"Special Items"

Hopeful

Veteran
Dec 21, 2002
5,998
347
Notice the paragraph where there was an $191 million net charge for special items!

Hmm I wonder what those items were!











BusinessWeek Online
AMR Climbs Out of the Red
Thursday January 18, 8:08 am ET

It's been a long time since anyone could write this: American Airlines posted an annual profit. Okay, it was a small one and it took five years. But big U.S. airlines have struggled for so long -- bedeviled by a high cost structure, fuel spikes, and a post-September 11 travel slump -- that the Jan. 17 announcement by American Airlines' parent AMR Corp.'s (NYSE:AMR - News) seemed like a small triumph.

ADVERTISEMENT
CEO Gerard Arpey announced a net profit of $17 million for the three months ended Dec. 31, 2006, beating by a long shot a net loss of $409 million during the same quarter of 2005 (excluding a $191 million net charge for special items.) "By producing a fourth quarter and full year profit for the first time since 2000, the people of American Airlines made 2006 a proud milestone in our ongoing turnaround," Arpey crowed in a press release Jan. 17.

Conditions have improved for airlines recently. As energy prices sank in recent months, AMR paid $120 million less for fuel during the fourth quarter than it would have paid at prices prevailing from the prior-year period, for example. Arpey has also managed some feats, such as slimming his company's total debt burden by 8.5% year over year to $18.4 billion during the quarter.

The recent results come after Arpey battled for years to get the sprawling the Fort Worth-based carrier into shape. As fuel costs began to soar after Hurricane Katrina, for example, American installed devices on all of its 737s and many 757s to help their wings fly more efficiently. American estimates that move saves between 100,000 and 140,000 gallons of fuel annually per aircraft. AMR even arranged in 2005 to fly their planes directly over the North Pole on the new Chicago- to-Shanghai route when weather allows, a move that saves more than $3,000 per flight (see BusinessWeek, 5/8/06, "AMR: Making Every Gallon Count").

"We have a lot of work left to do, but the track we are on today is the right track to position our company for long-term success," Arpey said in the press release.

Market players had expected worse. The mean analyst forecast had been for Arpey to lose 13 cents per share during the quarter, according to the San Francisco research firm StarMine, which aggregates data from Thomson Financial. AMR actually earned 7 cents per share.

AMR's share price fell 2.5% to $39.24 on the New York Stock Exchange in late afternoon trading Jan. 17. Earlier the same day, AMR had traded at its high of the year of $41 per share before investors decided to take some profits. Investors sold others in the industry, such as United Airlines' parent UAL Corp. (NASDAQ:UAUA - News), amid a rise in oil prices.

"We think AMR showed extremely strong improvement and, with the recent drop in fuel costs, it is likely to post strong '07 results," Standard & Poor's equity analyst Jim Corridore said in a research note. (S&P, like BusinessWeek.com, is owned by The McGraw-Hill Companies.) "We also like AMR's focus on debt reduction and what we see as its strong cash position." He hiked his forecast on the company's earnings for 2007, bringing his target price to $50 from $30 per share. He also upgraded the stock to buy from hold.

AMR ended 2006 with $5.2 billion in cash and short-term investments, compared to a balance of $4.3 billion at the end of 2005.

Maybe American Airlines can soon begin to post profits every quarter. The sky's the limit. Notic
 
Why was the operating profit not posted? I have yet to see that. Also, were there any "special charges" for '06? TC
 
Notice the paragraph where there was an $191 million net charge for special items!

Explanation

The loss for the fourth quarter of 2005 includes a net $191 million negative impact of special items, including $155 million for aircraft charges, $73 million for facility charges and a $37 million gain related to debt restructuring.

Special items occur when the company has to take a charge or recognize a gain that does not relate to the normal course of business. In 4Q05, I believe we announced that we were parking some MD80s and returning TW 757s. If those assets had any value left on the balance sheet, their values would have had to be at least partially written off as an expense. Same goes for facilities - if we had abandoned some space because we didn't need the gates anymore, we would have written off those assets.

Special items can go either way. IIRC, if you look back at 4Q04 you will find that we recorded a special gain due to the sale of our equity position in Orbitz.

Even though special items are called out separately, they are still included in our financial results as our official "GAAP" number reported to Wall Street. Management and investors both prefer to look at the ex-special items numbers, though, to gauge how well the business itself is operating right now.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #4
Explanation
Special items occur when the company has to take a charge or recognize a gain that does not relate to the normal course of business. In 4Q05, I believe we announced that we were parking some MD80s and returning TW 757s. If those assets had any value left on the balance sheet, their values would have had to be at least partially written off as an expense. Same goes for facilities - if we had abandoned some space because we didn't need the gates anymore, we would have written off those assets.

Special items can go either way. IIRC, if you look back at 4Q04 you will find that we recorded a special gain due to the sale of our equity position in Orbitz.

Even though special items are called out separately, they are still included in our financial results as our official "GAAP" number reported to Wall Street. Management and investors both prefer to look at the ex-special items numbers, though, to gauge how well the business itself is operating right now.


Actually, I find it ironic that the $191 million charge equals the PUP package for the executives!
 
Actually, I find it ironic that the $191 million charge equals the PUP package for the executives!

The $191 million charge was discussed a year ago. As posted by Connected1, the charge related to aircraft and facility write-downs.

I thought this year's incentive comp payments were gonna equal $200+ million?
 
<_< ----- Strange! I could be wrong, but I believe aa is still flying all but three of the TWA 757's! Sixteen flying, three grounded, total nineteen.
 
<_< ----- Strange! I could be wrong, but I believe aa is still flying all but three of the TWA 757's! Sixteen flying, three grounded, total nineteen.

The decision to return them to their lessors triggered the write-down. Doesn't matter that AA continues to fly them today. Additionally, the write-down also related to the 33 or so MD-80s that were grounded late in 2005 (or which AA had determined in late 2005 to ground in early 2006).
 
Explanation
Special items occur when the company has to take a charge or recognize a gain that does not relate to the normal course of business. In 4Q05, I believe we announced that we were parking some MD80s and returning TW 757s. If those assets had any value left on the balance sheet, their values would have had to be at least partially written off as an expense. Same goes for facilities - if we had abandoned some space because we didn't need the gates anymore, we would have written off those assets.

Just to clarify...the MD80s and TW757s were most likely operating leases, not capital leases. As a result the write-downs were for the value of the monthly lease payments due until lease expiration of the equipment. So for a single aircraft being parked say 24 months early take the monthly lease payment x 24 to get the write down for that aircraft. Add those up for all the parked equipment and you get to the total 'special item.' If the equipment was owned the write down would be for the net of the book value minus a reasonably anticipated sale price for the equipment.
 
Just to clarify...the MD80s and TW757s were most likely operating leases, not capital leases.

According to the last 10-K filed by TW, all of their leases were operating leases. AMR negotiated lower lease rates, but didn't change them over to capital leases because they had no intention of keeping them in the fleet long term.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top