AC reported a $145M operating loss on revenues of $2.12B for the Jan-Mar period. This represents an operating margin of -7%. Despite a strong Cdn economy.
Revenue was down >4% from same period last year, despite the impact of SARS last year.
Mark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 6 Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2436 times:
Yyz717-- Overall, a terrible result.
Well it's not great -- but then it's hardly apocalyptic either. Oh and SARS really only impacted about 10 days worth of Q1 2003 -- Q2 was by far the more heavily affected quarter.
Hopefully AC will snag an operating profit next (this) quarter.
Mark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2425 times:
L.1011 --First, a Canadian reading CBC?! Wow!
Why specifically might this be surprising?
Secondly, is anyone surprised?
I hope not-- I think it's about in line with what's going on with them corporately, what's going with the industry worldwide, and what's been going on with their domestic competition, over the last little while.
Would still be nice to see them at least break even by next quarter or the quarter after that though.
Dash8King From Canada, joined Nov 2001, 2740 posts, RR: 20 Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2234 times:
As Mark said, it's not great - but hardly dismal.
I think it is look at how many bills they are escaping paying in CCAA, if they were paying all of their bills it would be a huge loss. This does not show hope for the future.
Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 3460 posts, RR: 18 Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 2177 times:
With Westjet and Jetsgo piling onto YUL-YYZ and having increased YOW-YYZ flights it sure will be interesting to see AC's second QTR results when they come out! The eastern triangle "use" to account for 25% of AC's revenue. Matching those LCC airfares just has to hurt big time!!!!
United Airline From Hong Kong SAR, PRC, joined Jan 2001, 7114 posts, RR: 16 Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2060 times:
So will Mr Victor Li come back and put $ into the airline??
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 14947 posts, RR: 59 Reply 19, posted (4 years 5 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1771 times:
AC is still full.
Hmmm...their load factors might be strong but many of those seats were purchased prior to Apr 18th. I would expect AC loads on YYZ-YUL/YOW to drop significantly this summer. Not to mention yields.
Incidently, average yield from 2003 Q1 to 2004 Q1 dropped 9%. Another extremely poor trend.
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 14947 posts, RR: 59 Reply 21, posted (4 years 5 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1734 times:
Your just so darn pessimistic
On the contrary! I am "optimistic" that AC will collapse into liquidation in a sea of red ink and worsening operational performance.
With militant unions, a unionized workforce with only 50% the productivity level of WJ, incompetent mgmt, a sea of debt, and a -7% operating margin in Q1, AC is on short finals to the vast airline graveyard. RIP AC.
Captaingomes From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 6376 posts, RR: 59 Reply 22, posted (4 years 5 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1712 times:
Hey Neil, no disrespect intended, but I was wondering if you could substantiate how the workforce is 50% less productive at AC compared to WS? Is this based on all employee groups? Does it take into account staffing levels, wages, benefits, and all factors involved? There's no doubt that WS employees are more productive, but they are also going after lower yields and have a much less diverse product, so we have to take everything into account. The 50%, if even true, is probably based on a worst case scenario comparing one particular category of employees to another with assumptions widely skewed in favour of WS, just to make AC look bad.
"it's kind of like an Airbus, it's an engineering marvel, but there's no sense of passion" -- J. Clarkson re: Coxster
Yyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 14947 posts, RR: 59 Reply 23, posted (4 years 5 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1693 times:
Hey Neil, no disrespect intended, but I was wondering if you could substantiate how the workforce is 50% less productive at AC compared to WS? Is this based on all employee groups? Does it take into account staffing levels, wages, benefits, and all factors involved?
It's based on a combination of productivity and pay. Basic productivity (# unionized ee's per aircraft) is much lower at AC, add the muich higher wage rates and you have the 50%. It has been quoted many times by various airline analysts. In other words, with their current (poor) productivity, AC employees will need a 50% cut in pay to become as relatively efficient as WJ.
There's no doubt that WS employees are more productive, but they are also going after lower yields and have a much less diverse product,
Nonsense. AC and WJ are going after the same traffic: people flying from A to B. There is nothing less "diverse" (whatever that means) about WJ's traffic base.
AC has the 2nd highest cost per ASM of any airline in North America. The only airline worse is US, which is far more of a short haul carrier. When you equalize the stage length, AC drops to last place.
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 14947 posts, 
From United States, joined Aug 2001, 2209 posts, 
From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 3460 posts, 
From Hong Kong SAR, PRC, joined Jan 2001, 7114 posts, 
From Italy, joined Jun 2000, 4305 posts, 
