts: 6127
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 1999 6:10 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 1:10 pm

"Too many empty seats" ???

We have one of the highest load factors in the world....
 
BuildingMyBento
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 3:33 pm

Inaugurate a J-class only route between HKG and PEK/PVG?
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Posts: 5715
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:06 pm

How is the LHR-HKG-LHR route doing ?
 
EddieDude
Posts: 6989
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:19 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:14 pm

The move from 3-3-3 to 3-4-3 in Y in the 77Ws is bad for passengers, but CX must have made a very thorough analysis of how that will improve their bottom line. I wonder whether that increase in seats will mean cutting some frequencies to markets such as LHR and LAX or not. Too bad CX could not remain a 9-abreast operator like SQ, DL, BA and TK.

I wonder if Cathay Dragon could launch more routes in Asia and Oceania to create new revenue and profit sources. Perhaps it is also time for CX to be more collaborative with other alliance members with whom CX has had cold/rocky relationships up until now (DL and KE seem to be doing that themselves and the prospects are great).

My experience with CX back in 2002 was quite good, so I wish them well. It would be awesome to see a CX flight to MEX but ULH and 5th freedom routes have the odds against them, so I won't be holding my breath.

Having said all that, it seems to me that if the loss was attributed to the hedging (and, as has been mentioned, in the absence of said hedging, the profit would have been quite high), then things do not seem so bleak for CX. The increased competition might be a good incentive for them to be more efficient, more innovative and more attractive to customers in terms of soft product at least.
Upcoming flights:
May: AM MEX-CUN 73H (Y), AM CUN-MEX 73W (Y).
August: KL MEX-AMS 74M (J), KQ AMS-NBO 788 (J).
 
workhorse
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 6:02 pm

EddieDude wrote:
The move from 3-3-3 to 3-4-3 in Y in the 77Ws is bad for passengers, but CX must have made a very thorough analysis of how that will improve their bottom line. I wonder whether that increase in seats will mean cutting some frequencies to markets such as LHR and LAX or not.


There is no way in hell I'll fly on a 3-4-3 77W if there is a 380 available on the same route (as is the case with LHR-HKG or CDG-HKG for example). That despite being a huge fan of CX since years.
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 6:11 pm

BuildingMyBento wrote:
Inaugurate a J-class only route between HKG and PEK/PVG?


What are you smoking?

Just flew SIN-HKG-LAX in CX J yesterday - wife and I were quite impressed. Food wasn't bad at all - in fact I'd say ex-SIN it was downright good! Which let's face it, even the best airplane food is still leftovers. Service was top-notch and I was impressed that the FAs and ISM called us by name on both flights (rarely happens on AA). In fact the chicken makhanwala on HKG-LAX was delicious! Truly tasty dish that was as good as I've had in any premium cabin.

I have to say though I was shocked that the J cabin was so empty. I'd say barely half full on the way to HKG and to LAX the F cabin was completely empty, and at least 16 opens seats in J. I know that's an N of only 1 but I'd been checking loads and award space the past few days and our flight wasn't the only one going out light (up front anyway).

Not just China but I'm sure CX is feeling the pressure from the US3 as well - in fact if I had to do it over again I'd probably choose AA J over CX for multiple reasons (personal air vents is huge for me as I cannot at all sleep in an 80 degree cabin which Asian airlines love for some reason). But AA charges much less than CX and provides arguably an equivalent level of service (if not better!). Plus an AA J pax can still access the excellent CX lounges.
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 6:15 pm

workhorse wrote:
EddieDude wrote:
The move from 3-3-3 to 3-4-3 in Y in the 77Ws is bad for passengers, but CX must have made a very thorough analysis of how that will improve their bottom line. I wonder whether that increase in seats will mean cutting some frequencies to markets such as LHR and LAX or not.


There is no way in hell I'll fly on a 3-4-3 77W if there is a 380 available on the same route (as is the case with LHR-HKG or CDG-HKG for example). That despite being a huge fan of CX since years.


Most Y pax probably don't even know the difference between 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 (prior to booking anyway). CX, AA, etc know this. AA's Y loads aren't suffering at all since switching to 3-4-3 on the 77W. CX has historically focused far more on J and F (and now PEY too). So from that standpoint would you rather fly BA's horrific CW (2-4-2!!!) or CX's industry-leading J?
 
User avatar
res77W
Posts: 302
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:59 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 6:40 pm

Is there a timeline for 3-4-3 to roll out in Y?

-Rowen
 
keitherson
Posts: 241
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 6:42 pm

workhorse wrote:
EddieDude wrote:
The move from 3-3-3 to 3-4-3 in Y in the 77Ws is bad for passengers, but CX must have made a very thorough analysis of how that will improve their bottom line. I wonder whether that increase in seats will mean cutting some frequencies to markets such as LHR and LAX or not.


There is no way in hell I'll fly on a 3-4-3 77W if there is a 380 available on the same route (as is the case with LHR-HKG or CDG-HKG for example). That despite being a huge fan of CX since years.

You won't. But everyone else will. Every 3-4-3 77W operator is doing fine.

Do you think CX is losing money because (low-yield) economy class passengers are choosing to fly A380s instead? No, they're losing money because everyone is flying MU's 3-4-3 77W's that you are boycotting. :roll:
 
workhorse
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 6:57 pm

keitherson wrote:
Do you think CX is losing money because (low-yield) economy class passengers are choosing to fly A380s instead? No, they're losing money because everyone is flying MU's 3-4-3 77W's that you are boycotting. :roll:


Interesting that you would mention MU and not CZ (just at CX's doorway) or CA whose 777s are 9 abreast. :)
 
User avatar
KTPAFlyer
Posts: 764
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:08 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:04 pm

I think CX has to start taking more risks, particularly with its route network. In the US, EK has thrown a lot of stuff at the wall, some of it stuck and others didn't. They need to strengthen their JV/Oneworld partners and leverage it to start new routes. IMHO, CX is way too conservative in this regard and there are a lot of routes that can support HKG that they are not flying. IAH and SEA are two solid ones that come to mind immediately, and CX needs to evaluate where they can and cannot make money. You can never succeed if you don't try and CX will figure this out one way or another.
 
workhorse
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 11:35 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:04 pm

9w748capt wrote:
Most Y pax probably don't even know the difference between 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 (prior to booking anyway). CX, AA, etc know this. AA's Y loads aren't suffering at all since switching to 3-4-3 on the 77W. CX has historically focused far more on J and F (and now PEY too). So from that standpoint would you rather fly BA's horrific CW (2-4-2!!!) or CX's industry-leading J?


Well, if I fly J, I probably fly for work, which means with a full-fare ticket that will bring me a lot of miles that I will use... in Y! :)

So I will tend to choose the carrier with whom I am the most likely to fly for leisure in my off-duty time. If an airline manages to piss me off their Y, I will probably be avoiding their J too.
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:23 pm

workhorse wrote:
9w748capt wrote:
Most Y pax probably don't even know the difference between 3-3-3 and 3-4-3 (prior to booking anyway). CX, AA, etc know this. AA's Y loads aren't suffering at all since switching to 3-4-3 on the 77W. CX has historically focused far more on J and F (and now PEY too). So from that standpoint would you rather fly BA's horrific CW (2-4-2!!!) or CX's industry-leading J?


Well, if I fly J, I probably fly for work, which means with a full-fare ticket that will bring me a lot of miles that I will use... in Y! :)

So I will tend to choose the carrier with whom I am the most likely to fly for leisure in my off-duty time. If an airline manages to piss me off their Y, I will probably be avoiding their J too.


Why use your miles in Y? CX award availability is still pretty stellar!

Not a good idea to judge an airline's J based on their Y. AA Y sucks by all accounts, but their J (on the 77W at least) is pretty damn solid.
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:25 pm

KTPAFlyer wrote:
I think CX has to start taking more risks, particularly with its route network. In the US, EK has thrown a lot of stuff at the wall, some of it stuck and others didn't. They need to strengthen their JV/Oneworld partners and leverage it to start new routes. IMHO, CX is way too conservative in this regard and there are a lot of routes that can support HKG that they are not flying. IAH and SEA are two solid ones that come to mind immediately, and CX needs to evaluate where they can and cannot make money. You can never succeed if you don't try and CX will figure this out one way or another.


Great point. Case in point BR which has been far more adventurous with US expansion (IMO) than CX. BR flies IAH-TPE - no idea how they're doing, but no doubt that BR and CI are stealing transit pax from CX.
 
BuildingMyBento
Posts: 173
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2017 3:18 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 7:49 pm

9w748capt wrote:
BuildingMyBento wrote:
Inaugurate a J-class only route between HKG and PEK/PVG?


What are you smoking?

Just flew SIN-HKG-LAX in CX J yesterday - wife and I were quite impressed. Food wasn't bad at all - in fact I'd say ex-SIN it was downright good! Which let's face it, even the best airplane food is still leftovers. Service was top-notch and I was impressed that the FAs and ISM called us by name on both flights (rarely happens on AA). In fact the chicken makhanwala on HKG-LAX was delicious! Truly tasty dish that was as good as I've had in any premium cabin.

I have to say though I was shocked that the J cabin was so empty. I'd say barely half full on the way to HKG and to LAX the F cabin was completely empty, and at least 16 opens seats in J. I know that's an N of only 1 but I'd been checking loads and award space the past few days and our flight wasn't the only one going out light (up front anyway).

Not just China but I'm sure CX is feeling the pressure from the US3 as well - in fact if I had to do it over again I'd probably choose AA J over CX for multiple reasons (personal air vents is huge for me as I cannot at all sleep in an 80 degree cabin which Asian airlines love for some reason). But AA charges much less than CX and provides arguably an equivalent level of service (if not better!). Plus an AA J pax can still access the excellent CX lounges.


I have no idea what your reply has to do with what I mentioned. Perhaps we're toking the same thing?

Anyway, if given the choice, I'd always take CX over a mainland carrier...to the mainland. Why wouldn't all J to those two cities be feasible? Simply an issue of labor costs?...
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 9526
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:00 pm

TC957 wrote:
Yet, contrary to a-net myth, operating a big fleet of 77W's isn't the automatic route to success. QF are doing just fine without them.
A quick check on availability LHR - HKG next few days confirms tons of seat availability, but with premium cabins doing well. So perhaps they could save something by cutting LHR down to 4 a day, at least seasonally, especially now LGW is up & running.


Of course the 77Ws don't guarantee success. However it sounds like much of this loss was due to fuel hedging.
-Dave


MAX’d out on MAX threads. If you are starting a thread, and it’s about the MAX - stop. There’s already a thread that covers it.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12592
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:14 pm

EddieDude wrote:
Too bad CX could not remain a 9-abreast operator like SQ, DL, BA and TK.

BA is going 10abreast on LGW 77E routes, and possibly some LHR routes as well (since they're converting far more planes than are based at LGW).


keitherson wrote:
workhorse wrote:
There is no way in hell I'll fly on a 3-4-3 77W if there is a 380 available on the same route (as is the case with LHR-HKG or CDG-HKG for example). That despite being a huge fan of CX since years.

You won't. But everyone else will. Every 3-4-3 77W operator is doing fine.

Exactly.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
nojetlag
Posts: 19
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 11:58 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 9:51 pm

I have been flying Cathay frequently for 20 years both business and economy, and last trip in February the first class lounge at HK airport was empty, never seen that before. The restaurant there is superb. The trip before Cathay staff were cold and indifferent, but this last trip they were back to being friendly and good. I think they are now making an effort as they saw passenger numbers decline in 2016. Flew on the new 350 in business with the seats that I dislike, (cathay coffins) but Cathay say many people like them. Well why don't they put both types in the business class cabin so passengers have a choice. I think Cathay may have turned the corner and will improve in 2017. I hope so as it was such a great airline.
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2174
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 10:14 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
EddieDude wrote:
Too bad CX could not remain a 9-abreast operator like SQ, DL, BA and TK.

BA is going 10abreast on LGW 77E routes, and possibly some LHR routes as well (since they're converting far more planes than are based at LGW).


keitherson wrote:
workhorse wrote:
There is no way in hell I'll fly on a 3-4-3 77W if there is a 380 available on the same route (as is the case with LHR-HKG or CDG-HKG for example). That despite being a huge fan of CX since years.

You won't. But everyone else will. Every 3-4-3 77W operator is doing fine.

Exactly.


I thought it was just the regional 777s getting 10 abreast, but the long-haul birds were staying 9?
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 10:29 pm

BuildingMyBento wrote:
9w748capt wrote:
BuildingMyBento wrote:
Inaugurate a J-class only route between HKG and PEK/PVG?


What are you smoking?

Just flew SIN-HKG-LAX in CX J yesterday - wife and I were quite impressed. Food wasn't bad at all - in fact I'd say ex-SIN it was downright good! Which let's face it, even the best airplane food is still leftovers. Service was top-notch and I was impressed that the FAs and ISM called us by name on both flights (rarely happens on AA). In fact the chicken makhanwala on HKG-LAX was delicious! Truly tasty dish that was as good as I've had in any premium cabin.

I have to say though I was shocked that the J cabin was so empty. I'd say barely half full on the way to HKG and to LAX the F cabin was completely empty, and at least 16 opens seats in J. I know that's an N of only 1 but I'd been checking loads and award space the past few days and our flight wasn't the only one going out light (up front anyway).

Not just China but I'm sure CX is feeling the pressure from the US3 as well - in fact if I had to do it over again I'd probably choose AA J over CX for multiple reasons (personal air vents is huge for me as I cannot at all sleep in an 80 degree cabin which Asian airlines love for some reason). But AA charges much less than CX and provides arguably an equivalent level of service (if not better!). Plus an AA J pax can still access the excellent CX lounges.


I have no idea what your reply has to do with what I mentioned. Perhaps we're toking the same thing?



Maybe. Haha - the first sentence of my post was in response to you, but the rest of my post was my own ramblings.

In any case - an all J flight to PVG? Come on ... CX is losing enough money!
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12592
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 10:46 pm

jbs2886 wrote:
I thought it was just the regional 777s getting 10 abreast, but the long-haul birds were staying 9?

Based on their presentation, 25 B77Es are supposed to get the capacity increase, yet only 15 or so are currently based at LGW... so either they're planning to massively ramp their LGW offerings, or some of the LHR birds will get it too.

They haven't really made that clear.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
jbs2886
Posts: 2174
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2015 9:07 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 15, 2017 11:16 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
jbs2886 wrote:
I thought it was just the regional 777s getting 10 abreast, but the long-haul birds were staying 9?

Based on their presentation, 25 B77Es are supposed to get the capacity increase, yet only 15 or so are currently based at LGW... so either they're planning to massively ramp their LGW offerings, or some of the LHR birds will get it too.

They haven't really made that clear.


Oh sorry, I meant Cathay.
 
fly_airbus
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2000 7:44 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:50 am

This Bloomberg commentary sums it up very well.

https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2017-03-15/cathay-pacific-s-cost-crisis

"Aircraft are pretty safe as long as they know the route to their desired destination and keep plenty of fuel in the tank. Cathay Pacific, at this point, appears to have neither. Investors should assume the brace position."

Ouch.
 
c933103
Posts: 3857
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Thu Mar 16, 2017 7:40 am

when is their fuel hedging contract going to end?
Peace cannot counter violence when violence are being used by the powerful without mercy. #HongKong
But there is one possible exception. That is if the world could come together and make those who use violence lose their power. #China
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 22, 2017 2:37 pm

TC957 wrote:
Yet, contrary to a-net myth, operating a big fleet of 77W's isn't the automatic route to success. QF are doing just fine without them.


And when QF booked an astronomic loss in 2014, people argued that QF should have ordered the 777 :scratchchin:
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Wed Mar 22, 2017 2:44 pm

c933103 wrote:
when is their fuel hedging contract going to end?


Cathay Pacific to Revamp Fuel Hedges
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
horizon360
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2016 7:48 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:15 am

nojetlag wrote:
Flew on the new 350 in business with the seats that I dislike, (cathay coffins) but Cathay say many people like them. Well why don't they put both types in the business class cabin so passengers have a choice.


I've never heard anyone else refer to the latest generation zodiac business seats as coffin-like. Are you sure you weren't on one of CX's old A340's?
 
Thenoflyzone
Posts: 2855
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 4:42 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Thu Mar 23, 2017 11:46 am

workhorse wrote:

Interesting that you would mention MU and not CZ (just at CX's doorway) or CA whose 777s are 9 abreast. :)


CA is beginning to roll out 3-4-3 on their B77Ws.

http://www.routesonline.com/news/38/air ... -dec-2016/
us Air Traffic Controllers have a good record, we haven't left one up there yet !!
 
9w748capt
Posts: 1699
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:27 am

Re: Cathay Pacific reporta $74 million loss for 2016

Thu Mar 23, 2017 12:22 pm

nojetlag wrote:
I have been flying Cathay frequently for 20 years both business and economy, and last trip in February the first class lounge at HK airport was empty, never seen that before. The restaurant there is superb. The trip before Cathay staff were cold and indifferent, but this last trip they were back to being friendly and good. I think they are now making an effort as they saw passenger numbers decline in 2016. Flew on the new 350 in business with the seats that I dislike, (cathay coffins) but Cathay say many people like them. Well why don't they put both types in the business class cabin so passengers have a choice. I think Cathay may have turned the corner and will improve in 2017. I hope so as it was such a great airline.


Huh? The 77W and A350 J class seats used by CX, AA, etc are the best out there. Sounds like you're confusing these J seats with the prior version that was on the 747s and A340s.

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