• NC Software is proud to announce the release of APDL - Airline Pilot Logbook version 10.0. Click here to view APDL on the Apple App store and install now.

Virgin America Reports 2009 2Qt

Grandpa +65

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 1, 2006
Posts
315
Total Time
a lot
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/finance/news/prnews/SIG=112sle93o/*http://www.prnewswire.com/yahoo/ Virgin America Reports 2009 Second Quarter Financial Results

Start-up Domestic Airline Reports Year-Over-Year Growth, Versus Industry Declines

  • Press Release
  • Source: Virgin America
  • On Thursday August 27, 2009, 9:00 am

SAN FRANCISCO, Aug. 27 /PRNewswire/ -- Virgin America, the award-winning start-up airline, today reported its financial results for the second quarter of 2009. Despite double-digit industry revenue decreases, the new carrier reported significantly improved financial results and unit costs, record-setting load factors and steady year-over-year growth in stage length-adjusted guest unit revenue.

"Given double digit year-over-year industry revenue declines and a 48 percent increase in our capacity, we're particularly pleased to report stage-length adjusted unit revenue growth and record-setting load factors in the second quarter," said Virgin America President and CEO David Cush. "As we continue to grow to new destinations in 2009 and beyond, our business model is right on track. We're confident that our low fares, award-winning service and high-tech amenities continue to provide an unrivalled value proposition at a time when consumers are more discerning than ever."
Second Quarter Reporting Highlights:

  • Operating results: The airline reported an $11.4 million operating loss on revenues of $135.9 million - an 81.6 percent improvement year-over-year.
  • Growing load factors: The airline reported an 85.3 percent overall load factor in 2Q09 - an 8 point improvement over 2Q08, despite a 42.9 percent increase in scheduled service capacity. Traffic increased by 57 percent year-over-year. The airline reported the highest loads in its history, with an 85.1 percent load factor in April; 84.1 percent load factor in May; and 86.6 percent load factor in June.
  • Significant top line progress: Revenue in 2Q09 was up by 46.9 percent versus 2Q08. Virgin America's stage-length adjusted guest unit revenue was up 2.7 percent versus 2Q08.
  • Exceptional cost control: Unit costs (CASM) dropped by 35.6 percent while non-fuel CASM dropped by 20.9 percent, as the airline was able to increase capacity at a very low marginal cost.
  • Cash: The airline ended 2Q09 with $28 million in unrestricted cash and $54 million in total liquidity, with full funding for its operation through its projected profitability date.
 

firstthird

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Posts
687
Total Time
7000
how are they still operating with no US investors? anyone know how they are getting around the 25% max foreign investor rule?
 

LoveGun

Well-known member
Joined
May 6, 2004
Posts
212
Total Time
8000
VA's CASM goes down with expansion and revenue went up. Sounds like an aircraft order is in their future.
 

FADEC

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 15, 2002
Posts
129
Total Time
9000 +
VA's CASM goes down with expansion and revenue went up. Sounds like an aircraft order is in their future.

$28 million cash in hand doesn't sound very healthy going into the quiet season. I doubt there will be much growth let alone aircraft orders
 

Splert

PoipuBayResort15thTBox
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
1,188
Total Time
...
Press Release
  • Source: Virgin America
  • On Thursday August 27, 2009,
  • Second Quarter Reporting Highlights:
  • Operating results: The airline reported an $11.4 million operating loss on revenues of $135.9 million - an 81.6 percent improvement year-over-year.
VA did not report net income.

Operating loss does not include interest expense (on the jets) which in VA's case would result in a larger and deeper net loss. Unless of course they paid cash for the aeroplanes.

VA's PR department is reporting its loss in the best light possible.

Corporate PR at it's finest.
 

ualdriver

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Posts
1,400
Total Time
13Kish
[/LIST]
VA did not report net income.

Operating loss does not include interest expense (on the jets) which in VA's case would result in a larger and deeper net loss. Unless of course they paid cash for the aeroplanes.

VA's PR department is reporting its loss in the best light possible.

Corporate PR at it's finest.

No, they reported it. Net income of (15.8M). That number includes some non-cash stuff like depreciation and interest expense like you mentioned.
 

Splert

PoipuBayResort15thTBox
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
1,188
Total Time
...
No, they reported it. Net income of (15.8M). That number includes some non-cash stuff like depreciation and interest expense like you mentioned.
You are right.

I should have went to the VA website first and read the ENTIRE press release.
 

front9

Titanium Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2004
Posts
202
Total Time
46,987
Thats cause you and other h8ters are all the same...dont read sh!t, just respond emotionally. I remember when Jetwho got the same sh!t from you h8ters when they first started up. 10 years ago, aholes like Specker and Ualiar would bash Jetwho for bringing down the industry and lowering wages. Now look where they are. I remember a time when this website used to be about getting guys hired and networking. I miss the good times...
 

Splert

PoipuBayResort15thTBox
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Posts
1,188
Total Time
...
What's a hater CA Bitter Pants or are you CA Drunk Poster?

VA bullet pointed the OM not the NI.

That was done for a reason.

I wish everone in aviation well.

There is more to life than positive rate gear up. Grow up and stop drinking and posting.
 
Last edited:

ualdriver

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Posts
1,400
Total Time
13Kish
That semi-coherent post a couple above mine was probably meant more for UAliar.......uh.......I mean me. As most on flightinfo know, I mostly post lies, hence the cute play on words....And for the record, I still think VA sucks and is killing a reasonable opportunity for airlines like mine, SWA, JBLU, etc, to raise fares in the Bay area (OAK, SFO, SJC traffic). Every market they enter is a new fare war the industry doesn't need. Every new market is more seats in a city-pair that probably doesn't need more seats or siphons off traffic from a neighboring city-pair. All partially and happily subsidized by, well.......
 

johnsonrod

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Posts
4,218
Total Time
8000+
It all comes down to cash flow. No cash = no operation. Are they cash flow positive or negative? If negative then they are eating away at any equity left over from investors because banks will likely not lend to them.

How are they covering their cash obligations????
 

Sailpilot

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Posts
214
Total Time
10:32a
Thats cause you and other h8ters are all the same...dont read sh!t, just respond emotionally. I remember when Jetwho got the same sh!t from you h8ters when they first started up. 10 years ago, aholes like Specker and Ualiar would bash Jetwho for bringing down the industry and lowering wages. Now look where they are. I remember a time when this website used to be about getting guys hired and networking. I miss the good times...

As a Jetblue Pilot: Specker and Ualair were right.

"Where they are": Still at the bottom and only benefiting from the advances of Union pilots and there CBA's paid for by their dues.

Just keeping it real....:D
 

front9

Titanium Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2004
Posts
202
Total Time
46,987
As a Jetblue Pilot: Specker and Ualair were right.

"Where they are": Still at the bottom and only benefiting from the advances of Union pilots and there CBA's paid for by their dues.

Just keeping it real....:D


Are you talking about how Jetblue got started 10 years ago? And you say this cause you are now union and paying dues right?
 

clickclickboom

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
1,081
Total Time
15k
From another JB pilot:


I dont blame jetblue for the loss of pay and benefits that the legacies encountered after 9/11 But let me say that jetblue has been instrumental in continuing to kick the other pilot groups while they were down.

9/11 was/is the only reason that jb was able to build critical mass and now they are a viable long term airline that JUST now is starting to raise compensation and benefit levels to average. I can only hope that the trend continues with other airlines.

JB SHOULD have been the last bottom feeder airline to survive airlines like va financed by back door deals and billionaire promises should not be flying in our skies.
 

front9

Titanium Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2004
Posts
202
Total Time
46,987
That semi-coherent post a couple above mine was probably meant more for UAliar.......uh.......I mean me. As most on flightinfo know, I mostly post lies, hence the cute play on words....

I dont have to capitalize the A in UA, they know who you are...


And for the record, I still think VA sucks and is killing a reasonable opportunity for airlines like mine, SWA, JBLU, etc, to raise fares in the Bay area (OAK, SFO, SJC traffic).

Talk about posting when drunk, you're saying its VA's fault your airline cannot raise fares??? Lets just throw out the economy, scope or lack of, Tilton etc etc etc as factors of your demise...its all VA's fault.

Every market they enter is a new fare war the industry doesn't need. Every new market is more seats in a city-pair that probably doesn't need more seats or siphons off traffic from a neighboring city-pair. All partially and happily subsidized by, well.......

You mean the fare war WN creates when entering a new market or when Jwho copies whatever city pair VA announces. Look junior, bottom line is you sound like a certain Iranian dictator who blames the U.S. for every problem HE has in his country. Its everybodys fault but our own. I saw the writing on the wall 12 years ago or so when a certain exec from UA said "we are not a cargo carrier" and shut down a profitable DC10 operation. I got off when everybody else was trying to jump on the titanic. Cya
 
Last edited:

ualdriver

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Posts
1,400
Total Time
13Kish
Talk about posting when drunk, you're saying its VA's fault your airline cannot raise fares??? Lets just throw out the economy, scope or lack of, Tilton etc etc etc as factors of your demise...its all VA's fault.

I didn't say it was all VA's fault, but they're certainly trashing the possibility of ANYONE making money on Bay area O&D routes they fly on. VA does, however, represent what is wrong with the airline industry. They're dumping capacity into markets that don't need the extra seats. In order to gain market share, instead of competing on the quality of their product, they offer low prices that THEY can't even make money on. In order to protect market share, everyone operating on that city pair has to match VA's ridiculously low fares. Tell me where I'm wrong in that analysis.....or maybe I'm lying again. I lie all the time on this forum, you know.

Take a step back and look at what the industry is collectively doing. There are too many seats so they're cutting capacity and trying to get fares up. Two fare increases have stuck recently. As a whole, we're trying to rationalize our industry.....except VA.


You mean the fare war WN creates when entering a new market or when Jwho copies whatever city pair VA announces. Look junior, bottom line is you sound like a certain Iranian dictator who blames the U.S. for every problem HE has in his country. Its everybodys fault but our own. I saw the writing on the wall 12 years ago or so when a certain exec from UA said "we are not a cargo carrier" and shut down a profitable DC10 operation. I got off when everybody else was trying to jump on the titanic. Cya

Yeah, I'm sure you were able to predict the downward spiral of UA 12 years ago....You could barely write in coherent sentences a few posts ago and now you're a soothsayer. OK. And you'll have to point out where I said VA is the reason for my airline's most recent decline. VA is trashing yields on the city-pairs that they're flying on and acting irresponsibly, however, all while producing huge losses that make Glenn Tilton blush.

Further, the difference between you guys and JetBlue is that if you take a peek at JetBlue's financials from earlier in the decade when they were just starting out, despite also growing into a declining economy, JetBlue was making money by this time in its existence. You guys, however, despite your pathetically low wages helping subsidize your bottom line, are still deep in the red. Don't worry, though, those $99 SFO-FLL fares should help.

Don't bother with the UA attacks in rebuttal in order to attack me instead of the facts concerning your airline. The difference between you and me is that I already know UA is a crappy carrier.
 

jayme

My Mona Lisa
Joined
Feb 8, 2003
Posts
943
Total Time
8000
In order to gain market share, instead of competing on the quality of their product, they offer low prices that THEY can't even make money on.

Did you really just say that?

The quality is head and shoulders above any other airline out there. But if we charge a dollar more than everybody else, then we are on page 2 on the customer's Expedia search and the airplane goes out empty.

I'm not management, but even I can tell you have no idea what you're talking about. I think you're argument boils down to "WE WERE HERE FIRST!" Sorry sir, but that doesn't hold much water with me.

As for the crappy wages, I think we'll see them come up as soon as it's sustainable to do so, and if they don't we'll end up with a union. It's still more than I was making at United Express (thanks for selling out the profession, by the way...)

Good luck with your career. And I mean that.
 

clickclickboom

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
1,081
Total Time
15k
Did you really just say that?

The quality is head and shoulders above any other airline out there. But if we charge a dollar more than everybody else, then we are on page 2 on the customer's Expedia search and the airplane goes out empty.

I'm not management, but even I can tell you have no idea what you're talking about. I think you're argument boils down to "WE WERE HERE FIRST!" Sorry sir, but that doesn't hold much water with me.

As for the crappy wages, I think we'll see them come up as soon as it's sustainable to do so, and if they don't we'll end up with a union. It's still more than I was making at United Express (thanks for selling out the profession, by the way...)

Good luck with your career. And I mean that.


And therin lies the mentality that destroys this profession one new shiny jet at a time.

Not only are you rationalizing your insolvent airline by financing them with your substandard wages but you are using your onboard service as an excuse as well.

Tell your kid in 13 years that they need to take $400,000 in loans for an education because your job was at least better than united express. One good thing about this economy is all the trust fund brats are going broke and reality sets in when you realize that your meager $50,000 that you were using to play now has to feed your family
 

ualdriver

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Posts
1,400
Total Time
13Kish
Did you really just say that?

The quality is head and shoulders above any other airline out there. But if we charge a dollar more than everybody else, then we are on page 2 on the customer's Expedia search and the airplane goes out empty.

I'm not management, but even I can tell you have no idea what you're talking about. I think you're argument boils down to "WE WERE HERE FIRST!" Sorry sir, but that doesn't hold much water with me.

As for the crappy wages, I think we'll see them come up as soon as it's sustainable to do so, and if they don't we'll end up with a union. It's still more than I was making at United Express (thanks for selling out the profession, by the way...)

Good luck with your career. And I mean that.

I don't need "luck." I need guys like you to stop undermining my contract. But thanks anyway.

You're telling me I sold out the profession? A VA pilot? Here's the difference.....when we made the mistake as mainline airline pilots of giving away RJ flying (your cited example), we didn't have the benefit of history and hindsight when making that decision. RJ's were new, and no one had any idea what the RJ flying would devolve too. So I sold out the profession because I didn't have a crystal ball???

You, on the other hand, know the damage the LCC's did to mainline wages and work rules. You saw that we all got DRAGGED DOWN to that lower denominator. You saw the pensions go away. You saw work rules get trashed, yet you decide to MAJORLY undercut A320/narrowbody wages even further because "it's better than UA Express." And the spiral continues...

So to recap, I look at history, see the mistakes we made, and won't make that mistake concerning RJ flying in the future (your example). You, on the other hand, look at history, see the mistakes were made with LCC wages and work rules, and then REPEAT THE SAME MISTAKE. Then YOU tell ME I'm selling out the profession. I guarantee you that if I lose my job at UA you won't see my application at VA because I know the damage that $95/hr. Captains causes the profession. It's just not worth it. You, OTH, happily submit yours and help with the downward spiral. I apparently learned from history and you didn't. I won't hold my breath about the VA pilots actually taking a stand and voting a union in, either.

I'm not management, but even I can tell you have no idea what you're talking about. I think you're argument boils down to "WE WERE HERE FIRST!" Sorry sir, but that doesn't hold much water with me.

The quality is head and shoulders above any other airline out there. But if we charge a dollar more than everybody else, then we are on page 2 on the customer's Expedia search and the airplane goes out empty.

You don't have to be management to log onto the BTS or read 10Q's. It's not rocket science. And you don't have to charge $1 more than anyone else. You also don't have to charge 50% less, either. If your product is so great, why the fare wars? Why the $99 to FLL that is a guaranteed money loser? Why not pay your employees, particularly the pilots, a fair market wage and charge fares that resemble the going rate and let your "superior product" win customers over?

The problem is VA is using classic techniques to steal market share that have been used over and over by the likes of Western Pacific, Vanguard, Skybus, and countless others that simply implode and make the airline industry the crappy industry that it is.

Here's the recipe:
1) Trick a bunch of people into fronting money for a "new and different" upstart airline
2) Hire non-union workers and pay them a fraction of the going rate
3) Buy a bunch of airplanes
4) Dump a bunch of seats into a market where those evil incumbent airlines are "charging too much."
5) Charge fares that NO ONE can make money on in the hope that you last longer than the incumbents
6) Hope that cash doesn't run out before "projected profitablility date" (yes, Cush said that too)
7) Said airline's employees come on flightinfo.com and tell us all how they're not undercutting the profession and/or have a great relationship with management and/or are home every night and/or tell us about the great strides their wages will make in the future (pick your favorites)
7) Crash and burn, taking a pound of flesh from your competitors with you.
8) Competitors left behind raise fares to profitable levels, and then upstart begins above at #1.

When VA starts paying its employees a market wage and charges fares that aren't starting inane fare wars, I'll accept the loss like a capitalist should.
 

ualdriver

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Posts
1,400
Total Time
13Kish
Anyway, that above post was too long and I'm just repeating myself over and over. I'm done.
 
Top