Melburnian1
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2013
- Posts
- 25,447
Dannyism, I would call VA a 'struggling' business.
I don't understand why JB (CEO) was recently rather generous with what appeared to be an above-inflation pay rise for flight crew.
QF is salivating in making profits, but when one also considers its performance during the last five years in aggregate, it too has not exactly set the investing community on fire.
Both businesses have huge fixed costs and despite for instance AJ's denials, much of the 'improvement' in QF's performance has come from lower fuel prices. The latter is unlikely to last forever.
Both companies need to replace major assets such as some planes.
While I don't like Mr Warren Buffett's politics, his longstanding view that airlines and insurance companies should be avoided by investors is sensible. Notably he invests in freight rail operators: although they too have had challenging times with the decline in coal haulage among other problems, overall investing in rail freight is preferable to investing in airlines' self loading freight carriage.
It will be very interesting to see whether VA's major investors - HNA Group, SQ and EY plus others - are all patient when in five years VA has repeatedly, as it has in the past, failed to turn a profit or cover the cost of capital.
Is Australia domestically a natural monopoly for an airline? The 'two airline' policy was in a different era but it kept fares high, and the two airlines fairly stable. Now we have a situation with two airlines (each having an LCC subsidiary) where one mainline group (VA) is profitless, and has also sold off much of its loyalty scheme; the other (QF) is making profits but not consistently if we look back a few years, and which has cut back on international operations compared with 20 or even 10 years ago (no BKK, HKG or SIN - LHR for one) even if its spin is that it is now 'expanding internationally'.
I don't understand why JB (CEO) was recently rather generous with what appeared to be an above-inflation pay rise for flight crew.
QF is salivating in making profits, but when one also considers its performance during the last five years in aggregate, it too has not exactly set the investing community on fire.
Both businesses have huge fixed costs and despite for instance AJ's denials, much of the 'improvement' in QF's performance has come from lower fuel prices. The latter is unlikely to last forever.
Both companies need to replace major assets such as some planes.
While I don't like Mr Warren Buffett's politics, his longstanding view that airlines and insurance companies should be avoided by investors is sensible. Notably he invests in freight rail operators: although they too have had challenging times with the decline in coal haulage among other problems, overall investing in rail freight is preferable to investing in airlines' self loading freight carriage.
It will be very interesting to see whether VA's major investors - HNA Group, SQ and EY plus others - are all patient when in five years VA has repeatedly, as it has in the past, failed to turn a profit or cover the cost of capital.
Is Australia domestically a natural monopoly for an airline? The 'two airline' policy was in a different era but it kept fares high, and the two airlines fairly stable. Now we have a situation with two airlines (each having an LCC subsidiary) where one mainline group (VA) is profitless, and has also sold off much of its loyalty scheme; the other (QF) is making profits but not consistently if we look back a few years, and which has cut back on international operations compared with 20 or even 10 years ago (no BKK, HKG or SIN - LHR for one) even if its spin is that it is now 'expanding internationally'.
Last edited: