Mr. Irrelevant
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 562
HERCDRVR,
Interesting piece. I don't believe it has anything to do with JBlue's long term viability however. It's nice to see an analyst telling us what they really think although in this case the IPO run up has more to do with it than the company's long-term prospects. Long-term underperformance in the market after the first day of an IPO is a pretty well-known hypothesis (and well documented) and should be a real hot subject the next few years when everyone looks at the 1997-2000 IPO's.
That business model they're using is clearly a winner. This fellow Byron that wrote the article is a writer, just that, not an expert in investment analysis of airlines. There were numerous holes in his story starting with his theory of low cost carriers competing out of LGA or Newark. Could happen, but really, Jet Blue is in pretty good with NY Pols and I doubt there is that chance, among many reasons. He also points out the difficulty airlines face in a down economy (what a genius) however if he had done his research he would know the airline that performs best in these types of markets, SWA, is the one Jet Blue is modeled after.
Cash flow will mean eveything as it always has but of course, SWA again, could finance all enternally if they wanted, the same way Jet Blue may be able to at some point. So, not all airlines at all points in their life cycle need to take out enormous amounts of debt. At least those that control their growth don't.
Jet Blue doesn't use these systems so they can have pretty colors for pilots and employees to look at on a laptop, they know it's a cost saver over the long haul.
I'm not a huge Jet Blue fan but the idea is clearly a winner. I'd be more than willing to put my money on it once the price settles down.
I wonder if this guy even realizes SWA has made money 30 years running now???? Yada, yada, yada.
Mr. I.
Interesting piece. I don't believe it has anything to do with JBlue's long term viability however. It's nice to see an analyst telling us what they really think although in this case the IPO run up has more to do with it than the company's long-term prospects. Long-term underperformance in the market after the first day of an IPO is a pretty well-known hypothesis (and well documented) and should be a real hot subject the next few years when everyone looks at the 1997-2000 IPO's.
That business model they're using is clearly a winner. This fellow Byron that wrote the article is a writer, just that, not an expert in investment analysis of airlines. There were numerous holes in his story starting with his theory of low cost carriers competing out of LGA or Newark. Could happen, but really, Jet Blue is in pretty good with NY Pols and I doubt there is that chance, among many reasons. He also points out the difficulty airlines face in a down economy (what a genius) however if he had done his research he would know the airline that performs best in these types of markets, SWA, is the one Jet Blue is modeled after.
Cash flow will mean eveything as it always has but of course, SWA again, could finance all enternally if they wanted, the same way Jet Blue may be able to at some point. So, not all airlines at all points in their life cycle need to take out enormous amounts of debt. At least those that control their growth don't.
Jet Blue doesn't use these systems so they can have pretty colors for pilots and employees to look at on a laptop, they know it's a cost saver over the long haul.
I'm not a huge Jet Blue fan but the idea is clearly a winner. I'd be more than willing to put my money on it once the price settles down.
I wonder if this guy even realizes SWA has made money 30 years running now???? Yada, yada, yada.
Mr. I.
