Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

US Airways Group, Inc. Message Board

wgrsh 163 posts  |  Last Activity: May 20, 2015 2:20 PM Member since: May 11, 2005
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    AAL Share count has been reduced!

    by zetove Mar 11, 2015 1:57 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 11, 2015 11:37 AM Flag

    // That's the diluted share count guided. //

    I'll go back and look, but is it the guidance 8-K at the end of January that you are referencing?

  • Reply to

    AAL Share count has been reduced!

    by zetove Mar 11, 2015 1:57 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 11, 2015 11:16 AM Flag

    // 698m shares in the 8-K //

    I'll bet the difference between that and the diluted share count are the shares held for the disputed claims.

  • Reply to

    AAL Share count has been reduced!

    by zetove Mar 11, 2015 1:57 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 11, 2015 11:14 AM Flag

    // you just don't want to talk about it, trust me. //

    Well, the potential write-off is known and out there. If the market wants to be surprised by it, it'll be surprised. If not, it won't be surprised.

  • Reply to

    AAL Share count has been reduced!

    by zetove Mar 11, 2015 1:57 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 11, 2015 10:35 AM Flag

    Regards share count ... don't you have to add in the shares being held for disputed claims to the number you are citing?

  • Reply to

    squawkbox today

    by raysouth90 Mar 11, 2015 9:50 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 11, 2015 10:23 AM Flag

    bears ... ok, thanks ... was just wondering if I missed some news out there today.

    Yes, the prasm comps YOY seemed explained to me in the CC, but spooked others I guess.

    A small percent due to currency, residual VZ until June, and added seats that couldn't be presold. But having said that, when airlines want to pullback, they pullback, and use anything as an excuse.

  • Reply to

    squawkbox today

    by raysouth90 Mar 11, 2015 9:50 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 11, 2015 10:06 AM Flag

    bears ... they said something today about VZ? Just wondering, though agree with what you said.

    And I think the biggest VZ hit has past being in Q3 & Q4 of last year with a smaller hit in the beginning of this year and no YOY impact after June.

  • Reply to

    Jet Fuel

    by unclespeaking Mar 6, 2015 1:29 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 6, 2015 4:26 PM Flag

    // Not surprised it's moving in tandem with oil -- //

    It'll be interesting to see how oil reacts as the dollar strengthens further on this next leg.

  • Reply to

    Watch Volatity

    by unclespeaking Mar 6, 2015 11:27 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 6, 2015 11:51 AM Flag

    If the market doesn't reverse soon, the S&P is going to test its 50 day, and maybe the 100 day.

  • Reply to

    We do Banks now

    by unclespeaking Mar 6, 2015 9:28 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 6, 2015 10:47 AM Flag

    unc ... yes, aware of the other half of stress test coming.

    The positions I'm building is for overtime ... and I started on pullbacks in the sector over the last few months ... definitely not today. And the sector may stutter until the realization of the start of rate hikes.

    Did you hear anyone saying they liked financials over the last few months? ... especially after the recent strength in the long end and talk of putting off the rate hike. Some stocks dipped and stabilized ... thought I'd take a shot ... long term part of portfolio.

    Not changing view on airlines.

  • Reply to

    We do Banks now

    by unclespeaking Mar 6, 2015 9:28 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 6, 2015 10:06 AM Flag

    unc ... I've been building a position ... but going more with regional than money center. See how it turns out over the next couple of years.

  • Reply to

    Traffic concern

    by markusgzee Mar 4, 2015 11:10 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 1:20 PM Flag

    markus ... I think AAL cut revenue seats and added seats that still need to develop revenue. You're seeing that, and worrying. But they will develop those added, no cost seats, and that will balance things out by the end of the year ... maybe even provide a positive impact to profits.

  • Reply to

    Traffic concern

    by markusgzee Mar 4, 2015 11:10 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 1:05 PM Flag

    // fare prices are down about 3% on average //

    PRASM is down 3%, not fares.

    Let's look at an imaginary airline with 11 airplanes each flying one route/day, 10 seats at a fare of $100. Stay with me on this.

    The airline cuts capacity by dropping one route and loses $1000 in revenue, but also saves $900 in costs. So it loses $100.

    The airline adds a seat to the other aircraft so now it has the same ASMs (PRASM is down (fares are still the same)), and this extra seat has no cost. If it fill just one of those extra seats it clears $100 and profits don't change YOY.

    Pretty simplistic, but think this is what AAL is saying about what's going on for that component of the PRASM decrease. Anyway, compared to last year (ex-fuel), it is labor costs that will cause the profits to be different.

  • Reply to

    Traffic concern

    by markusgzee Mar 4, 2015 11:10 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 12:26 PM Flag

    markus ... Let say fuel is the same as last year ... what percent of this years miss will be due to labor expense and what will be due to the revenue you worry about?

  • Reply to

    Traffic concern

    by markusgzee Mar 4, 2015 11:10 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 12:07 PM Flag

    markus, you didn't comprehend what I said. You said they won't duplicate last year, and I agreed, but (ex-fuel) meaning I understood that eps would be higher due to fuel, and the main reason they wouldn't beat last year (ex-fuel) is the labor expense. That's the biggy.

    And given that you didn't follow me in that, you probably didn't understand what I meant about costs.

  • Reply to

    Traffic concern

    by markusgzee Mar 4, 2015 11:10 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 11:42 AM Flag

    // i disagree that we can't hit results due to labor expense, as fuel more than covers it at this time //

    Gee whiz, markus ... I know I don't articulate things as well as they should be, but I did say, "Generally, true (ex-fuel). "

  • Reply to

    Traffic concern

    by markusgzee Mar 4, 2015 11:10 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 11:06 AM Flag

    // anyone expecting last years results will be disappointed //

    Generally, true (ex-fuel). And that is because of the labor expense bump, but synergies will get that back over time. That said, the revenue change you're worried about was "self-imposed". But if you look at their capacity cuts impacting revenue, it was the type that also cut costs. The extra seats that brought capacity back up, are essentially free of costs. Also, I think, as the year goes on, things will improve in the areas you are concerned about, but take into account the "costs" involved with the capacity movements.

  • Reply to

    Why are we down today?

    by markusgzee Mar 5, 2015 10:20 AM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 10:32 AM Flag

    // nothing makes sense anymore //

    The problem may be that you are trying to predict daily price movements ...

    markus ... get a grip ... you're going to be a father soon. Family needs youl

  • Reply to

    Traffic concern

    by markusgzee Mar 4, 2015 11:10 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 10:27 AM Flag

    // SO again, is anyone concerned about the overall drop in traffic?, .. //

    markus ... Short answer, no. AAL had a two edged sword. They cut capacity, but made it up with the extra seats. So, in the current quarter revenues have "both" of those impacts. I would think AAL's yield is holding up just as well as other carriers.

    All airlines are in a pullback, not just AAL. I think the real reason for the malaise is not operational, but the question of how soon oil rebounds. Nobody knows, but people aren't going to accept the current oil situation as normal unless it becomes normal. So, a short term benefit is good, but not a huge bump to valuations.

    I'm sure if oil starts rising, it will stop at a level that is still very profitable for the airlines, but that remains to be seen and many don't believe that yet. As far as I'm concerned, if Brent stays at $80 or below, things are good.

  • Reply to

    BOA sees it my way

    by scottmmoore826 Feb 28, 2015 7:24 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 9:26 AM Flag

    Well ... maybe that was just because there was general stability in prices, and you saw a correlation but the correlation wasn't the causative correlation. Just do a search and you'll find numerous article dating back many years that state oil products are based off of Brent.

  • Reply to

    Traffic concern

    by markusgzee Mar 4, 2015 11:10 PM
    wgrsh wgrsh Mar 5, 2015 9:22 AM Flag

    This happens every year ... certainly not worse than last year. Didn't DAL say the other day that one of the reasons for their prasm weakness was fewer cancellations than last year? I know AAL said during the CC that was a component of their prasm projection, among other things (extra seats, currency, etc)

LCC
22.550.0000(0.00%)Dec 6 4:00 PMEST