//There is a lot more work to be done, but hopefully the first quarter was a demonstration that there are some good things happening in the company,” said Thomas McInerney, Genworth’s chief executive officer, in an interview Friday after the company’s quarterly conference call.// I would have more confidence if he had omitted "hopefully"
Disagree, if was an oligopoly fares and revenues wound not be down as much and Munoz would not be saying there is still too much capacity. You know more than Munoz? If gdp was growing at 3-4% than current capacity would be ok, it's not ok at 2% growth
//“I used to be in the railroad industry for a long time and consolidation there over the many years I think did help the business and economic model. It allows us, again, to generate some funds we can reinvest in the
business, there’s plenty of competition, truly. And I think all of that combined makes for a better product for our customers,” Munoz said.
Munoz predicted that consolidation will continue, “There is a lot of capacity out there and eventually I think you’ll see some more consolidation.”//
There you go, despite all the huge mergers there is still way too much capacity, what capacity that was lost with mergers was replaced by both the big 4 and by the lcc/ulcc airlines ...current DOJ maybe will ok alk/va merger but i dont see any more mergers until there is a more friendly DOJ. trump use to own an airline so if elected would think he would understand the need for more consolidation . Talk of an airline oligopoly was BS..
Anyone know shares outstanding and market cap? SEC filing for 12-31-16 shows 660m shares which would put market cap at 4B, Google Finance showing 660m shares but only 263m cap and yahoo showing 125m shares and cap at 755m.. ...755m cap is very low for company with 4B in sales so I am assuming the 4B cap is the correct number..
Think I'll buy some VA puts on bet that DOJ Baer will try to stop merger...no valid reason to justify stopping the merger but really wasn't one with LCC/AMR.except VA/ALK not legacies..DOJ did ask for second request which usually leads to a consent agreement to modify merger or lawsuit to stop merger.
RASM, PRASM. WHATASM...bottom line imo is that yoy revenues are down 4%...cant have that, revenues need to at least be flat yoy and ideally grow for pps to get back to highs
Based on dal minus 5% prasm it is possible aal will increase negative 2q prasm guide , but should not if Kirby's prasm "much better" in June comment is true...I don't have much faith in Kirby. If down 6-8% estimate holds for May than pps may rise imo..
Baker was drinking the koolaid like all the other annals last year..fact is pps is about half what his past year's pt has averaged...he did nail the aamrq merger bet bigtime
No I'm not until their secret magical yield software starts generating positive prasm and increasing revenues
For the record I have said repeatedly since 4q 2014 ccall when they guided prasm to be down in 1q that it has been all about the base(prasm), not treble(everything else)...unfortunately I did not sell before Parker's May ulcc "were going to war" comment...few analysts or anyone else took the declining prasm very seriously, now that's all aal management and everyone else talks about.. fact is aal was fully valued at 55$ on a taxed basis and overvalued when factoring in declining revenues...aal will only go up if we see fares rising and capacity declining and SA stabilizing.among other things..still a lot more negatives than positives for aal..why pps at 32$
It's all about the base(prasm) no treble(everything else)..been a year and half since I first said that , didnt think would still be true
No surprise as that was original plan BO2015
Good find Anthony...interesting that Moodys is saying the restructuring is a credit positive yet they downgraded gnw..
//What the #$%$ have they been doing/hiding if they really think the stock has 50% Upside Potential?".// Typical Fish behavior before they drop their PTs...average will likely be closer to 40$
1q BV was 28.19 share. However, it is only 19.80 excluding accumulated comprehensive income(loss) which was 4.2B as of 3-31-16, up from 3B 12-31-15. Not sure what this all means other than that the 19.80 ex BV is considered the more valid number when valuing gnw and other insurers, not the 28.19..
Obvious screw up buying too early They knew South America and Dallas and other big headwinds from ulccs etc...they have been drinking the kookaid