Earnings Releases

[USA320Pilot]

MEDIA ADVISORY

US AIRWAYS TO REPORT SECOND QUARTER 2004 RESULTS

ARLINGTON, Va., July 15, 2004 -- US Airways will announce its second quarter 2004 results on Tuesday, July 27, 2004, at 11 a.m., Eastern Daylight Time.

A conference call will be held with analysts from the investment community. The media and other interested parties are invited to listen via a special Webcast on US Airways’ Web site here.

Participants must log on at least five minutes prior to the call to register. An archive of the conference call also will be available on US Airways’ Web site for one year from completion of the call. A telephone replay of the call will be available through 11 a.m., Eastern time, July 30, 2004, by calling 973-341-3080, PIN 4969247.

The Webcast must be accessed using Real Player, which can be installed through usairways.com by following the instructions shown on the Investor Presentations page (URL listed above). The download is free and should take approximately 10 minutes.

Members of the media needing additional information should contact US Airways Corporate Affairs at 703-872-5100. Analysts should contact US Airways Investor Relations at 703-872-7923.

Reporters needing additional information should contact US Airways Corporate Affairs at (703) 872-5100.

 

[ITRADE]

Thank you.

Can we close the topic since the question was answered?

 

[700UW]

I guess CAL hid their profits with that $17 million loss for the quarter, huh?

The Delta loss IMO was not as telling as the CAL loss as to show what US may report.

If you read the CAL report:

The Houston-based company said it had an expense of $19 million, after taxes, in the latest quarter due to the retirement of leased MD-80 aircraft. Excluding the aircraft retirement charge, Continental reported a profit of $2 million, or 3 cents a share.

 

[mweiss]

GAAP...allow some leeway as to how and when some charges are taken. But you have to be consistant

Correct. And if you change your practices, you must publicly state that you have done so, in order to allow for an apples-to-apples comparison to be made by investors.

and the stating of profit and loss is less important right now then US's cash position is.

But this just means exactly what I was saying before...you can mess with cash flow much more easily than you can P&L.

 

[PITbull]

RJs will effect the cash flow and be shown as an expense, as the company has to take delivery of these a/c. Its part of their business plan, even if they regret bringing them in this late in the game.

When you spend more, it effects any profit forcast, or profits that could have been shown. RJs are an "unusual expense" and not a "fixed item".

By September 1, U will have 21 Rjs on the property. (And that is just in LESS THAN 3 quarters). That's a hell of alot of airplane deliveries for 1 year, especially for a company that alledges its going "over the cliff".

All must keep in mind that there are just 1 set of books....for mainline and MAA.

So the expenses to jump start another carrier within a carrier IS DEFINITELY GOING TO SHOW UP AS A HUGE EXPENSE/LIABILITY AND NO PROFITS.

Take out the RJ deliveries and expense and the "jump starting of a brand new airline", then what would be the "cash flow" and how does that translate into a profit at the end of a quarter or year?

Delivery of a/c for Q2 will be 6 (making the total 10). However for the third quarter, it will be 11.

Mweiss, now tell us....

 

[deltawatch]

Q2 is as good as it gets for the industry in any given year. For the company to break even in Q2 means that there will be significant losses in Q3 and Q4 ...... unless something is changed.

How about fuel prices that would help!

 

[N628AU]

If you read the CAL report:

The Houston-based company said it had an expense of $19 million, after taxes, in the latest quarter due to the retirement of leased MD-80 aircraft. Excluding the aircraft retirement charge, Continental reported a profit of $2 million, or 3 cents a share.

Not really hiding much since even a $2 million dollar profit for the strongest quarter of the year for a carrier with costs lower than U is nothing to write home about. I bet that $2 million goes real far come September-October-November.

 

[mweiss]

How about fuel prices that would help!

If you haven't been following the news lately, they're on the rise. So much for help from that source...

 

[insp89]

I'm ready to be convinced. Examples, please.

weiss, weiss, anyone seen weiss or ITRADE ? I think Pitbull is looking for you two..

 

[mweiss]

Sorry, I missed this one...sometimes when I look at "new" posts it jumps ahead a bit.

RJs will effect the cash flow and be shown as an expense

They're shown as an expense (meaning a decrease in cash). They're also shown as a capital asset. Net impact on P&L = 0.

When you spend more, it effects any profit forcast...

Only if you are not receiving comparable asset valuation.

Now, it is possible that US is (intentionally???) overpaying for the RJs, in which case they are spending more than the increase in capital assets. But that would be extraordinarily unusual.

RJs are an "unusual expense" and not a "fixed item".

How so? What's unusual about RJs?

So the expenses to jump start another carrier within a carrier IS DEFINITELY GOING TO SHOW UP AS A HUGE EXPENSE/LIABILITY AND NO PROFITS.

Hey, now...you took the business classes too...

The RJs will show up as expenses, decreasing cash, and new assets, increasing assets. They will not show up as a liability, unless they were purchased with debt.

If they were purchased with debt, then there is zero impact on cash. Instead, there's an increase in debt with a corresponding increase in assets.

Take out the RJ deliveries and expense and the "jump starting of a brand new airline", then what would be the "cash flow" and how does that translate into a profit at the end of a quarter or year?

Cash flow does not equate to P&L. Yes, if there was not an increase in debt, and the company is paying cash for these airplanes, there is a definite cash flow problem. I'm not disputing that.

However, there is no, zero, zippo, zilch impact on P&L. Nada.

 

[PITbull]

What's unusual about RJs is that they HAPPEN TO BE aircraft. (Huge ticket items)...

Airlines don't usually buy a/c when they are showing up losses every quarter. Most airlines shrink rather than grow when they have losses every quarter.

However, the most unusual is that inspite of huge losses projected, U is still buying a/c and growing one part of the business....but yet, toying with another BK.

Go figure.

I think you and I are talking apples to oranges.


If a company is growing the business and spending money on the hope that it will improve the business and product, there will be less "over all" money at the end of the year.

Call it less profit, no profit, or whatever makes your heart tick. Any business that is taking most of the revenue to grow a business and pay down debt WILL NOT SHOW A PROFIT.

The problem here with U that is hard to conceptulize is that U managment is saying we are going over a cliff and going out of business and may do another walk into BK if they don't get concessions,

YET....THEY HAVE ENOUGH REVENUE TO GROW ONE PART OF THE BUSINESS. A BUSINESS THEY SAY IS GOING OUT OF BUSINESS

 

[insp89]

Well said Pitbull..

 

[mweiss]

What's unusual about RJs is that they are aircraft.

Oh my god! Stop the presses! An airline is buying...aircraft!!! How unusual! Next we'll be hearing about power companies buying generators, and software companies buying COMPUTERS!

Airlines don't usually buy a/c when they are showing up losses every quarter.

Cash flow. Not profit. Cash flow. Buying the airplanes, even when showing losses overall, impacts cash flow.

However, the most unusual is that inspite of huge losses projected, U is still buying a/c and growing one part of the business....but yet, toying with another BK.

So? Yeah, it's stupid (keep in mind that the current group doesn't have much of a choice). But it still has nothing to do with P&L. It's all cash flow.

And YES, I agree that it is a major cash flow problem, and the cash flow problem may very well put the company back into bankruptcy. But let's not mix apples and oranges here. Buying airplanes, even if you're not an airline, does not do anything to the P&L.

 

[PITbull]

Mweiss,

U doesn't have much of a choice you say????

To buy RJs is what? A smart move?

IT raises CASMs AND its a huge expense and drain to buy RJs and start a new airline within an airline on the gamble it will save your business.

Give me a friggen break here, mwiess.

You don't have to have a come back for every little thing. Forget the PROFIT thing someone mentioned in a post....

The real issue is if U reports even a slight profit this quarter, one has to consider all the expense to this new business plan, that is just a plain gamble..pure and simple logic here... my man.

IMO, the RJ factor is a bad one, and will ultimately hurt our business because of its "untimeliness".

 

[mweiss]

U doesn't have much of a choice you say????

Not just me. You said it, too. They entered into a contract that they shouldn't have, and now it'll cost more to break the contract than it's worth.

To buy RJs is what? A smart move?

A less dumb move than abrogating the contract.

I agree that, in every other respect, the RJs are an extraordinarily bad thing.