4th QUARTER LOSS
- Thread starter SKY HIGH
- Start date
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #17
oh no? Where did i say it was RUNNING OUT? They had to write down the value of their hedges.
And why is U even mentioned on here. It's a WN tread. But, I can see why you berate them, didnt they take your bennies away in retirement? Boy, Boeing, being a senior citizen is tough, huh?
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 11,289
- 1,427
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #19
<rolling eyes> As USUAL, KC, waving his wn pom-poms.
NEVER said he was wrong. Now, read this carefully, that's how you exchange DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #20
US has the among the highest CASM, WN among the lowest, so they make something of a natural comparison. Besides, US had been the latest big airline to report when I posted that reply.
You're the one that said "What is WN fuel hedge advantage now?" which I interpreted as another "If it weren't for their hedges...." or "Wait till their hedges run out and the playing field is level." If my interpretation was wrong, I apologize.
However, you did ask for a comparison - what is WN's fuel hedge advantage over WHO now - since no two airlines have exactly the same hedge position. So the answer to that question requires a comparison to SOMEONE.
WN is on the good side of hedge comparisons - they've reduced the amount of hedging to only 10% for the 1st quarter (lower than most) as well as being hedged in the $60+ per barrel of crude price range (lower than anyone that has hedges). Using US for comparison, they have 38% of 1st quarter fuel need hedged at $120+. So with crude below $50/bbl, WN has the advantage even though their hedges are at a price above market.
Lastly, why is it that there are always those who attack the messenger when they don't like the message?
Jim
You're the one that said "What is WN fuel hedge advantage now?" which I interpreted as another "If it weren't for their hedges...." or "Wait till their hedges run out and the playing field is level." If my interpretation was wrong, I apologize.
However, you did ask for a comparison - what is WN's fuel hedge advantage over WHO now - since no two airlines have exactly the same hedge position. So the answer to that question requires a comparison to SOMEONE.
WN is on the good side of hedge comparisons - they've reduced the amount of hedging to only 10% for the 1st quarter (lower than most) as well as being hedged in the $60+ per barrel of crude price range (lower than anyone that has hedges). Using US for comparison, they have 38% of 1st quarter fuel need hedged at $120+. So with crude below $50/bbl, WN has the advantage even though their hedges are at a price above market.
Lastly, why is it that there are always those who attack the messenger when they don't like the message?
Jim
Jim,
Do you have RASM numbers for Southwest vs. Usair handy ? Thanks in Advance.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #22
First, yield...US = 13.36 cents, WN = 15.19 cents
The two carriers report RASM differently - US only reports passenger RASM for mainline while WN reports operating RASM (which includes additional operating revenue beside passenger revenue) so the results aren't directly comparible.
Given that caveat, US PRASM = 10.68 cents and WN RASM = 10.74 cents.
Since passenger RASM is a function of both yield and load factor, WN's traditionally lower load factor would result in the PRASM being lower than US'. Using only revenue reported as passenger revenue, you can calculate WN's PRASM as 10.30 cents but there may be some passenger revenue in "other revenue" - US reports most of the ala carte revenue there instead of passenger revenue.
One other note - for WN it doesn't apply, but the US numbers above are for mainline only. The shorter haul Express usually has higher RASM, PRASM, and CASM.
The consolidated number for US are (and US includes both PRASM and RASM):
CASM = 15.28 cents
Yield = 15.29 cents
PRASM = 12.01 cents
RASM = 13.44 cents
Jim
The two carriers report RASM differently - US only reports passenger RASM for mainline while WN reports operating RASM (which includes additional operating revenue beside passenger revenue) so the results aren't directly comparible.
Given that caveat, US PRASM = 10.68 cents and WN RASM = 10.74 cents.
Since passenger RASM is a function of both yield and load factor, WN's traditionally lower load factor would result in the PRASM being lower than US'. Using only revenue reported as passenger revenue, you can calculate WN's PRASM as 10.30 cents but there may be some passenger revenue in "other revenue" - US reports most of the ala carte revenue there instead of passenger revenue.
One other note - for WN it doesn't apply, but the US numbers above are for mainline only. The shorter haul Express usually has higher RASM, PRASM, and CASM.
The consolidated number for US are (and US includes both PRASM and RASM):
CASM = 15.28 cents
Yield = 15.29 cents
PRASM = 12.01 cents
RASM = 13.44 cents
Jim
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #24
LOL, who's bitter?
That I post articles relevent to this board that dont emit the usual Kum-bi-ya from employees here? Just keeping it real. You know, like those overlooked maintenance issues. Kicking passengers off your flights. Reporting your quarter results. Yep, so sad.
WNjetdoc
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 532
- 0
Case in point, lmao.
....btw, sorry to further sadden you, while we had a quarterly loss it was yet another yearly profit. 
To further cause more rage in you, (and all the other haters), if we are not making a profit then you all should be sheeting in your pants, its really bad for you guys then, *wink*.
AMF.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #26
Case in point, lmao.
To further cause more rage in you.
Personally, you dont do squat to me. Who would rage over a comment on the internet. <yawn>
Then explain why all the all cap drama throughout all your posts
