CAL or UPS?????

[727C47]

ups !!

 

[av8instyle]

As for the AK comparison....... its all about company profitability in order to keep your contract moving in the right direction and not a concessionary contract. Heres a blurb about Alaska.... tell me what card you'd play? nuff said......................



Alaska Air Group Reports 2006 Full Year And Fourth Quarter Results

1/25/2007 5:00 a.m.

SEATTLE — Alaska Air Group, Inc. (NYSE:ALK) today reported a full year net loss of $52.6 million, or $1.39 per share, compared to a net loss of $5.9 million, or $0.01 per diluted share, in 2005.

Are you kidding?? Read below. Gimme a break.

A banner year

AAG reports record adjusted pretax profit,
exceeds $3 billion in revenue for first time

Employees to share in profits

January 25, 2007


By Don Conrard

Alaska Air Group (AAG) today reported a net loss of $52.6 million for 2006 under generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), as a number of special charges offset gains in load factor and ticket prices.

These special charges, totaling $190.3 million, relate to the transition to an all-Boeing 737 fleet at Alaska Airlines, a voluntary early retirement program for employees and a decline in the value of the fuel hedge portfolio due to contract settlements.

Bill Ayer talks
about Q4 earnings​

Excluding these special items, AAG would have reported a record net profit for the year of $137.7 million.

That’s good news for employees at Alaska and Horizon Air, who will receive $36.8 million in gain-sharing payouts based on results for the year (see related story). The payout is the largest in company history.

Alaska Airlines employees also benefited last year from a $122 million contribution to their defined benefit retirement plans. This brought the funded percentage of the airline’s four plans to nearly 80 percent based on projected benefit obligations, placing them among the most secure in the industry.

“We are very pleased to report an adjusted pretax profit, marking our fifth consecutive year of improving profitability,” Chairman and CEO Bill Ayer said. “This positive trend reflects the commitment of people at Alaska and Horizon to help us achieve our financial, operational and customer goals, and I am pleased that employees at both companies will share in this success.”

Related story:
Employees will share in payout​

With the help of higher air fares and added passenger traffic, AAG’s total revenues for 2006 “exceeded the $3 billion mark for the first time, representing revenue growth of more than 12 percent over 2005,” Ayer said.

Strong cash flow from operations bolstered AAG's cash balance to hold the airline’s portfolio of cash and short-term investments at slightly more than $1 billion, despite a significant capital spending program.

“This puts our ratio of cash to revenues at 30 percent, which we believe to be among the best in the industry,” CFO Brad Tilden said.
Why there’s a GAAP between the numbers

Alaska Air Group is required to report its results using generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The company also reports adjusted earnings to help analysts and others gain a sense of AAG’s ongoing earning power.

The news media typically report GAAP results. Analysts focus on adjusted results, which are also used as the basis for AAG’s incentive pay plans. In a conference call with financial analysts following today’s earnings announcement, Ayer noted: “We’ve made a lot of progress, but there is obviously more to do. And we’re committed to doing it the right way — the way that continues to build a product that customers want and are willing to pay for.”

Alaska Airlines
Excluding special items, Alaska Airlines earned an adjusted pretax profit of $200.5 million for the year, after posting a $1.9 million loss in the fourth quarter.

Measured by GAAP, Alaska reported a pretax loss of $92.2 million for the year and $12.1 million for the quarter.

Among the items that hurt fourth-quarter results was an additional $4.6 million of depreciation on MD-80s the airline owns.

“We’d originally intended to sell all 20 owned aircraft in a bulk sale-leaseback transaction and had ceased depreciation in anticipation of that deal closing in the fourth quarter,” Tilden said. “At the end of the year, however, we determined it would be better not to proceed with that transaction. This resulted in a catch-up depreciation adjustment for the fourth quarter.”

Tilden estimates 2007 depreciation expense will be slightly lower than what rent expense on the MD-80s would have been had the contemplated sale-leaseback transaction been completed.

Thanks to a 6.7 percent increase in yield and 5.4 percent gain in traffic, the airline’s total operating revenues for the year climbed 11.4 percent to a record $2.7 billion on a capacity increase of 4.4 percent.

Including special items, Alaska’s total operating costs jumped 22.5 percent last year to $2.8 billion.

“About $33 million of that increase in operating costs was due to increases in wages, benefits and incentive pay,” Tilden said.

Excluding special items and fuel expense, the airline ended the year with unit costs of 7.81 cents, shy of its announced goal for 2006 of 7.65 cents per ASM.

“While these improvements are not especially exciting when viewed one year at a time, the five-year effort has resulted in an aggregate decrease of 10.5 percent, or about $206 million in actual savings,” Ayer said. “This kind of steady improvement gives me confidence in our ability to continue to improve our competitive position.”

Turning to operational performance, Alaska’s on-time rate of 73.2 percent for 2006 was an improvement over 2005. “But we’re still about two points under the expected industry average of 75.9 percent and we’re working very hard to improve our performance,” Ayer said. “It’s what our customers expect and our employees deserve.”

Falling oil prices are expected to minimize the contribution of Alaska’s fuel hedge portfolio in 2007, but we should still benefit from lower fuel prices,” said Tilden.

“Our portfolio is mainly composed of caps that allow us to reap the benefit of lower oil prices, but limit our risk should prices go back up,” Tilden said.

About 45 percent of Alaska Airlines’ expected fuel consumption for this year is hedged at just under $58 per barrel.

The combination of higher fares and lower unit costs (excluding fuel and special items) helped Alaska Airlines achieve a 7.4 percent profit margin in 2006, up from 3.6 percent the year before.

 

[av8instyle]

There was never any "AK comparison". I was simply making a valid point with regards to making career decisions based on CURRENT CONTRACT WAGES.
Please re-read previous if you don't get it.

And BTW I'm not really sure what your post meant to imply. You gotta read deeper than the 1st line of an acticle to get the big picture. We just had our most profitable year EVER. And the airline's been around for 75 years. Been profitable for something like 30 of the last 35. Our pay cuts were handed to us by an arbitrator, not because we needed to take cuts to save the company. Our company is a loooong way from anywhere near trouble.

 

[Networ-King]

There was never any "AK comparison". I was simply making a valid point with regards to making career decisions based on CURRENT CONTRACT WAGES.
Please re-read previous if you don't get it.

And BTW I'm not really sure what your post meant to imply. You gotta read deeper than the 1st line of an acticle to get the big picture. We just had our most profitable year EVER. And the airline's been around for 75 years. Been profitable for something like 30 of the last 35. Our pay cuts were handed to us by an arbitrator, not because we needed to take cuts to save the company. Our company is a loooong way from anywhere near trouble.

Never said your company was in trouble...... if this was your best year ever then maybe you guys can start climbing the ladder again. The IPA didn't do as good a job as they should have IMO. Oh well.. there's always next time... enjoy Alaska Airlines Im sure you guys are gonna be just fine.

 

[whymeworry?]

I disagree. I think it's very relevant. The point I was trying to make is that choosing a major based highly on money is not the wisest move. Three years ago based on money Alaska would have been a better option than UPS. Do you smell what I'm stepping in?

I think you miss my point. 3 Years ago UPS was still a HIGHLY profitable company and pax carriers, including Alaska, were bleeding red. I am not suggesting UPS contract will always be higher than that of PAX airlines, rather I am suggesting the pilot groups of Cargo carriers have a much easier time extracting contractural enhancements from highly profitable companies rather than from the pax side of the market. Its all about supply and demand. There is way too much supply of pax carriers. On the cargo side there are few with the clout and the critical mass of UPS/ FEDEx. It would take 2 decades, by my estimation, for any company to attempt to get as big at those two companies. It is their sheer size that allows them to maintain such an extensive global shipping network, which invaribly leads to their massive profit centers. Pax carriers are too busy running price wars to ever get consistantly profitable on the scale of UPS/ FEDEx

 

[vanguardsdead]

you are all idiots

 

[RogerOver]

I would cry if I had to go back to flying PAX. Just listening to that bitc*y FA on DAL yesterday who was making every PA announcement in the most condescending tone, as if she were speaking to a roomful of six year olds, was enough to thank my lucky stars that I get to fly freight for a living (I had to talk myself into not making a comment to her or the CA. With customer service like that, it's no wonder DAL is going broke).

And by the way, does it bother anyone else when the CA of a 757 who has been doing this for 30+ years gets on the PA and says things like "We'll be taking off on runway 32" or "the weather in XYZ is 400 Broken" or "ATC has just issued us an EDCT?"

I always used to make my PA announcements from the perspective that I was talking to my mother (whose VCR would still be flashing 1200am if she still had a VCR). Go ask 10 people on the street what "broken" clouds are. Ask them what "Runway 32" means to them (why didn't we use on of the other 31 runways? EDCT? Is that Estimated Daylight Central Time?

Ahhhhh....boxes. So much better.

By the way, I'm sure Continental will never furlough again

RO

 

[psysicx]

How much do you really fly at night? It sounds like not a lot from the people on here.

 

[V-STALL]

The flying at night thing is not just at UPS. A buddy of mine went to CAL after he turned down an opportunity at UPS, and his very first trip was a Red-Eye! He flies more at night than I do. Flying for UPS is by far one of the more if not the most stable career decision you can make right now in the airline biz. You find your nich and stick with that and your QOL goes way up. You will have to pay your dues before you find it though, just like anywhere else. UPS=Stability! It all depends on what you are looking for, good luck with your very important decision.

 

[av8instyle]

I think you miss my point. 3 Years ago UPS was still a HIGHLY profitable company and pax carriers, including Alaska, were bleeding red. I am not suggesting UPS contract will always be higher than that of PAX airlines, rather I am suggesting the pilot groups of Cargo carriers have a much easier time extracting contractural enhancements from highly profitable companies rather than from the pax side of the market. Its all about supply and demand. There is way too much supply of pax carriers. On the cargo side there are few with the clout and the critical mass of UPS/ FEDEx. It would take 2 decades, by my estimation, for any company to attempt to get as big at those two companies. It is their sheer size that allows them to maintain such an extensive global shipping network, which invaribly leads to their massive profit centers. Pax carriers are too busy running price wars to ever get consistantly profitable on the scale of UPS/ FEDEx

I agree with most of what you've said except the part about Alaska bleeding red. Aside from one-time charges we've been profitable for a while. Again, the 1st line of the article doesn't always tell the story. Just so you know.

 

[Palomino]

I would cry if I had to go back to flying PAX. Just listening to that bitc*y FA on DAL yesterday who was making every PA announcement in the most condescending tone, as if she were speaking to a roomful of six year olds, was enough to thank my lucky stars that I get to fly freight for a living (I had to talk myself into not making a comment to her or the CA. With customer service like that, it's no wonder DAL is going broke).

And by the way, does it bother anyone else when the CA of a 757 who has been doing this for 30+ years gets on the PA and says things like "We'll be taking off on runway 32" or "the weather in XYZ is 400 Broken" or "ATC has just issued us an EDCT?"

I always used to make my PA announcements from the perspective that I was talking to my mother (whose VCR would still be flashing 1200am if she still had a VCR). Go ask 10 people on the street what "broken" clouds are. Ask them what "Runway 32" means to them (why didn't we use on of the other 31 runways? EDCT? Is that Estimated Daylight Central Time?

Ahhhhh....boxes. So much better.

By the way, I'm sure Continental will never furlough again

RO

...and there will never be another EmeryWorldwide-type debacle...

 

[Networ-King]

you are all idiots

Interesting view point..... now go fuk yourself with your vast experience....freaking pr!ck.................