panamair
Topic Author
Posts: 4100
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:57 am

Some folks have asked for a summary of the Q2 2019 financial performance of the various US carriers....here's a comparison across various financial and statistical metrics of AA, DL, UA, WN, AS, and B6:

Before getting into the financials, here are some traffic/capacity figures to give you an idea of the size of these carriers and how they should be "grouped" when looking at financial metrics:

Q2 2019:

RPMs (Revenue Pax Miles) - in millions: - this is the measurement of traffic carried by the airline during the quarter:

DL: 63,173
UA: 63,001
AA: 62,658
WN: 34,528
AS: 14,638
B6: 13,782

ASMs (Available Seat Miles) - in millions - this is a measurement of the capacity offered by the airline during the quarter:

UA: 73,240
AA: 72,322
DL: 71,754
WN: 39,985
AS: 16,980
B6: 16,029

Pax Load Factor - RPMs divided by ASMs - remarkably similar across carriers:

DL: 88.0%
AA: 86.6%
WN: 86.4%
AS: 86.2%
UA and B6: 86.0%

Total number of passengers carried (in '000s)

AA: 55,464
DL: 53,972
UA: 42,592
WN: 42,569
AS: 12,028
B6: 11,026

Now here are the financial metrics:

Total Operating Revenues (in millions):

DL: 12,536
AA; 11,960
UA: 11,402
WN: 5,909
AS: 2,288
B6: 2,105

Operating Income GAAP and Margin:

DL: 2,128 (17.0% margin)
WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 364 (15.9%)
UA: 1,472 (12.9%)
B6: 250 (11.9%)
AA: 1,153 (9.6%)

Operating Income Adjusted (Non-GAAP) excluding special items and Margin:

DL: 2,138 (17.1%)
WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 375 (16.4%)* - AS didn't report this specifically in their release so this is roughly what it should be from what I could piece together (on the high end)
UA: 1,543 (13.5%)
B6: 252 (12.0%)
AA: 1,274 (10.7%)

Pre-Tax Income GAAP and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 351 (15.3%)
DL: 1,907 (15.2%)
UA: 1,354 (11.9%)
B6: 236 (11.2%)
AA: 882 (7.4%)

Pre-Tax Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
DL: 1,997 (16.0%)
AS: 362 (15.8%)
UA: 1,416 (12.4%)
B6: 238 (11.3%)
AA: 1,072 (9.0%)


Net Income GAAP and Net Margin:

WN: 741 (12.5%)
DL: 1,443 (11.51%)
AS: 262 (11.45%)
UA: 1,052 (9.2%)
B6: 179 (8.5%)
AA: 662 (5.5%)

Net Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 741 (12.5%)
DL: 1,532 (12.3%)
AS: 270 (11.8%)
UA: 1,100 (9.6%)
B6: 180 (8.6%)
AA: 810 (6.8%)
 
airboss787
Posts: 82
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 11:39 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:25 am

Thanks. This is very exhaustive and fascinating. United seems to have taken its place in the middle of most of the metrics. Which is may not be the worst place to be, but obviously not the best. They are doing well but definitely have room for improvement. It seems AA needs to buck up. WN numbers and margins, even with the MAX grounded, are simply phenomenal.

Among the big 4, DL and WN seem to be the best performing, UA improving and AA firmly last with the smallest margins and also smallest numbers relative to its size.

Looking at RPMs and ASMs, UA seems to be one of the biggest, but that does not necessarily reflect in the numbers below. Maybe, the large RJ fleet plays a role in some of these things and maybe because they have a huge international route network as well? Does having 2% less seat occupancy play a role in it as well?

OP -- Is it possible to also add CASM and RASM numbers to get an even better idea?
Star Alliance Gold
 
TropicalSky
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri May 05, 2017 1:37 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:29 am

Panamair thanks for this list....very interesting to compare the airlines. Delta is consistently in the top 3 in every category. It's amazing how much less seats they offered compared to United & American.
 
EBiafore99
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:03 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 10:42 am

Another interesting tidbit to compare is # of employees:

AA - 112,700
DL - 80,000
UA - 88,000

Could not believe the difference in # of employees between the three.


https://www.dallasnews.com/business/air ... e-slipping
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 598
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:49 pm

EBiafore99 wrote:
Another interesting tidbit to compare is # of employees:

AA - 112,700
DL - 80,000
UA - 88,000

Could not believe the difference in # of employees between the three.


https://www.dallasnews.com/business/air ... e-slipping


Why does AA have so many employees? The difference in employee numbers between AA on the one hand and UA/DL on the other must have an effect on CASM and profit figures for AA. I noticed how close the US3 ASM and RPM numbers are - with 32,000 extra employees between AA and DL that must make a big difference.
 
DFW17L
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 2:53 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:54 pm

Perhaps AA includes regional emps?
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 2:58 pm

panamair wrote:
Some folks have asked for a summary of the Q2 2019 financial performance of the various US carriers....here's a comparison across various financial and statistical metrics of AA, DL, UA, WN, AS, and B6:

Before getting into the financials, here are some traffic/capacity figures to give you an idea of the size of these carriers and how they should be "grouped" when looking at financial metrics:

Q2 2019:

RPMs (Revenue Pax Miles) - in millions: - this is the measurement of traffic carried by the airline during the quarter:

DL: 63,173
UA: 63,001
AA: 62,658
WN: 34,528
AS: 14,638
B6: 13,782

ASMs (Available Seat Miles) - in millions - this is a measurement of the capacity offered by the airline during the quarter:

UA: 73,240
AA: 72,322
DL: 71,754
WN: 39,985
AS: 16,980
B6: 16,029

Pax Load Factor - RPMs divided by ASMs - remarkably similar across carriers:

DL: 88.0%
AA: 86.6%
WN: 86.4%
AS: 86.2%
UA and B6: 86.0%

Total number of passengers carried (in '000s)

AA: 55,464
DL: 53,972
UA: 42,592
WN: 42,569
AS: 12,028
B6: 11,026

Now here are the financial metrics:

Total Operating Revenues (in millions):

DL: 12,536
AA; 11,960
UA: 11,402
WN: 5,909
AS: 2,288
B6: 2,105

Operating Income GAAP and Margin:

DL: 2,128 (17.0% margin)
WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 364 (15.9%)
UA: 1,472 (12.9%)
B6: 250 (11.9%)
AA: 1,153 (9.6%)

Operating Income Adjusted (Non-GAAP) excluding special items and Margin:

DL: 2,138 (17.1%)
WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 375 (16.4%)* - AS didn't report this specifically in their release so this is roughly what it should be from what I could piece together (on the high end)
UA: 1,543 (13.5%)
B6: 252 (12.0%)
AA: 1,274 (10.7%)

Pre-Tax Income GAAP and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 351 (15.3%)
DL: 1,907 (15.2%)
UA: 1,354 (11.9%)
B6: 236 (11.2%)
AA: 882 (7.4%)

Pre-Tax Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
DL: 1,997 (16.0%)
AS: 362 (15.8%)
UA: 1,416 (12.4%)
B6: 238 (11.3%)
AA: 1,072 (9.0%)


Net Income GAAP and Net Margin:

WN: 741 (12.5%)
DL: 1,443 (11.51%)
AS: 262 (11.45%)
UA: 1,052 (9.2%)
B6: 179 (8.5%)
AA: 662 (5.5%)

Net Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 741 (12.5%)
DL: 1,532 (12.3%)
AS: 270 (11.8%)
UA: 1,100 (9.6%)
B6: 180 (8.6%)
AA: 810 (6.8%)

Thanks. If you have the time and the inclination, I think seeing YTD would be interesting too as one quarter can be deceiving.
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
ScottB
Posts: 6641
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2000 1:25 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:02 pm

TropicalSky wrote:
Panamair thanks for this list....very interesting to compare the airlines. Delta is consistently in the top 3 in every category. It's amazing how much less seats they offered compared to United & American.


What's even more amazing is that they were first in RPMs and revenue even though they were third in ASMs. That's a big part of why they were also first in all of the income numbers (on an absolute basis) and up with WN & AS on all the margin numbers. Delta is exceptionally well-run right now.
 
HPAEAA
Posts: 1114
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 7:24 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:17 pm

DFW17L wrote:
Perhaps AA includes regional emps?

So I’m not sure where the Dallas morning news got that head count number, from the 10q, AA ended the quarter with 106,100 mainline and 27,700 regional employees.. so still a significantly higher head count, part of it probably relates to the fact that AA has a larger fleet & more FAs/Pilots to support it, but i think some of it is maintenance driven since they rely less on outsourcing than their competitors (atleast that was true for years).

https://americanairlines.gcs-web.com/ne ... 019-profit

Also, @panamair - thanks for pulling together the comparison!
1.4mm and counting...
 
FSDan
Posts: 2618
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 5:27 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:26 pm

panamair wrote:
Pax Load Factor - RPMs divided by ASMs - remarkably similar across carriers:

DL: 88.0%
AA: 86.6%
WN: 86.4%
AS: 86.2%
UA and B6: 86.0%


At first glance these differences seem insignificant, but it does seem noteworthy that the difference between DL and the next closest competitor AA (1.4%) is more than twice the difference between the best and worst of DL's major competitors (0.6%). That would seem to indicate that DL has differentiated themselves a little bit and is doing something better than competitors to manage load factors, particularly given that 3 of the 5 competitors had chunks of their fleet out of service and would have been flying less capacity than originally planned. DL might be better at planning day-of-week cancellations on slow days, or simply matching the right aircraft to each route.
This is my signature until I think of a better one.
 
majano
Posts: 144
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:45 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:37 pm

panamair wrote:
Some folks have asked for a summary of the Q2 2019 financial performance of the various US carriers....here's a comparison across various financial and statistical metrics of AA, DL, UA, WN, AS, and B6:

Before getting into the financials, here are some traffic/capacity figures to give you an idea of the size of these carriers and how they should be "grouped" when looking at financial metrics:

Q2 2019:

RPMs (Revenue Pax Miles) - in millions: - this is the measurement of traffic carried by the airline during the quarter:

DL: 63,173
UA: 63,001
AA: 62,658
WN: 34,528
AS: 14,638
B6: 13,782

ASMs (Available Seat Miles) - in millions - this is a measurement of the capacity offered by the airline during the quarter:

UA: 73,240
AA: 72,322
DL: 71,754
WN: 39,985
AS: 16,980
B6: 16,029

Pax Load Factor - RPMs divided by ASMs - remarkably similar across carriers:

DL: 88.0%
AA: 86.6%
WN: 86.4%
AS: 86.2%
UA and B6: 86.0%

Total number of passengers carried (in '000s)

AA: 55,464
DL: 53,972
UA: 42,592
WN: 42,569
AS: 12,028
B6: 11,026

Now here are the financial metrics:

Total Operating Revenues (in millions):

DL: 12,536
AA; 11,960
UA: 11,402
WN: 5,909
AS: 2,288
B6: 2,105

Operating Income GAAP and Margin:

DL: 2,128 (17.0% margin)
WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 364 (15.9%)
UA: 1,472 (12.9%)
B6: 250 (11.9%)
AA: 1,153 (9.6%)

Operating Income Adjusted (Non-GAAP) excluding special items and Margin:

DL: 2,138 (17.1%)
WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 375 (16.4%)* - AS didn't report this specifically in their release so this is roughly what it should be from what I could piece together (on the high end)
UA: 1,543 (13.5%)
B6: 252 (12.0%)
AA: 1,274 (10.7%)

Pre-Tax Income GAAP and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 351 (15.3%)
DL: 1,907 (15.2%)
UA: 1,354 (11.9%)
B6: 236 (11.2%)
AA: 882 (7.4%)

Pre-Tax Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
DL: 1,997 (16.0%)
AS: 362 (15.8%)
UA: 1,416 (12.4%)
B6: 238 (11.3%)
AA: 1,072 (9.0%)


Net Income GAAP and Net Margin:

WN: 741 (12.5%)
DL: 1,443 (11.51%)
AS: 262 (11.45%)
UA: 1,052 (9.2%)
B6: 179 (8.5%)
AA: 662 (5.5%)

Net Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 741 (12.5%)
DL: 1,532 (12.3%)
AS: 270 (11.8%)
UA: 1,100 (9.6%)
B6: 180 (8.6%)
AA: 810 (6.8%)

I take my hat off to you. This sir, is great work.
 
winginit
Posts: 2555
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 3:51 pm

spinotter wrote:
EBiafore99 wrote:
Another interesting tidbit to compare is # of employees:

AA - 112,700
DL - 80,000
UA - 88,000

Could not believe the difference in # of employees between the three.


https://www.dallasnews.com/business/air ... e-slipping


Why does AA have so many employees? The difference in employee numbers between AA on the one hand and UA/DL on the other must have an effect on CASM and profit figures for AA. I noticed how close the US3 ASM and RPM numbers are - with 32,000 extra employees between AA and DL that must make a big difference.


Anecdotally speaking, I believe Delta relies quite heavily on contractors even in HDQ positions whereas AA does to a much lesser extent. Unsure about UA.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18109
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:02 pm

First, great work and much appreciated.

This shows the value of a well run network where the customer isn't the enemy.

Lightsaber
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
Prost
Posts: 2452
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:10 pm

Panamair, a tip of my hat to you. I appreciate the time you took to put this together for us, people like you really are additive to this board.
 
panamair
Topic Author
Posts: 4100
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 2:24 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:38 pm

cledaybuck wrote:
Thanks. If you have the time and the inclination, I think seeing YTD would be interesting too as one quarter can be deceiving.


Here are the YTD 2019 figures:

RPMs (traffic) - in millions

AA: 117,460
UA: 116,098
DL: 114,790
WN: 65,232
AS: 27,087
B6: 26,516

ASMs (capacity) - in millions

AA: 138,996
UA: 138,885
DL: 134,169
WN: 77,871
AS: 32,487
B6: 31,466

Passenger Load Factor:

DL: 85.6%
AA: 84.5%
B6: 84.3%
WN: 83.8%
UA: 83.6%
AS: 83.4%

Passengers carried (in '000s)

AA; 105,398
DL: 99,035
WN: 80,382
UA: 79,046
AS; 22,442
B6: 21,191


Financial Metrics:

Total Operating Revenues (in millions):

DL: 23,008
AA: 22,544
UA: 20,991
WN: 11,059
AS: 4,164
B6: 3,977

Operating Profit GAAP and Margin:

DL: 3,148 (13.7% margin)
WN: 1,473 (13.3%)
UA: 1,967 (9.4%)
AS: 389 (9.3%)
B6: 325 (8.2%)
AA: 1,528 (6.8%)

Operating Profit Non-GAAP adjusted and margin:

DL: 3,166 (13.8%)
WN; 1,473 (13.3%)
AS: 422 (10.1%)
UA: 2,056 (9.8%)
B6: 339 (8.5%)
AA: 1,787 (7.9%)


Pre-Tax Income GAAP and margin:

WN: 1,472 (13.3%)
DL: 2,853 (12.4%)
AS: 357 (8.6%)
UA: 1,721 (8.2%)
B6: 294 (7.4%)
AA: 1,128 (5.0%)

Pre-Tax Income Non-GAAP adjusted and margin:

WN: 1,472 (13.3%)
DL: 2,829 (12.3%)
AS: 390 (9.4%)
UA: 1,805 (8.6%)
B6: 308 (7.7%)
AA: 1,386 (6.1%)


Net Income GAAP and Net Margin:

WN: 1,128 (10.2%)
DL: 2,173 (9.4%)
UA: 1,344 (6.4%)
AS: 266 (6.39%)
B6: 221 (5.6%)
AA: 847 (3.8%)

Net Income Non-GAAP adjusted and margin:

WN: 1,128 (10.2%)
DL: 2,171 (9.4%)
AS: 291 (7.0%)
UA: 1,409 (6.7%)
B6: 232 (5.8%)
AA: 1,047 (4.6%)
 
User avatar
spinotter
Posts: 598
Joined: Wed May 27, 2015 1:37 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:49 pm

panamair wrote:
cledaybuck wrote:
Thanks. If you have the time and the inclination, I think seeing YTD would be interesting too as one quarter can be deceiving.


Here are the YTD 2019 figures:

RPMs (traffic) - in millions

AA: 117,460
UA: 116,098
DL: 114,790
WN: 65,232
AS: 27,087
B6: 26,516

ASMs (capacity) - in millions

AA: 138,996
UA: 138,885
DL: 134,169
WN: 77,871
AS: 32,487
B6: 31,466

Passenger Load Factor:

DL: 85.6%
AA: 84.5%
B6: 84.3%
WN: 83.8%
UA: 83.6%
AS: 83.4%

Passengers carried (in '000s)

AA; 105,398
DL: 99,035
WN: 80,382
UA: 79,046
AS; 22,442
B6: 21,191


Financial Metrics:

Total Operating Revenues (in millions):

DL: 23,008
AA: 22,544
UA: 20,991
WN: 11,059
AS: 4,164
B6: 3,977

Operating Profit GAAP and Margin:

DL: 3,148 (13.7% margin)
WN: 1,473 (13.3%)
UA: 1,967 (9.4%)
AS: 389 (9.3%)
B6: 325 (8.2%)
AA: 1,528 (6.8%)

Operating Profit Non-GAAP adjusted and margin:

DL: 3,166 (13.8%)
WN; 1,473 (13.3%)
AS: 422 (10.1%)
UA: 2,056 (9.8%)
B6: 339 (8.5%)
AA: 1,787 (7.9%)


Pre-Tax Income GAAP and margin:

WN: 1,472 (13.3%)
DL: 2,853 (12.4%)
AS: 357 (8.6%)
UA: 1,721 (8.2%)
B6: 294 (7.4%)
AA: 1,128 (5.0%)

Pre-Tax Income Non-GAAP adjusted and margin:

WN: 1,472 (13.3%)
DL: 2,829 (12.3%)
AS: 390 (9.4%)
UA: 1,805 (8.6%)
B6: 308 (7.7%)
AA: 1,386 (6.1%)


Net Income GAAP and Net Margin:

WN: 1,128 (10.2%)
DL: 2,173 (9.4%)
UA: 1,344 (6.4%)
AS: 266 (6.39%)
B6: 221 (5.6%)
AA: 847 (3.8%)

Net Income Non-GAAP adjusted and margin:

WN: 1,128 (10.2%)
DL: 2,171 (9.4%)
AS: 291 (7.0%)
UA: 1,409 (6.7%)
B6: 232 (5.8%)
AA: 1,047 (4.6%)


I want to add my thanks, panamair. Great information!
 
N649DL
Posts: 580
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 6:26 pm

airboss787 wrote:
Thanks. This is very exhaustive and fascinating. United seems to have taken its place in the middle of most of the metrics. Which is may not be the worst place to be, but obviously not the best. They are doing well but definitely have room for improvement. It seems AA needs to buck up. WN numbers and margins, even with the MAX grounded, are simply phenomenal.

Among the big 4, DL and WN seem to be the best performing, UA improving and AA firmly last with the smallest margins and also smallest numbers relative to its size.

Looking at RPMs and ASMs, UA seems to be one of the biggest, but that does not necessarily reflect in the numbers below. Maybe, the large RJ fleet plays a role in some of these things and maybe because they have a huge international route network as well? Does having 2% less seat occupancy play a role in it as well?

OP -- Is it possible to also add CASM and RASM numbers to get an even better idea?


Pretty much dead on middle of the pack for UA. Likely sums up where they've been over the last decade and what future goals they want to attain. For all of the *bad* times within the last 10 years, they came out pretty good all things considered.

I'm not a financial analyst or anything, but if I'm reading this right it seems AA has some of the best pax numbers but the lowest returns financially. Yet it doesn't seem like they're on the brink of extinction either? I think they need to do more to get their costs in line.
 
Prost
Posts: 2452
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 6:23 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:35 pm

My guess is AA will be the canary in the coal mine, when they slide into break even or a loss we’re probably entering a recession environment.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1535
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:01 pm

panamair wrote:
cledaybuck wrote:
Thanks. If you have the time and the inclination, I think seeing YTD would be interesting too as one quarter can be deceiving.


Here are the YTD 2019 figures:

RPMs (traffic) - in millions

AA: 117,460
UA: 116,098
DL: 114,790
WN: 65,232
AS: 27,087
B6: 26,516

ASMs (capacity) - in millions

AA: 138,996
UA: 138,885
DL: 134,169
WN: 77,871
AS: 32,487
B6: 31,466

Passenger Load Factor:

DL: 85.6%
AA: 84.5%
B6: 84.3%
WN: 83.8%
UA: 83.6%
AS: 83.4%

Passengers carried (in '000s)

AA; 105,398
DL: 99,035
WN: 80,382
UA: 79,046
AS; 22,442
B6: 21,191


Financial Metrics:

Total Operating Revenues (in millions):

DL: 23,008
AA: 22,544
UA: 20,991
WN: 11,059
AS: 4,164
B6: 3,977

Operating Profit GAAP and Margin:

DL: 3,148 (13.7% margin)
WN: 1,473 (13.3%)
UA: 1,967 (9.4%)
AS: 389 (9.3%)
B6: 325 (8.2%)
AA: 1,528 (6.8%)

Operating Profit Non-GAAP adjusted and margin:

DL: 3,166 (13.8%)
WN; 1,473 (13.3%)
AS: 422 (10.1%)
UA: 2,056 (9.8%)
B6: 339 (8.5%)
AA: 1,787 (7.9%)


Pre-Tax Income GAAP and margin:

WN: 1,472 (13.3%)
DL: 2,853 (12.4%)
AS: 357 (8.6%)
UA: 1,721 (8.2%)
B6: 294 (7.4%)
AA: 1,128 (5.0%)

Pre-Tax Income Non-GAAP adjusted and margin:

WN: 1,472 (13.3%)
DL: 2,829 (12.3%)
AS: 390 (9.4%)
UA: 1,805 (8.6%)
B6: 308 (7.7%)
AA: 1,386 (6.1%)


Net Income GAAP and Net Margin:

WN: 1,128 (10.2%)
DL: 2,173 (9.4%)
UA: 1,344 (6.4%)
AS: 266 (6.39%)
B6: 221 (5.6%)
AA: 847 (3.8%)

Net Income Non-GAAP adjusted and margin:

WN: 1,128 (10.2%)
DL: 2,171 (9.4%)
AS: 291 (7.0%)
UA: 1,409 (6.7%)
B6: 232 (5.8%)
AA: 1,047 (4.6%)

Thanks. Looks like DL and WN are out ahead of the pack.
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
Brickell305
Posts: 675
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Fri Jul 26, 2019 8:09 pm

Prost wrote:
My guess is AA will be the canary in the coal mine, when they slide into break even or a loss we’re probably entering a recession environment.

I'd think UA would be a better bellwether. They have major hubs in cities that represent some of the most important industries in the country (finance - EWR, tech - SFO, oil - IAH, gov't - IAD) and also the second and third largest cities in the US (LAX, ORD). Unlike AA, UA doesn't currently have as many managerial/labor/operational issues hanging around their necks. AA could potentially start faltering even in a relatively decent economy.
 
Sancho99504
Posts: 641
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:44 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 2:23 am

N649DL wrote:
airboss787 wrote:
Thanks. This is very exhaustive and fascinating. United seems to have taken its place in the middle of most of the metrics. Which is may not be the worst place to be, but obviously not the best. They are doing well but definitely have room for improvement. It seems AA needs to buck up. WN numbers and margins, even with the MAX grounded, are simply phenomenal.

Among the big 4, DL and WN seem to be the best performing, UA improving and AA firmly last with the smallest margins and also smallest numbers relative to its size.

Looking at RPMs and ASMs, UA seems to be one of the biggest, but that does not necessarily reflect in the numbers below. Maybe, the large RJ fleet plays a role in some of these things and maybe because they have a huge international route network as well? Does having 2% less seat occupancy play a role in it as well?

OP -- Is it possible to also add CASM and RASM numbers to get an even better idea?


Pretty much dead on middle of the pack for UA. Likely sums up where they've been over the last decade and what future goals they want to attain. For all of the *bad* times within the last 10 years, they came out pretty good all things considered.

I'm not a financial analyst or anything, but if I'm reading this right it seems AA has some of the best pax numbers but the lowest returns financially. Yet it doesn't seem like they're on the brink of extinction either? I think they need to do more to get their costs in line.

They've carried 25 million more passengers YTD than UA, $1.5 billion more revenue, yet have made half a billion dollars less.
YTD, they've carried 6m more passengers, generated only $500m less revenue, but half the profit as DL.


Costs are definitely higher than the other's, but the pay and benefits are very similar to UA and DL, so aircraft acquisition costs and the debt have to be a huge reason for the disparity? I'm no financial expert either, but all that cheap debt doesn't seem to be working out so well.
kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out-USMC
 
AEROFAN
Posts: 1758
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 9:47 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 2:41 am

panamair wrote:
Some folks have asked for a summary of the Q2 2019 financial performance of the various US carriers....here's a comparison across various financial and statistical metrics of AA, DL, UA, WN, AS, and B6:

Before getting into the financials, here are some traffic/capacity figures to give you an idea of the size of these carriers and how they should be "grouped" when looking at financial metrics:

Q2 2019:..."


Thanks for making the time to put this together for us.
 
Justapax
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:31 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 3:54 am

[/quote]
Thanks for making the time to put this together for us.[/quote]

Panamair - thanks so much for compiling all of this info. For both the quarter and YTD. Indeed fascinating stuff. I hope you continue to put this together after each quarter!
 
77H
Posts: 1460
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2016 11:27 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 4:27 am

Anyone care to provide a constructive opinion on why UA is trailing the other US3 carriers so much on LF? Is this mainly an issue of ticket cost, lesser domestic coverage, customer service perception issues?

77H
 
LHUSA
Posts: 786
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 10:15 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 4:43 am

77H wrote:
Anyone care to provide a constructive opinion on why UA is trailing the other US3 carriers so much on LF? Is this mainly an issue of ticket cost, lesser domestic coverage, customer service perception issues?

Partly due to the rapid growth state that UA is currently in.

77H
 
wenders825
Posts: 350
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2016 7:29 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 7:02 am

EBiafore99 wrote:
Another interesting tidbit to compare is # of employees:

AA - 112,700
DL - 80,000
UA - 88,000

Could not believe the difference in # of employees between the three.


https://www.dallasnews.com/business/air ... e-slipping

AA outsources the least. Delta has ready reserve and DGS at so many different stations. can't speak for UA
 
airplaneboy
Posts: 679
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 11:59 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 7:31 am

WN is really a standout here. They are producing the most returns with the LEAST of everything when compared to the big 3. They have the smallest fleet, smallest network, smallest workforce, no codeshares, no charging for checked bags/change fees/seat assignments/ancillary fees/basic economy, etc. They’re also the only airline who’s growth is stalled since their entire fleet plan revolves around just the 737 MAX. Impressive performance for producing the most while having the least. That says a lot about how efficient they are.
 
Cactusjuba
Posts: 192
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:06 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 10:22 am

Warren Buffet has taken large investments in two airlines recently. Can you guess who? SW & DL, and the numbers don't lie. Not only are the financials great, but they have a loved brand, a strong employee focused culture, and their future fleets are being paid largely in cash.
 
EBiafore99
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:03 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 11:15 am

wenders825 wrote:
EBiafore99 wrote:
Another interesting tidbit to compare is # of employees:

AA - 112,700
DL - 80,000
UA - 88,000

Could not believe the difference in # of employees between the three.


https://www.dallasnews.com/business/air ... e-slipping

AA outsources the least. Delta has ready reserve and DGS at so many different stations. can't speak for UA


The more I thought about these numbers, I was wondering about the "outsourcing". I thought DGS was a sub of DL, so I would think the employees would be included, but you're probably right that they are not.
 
Boof02671
Posts: 1626
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 1:39 pm

spinotter wrote:
EBiafore99 wrote:
Another interesting tidbit to compare is # of employees:

AA - 112,700
DL - 80,000
UA - 88,000

Could not believe the difference in # of employees between the three.


https://www.dallasnews.com/business/air ... e-slipping


Why does AA have so many employees? The difference in employee numbers between AA on the one hand and UA/DL on the other must have an effect on CASM and profit figures for AA. I noticed how close the US3 ASM and RPM numbers are - with 32,000 extra employees between AA and DL that must make a big difference.

Because AA does more work in-house, and DL and UA use lots of vendors.
 
phxa340
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:07 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 3:24 pm

Not to turn this into a B6 vs AS thing but this shows that AS is ever so slightly ahead of B6 contrary to many members posts on here.
 
Sightseer
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 6:04 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 4:56 pm

Thanks Panamair!

airplaneboy wrote:
WN is really a standout here. They are producing the most returns with the LEAST of everything when compared to the big 3. They have the smallest fleet, smallest network, smallest workforce, no codeshares, no charging for checked bags/change fees/seat assignments/ancillary fees/basic economy, etc. They’re also the only airline who’s growth is stalled since their entire fleet plan revolves around just the 737 MAX. Impressive performance for producing the most while having the least. That says a lot about how efficient they are.

IINM the domestic market has generally been stronger than the international one for US carriers the last few years, so that would benefit carriers like WN that have relatively smaller international networks. Of course other airlines that are relatively more domestically oriented would benefit as well, and WN is outperforming them too.
 
alasizon
Posts: 1936
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:49 pm

airplaneboy wrote:
WN is really a standout here. They are producing the most returns with the LEAST of everything when compared to the big 3. They have the smallest fleet, smallest network, smallest workforce, no codeshares, no charging for checked bags/change fees/seat assignments/ancillary fees/basic economy, etc. They’re also the only airline who’s growth is stalled since their entire fleet plan revolves around just the 737 MAX. Impressive performance for producing the most while having the least. That says a lot about how efficient they are.


WN has 59,000 employees which is 55% of AA (not including regional employees). Coincidentally, their RPMs are also 55% of AA. The big difference in employee cost though is WN has very few layers of middle and upper management and they expect a lot of performance out of anyone that has the word Manager or Director in their title. Obviously with WN being a domestic focused airline, their pax carried will be a much higher percentage compared to AA & DL.

If you compare WN to AS though; AS has only 23,420 employees (including QX) which is 39.6% of WN and offers 41.7% of the ASMs. Since AS outsourced their ramp in every Lower 48 location and the figure quoted includes all of QX which is probably roughly equal to the number of employees that work for McGee and those that would be required if all the appropriate stations were in-sourced. That shows pretty well the similar rate of employees when it comes to WN & AS (domestic focused narrow-body carriers) and the additional employees required to support the larger, international operations of the US3 that also have large amounts of in-sourced MX compared to AS & WN.

I also wouldn't say that WN is the only one who's growth is stalled; I would argue AA & UA are also in that boat as they had to adjust/pull their plans to account for the MAX out of service, just as WN did by slowing their planned retirements.
Manager on Duty & Tower Planner
 
airplaneboy
Posts: 679
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 11:59 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 9:39 pm

alasizon wrote:
airplaneboy wrote:
WN is really a standout here. They are producing the most returns with the LEAST of everything when compared to the big 3. They have the smallest fleet, smallest network, smallest workforce, no codeshares, no charging for checked bags/change fees/seat assignments/ancillary fees/basic economy, etc. They’re also the only airline who’s growth is stalled since their entire fleet plan revolves around just the 737 MAX. Impressive performance for producing the most while having the least. That says a lot about how efficient they are.


WN has 59,000 employees which is 55% of AA (not including regional employees). Coincidentally, their RPMs are also 55% of AA. The big difference in employee cost though is WN has very few layers of middle and upper management and they expect a lot of performance out of anyone that has the word Manager or Director in their title. Obviously with WN being a domestic focused airline, their pax carried will be a much higher percentage compared to AA & DL.

If you compare WN to AS though; AS has only 23,420 employees (including QX) which is 39.6% of WN and offers 41.7% of the ASMs. Since AS outsourced their ramp in every Lower 48 location and the figure quoted includes all of QX which is probably roughly equal to the number of employees that work for McGee and those that would be required if all the appropriate stations were in-sourced. That shows pretty well the similar rate of employees when it comes to WN & AS (domestic focused narrow-body carriers) and the additional employees required to support the larger, international operations of the US3 that also have large amounts of in-sourced MX compared to AS & WN.

I also wouldn't say that WN is the only one who's growth is stalled; I would argue AA & UA are also in that boat as they had to adjust/pull their plans to account for the MAX out of service, just as WN did by slowing their planned retirements.


My point still stands. WN is producing more returns, with less when compared to the big 3. Regardless of having a large international network or not. Regarding being the most impacted due to the MAX being the only aircraft that will grow their fleet- United and American have other aircraft on order that will allow them to shuffle planes around. WN doesn’t have this luxury, because they only have the MAX on order. So considering they had a sizable amount of their future fleet taken away, their performance is even all the more impressive.
 
alasizon
Posts: 1936
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sat Jul 27, 2019 11:31 pm

airplaneboy wrote:
alasizon wrote:
airplaneboy wrote:
WN is really a standout here. They are producing the most returns with the LEAST of everything when compared to the big 3. They have the smallest fleet, smallest network, smallest workforce, no codeshares, no charging for checked bags/change fees/seat assignments/ancillary fees/basic economy, etc. They’re also the only airline who’s growth is stalled since their entire fleet plan revolves around just the 737 MAX. Impressive performance for producing the most while having the least. That says a lot about how efficient they are.


WN has 59,000 employees which is 55% of AA (not including regional employees). Coincidentally, their RPMs are also 55% of AA. The big difference in employee cost though is WN has very few layers of middle and upper management and they expect a lot of performance out of anyone that has the word Manager or Director in their title. Obviously with WN being a domestic focused airline, their pax carried will be a much higher percentage compared to AA & DL.

If you compare WN to AS though; AS has only 23,420 employees (including QX) which is 39.6% of WN and offers 41.7% of the ASMs. Since AS outsourced their ramp in every Lower 48 location and the figure quoted includes all of QX which is probably roughly equal to the number of employees that work for McGee and those that would be required if all the appropriate stations were in-sourced. That shows pretty well the similar rate of employees when it comes to WN & AS (domestic focused narrow-body carriers) and the additional employees required to support the larger, international operations of the US3 that also have large amounts of in-sourced MX compared to AS & WN.

I also wouldn't say that WN is the only one who's growth is stalled; I would argue AA & UA are also in that boat as they had to adjust/pull their plans to account for the MAX out of service, just as WN did by slowing their planned retirements.


My point still stands. WN is producing more returns, with less when compared to the big 3. Regardless of having a large international network or not. Regarding being the most impacted due to the MAX being the only aircraft that will grow their fleet- United and American have other aircraft on order that will allow them to shuffle planes around. WN doesn’t have this luxury, because they only have the MAX on order. So considering they had a sizable amount of their future fleet taken away, their performance is even all the more impressive.


I'm not sure I stand by WN producing more with less. Yes; they produce better than all but DL but I'm not convinced they are producing more with less. WN has ~750 aircraft (including MAXes) in their fleet, roughly the same as AA & DL and more than UA. When you factor in regional carriers, yes the fleets are bigger and the network much larger but when looking at just narrowbody to narrowbody fleet, the networks are similar. Overall narrowbody fleet counts for AA & DL skew slightly higher due to 757s used for European & South America service that WN does not partake in.

Fleet Count:
AA: 788 narrowbodies (excluding MAX)
WN: 719 narrowbodies (excluding MAX)
DL: 761 narrowbodies
UA: 571 narrowbodies (excluding MAX)

Take WN's operating revenue of 5,909 million and divide it by number of passengers carried for the quarter (42,569,000); that is $138.80 per passenger. AA on the other hand (who is the worst performing of the US3 this quarter) produced $215.63 per passenger. Prorating overall for domestic only Mainline (done by taking the published domestic revenue and multiplying it by (Overall Domestic RPM-Total Regional RPM)/Overall Domestic RPM) AA comes out to 6.567 billion in domestic ML operating revenue compared to WN's 5.909 billion in operating revenue. While it isn't exact (since some of the Regional ASMs I subtracted aren't domestic but rather fall under Latin America and Regional yield is better than ML), it shows that per narrowbody domestically AA is roughly making 8.33 million while WN is making 8.21 million.

That isn't more with less; its roughly equal. The difference is in CASM, overall CASM-ex for AA was 11.34 while WN was 9.09, DL was 10.15 and AS was 8.33. By keeping internal costs lower, WN is able to keep their CASM lower to provide a better margin but they aren't doing more with less, they are just in a better position cost-wise. Had AA had WN's CASM that would have saved them an additional 1.44 billion (approximately) and would put them at the top of the pack when it comes to operating margin (21.6%). Even if you applied the domestic only (952 million) share of that increase, AA would still be doing better than WN as AA would have a 17.6% operating margin. WN does a great job and transporting their bread and butter and avoiding some of the higher cost pieces (longhaul flying, regional networks) but they aren't doing more with less. They are doing better in the cost department but produce pretty close to everyone else on the revenue front.

Don't get me wrong, I think WN is a great product for the domestic US market but they aren't the underdog anymore.

Domestic Passenger Revenue (in millions)
WN: 5,487 **WN doesn't break down the Latin American operation versus domestic but I'll credit WN as having all domestic revenue for this purpose
AA: 8,009
DL: 8,071
AS: 2,111 **AS doesn't break down domestic vs Mexico

PRASM (in cents)
WN: 13.72
AA: 15.22 (17.02 for domestic)
DL: 15.84
AS: 12.43 (11.59 for Mainline, 19.78 for Regional)

Yield (in cents)
WN: 15.89
AA: 17.57
DL: 18.00
AS: 14.43
Manager on Duty & Tower Planner
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 3664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:01 am

There’s a study somewhere showing how DL is very good at matching the plane to market. It always the right sized plane for the available market. Accounts for the low ASM numbers. Look at the fleet-especially going on the A220 and B717, the right size from peak small markets and off-peak larger markets. They’ve avoided buying big wide-bodies which are to fill.
 
Dieuwer
Posts: 1522
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:19 am

Just imagine what will happen to the (already mediocre) AA numbers when AA pilots or flights attendants join the disgruntled mechanics and go on strike.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 3664
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 1:50 am

 
User avatar
PacoMartin
Posts: 383
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 8:18 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:01 am

airplaneboy wrote:
WN is really a standout here.
They’re also the only airline who’s growth is stalled since their entire fleet plan revolves around just the 737 MAX. Impressive performance for producing the most while having the least. That says a lot about how efficient they are.


A critical parameter is the change in net income from 2nd quarter 2018 in millions of dollars
$407.00 Delta Air $1,443.00 $1,036.00
$369.00 United $1,052.00 $683.00
$300.00 JBLU $179.00 -$121.00
$106.00 American $662.00 $556.00
$103.20 Spirit Air $114.50 $11.30
$69.00 Alaska $262.00 $193.00
$20.50 Allegiant $70.50 $50.00
$8.00 Southwest $741.00 $733.00

Let's keep in mind that Southwest retired 30 B737-300s the month before their first MAX delivery. Almost none of those planes were due to be retired, but that was their contract with their pilots. The effect of those 30 retired B733 jets, along with the grounding of 34 MAX jets, plus the intended delivery rate which was supposed to be 40 MAX jets these years is cumulative. I am surprised they managed to grow net income at all even if it was only $8 million
 
HPAEAA
Posts: 1114
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 7:24 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:08 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Thanks for posting that article, I’m curious to see what the updated results show given the changes from 2017. Jamie baker asked a similar question. At the JPM conference this year and DP seemed to side step it again..
1.4mm and counting...
 
Boof02671
Posts: 1626
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2016 12:15 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:10 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Just imagine what will happen to the (already mediocre) AA numbers when AA pilots or flights attendants join the disgruntled mechanics and go on strike.

No one will be going on strike.
 
Airbuser
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 1:42 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:35 am

Dieuwer wrote:
Just imagine what will happen to the (already mediocre) AA numbers when AA pilots or flights attendants join the disgruntled mechanics and go on strike.


Perhaps some of the problem with these unionized employees is the fact that they can’t strike. The shinanigans cause severe disruptions to some of the passengers and certainly get managements attention. But what is a worker to do? How long is too long to go without a contract? Should we be happy just to have a job or expect to be treated like our peers? Not getting a part of a companies profits when they are making record setting profits is frustrating. Add in the fact that almost all the employees have been here far longer than the current management team. They get theirs and the employees trudges on. Remember “Pull together win together.”? That worked really well for the employees. Nope.

The mechanics are in a tight spot. Less outsourcing than the competitors. Two Unions not sure what they want. Aging workforce ready to retire. They may have less to lose than management thinks.
 
heavymetal
Posts: 4571
Joined: Fri May 08, 2015 3:37 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:38 pm

alasizon wrote:
airplaneboy wrote:
alasizon wrote:

WN has 59,000 employees which is 55% of AA (not including regional employees). Coincidentally, their RPMs are also 55% of AA. The big difference in employee cost though is WN has very few layers of middle and upper management and they expect a lot of performance out of anyone that has the word Manager or Director in their title. Obviously with WN being a domestic focused airline, their pax carried will be a much higher percentage compared to AA & DL.

If you compare WN to AS though; AS has only 23,420 employees (including QX) which is 39.6% of WN and offers 41.7% of the ASMs. Since AS outsourced their ramp in every Lower 48 location and the figure quoted includes all of QX which is probably roughly equal to the number of employees that work for McGee and those that would be required if all the appropriate stations were in-sourced. That shows pretty well the similar rate of employees when it comes to WN & AS (domestic focused narrow-body carriers) and the additional employees required to support the larger, international operations of the US3 that also have large amounts of in-sourced MX compared to AS & WN.

I also wouldn't say that WN is the only one who's growth is stalled; I would argue AA & UA are also in that boat as they had to adjust/pull their plans to account for the MAX out of service, just as WN did by slowing their planned retirements.


My point still stands. WN is producing more returns, with less when compared to the big 3. Regardless of having a large international network or not. Regarding being the most impacted due to the MAX being the only aircraft that will grow their fleet- United and American have other aircraft on order that will allow them to shuffle planes around. WN doesn’t have this luxury, because they only have the MAX on order. So considering they had a sizable amount of their future fleet taken away, their performance is even all the more impressive.


I'm not sure I stand by WN producing more with less. Yes; they produce better than all but DL but I'm not convinced they are producing more with less. WN has ~750 aircraft (including MAXes) in their fleet, roughly the same as AA & DL and more than UA. When you factor in regional carriers, yes the fleets are bigger and the network much larger but when looking at just narrowbody to narrowbody fleet, the networks are similar. Overall narrowbody fleet counts for AA & DL skew slightly higher due to 757s used for European & South America service that WN does not partake in.

Fleet Count:
AA: 788 narrowbodies (excluding MAX)
WN: 719 narrowbodies (excluding MAX)
DL: 761 narrowbodies
UA: 571 narrowbodies (excluding MAX)

Take WN's operating revenue of 5,909 million and divide it by number of passengers carried for the quarter (42,569,000); that is $138.80 per passenger. AA on the other hand (who is the worst performing of the US3 this quarter) produced $215.63 per passenger. Prorating overall for domestic only Mainline (done by taking the published domestic revenue and multiplying it by (Overall Domestic RPM-Total Regional RPM)/Overall Domestic RPM) AA comes out to 6.567 billion in domestic ML operating revenue compared to WN's 5.909 billion in operating revenue. While it isn't exact (since some of the Regional ASMs I subtracted aren't domestic but rather fall under Latin America and Regional yield is better than ML), it shows that per narrowbody domestically AA is roughly making 8.33 million while WN is making 8.21 million.

That isn't more with less; its roughly equal. The difference is in CASM, overall CASM-ex for AA was 11.34 while WN was 9.09, DL was 10.15 and AS was 8.33. By keeping internal costs lower, WN is able to keep their CASM lower to provide a better margin but they aren't doing more with less, they are just in a better position cost-wise. Had AA had WN's CASM that would have saved them an additional 1.44 billion (approximately) and would put them at the top of the pack when it comes to operating margin (21.6%). Even if you applied the domestic only (952 million) share of that increase, AA would still be doing better than WN as AA would have a 17.6% operating margin. WN does a great job and transporting their bread and butter and avoiding some of the higher cost pieces (longhaul flying, regional networks) but they aren't doing more with less. They are doing better in the cost department but produce pretty close to everyone else on the revenue front.

Don't get me wrong, I think WN is a great product for the domestic US market but they aren't the underdog anymore.

Domestic Passenger Revenue (in millions)
WN: 5,487 **WN doesn't break down the Latin American operation versus domestic but I'll credit WN as having all domestic revenue for this purpose
AA: 8,009
DL: 8,071
AS: 2,111 **AS doesn't break down domestic vs Mexico

PRASM (in cents)
WN: 13.72
AA: 15.22 (17.02 for domestic)
DL: 15.84
AS: 12.43 (11.59 for Mainline, 19.78 for Regional)

Yield (in cents)
WN: 15.89
AA: 17.57
DL: 18.00
AS: 14.43



I’m not sure I understand the argument of this post. You argue that AA and SW are generating roughly the same domestic revenue $ per ML aircraft, so SW is not generating more on less. However you then go on to acknowledge that SW has lower costs than AA - and claim that if you just slap SW’s CASM on AA, AA would have some of the highest profits in the industry. But you can’t do that, and AA has markedly higher CASM than SW. What is driving that? If it’s anything other than seat density, then yes, SW must be generating more profit $ and more earnings $ with less than AA and the other legacies.
 
N757ST
Posts: 733
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 6:00 am

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 2:43 pm

You can’t really compare RASM or CASM unless you are comparing similar average segment length.
 
JAMBOJET
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2018 6:23 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:11 pm

panamair wrote:
Some folks have asked for a summary of the Q2 2019 financial performance of the various US carriers....here's a comparison across various financial and statistical metrics of AA, DL, UA, WN, AS, and B6:

Before getting into the financials, here are some traffic/capacity figures to give you an idea of the size of these carriers and how they should be "grouped" when looking at financial metrics:

Q2 2019:

RPMs (Revenue Pax Miles) - in millions: - this is the measurement of traffic carried by the airline during the quarter:

DL: 63,173
UA: 63,001
AA: 62,658
WN: 34,528
AS: 14,638
B6: 13,782

ASMs (Available Seat Miles) - in millions - this is a measurement of the capacity offered by the airline during the quarter:

UA: 73,240
AA: 72,322
DL: 71,754
WN: 39,985
AS: 16,980
B6: 16,029

Pax Load Factor - RPMs divided by ASMs - remarkably similar across carriers:

DL: 88.0%
AA: 86.6%
WN: 86.4%
AS: 86.2%
UA and B6: 86.0%

Total number of passengers carried (in '000s)

AA: 55,464
DL: 53,972
UA: 42,592
WN: 42,569
AS: 12,028
B6: 11,026

Now here are the financial metrics:

Total Operating Revenues (in millions):

DL: 12,536
AA; 11,960
UA: 11,402
WN: 5,909
AS: 2,288
B6: 2,105

Operating Income GAAP and Margin:

DL: 2,128 (17.0% margin)
WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 364 (15.9%)
UA: 1,472 (12.9%)
B6: 250 (11.9%)
AA: 1,153 (9.6%)

Operating Income Adjusted (Non-GAAP) excluding special items and Margin:

DL: 2,138 (17.1%)
WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 375 (16.4%)* - AS didn't report this specifically in their release so this is roughly what it should be from what I could piece together (on the high end)
UA: 1,543 (13.5%)
B6: 252 (12.0%)
AA: 1,274 (10.7%)

Pre-Tax Income GAAP and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
AS: 351 (15.3%)
DL: 1,907 (15.2%)
UA: 1,354 (11.9%)
B6: 236 (11.2%)
AA: 882 (7.4%)

Pre-Tax Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 968 (16.4%)
DL: 1,997 (16.0%)
AS: 362 (15.8%)
UA: 1,416 (12.4%)
B6: 238 (11.3%)
AA: 1,072 (9.0%)


Net Income GAAP and Net Margin:

WN: 741 (12.5%)
DL: 1,443 (11.51%)
AS: 262 (11.45%)
UA: 1,052 (9.2%)
B6: 179 (8.5%)
AA: 662 (5.5%)

Net Income Non-GAAP adjusted excluding special items, and Margin:

WN: 741 (12.5%)
DL: 1,532 (12.3%)
AS: 270 (11.8%)
UA: 1,100 (9.6%)
B6: 180 (8.6%)
AA: 810 (6.8%)

Awesome read!
Thanks for your effort putting this together!
 
alasizon
Posts: 1936
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Sun Jul 28, 2019 6:13 pm

heavymetal wrote:
I’m not sure I understand the argument of this post. You argue that AA and SW are generating roughly the same domestic revenue $ per ML aircraft, so SW is not generating more on less. However you then go on to acknowledge that SW has lower costs than AA - and claim that if you just slap SW’s CASM on AA, AA would have some of the highest profits in the industry. But you can’t do that, and AA has markedly higher CASM than SW. What is driving that? If it’s anything other than seat density, then yes, SW must be generating more profit $ and more earnings $ with less than AA and the other legacies.


My point is that WN isn't doing more with less; they are doing roughly the same as everyone else when it comes to revenue per aircraft. Their difference is when it comes to costs. That isn't doing more with less, that is simply having lower costs while producing the same as the lowest performing of the US3.

I'm fully aware that you can't just slap WN's CASM on AA; my point though was that WN's benefit is costs, not doing more with less resources/opportunities for profit.
Manager on Duty & Tower Planner
 
N649DL
Posts: 580
Joined: Sat Aug 25, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Mon Jul 29, 2019 1:00 am

Sancho99504 wrote:
N649DL wrote:
airboss787 wrote:
Thanks. This is very exhaustive and fascinating. United seems to have taken its place in the middle of most of the metrics. Which is may not be the worst place to be, but obviously not the best. They are doing well but definitely have room for improvement. It seems AA needs to buck up. WN numbers and margins, even with the MAX grounded, are simply phenomenal.

Among the big 4, DL and WN seem to be the best performing, UA improving and AA firmly last with the smallest margins and also smallest numbers relative to its size.

Looking at RPMs and ASMs, UA seems to be one of the biggest, but that does not necessarily reflect in the numbers below. Maybe, the large RJ fleet plays a role in some of these things and maybe because they have a huge international route network as well? Does having 2% less seat occupancy play a role in it as well?

OP -- Is it possible to also add CASM and RASM numbers to get an even better idea?


Pretty much dead on middle of the pack for UA. Likely sums up where they've been over the last decade and what future goals they want to attain. For all of the *bad* times within the last 10 years, they came out pretty good all things considered.

I'm not a financial analyst or anything, but if I'm reading this right it seems AA has some of the best pax numbers but the lowest returns financially. Yet it doesn't seem like they're on the brink of extinction either? I think they need to do more to get their costs in line.

They've carried 25 million more passengers YTD than UA, $1.5 billion more revenue, yet have made half a billion dollars less.
YTD, they've carried 6m more passengers, generated only $500m less revenue, but half the profit as DL.


Costs are definitely higher than the other's, but the pay and benefits are very similar to UA and DL, so aircraft acquisition costs and the debt have to be a huge reason for the disparity? I'm no financial expert either, but all that cheap debt doesn't seem to be working out so well.


Could be related to the massive Airbus order back when AA was in BK in 2012 plus whatever financing terms they got a slew of 788-9s and a ton of 738s to kill off all the S80s. I read that Airbus gave AA a hell of a deal back then but the devil is in the details. All the while, the rumors on here is that MIA went from being a cash cow to barely breaking even (likely) because of overflow at CLT. It could also be related to the costs of the work groups at legacy AA / US.

I know people have problems with AA, but having flown them out of the blue for work over the last few years, I always thought their new corporate image was sharp. Plus, flights and baggage were all on-time. It's a matter of adjusting costs and finances at this moment for the most part.
 
Sancho99504
Posts: 641
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 2:44 pm

Re: Q2 2019 US Carriers Financial Performance

Mon Jul 29, 2019 3:42 pm

N649DL wrote:
Sancho99504 wrote:
N649DL wrote:

Pretty much dead on middle of the pack for UA. Likely sums up where they've been over the last decade and what future goals they want to attain. For all of the *bad* times within the last 10 years, they came out pretty good all things considered.

I'm not a financial analyst or anything, but if I'm reading this right it seems AA has some of the best pax numbers but the lowest returns financially. Yet it doesn't seem like they're on the brink of extinction either? I think they need to do more to get their costs in line.

They've carried 25 million more passengers YTD than UA, $1.5 billion more revenue, yet have made half a billion dollars less.
YTD, they've carried 6m more passengers, generated only $500m less revenue, but half the profit as DL.


Costs are definitely higher than the other's, but the pay and benefits are very similar to UA and DL, so aircraft acquisition costs and the debt have to be a huge reason for the disparity? I'm no financial expert either, but all that cheap debt doesn't seem to be working out so well.


Could be related to the massive Airbus order back when AA was in BK in 2012 plus whatever financing terms they got a slew of 788-9s and a ton of 738s to kill off all the S80s. I read that Airbus gave AA a hell of a deal back then but the devil is in the details. All the while, the rumors on here is that MIA went from being a cash cow to barely breaking even (likely) because of overflow at CLT. It could also be related to the costs of the work groups at legacy AA / US.

I know people have problems with AA, but having flown them out of the blue for work over the last few years, I always thought their new corporate image was sharp. Plus, flights and baggage were all on-time. It's a matter of adjusting costs and finances at this moment for the most part.

Between the new contracts that WN pilots and Flight Attendants, their costs have gone up significantly. AA pilots have the 4th best contract right now as far as pay goes.

I've been chastised heavily in the past for blasting other airlines for having debt when they could easily not have it.

A lot of AA's aircraft could have been paid for with cash. They chose to finance everything. Even at 2-3%, that's a hell of a lot of interest being paid for the next 20 years that it will take them to bring that number down to what DL or WN have in debt.
kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out-USMC

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