Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Fragrant Harbour
Reload this Page >

CX profits falls by 82%

Fragrant Harbour A forum for the large number of pilots (expats and locals) based with the various airlines in Hong Kong. Air Traffic Controllers are also warmly welcomed into the forum.

CX profits falls by 82%

Old 17th Aug 2016, 04:42
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In someone pocket
Posts: 1,139
CX profits falls by 82%

Cathay?s first half net profit falls 82 per cent as tourism, cargo yields decline | South China Morning Post
jetjockey696 is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2016, 05:12
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: HK
Posts: 10
4.5 billion in fuel hedging costs. Oh well.
Freehills is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2016, 05:35
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Asia
Posts: 126
But Ivan told me this was a good loss...
Dilbert68 is online now  
Old 17th Aug 2016, 06:27
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: overthere
Posts: 2,932
This is a good opportunity for the pilot community to help the company. If you burn more fuel, demand rises, hence fuel prices rise, and this hedge problem goes away. Win Win.
donpizmeov is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2016, 06:48
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Cesspit
Posts: 316
Explains why these muppets have become such penny pinchers.
When you give 94 cents in every dollar you make to a hedge fund you're left with very few pennies to pinch.

Fuel is to a large extent automatically hedged through ticket prices, fuel surcharges and the competitions requirement to purchase the same product at the same price. 60 percent hedging position is not a hedge, it's a gamble.

For them to shrug it off with the throw away line that they still believe in fuel hedging covers up the fact we'll never see hedging at 60 percent again. An airline encourages open and honest reporting of human errors. Some leadership from the top wouldn't go astray.
Over the last 2 years the CX spokeswoman has also gone very quiet that historically, they've had more hedging gains than losses. I wonder why..

What should have been a $4,843 million profit is reduced to $353 million by the use of the throw away line that they believe this is the correct strategy.
The 7 percent plummet in the share price would suggest the shareholders disagree.

Last edited by Progress Wanchai; 17th Aug 2016 at 08:13.
Progress Wanchai is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2016, 09:22
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 410
Down 17% for the previous 12 months, and only cents/pennies above book value.
OK4Wire is offline  
Old 17th Aug 2016, 23:03
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,544
Anotherday: Just trying to clarify - you are advocating for our present management? Or are you just working on the premise that it can only get worse. Overall, love your positive attitude.
Trafalgar is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 03:55
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: usa
Posts: 12
Let's be honest, why does any CX pilot care. Profit sharing is, at best,a few good dinners out in HK, when they make hundreds of millions of USD.If they made triple the profit we would still get a pittance.
Why taxi out at MTOW with high temps, marginal performance and planning on no tailwind, dry runway,with tons of profit making cargo in the hold while in contract compliance. A sensible safe pilot,not planning on going into captains discretion,would plan for the worst case and take of at a sensible weight.
Our union would also talk to the press ( as cabin crew does) about serious concerns regarding three man crews,minimum days off, sims in HK or TPE after hitting, or to avoid 900 hours in a year,not to mention many of our pilots inability (due to fatigue or lack of experience)to fly a visual segment without a Dear Gus letter, or to manage a very simple and common,in many busy airports, ILS/ GS interfernce without a Dear Gus letter.
Why is this pilot group willing to hide the facts in order to prop up this inept management team? We are tied to them, like it or not, until investors in CX deceide otherwise. CX management will not change until change is forced upon them. My rant is over. Cheers
Fl00 is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 05:06
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 754
You talk about the Dear Gus letter as if it's the great way of honestly reporting to the boss your shortcomings, with the intent they be promulgated to a wider audience for the greater good. And on a fleet with Gus in charge, it probably is as such.

Clearly you need to be brought up to speed on the dysfunctional relationship airbus pilots have with the fleet office
broadband circuit is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 05:49
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: usa
Posts: 12
Hi Broad Band,
Having never been on the Airbus fleet, I can't compare. And all of my observations are not an indictment of the CHeif Pilots office ( I am sure he has little control of the problems we have). I also believe in his philoshy of a just culture, and I applaud it. My point is more to the fact that flight ops (maybe 777 only, I don't know about the Airbus fleet)may have a just culture, but managent above flight ops have no intention of doing anything but inflating there bonuses in the short term, with no thought to long term profit, safety, or any care at all for employee moral.

Cheers
Fl00 is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 05:55
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: usa
Posts: 12
As an aside I am aware of how much worse the rosters, and general quality of life,Airbus and freighter pilots suffer.
Let's remember it's ALL CX PILOTS that suffer under this inept management style.
Fl00 is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 06:47
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brexitland
Posts: 1,134
Only a matter of time before the whole caboodle is sold to the Chinese. What other explanation could there possibly be for such long term and targeted incompetence?
Cathay Senior Management have, single handedly, turned a once great airline into a laughing stock of "how not to do it". Their methods would have been questionable when the world actually tolerated "mill owners". The fact is that now the accountants have worked out that we can survive (a la Singapore Airlines) a hull loss and it will have no appreciable effect on the "bottom line" . Low hours pilots, cheap accommodation,lower salaries and allowances, ever reducing COS.
All perpetuated by "Yes men/women" who haven't an ounce of integrity between them and their "Judas shillings".
Rant over too......
Arfur Dent is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 06:59
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 110
Ivan at it again!
Just watched the Bloomberg interview from yesterday.
Seriously?......... This is the guy running our airline?
It is definitely over.
We will bleed out slowly over the next 10 years or so.
Not that it really matters, because no one can put a positive spin on that fuel hedging, but can we find someone else to front the media?
What a disgrace.
Michael Hunt is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 07:33
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 110
Originally Posted by slam_click View Post
I thought he did quite well for his interview. Argue all you like about chinglish, but his English is way better than my Cantonese. A good interview for CX is where the interviewee gets along the story they want to sell, instead of what the interviewer wants. He had what he wanted to say and manipulated the question back to his 'script'.
You're not serious.
Most of it was incoherent rambling.
The look on the interviewers face said it all.
Michael Hunt is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 10:08
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: In the Auzzie outback
Posts: 96
We all know we get nothing for profit share regardless of how the company performs but I could really use that 13th month...
dabz is online now  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 11:29
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: HK
Posts: 41
84.5% load factor and we cannot make money?
WTF someone or a whole department needs to be sacked!
Fanfares are a joke, the locals are very flexible when it comes to cheapness, yes it fills seats but at what yield factor
landrecovery is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 11:45
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: hong kong
Posts: 397
Shesus there is some drivel on this forum , I think STW sums it up
Anyway heres my drivel
One of the reasons why cx's yield is down , way down ,is because they have managed to piss off most of there premier crowd .... Thats one reason EXCEPT for the MASSIVE fuel hedging LOSS
goathead is offline  
Old 18th Aug 2016, 20:08
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: somewhere
Posts: 230
In my opinion Goathead may have hit the nail on the head. Perhaps many corporate clients have voted with their feet and gone to competitors because what CX offer now is not a premium product or a timetable reliable product? Have they surrendered that lucrative market to the competition having cost cut the product to the bone? There may be some truth in that contention, I don't know . But there certainly seems to be a crisis at CX with the company unable to make a profit which will satisfy the shareholders even with 85 percent load factor , low fuel prices and a hub network through Hong Kong for which other airlines would kill .
kenfoggo is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2016, 01:11
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
The corporate graveyard is littered with the bones of companies who devalued a premium brand or service to pinch a few pennies or weather a short economic storm.
Shep69 is offline  
Old 19th Aug 2016, 02:27
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: one country, one system
Age: 52
Posts: 31
Goathead and Shep,

here is an idea for you:

produce evidence to support your opinion. Data, quotes, numbers, anything to work with.

If you don't you are just waffling.

How do you know premier customers choose other airlines over Cathay? Which airlines ? Which routes ? What is your source ? Why is this economic storm a storm ? Why is it short ?
Sam Ting Wong is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.