Air New Zealands Profit Announcement

[ozziekiwi]

Surprised that no comment has been made regarding the National Carriers profit and surge in the share price !!

The majority state-owned carrier's $262 million profit after tax for the year to June 30 was up 45 per cent on last year and was achieved on the back of increased passenger volumes and reduced fuel costs.

Pity the White Rat can;t emulate this performance !! :ok:

[mattyj]

I've been travelling back and forth between Gisborne and Auckland weekly for work and for $400+ each way and with lousy business schedules, I think my company paid for most of that profit..at least the first 200 million..

..seriously airnz, you completely suffocate aviation in NZ and totally rip off the public and make excessive profits too..nice!

[waren9]

it no secret the regions support the business beyond proportion. always have.

but if you consider the investment, its still a lousy return. nothing excessive about it mattyj

there are lots of reasons why you cant travel for the same cents/km on a b1900 as a 777. i think there are a lot of people out there that look at some of the loss leading fares and dont really appreciate what it actually costs to travel by air

[Boney]

What a pity they weren't making that profit back in 2001.

They would have been able to pay their own fuel bill instead of making Ansett Airlines pay both airlines' fuel bills.

[moa999]

And it must be damm site embarassing that despite all the moolah, you get beaten month in month out by Jetstar NZ for OTP

[craka]

Jetstar NZ use a 15 minute window. Air NZ a 10 minute one. Apples/oranges.

[Jack Ranga]

They're a cracking airline, should be proud of them :ok:

[waren9]

dont forget the engine stealing and bank account emptying either boney. rage on brother

true moa but the cancellations column tells a slightly different story.

[pull-up-terrain]

I love it how Air NZ in the past few years announce their profits leading up to Qantas announcing theirs. It just absolutely mocks Qantas management. Just shows that a unionised end of line carrier with the right aircraft can still make a profit.

[Ollie Onion]

Craca, that is not correct, Jetstar uses 10 minutes just as Air NZ has done and Air NZ just use the OTP from the jet domestic fleet for this reporting so it is apples v apples. Having said that, good on Air Nz for the profit, they are a great airline.

[NZScion]

It's hardly apples with apples, Air NZ are running a larger and far more complicated network, and have more exposure to congestion and ramp delays (not necessarily their own fault)... Also there are inherent delays running a full service airline vs LCC, you never hear of Jetstar waiting for tranship pax...

Apples vs oranges, and never trust statistics you didn't fake yourself...

[AirWest]

Of course they are going to make money, how could they not?

No 'real' competetion domestically hence why they can charge like a wounded bull, lower staff costs to make it viable to to fly the trans tasman and poaching the routes interntionally that will make a profit.

[Berealgetreal]

Question for the experts. Can the EK 380/777 reach NZ? 777X?....

...

[craka]

http://www.jetstar.com/nz/en/what-we-offer/our-performance

[Soteria]

Bit of a shame that some folk are laying the boot into ANZ on here. I've got a couple of mates flying for them and they are pretty content, even though as with any airline life isn't perfect. They've served long careers, earn good coin, enjoy a measure of job security and reckon overall conditions aren't too shabby.
So to see pilots actually flying because the airline is profitable and managed well, and not being made redundant or on LWOP is a pleasing, albeit rare, but pleasing result.
Good on them I say.

[framer]

I say good on them as well.
Air NZ management seem to have engaged their staff more than other airlines I've watched over the last decade and also have been smart with their fleet choices.
I don't work for them so maybe that's just how it looks from the outside.
On the OTP comparison with Jetstar, I have noticed that if a jetstar flight is running an hour or so late they reschedule the flight, does that then mean that it can leave 'on time' based on the new departure time?

[Cactusjack]

On the OTP comparison with Jetstar, I have noticed that if a jetstar flight is running an hour or so late they reschedule the flight, does that then mean that it can leave 'on time' based on the new departure time?
Correct! So, as an analogy - JQ 666 is running 3 hours off schedule, it's scheduled time of departure was 1345. They cancel the flight altogether, create a new flight number - JQ 667 with an ETD of 1645. Guess what, it is actually off blocks early at 1642!!!! A miracle! Old flight cancelled, new flight created and departs on time.........oldest trick in the book. Welcome to aviation smoke and mirrors lesson 1. Lesson 2 is 'how to fudge ACARS' :ok:....TBC

[framer]

Thanks Cactus.
Having paxed on them quite a bit domestically in NZ I was pretty surprised to see them advertising on bill boards that they have the best OTP in NZ and figured that the only way they could say that was if they were fudging it just as you described.
Ta.

[Ollie Onion]

Cactus,

What a load of Bollocks, I have never seen a flight re-timed with a new flight number to fudge the OTP. I can tell you about 90% of my flights leave and arrive early.

[Cactusjack]

Ollie, I couldn't give a rats about you or your flights. I know what I know champ. It might not happen a dozen times a day but it does happen. And that info comes directly from more than just one of your flying colleagues, so perhaps YOU have been lucky?

[lilflyboy262...2]

Buddy of mine works at Auckland Domestic doing the ground handling.
He confirmed what Cactus was saying.

[p.j.m]

Surprised that no comment has been made regarding the National Carriers profit and surge in the share price !!

No surprise, their service and flights are a pleasure. I'd fly Air NZ any day.

[Big M]

Cancel and retime - definitely true. What are the figures bandied around all the time in media/press/for awards etc? On time departures. Cancelled flights are not. Some statistic gatherers do actually publish numbers of cancelled flights but it is rare.

Of course on time departure figures are a complete concocted wank anyway. Just another data point that the managers/non-operational people have decided will be a measure of "performance" "greatness" and of course their own ability to grab a bonus based on these figures.

Doors closed and park brake off means so much to the "on-time" industry but bugger all to people/freight being moved from A to B actually in the time promised/published/stated.

Cancel and re-time is very real and they all do it. Some, of course are worse offenders than others.

:ok:

[Ollie Onion]

Retiming is true, no doubt there. What doesn't happen is the 'creation' of a new flight number to fool the OTP stats. I don't know what airline Cactus' mates work for but one that has a fluid schedule like he suggests and a chief pilot who rings you personally to bollock you for performing a go around (see other posts) sounds more based in fantasy land that OZ or NZ.

I should also point out that Jetstar NZ had an ANNUAL cancellation rate of 0.6% or 1 in every 160 flights cancelled. Seems reasonable. Aside from conspiracies about some complicated plan to dupe OTP figures it may almost be possible that the stats show Jetstar NZ as having better OTP because they actually do.

[waren9]

can someone rename this thread pls to reflect the actual topic being discussed?

:rolleyes:

[AirWest]

It seems that even there is a huge backlash of residents in New Zealand that are disliking Air New Zealand

Editorial: Air NZ flying high but must heed flak on regional fares - Business - NZ Herald News (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11315188)

[27/09]

It seems that even there is a huge backlash of residents in New Zealand that are disliking Air New Zealand

Actually more a few making some political noises. Lets face it if Air NZ was creaming it on the regional routes there'd be other operators after a share of the cake. The fact there's not would indicate the fares are probably about right.

You have to remember the private motor car is the biggest competitor to air travel in New Zealand, not any other airline that might come along.

[haughtney1]

Flying domestically in NZ outside of the main trunk routes is NEVER going to be cheap, but it can be value for money. When NZ hits a population of about 20 million or so, we might see an improvement....:ugh:
Air NZ are however masters at ripping customers new ones...:ok:

[Shredder6]

Lets face it if Air NZ was creaming it on the regional routes there'd be other operators after a share of the cake

Like Origin Pacific.

Was looking at flying Wellies Blenheim the other week about a month before needing to travel, from memory the fare was around $240. One way.
And that wasn't the most expensive seat.

[outboundjetsetter]

Just had a look on the air nz website, 2 adults 1 Child and one infant return AKL to GIS return = about $2400 NZD if you have a flexible ticket and 2 check in bags off an international flight.AIR NZ ARE YOU INSANE!!??? you are your own worst enemy!.

[27/09]

Elzilcho

I think that on many international fares the domestic portion is included as part of the international fare. In other words there is very often no $50 for the domestic portion.

[waren9]

presumably objs's intl sectors were with another carrier for him to know that number

[c100driver]

OBJS said,
Just had a look on the air nz website, 2 adults 1 Child and one infant return AKL to GIS return = about $2400 NZD if you have a flexible ticket and 2 check in bags off an into flight.AIR NZ ARE YOU INSANE!!??? you are your own worst enemy!.

Nothing like finding the worst case to make your point.

Just used the same criteria 2 adults, 1 child and an infant. Not flying on a Friday or Monday booking using seat plus bag.

Booking tomorrow - $1449 return.
Booking next month - $909 return.

[outboundjetsetter]

C100driver When i did a random search of dates i wasn't trying to find the most expensive price, I put some random dates in around nov- Dec as this is the time id like to 'come home' shocked to see 399 per adult per sector, just did another search today and found the prices have come down significantly for a similar period???( around 1600) .
I am not trying to find the worst case scenario to make a point! I do have one child infant and wife and clearly remember flying home ( internationally with another carrier which lucky for me is my choice) then enjoying a 1900 flight which cost about half as much 4-5 years ago.Inflation is high in nz you certainly notice it when returning as as Expat but i I don't buy the "1900 seats =higher $/mile v's ATR running costs excuse etc etc.. sure an 'A' check is an 'A' check but competition is competition ( healthy) also.
p.s Warren yes the international flights are from another Carrier, Air NZ don't fly to where I live,

[juliet]

If you don't buy that a 1900 has higher seat costs than an ATR then you don't know much about airlines and aviation.

edit: oh and Ive just checked the same flights as well. 25 Nov to 3 Dec, 2 adults, 1 child, 1 infant, seat and bag tickets, middle of the day (no real variation over the day anyway) comes to $654. Total.

[mattyj]

No, they are a rip off, and Yes, if you live in a provincial town, the availability and pricing is a major issue! In Gisborne it's common practice to drive 3 hours to Napier to get cheaper airfares at better times. Ditto, Wanganui to Palmy, Taupo to Hamilton etc. people have been talking about it in the cafés and bars here since the announcement.

New Zealanders are pretty hard to get riled, but one thing that causes muttering is big monopolies, partially state owned, charging top dollar, and then shoving it down our throats with public (record) profit announcements.
Same goes for power companies, and internet/telecom providers!

[Jack Ranga]

What about fares to and from phuckatarnae??

[juliet]

No, they are a rip off, and Yes, if you live in a provincial town, the availability and pricing is a major issue! In Gisborne it's common practice to drive 3 hours to Napier to get cheaper airfares at better times. Ditto, Wanganui to Palmy, Taupo to Hamilton etc. people have been talking about it in the cafés and bars here since the announcement.

New Zealanders are pretty hard to get riled, but one thing that causes muttering is big monopolies, partially state owned, charging top dollar, and then shoving it down our throats with public (record) profit announcements.

So what do you propose? ANZ makes single digit ROI. Yes it is a good profit, relative to the losses most other airlines are making. As a ROI its not that great, and most business wouldn't be bothered with a return that low.

So what exactly should ANZ do? Run the regions at a loss? Run the regions at break even? How exactly is this beneficial to the investors, including the government that gets a return thanks to their stake.

People need to get real about what an airline costs to run, and what its purpose is. Its a business that should be making money. If its not then you start putting jobs at risk, and you run the very real risk of flights to the regions being severely cut back. How does that help anyone?

[empacher48]

With all this talk about fares into and out of Gisborne, I guess no one has made the connection that the landing charges into Gisborne are now higher than they are at Wellington?

I guess no one else has seen that Airways have been increasing their airways charges by around 80% per year over the last three years?

How much have wages, fuel, maintenance costs increased in the same period?

Oh yes, of course the CAA have increased their fees by up to 400% in the last two years. (My medical went from being $180 to over $400, a new licence went from $60 to $230, auditing charges went from $180 an hour to $800 an hour).

The actual fares themselves have remained static over that period.

Has anyone here got an idea of how capital expensive running an airline is? I think the return on investment in Air New Zealand this year was about 2.75%, which is absolutely amazing for an airline, but still no where as good as what you could get if you kept the money in the bank. If you actually owned shares in the bank, then you would sell your shares if your return was less than 20%. Pharmaceutical companies, anything less than 80% is bad.

Air New Zealand does now have a CEO who is more interested in numbers and is not afraid of axing under performing routes. He has a mindset with regional New Zealand, that if you don't use it, you'll end up loosing it.

[Gate_15L]

Regional fares too high? Aw tuff. suck it up princesses... Thats the real cost of regional, low yield low volume routes.

Any time that there has been a competitor start up, the majority of the general public would still fly the Koru and wouldn't support the challenger anyway because of xyz... insert crappy service, bad frequency, doesn't connect to my international flight, uses child labour, doesn't give out biscuits on a 20 minute sector.

So suck it up regional NZ, quit complaining, you did it to yourselves. Hope you like driving...:ugh:

[davys747]

I guess no one else has seen that Airways have been increasing their airways charges by around 80% per year over the last three years?



From the Airways website:


Airline prices

The final overall price increase is 10.6% in 2013-14, 3.5% in 2014-15 and 1.2% in 2015-16. This is an increase of just over 5% a year, or 15.7% over the three years.

As a consequence of the high quality of customer submissions, we have revised Airways’ price increase from the 23% proposed in February to 15.7% over the three years of the pricing period.

In addition, prior to these increases, there were no increases for the previous 11 years.

[27/09]

What about fares to and from phuckatarnae??
Jack, I like it, have you ever thought about getting a job writing Maori pronunciations? Based on this example you'd do well I'd say. :ok:

As for the fares I have no idea.

[27/09]

As a consequence of the high quality of customer submissions, we have revised Airways’ price increase from the 23% proposed in February to 15.7% over the three years of the pricing period.

Typical Airways tactic. Come out with a high price and then after some "consultation" drop their price to the level they actually wanted right from the start and make out they're the good guys.

Airways are very much a cost plus organisation with no concept of market forces. Airport companies are the same. As for CAA, they're digging themselves out of a big financial hole, caused by ballooning staff numbers and the unnecessary shift to new expensive building.

[Lindstrim]

What about fares to and from phuckatarnae??

Anywhere from 90 to 260 one way.

[Jack Ranga]

I speak Kiwi better than a Kiwi :ok: