747-8i slain by fuel hedging emperor.

[Runnymede]

Cost of a new 747-8i Intercontinental = USD $0.3b or maybe less if negotiated. Call the Donald. He knows about these things apparently....

Fuel Hedge loss in 2015 = HKD $8.5b = USD $1.1b
Fuel Hedge loss in 2016 = HKD $8.5b = USD $1.1b
Fuel Hedge loss in 2017 = likely to be = USD $0.8b

That's a USD $3,000,000,000 hard landing, written in the Maint Log, on page 33.

What could CX have done with that rather uncharacteristic bet/loss of $3b ???

Certainly not invest in a premium high capacity flagship fleet, capable of solving a range of..... capacity, slot, marketing perception/premium pax requirements, cargo and crewing issues, at one fell swoop.

Where are the emperors clothes? In fact, who is the emperor?

[Average Fool]

Not really sure where you come up with those fuzzy facts.

Mr Chew made it very clear that fuel hedging is benefitting us.

[raven11]

But...but....the A350 is our new flagship....

Don't you see the average person in the street look up, and excitedly point, every time they see one...?

"Look, look, everybody, there goes another medium sized twin jet airliner!!"

[kenfoggo]

The A350 is an accountants solution to the cost of fuel. Just as cramming 10 abreast into Economy on the 777 is an accountants solution to a capacity problem. What would have been the strong thing to do would have been to resist this drive to increase capacity and make the old roomy cabin (compared to the competition) a unique selling proposition . 10 abreast surely is not what the customer wants? But that would have required airline thinking and strong leadership rather that a bean counter making the decisions.

[mngmt mole]

Come on guys, let's be fair. So far, all of the bean counters decisions have been brilliant......oh, wait :ooh: