"I don't know where you come up with "Positive cash flow during the month was $7 million per day.” Please give us your source because it seems to be backwards from what the Denver Business Journal is reporting."
UNITED.COM Straight from investor relations, financial releases, october results.
"How did they increase their cash on hand to $2.6B while losing $2.8B for the year? I'd like to understand and resolve the discrepancy."
Smoke and mirrors. Lets say you own a 747-400. you bought it new for 200 million and planned on depreciating it away over the course of 25 years. Lets say it has a book value after 10 years of 130 million. In BK, to improve the "post BK" numbers, you decide that jet is now worth 30 million. Guess what, you just "lost" $100 million!!!!! No cash changed hands, nobody's trailer was repo'd, but you LOST $100 MILLION ON ONE JET!!! That's the "game" of BK. You revalue as much as you can AS LOW as you can, and go from there. That's why a thourough understanding of the COMPLETE financial picture is VITAL!! How much per year in cash flow? Lease rates? defered expenses? depreciation schedules? All of it matters.
For example
Company A buys A320's and depreciates them over 25 years with a 20% residual value.
Company B buys A320's and depreciates them over 20 years with a 10% residual value.
Same jets, same price. Lets assume identical revenue and identical cash flow, it's entirely plausible for Company A to report a "profit" and company B to report a lose. In all cases A will have higher "earnings". Which company is the better long term bet?
In other words, most of that loss you cite isn't "real", and Denver biz was WAY off on even it's "operating loss" prediction (by something like 300 MILLION). Not a credible publication....
UNITED.COM Straight from investor relations, financial releases, october results.
"How did they increase their cash on hand to $2.6B while losing $2.8B for the year? I'd like to understand and resolve the discrepancy."
Smoke and mirrors. Lets say you own a 747-400. you bought it new for 200 million and planned on depreciating it away over the course of 25 years. Lets say it has a book value after 10 years of 130 million. In BK, to improve the "post BK" numbers, you decide that jet is now worth 30 million. Guess what, you just "lost" $100 million!!!!! No cash changed hands, nobody's trailer was repo'd, but you LOST $100 MILLION ON ONE JET!!! That's the "game" of BK. You revalue as much as you can AS LOW as you can, and go from there. That's why a thourough understanding of the COMPLETE financial picture is VITAL!! How much per year in cash flow? Lease rates? defered expenses? depreciation schedules? All of it matters.
For example
Company A buys A320's and depreciates them over 25 years with a 20% residual value.
Company B buys A320's and depreciates them over 20 years with a 10% residual value.
Same jets, same price. Lets assume identical revenue and identical cash flow, it's entirely plausible for Company A to report a "profit" and company B to report a lose. In all cases A will have higher "earnings". Which company is the better long term bet?
In other words, most of that loss you cite isn't "real", and Denver biz was WAY off on even it's "operating loss" prediction (by something like 300 MILLION). Not a credible publication....