Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

AWA money situation

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

needsumluv

Active member
Joined
Sep 10, 2004
Posts
37
All right - to all the speculators with a good knowledge of finances...

How is AWA doing money wise?

Their market cap is 183,000 and I'm not sure what their debts ,other than lots, are but they look to be in bad shape. I think they have 600,000 million cash on hand.

Should people be worried? Their investor call says they can only take one more year with the current losses.
 
Our cash on hand is 275.74 million. Except for SW, JB, or AT, all airlines are in bad shape can only take "one more year". We are not yet, however, teetering on the point of Chap 11.
 
our CFO spoke at the training center a couple weeks ago: "Right now this industry, as a business, simply doesn't work." Can't argue with that. Without either a drop in fuel prices or a liquidation of multiple carriers, he forsees Ch. 11 in 12-18 months for 80% of the industry, the obvious exception being Southwest and perhaps a couple other LCC's.

That said, AWA is well-positioned if the industry outlook does brighten. Unless you have an offer from Southwest, FedEx, or UPS, AWA offers as good a chance as any for a decent airline career with a pilot contract competitive with most other carriers out there.
 
reepicheep said:
our CFO spoke at the training center a couple weeks ago: "Right now this industry, as a business, simply doesn't work." Can't argue with that. Without either a drop in fuel prices or a liquidation of multiple carriers, he forsees Ch. 11 in 12-18 months for 80% of the industry, the obvious exception being Southwest and perhaps a couple other LCC's.

That said, AWA is well-positioned if the industry outlook does brighten. Unless you have an offer from Southwest, FedEx, or UPS, AWA offers as good a chance as any for a decent airline career with a pilot contract competitive with most other carriers out there.

I agree. Not a bad place to be. Others will go Ch. 11 before AWA.
 
TWA Dude said:
Our cash on hand is 275.74 million. Except for SW, JB, or AT, all airlines are in bad shape can only take "one more year". We are not yet, however, teetering on the point of Chap 11.

You forgot Alaska. We have 880 million in the bank and the 2nd lowest debt to equity ratio, next to Southwest.

Don't let the paper "losses" fool you, we are making money.
 
mach none said:
Don't let the paper "losses" fool you, we are making money.

Sounds like they fooled you. Companies don't survive on "paper losses". Eventually the "cash" losses kick in. Then you have nothing to borrow on.
 
I think we are ok for now but a lot depends on fuel prices.

Our CEO doesn't see USAirways, United, or any of the legacies just going away. With GE owning most of USAirways fleet they are going to keep throwing money at them for as long as the cost of keeping them in business is less than taking back and remarketing 200+ airplanes.

This is a real problem because as long as they can sit in BK court they set the pricing for the market making it really hard for any non BK airlines to raise fares. Hate to say it United and Airways guys, but your companies are slowly draging the rest of us down with you. Looking at Frontier last quarter, they really felt the pricing power of United/TED and couldn't get their RASM's up to cover costs.

Parker sees industry consolidation, but their are a lot of obstacles to this. One being that jetblue and airtran placed orders for aircraft way before fuel prices and overcapacity started to hit us. They can't get out of these contracts so it isn't likely that they are going to merge or aquire another airline when they can expand with their own aircraft. According to him, Indy air is just another GE case and they should really go away. Selling tickets from IAD to the west coast for $85 each way isn't going to solve their problems. We tried it and failed big time. ATA will probably go away but they will have little effect as NW, Southwest, and Air Tran have already announced plans to fill the capacity.
Maybe code shares are the answer?

As TWA Dude said, we have cash but it can only last so long. Parker wasn't concerned about a BK filing as he said that during the ATA deal many banks and investor groups stepped up to offer us more cash and were confident with our long term plans in LAS and PHX. What bothered him more was the Bush admin's proposal to add a $2.50/segment tax to airline prices. This would really hurt airlines such as AWA that rely on the "hub" model to move passengers. For all you GWB supporters, what were you thinking voting for this fool? (please don't respond to this statement, it's rhetorical)

He flat out told us that he was not happy with MESA and their operational performance and that we were committed to taking way too many RJ's. Getting out of the MESA contract would cost us more than just taking the planes and finding a place for them. Not to mention, we need their feed in our hubs. MESA brings in people from small cities in CA and AZ to feed our east coast and mexico flights. JO has us by the balls it seems.

If Southwest isn't knocking at your door, this is still a great place to come. We are getting new airplanes. We are adding routes out of CA and our hubs. Just announced LAS-ANC and LAS-PIT. We also started OAK-SJD with a 737 last month.

Our contract is good compared to what everyone else is getting. Everyone else seemed to have come down to our level (that part sucks). We still get crew meals though(sarcasm, though I'm one of the few guys that likes them)! I'm on reserve here in PHX. I hold weekends off, 13 days off a month, and rarely fly more than 40 hours/month. Two hour call out to the crew room, trip and duty rigs, and PBS bidding. We have 401K matching plus the company deposits 7% of your monthly gross into your 401K as a defined retirement plane. This is actually really good.

I get really frustrated by our crappy operational performance, but other than that my worst day here is still better than my best day at my old regional.

I think it was worth the move. I can't control crazy extremists, oil, and BK judges so I try not to worry about it too much.

Try to have a backup plan regardless of where your fly!

oh, mach none - when you finish with less cash than you started, it's a loss. I love it when pilots tell themselves that we are making money and that they are hiding it. I fly with some guys that still want significant raises because they think our losses are just made up numbers.
 
You guys speaking about SWA seem to have forgotton that they have just stepped way out on a limb with the ATA deal. The numbers for next yr are too far off to call but at the current rate SWA would in all likely hood post a loss. Now as for the other carriers, USairways should have been gone by now but it seems that someone somewhere wants them around. GECal is giving them more money and the feds have also just cut them a break. UAL on the otherhand must have pi$$ed someone off because they can't seem to catch a government break. They do however seem to have enough cash to pay their BK lawyers millions and still have enough left over to paint airplanes TED!!!! AA, I think we are about to hear of more furloughs from them. Alaska seems to be doing pretty well and I think may be hiring, AK737 what do you know??? JB and Airtran pretty dam good!!! Us here at AWA not too bad either, keep in mind that if we were doing as bad as some of you may think we would not have been looking at ATA nor would we be interviewing and hiring!!! Just something to ponder...


WD.
 
Wiskey Driver said:
You guys speaking about SWA seem to have forgotton that they have just stepped way out on a limb with the ATA deal. The numbers for next yr are too far off to call but at the current rate SWA would in all likely hood post a loss.

I think you had too much whiskey.
 
Wiskey Driver said:
You guys speaking about SWA seem to have forgotton that they have just stepped way out on a limb with the ATA deal. The numbers for next yr are too far off to call but at the current rate SWA would in all likely hood post a loss.
WD.

We asked Doug about this. He thought the ATA deal was good for SWA. They probably didn't want the codeshare but it was needed to get the job done. It can't really hurt as it will bring them money and passengers that they may not have already had.

As for profitabilty, they are hedged heavily through 2008. They are buying more hedges but obviously they can only hedge at the current rates which is what we are doing. I believe he said it was between $35 to $40. He didn't think Southwest could make money at $40+ either, especially since they run one of the lowest load factors in the business. Their low load factor has never hurt them from making money because of low oil prices and high utilization keep their costs so low. At $40 can they still make money with LF's in the high 50's low 60's?
 
TWA Dude said:
Our cash on hand is 275.74 million. Except for SW, JB, or AT, all airlines are in bad shape can only take "one more year". We are not yet, however, teetering on the point of Chap 11.


Cash, restricted cash and investments on Dec. 31, 2004 was $419.1 million, of which $305.7 million was unrestricted.
 
TAZ MAN said:
Sounds like they fooled you. Companies don't survive on "paper losses". Eventually the "cash" losses kick in. Then you have nothing to borrow on.

That is interesting because on 9/10/01, we had approx 600m in the bank, now we have 880m. We have paid cash for all but 4 of the NG aircraft. Alaska will be alright.

But I don't want to hijack this thread. Off to fly.
 
canyonblue said:
I think you had too much whiskey.

That was no disrespect to SWA but you can't possibly think that if things remain the same it won't neg impact you guys. Com'on man think with your head and not your heart!!!!

WD.
 
Cactus73 said:
This is a real problem because as long as they can sit in BK court they set the pricing for the market making it really hard for any non BK airlines to raise fares. Hate to say it United and Airways guys, but your companies are slowly draging the rest of us down with you. Looking at Frontier last quarter, they really felt the pricing power of United/TED and couldn't get their RASM's up to cover costs. [OUOTE]

We all have a short memory in aviation probably because it can be such a painful business. Remember AWA spent the majority of the early 90's in bankruptcy along with Continental and others. AWA also received a $380M government loan guarantee in 2001 while United did not.

One of the main problems with the industry in my opinion, is that it is only partially deregulated. A mature company with a senior work force will have higher labor costs than a young company. This senior company has also been paying the taxes for years that built the aviation infrastructure we have today. However, unlike giant banks and oil companies, they are not allowed to merge. A merger while possibly bad for the employees, would allow companies to streamline operations while reducing competition at the same time. So the company is forced to expand while new companies with lower labor and overhead costs come in and cherry pick their profitable routes.

I would love to see everyone doing well like the late 90's, but I think it will be a rough road until giant mergers are accomplished, all the major companies are in bankruptcy, or we find a bunch of people who are willing to pay fares that cover costs.
 
Not sure I agree that airlines are "not allowed to merge." There were two seminal moments in recent history - 1995 and again in 2001 - where a merger between USAir and United could well have been pulled off. In both cases, the root cause of the failure to merge were insurmountable employee issues between the two airlines, not governement stonewalling, that killed the deals.
 
When a production company (i.e. Exxon, General Motors) has its costs go up, it raises its prices.

When a distributor (i.e. Gas station, Auto dealership) has its costs go up, it raises its prices.

When a service company (i.e. accounting firm, stock brokerage) has its costs go up, it raises its prices.

When an airline (i.e. United, Fly-I, etc) has its costs go up, it LOWERS its prices.

WTFO?

Yes, airlines have a 'perishable' product (aircraft seats). But at some point hopefully more airline executive will have the cajones and foresight to raise fares to a level that can support the business without driving away customers. And before you mention that 'the only thing passengers are looking at is price', take a look at Hawaiian airlines. Yes they are in bankruptcy, but they are paying 100% of all present costs in addition to the cost of running the bankruptcy. They charge more than UAL, AA, NW, ATA, or any of the other airlines going to the islands. Yet, despite that, they have the highest load factor in the industry, and as a result have had profitable months almost every month for two years.

Yes, cost is important to passengers. But they will pay a little more for service. That additional may be enough to get most airlines back into the black.

If only the execs could see it.

my 2 cents.

HAL
 
Guppiedriver said:
Cash, restricted cash and investments on Dec. 31, 2004 was $419.1 million, of which $305.7 million was unrestricted.
You're right, that's what the company press release stated. I got my number from a balance sheet report on Etrade. I don't know enough about financial stuff to distinguish the different numbers.
 
reepicheep said:
Not sure I agree that airlines are "not allowed to merge." There were two seminal moments in recent history - 1995 and again in 2001 - where a merger between USAir and United could well have been pulled off. In both cases, the root cause of the failure to merge were insurmountable employee issues between the two airlines, not governement stonewalling, that killed the deals.

I agree that the employee issues were there in 2000-2001, but I believe the main reason it was not completed was that the Justice Dept was going to require the combined carrier to divest itself of too many strategic assets in the name of competition.

USA Today 7/27/2001:
United Airlines said Monday it is in talks to terminate its $4.3 billion proposed takeover of US Airways Group. A United official said earlier it had decided to end its quest to buy US Airways and become the largest air carrier in history because the Justice Department won't allow the the $4.3 billion deal to go forward.

United decided that federal antitrust enforcers would not approve any version of the merger that made strategic sense to United, the United official said. US Airways was notified late last week that the deal first proposed in May 2000 is dead, he said. [End Qoute]
 
We all have a short memory in aviation probably because it can be such a painful business. Remember AWA spent the majority of the early 90's in bankruptcy along with Continental and others. AWA also received a $380M government loan guarantee in 2001 while United did not.

Right on Noserider. The "legacies" are in a life or death struggle to match costs with LCCs with typically younger fleets (and usually one type of aircraft), younger work forces, and domestic only operations. Cactus wants to say his airline is being pulled down by U and UAL. That's ironic because I'm sure a lot of pilots on the other side would say the same about LCCs - not productive to point fingers either way. There seems to be a lot of resentment for the legacies having to adapt to the new model. That's the way it is - 2 in Ch11 now, I'm sure more to come, and in my opinion all the legacies will have to see Ch11. Unfortunately I don't think the legacies are going to be the only ones to visit bankruptcy, so you may want to be humble with what you say.

Cactus, do you really think any of the legacy airlines control domestic pricing? You use Frontier as an example. According to their latest press release, they have roughly 20% more seats Jan 2005 than Jan 2004. Meanwhile United has gotten rid of 2 and a half times the Frontier fleet, and then dropped domestic seats another 14% this Jan. Good luck to you.
 
Wiskey Driver said:
That was no disrespect to SWA but you can't possibly think that if things remain the same it won't neg impact you guys. Com'on man think with your head and not your heart!!!!

WD.

You are crazy. Southwest is fine. They will always be fine. There is no way they will ever loose money, and they are hiring like crazy! Best place in the world to work!!!

[Fade to 5 years ago and replace the word "Southwest" in the above sentence with AA, DAL, USAIR, UAL, etc....]
 

Latest resources

Back
Top