Virgin Australia - Phoenix Rising from the Ashes?
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From The Australian June 10:
I'm betting not too many of the bond holders will be investing in the hope of recouping their losses.
Jayne's popular in the same paper this morning:
Is Jayne Hrdlicka a bully? The evidence is thin.
I'm betting not too many of the bond holders will be investing in the hope of recouping their losses.
Jayne's popular in the same paper this morning:
Is Jayne Hrdlicka a bully? The evidence is thin.
You'll probably find they will off load as little of the company as they can in the IPO in order to recoup their initial outlay and retain full control of the airline. They've had the opportunity to cut costs heavily under administration unlike QF. They will continue to do well and grow their profit as long as they retain and grow market share. Just remember, the triangle is one of the most profitable set of routes in the world.
Just remember, the triangle is one of the most profitable set of routes in the world.
Virgin were flying this "most profitable route" before they went bankrupt, did not seem to help.
It didn't seem to help them when they had management racking up debt like no tomorrow and paying stupid amounts of money for aircraft leases. These are simply some of the busiest routes in the world. If you have competent management who manage their yield, it's simply a cash cow. Without the triangle, VA would have gone into administration a long time before covid.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: New Zealand
Age: 71
Posts: 1,475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is only a profitable route/triangle if you market the route properly, hedge your fuel correctly, offer a service that keeps people coming back or at least interested, and so the list goes on. Many good, profitable, fail safe companies globally have gone tits up due to mismanagement, poor culture or a piss poor C-suite at the helm.
Sounds about right on a straight revenue dollar/km flown basis.
Of course, given sufficient aptitude and application, it wouldn't be difficult to stuff that up. Revenue is one thing, costs are an entirely different matter.
Last edited by MickG0105; 11th Jun 2022 at 09:59. Reason: Tidy up
VA announcing expansion of its 737 International Network, OOL-DPS to commence at the end of March 2023. The ultimate 'bogan bus' route.
VA currently has also scheduled in BNE/SYD to VLI/APW (and has opened them for booking) to start at the end of March 2023 as well.
VA currently has also scheduled in BNE/SYD to VLI/APW (and has opened them for booking) to start at the end of March 2023 as well.
Thanks MickG…
Revenue per hour, as you know, is not a measure of profitability. So still looking for a source for that claim.
2. Melbourne – Sydney
The service between Australia’s two biggest cities earned Qantas Airways some $861m last year, with an average revenue per hour of $23,773. It is one of four domestic routes that make up the top ten, and the only one outside North America. It was the only one of the ten most lucrative services to post higher revenue in 2018/19, although there was only a modest 1.4% rise from $849m the year before.
The service between Australia’s two biggest cities earned Qantas Airways some $861m last year, with an average revenue per hour of $23,773. It is one of four domestic routes that make up the top ten, and the only one outside North America. It was the only one of the ten most lucrative services to post higher revenue in 2018/19, although there was only a modest 1.4% rise from $849m the year before.
CASK ex-fuel should be sub 9 cents. Given the pax density on the route you get load factors and aircraft utilisation that are relatively very high, so CASK for that route is probably closer to 8 cents ex-fuel.
That sort of revenue V cost dynamic is not common.
Derby?
Where will the tech stop be? Tindal? Derby? OOL PER is limited let alone to WADD with alternate
YBCG-WADD Where will the tech stop be? Tindal? Derby? OOL PER is limited let alone to WADD with alternate
Yes, truely a victorious emergence from the Ashes, went bankrupt, restructured and wrote off debt leaving suppliers millions out of pock, sacked a load of staff, shutdown part of the airline, paid themselves massive bonuses and started again from a debt free position….. truely remarkable.
YBCG WADD approx 2400nm, seasonal winds up to 40ish on the nose one way. Never driven a 737, no idea if it will do it. The 738 Max certainly will as SQ flies it to Cairns.
Virgin used to fly to Bali in the NG from???
Fantastic to hear of new routes all round!
Virgin used to fly to Bali in the NG from???
Fantastic to hear of new routes all round!
Yes, truely a victorious emergence from the Ashes, went bankrupt, restructured and wrote off debt leaving suppliers millions out of pock, sacked a load of staff, shutdown part of the airline, paid themselves massive bonuses and started again from a debt free position….. truely remarkable.
The Virgin IPO will be hyped to the stratosphere by Bain and its minion like Red69. Howevr Bain has "Form" in these matters...
Their strategy is not only to recover their investment, with interest, but to sink their claws in very, very deeply into the future revenue stream from the company for years after the IPO.
They do this by creating a stack of liabilities and cost streams in the company before they sell it. The average investor misses these because they are buried in the fine print. SUre Virgin will make a lot of money, but the investors wont see any of it, Bain creams it off for years.
Typical ploys:
- a management agreement between Bain and various Virgin entitiies.
-- ditto for consulting agreements.
- Loading the company with debt and paying itself huge "management fees" before the IPO - sucking all the free cash out of the business.
- preferential long term leasing deals.
An example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/occupywalls..._and_fraud_is/
Their strategy is not only to recover their investment, with interest, but to sink their claws in very, very deeply into the future revenue stream from the company for years after the IPO.
They do this by creating a stack of liabilities and cost streams in the company before they sell it. The average investor misses these because they are buried in the fine print. SUre Virgin will make a lot of money, but the investors wont see any of it, Bain creams it off for years.
Typical ploys:
- a management agreement between Bain and various Virgin entitiies.
-- ditto for consulting agreements.
- Loading the company with debt and paying itself huge "management fees" before the IPO - sucking all the free cash out of the business.
- preferential long term leasing deals.
An example:
Even as Bain’s debt increased the company’s costs, store revenue fell, making those debt payments harder to pay. In 2002, Bain had the company take out more debt to help finance a dividend recapitalization (a fancy term for when a company borrows money, not to finance actual business operations, but to pay dividends…) that sucked $120 million out of the company and put $85 million in Bain’s pockets alone. Payouts like that are usually only a thing when a company performs really well, but Bain wanted its ROI NOW NOW NOW, even if that meant piling more debt onto the company. And since dividends were taxed at a lower rate than capital gains, it was an even easier way for the Bain boys to get rich(er) quick.
Shortly after Bain’s takeover, Napa County, CA sued KB for deceptive pricing and reselling returned toys as new, and in a separate class action alleging deceptive pricing. Both cases settled in 2003, with Big Lots picking up the tab — not Bain.
By 2004, Bain had bankrupted KB, resulted in the loss of thousands of retail and warehouse jobs. Another private investment firm then took ownership of the company. KB’s online assets, including eToys.com, and inventory were sold to D.E. Shaw, an investment firm that was buying up financially distressed toy retailers at the time.
In 2005, a group of creditors sued Bain and KB execs in Delaware, arguing that the 2002 dividend recap was done “when the economy and the company’s business was declining and had a ‘devastating impact’ on the Pittsfield-based chain of mall-based toy stores,” making the payout improper. Bain tried to get the court to declare that these creditors didn’t have standing to sue them for fraudulent conveyance in the matter, which would essentially block other creditors from suing them for it as well.
Big Lots, KB’s previous owner, also sued Bain outside of the bankruptcy court, accusing Bain of fraud and shorting them $45 million still owed on the sale, but the case was dismissed for being improper outside of the bankruptcy proceedings.
Shortly after Bain’s takeover, Napa County, CA sued KB for deceptive pricing and reselling returned toys as new, and in a separate class action alleging deceptive pricing. Both cases settled in 2003, with Big Lots picking up the tab — not Bain.
By 2004, Bain had bankrupted KB, resulted in the loss of thousands of retail and warehouse jobs. Another private investment firm then took ownership of the company. KB’s online assets, including eToys.com, and inventory were sold to D.E. Shaw, an investment firm that was buying up financially distressed toy retailers at the time.
In 2005, a group of creditors sued Bain and KB execs in Delaware, arguing that the 2002 dividend recap was done “when the economy and the company’s business was declining and had a ‘devastating impact’ on the Pittsfield-based chain of mall-based toy stores,” making the payout improper. Bain tried to get the court to declare that these creditors didn’t have standing to sue them for fraudulent conveyance in the matter, which would essentially block other creditors from suing them for it as well.
Big Lots, KB’s previous owner, also sued Bain outside of the bankruptcy court, accusing Bain of fraud and shorting them $45 million still owed on the sale, but the case was dismissed for being improper outside of the bankruptcy proceedings.
The Virgin IPO will be hyped to the stratosphere by Bain and its minion like Red69. Howevr Bain has "Form" in these matters...
Their strategy is not only to recover their investment, with interest, but to sink their claws in very, very deeply into the future revenue stream from the company for years after the IPO.
They do this by creating a stack of liabilities and cost streams in the company before they sell it. The average investor misses these because they are buried in the fine print. SUre Virgin will make a lot of money, but the investors wont see any of it, Bain creams it off for years.
Typical ploys:
- a management agreement between Bain and various Virgin entitiies.
-- ditto for consulting agreements.
- Loading the company with debt and paying itself huge "management fees" before the IPO - sucking all the free cash out of the business.
- preferential long term leasing deals.
An example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/occupywalls..._and_fraud_is/
Their strategy is not only to recover their investment, with interest, but to sink their claws in very, very deeply into the future revenue stream from the company for years after the IPO.
They do this by creating a stack of liabilities and cost streams in the company before they sell it. The average investor misses these because they are buried in the fine print. SUre Virgin will make a lot of money, but the investors wont see any of it, Bain creams it off for years.
Typical ploys:
- a management agreement between Bain and various Virgin entitiies.
-- ditto for consulting agreements.
- Loading the company with debt and paying itself huge "management fees" before the IPO - sucking all the free cash out of the business.
- preferential long term leasing deals.
An example:
https://www.reddit.com/r/occupywalls..._and_fraud_is/
Few Bali issues this week, appears East coast is stopping Darwin en route.
