CX announces HK$2.3 billion profit for 2018
 

Embattled Cathay Pacific Airways has said it expects to announce a net profit of HK$2.3 billion (US$295 million) for 2018 – a huge turnaround from its HK$1.25 billion loss the previous year.

So, this is why they wanted the vote to be passed before they announced this news.

Yes, now you know why the company was desperately trying to hurry and get the vote through. I completely expected that from the management, but I can't understand why the AOA GC wanted to play along with that (oh, wait...). We were just about sold down the river for pennies. Now, the management have to deal with not only an energized pilot group, industry leading sickness and resignation rates, but now they also have to deal with healthy profits and the obvious expectations of their pilots because of it. CC and the TB are our friend, and it will take some serious improvements to my contract to convince me to drop those actions. It's time to restore our value to what we know we are worth. POS 18....? Will soon be consigned to the dustbin of history (along with the CK video attempting to sell it :=). Every pilot in this airline will now simply tell management, "stop the crap", and give us a proper contract. The longer our management pretend to themselves that nothing has changed, the more it will change.

HK$ 2.3 Bn on a Market cap of HK$ 51.3 Bn = 4.48% return - not earthshaking really...... given the risks of the airline business.......

CX share price opened at $HK12.06 this morning. After lunch it went to $HK13.16.

When was the Profit Alert released to the market, during the lunch break, or after trading closed today?

I'm still holding mine at $21/share....a long way to go for me to break even :ugh:

Jeez RAT - calm down man.... it's only a job

They can't pull out your fingernails or shoot your kids............................

Think it is the other way round - this profit was made because the fuel hedging nightmare is finally over. All management had to do was - nothing.

Actually if all those so called Managers had only ever taken long drunken lunches and never come to work at all, we would be rolling in dosh.

For an airline thats a good return on capital. Airlines aren't great investments compared other businesses.

We will never know how much profit is really there - with transfer pricing Swire move the money around to fill their pockets, avoid the taxman and screw over the little people. The biggest transfer pricing example is the so called fuel hedge.

Makes a mockery of the Jellyfish's statement " but to be honest it is all we can afford " in his pre TA vote video.

The Cav

Let's see how they spin this profit! By the way, the profit is the same amount that Qantas has reported. Joyce says he is happy with the way the company adapted to the challenging times. I bet we will be told times are tough...competition, we poor, bleak future etc etc

Let's remember this is a NET profit, so all the fines and penalties have already been deducted. It is a trunround from last year which the markets will like. The management can say what they like, the figures tell a different story to the one they were pushing 3 weeks ago. Of course their response will be "thanks to the efforts of all staff EXCLUDING pilots, a profit was made". Dream on 9th floor, your bluff has been called and you lost.

Uhm, no, QF reported 523m USD profit in 6 months - so about 4 times as much for the whole year

that applies to all airlines

to my mind the important thing is , as you say, AIRLINES AREN'T GREAT INVESTMENTS - so expecting them to be open handed and generous to their staff is a fantasy - it is a business that requires an unremitting focus on cost control and cost reduction if they want to survive - see Ryanair........

My ISM neighbour has told me HKD10,000 per employee profit share EXCLUDING CX pilots due labour unrest issues.

Costs need to be controlled and any moron with a spreadsheet can cut each line item, which is what CX do, generations of mis-manager after mis-manager. More importantly than cost cutting is yield management. It doesn't matter what your costs are provided you can charge enough to provide a desirable yield. The CX product has been cut and cut and cut, so it is no longer any better than HKA, so the customer isn't prepared to pay a premium to travel with CX. Our product is worse than other premium carriers, so again customers choose not to fly CX. With our leave and staff travel 'privileges' being so poor over the last four years I have travelled with 5 other carriers (from the budget to premium). It is shocking how far behind CX is in ticketing, seats, food, IFE and service. Have you looked at our loads around the network? Pax are ditching CX in droves. If we are to survive we need to focus on yield and manage costs, not just cost cutting.

I'd be interested to know which airlines can charge a premium for service these days?

Sure BA etc get away with murder on trans-Atlantic but that's because they have Heathrow sewn up

I honestly am struggling to think of any that fit the bill..... the rest of the world proves that passengers overwhelmingly choose by price and price alone

Oh dear... you are in for a shock - haven't heard that sort of attitude in 30 years.... I think maybe you don't realize what is happening everywhere else

It's not up to management - its the consumers who will stiff you my friend. They go to the lowest cost airline every time and if that's Lion Air so be it

How many airlines go bust every year? Lots - and a lot of them are the "fuller service "ones

Your services are worth exactly what someone is willing to pay for them - and if that's less than you think you should be paid either quit or retrain...... fast..........

regretfully you are correct in almost every detail....................

When 50 million Indonesians or 200 million Chinese join the middle-class they all want to fly places - they don't give a stuff about "image" or history or your pay packet and historical benifit packages

Same in Europe when a bunch of 20 year olds go out they used to go to maybe London - now they want to fly to Riga. All they care about is PRICE

Reading this forum a lot of people at CX seem to stuck in a time warp - the management are no doubt a bunch of chiseling b****** but that's about par for the course these days everywhere in every industry. One thing I am sure of this that they understand the customers a lot better than the posters above do. They are (probably desperately) trying to avoid becoming an Alitalia, Gulf Air, Monarch or a TWA .

I'm sorry but that's the real world and that is what you are up against - you don't like it (and I don't like it for the record) but there is absolutely nothing you can do - the economic and social forces are far far bigger than a few Directors at CX :(

It's the attitudes displayed above that results in certain airlines becoming career ghettos. You only have to look at the very profitable US airlines for the example we should all be insisting on. Southwest Airlines seems to have no problem catering to the "cost conscious" traveler, and at the same time paying first world pay and associated benefits, a proper rostering system, health care and most important of all, positive management/employee relations (oh, and massive profits....). The difference is a management that values its employees, treats them properly and respects their contribution to the overall growth and prosperity of the airline. If you want to compare yourself to the bottom feeders...have at it. You'll undoubtedly succeed in reaching those lofty heights.

Pilots quoting economic theory.... priceless

Perhaps you could give us one that explains shortages of highly skilled labour caused by high attrition, being fixed by offering considerably worse employment conditions? "Idiotic Airline Executive short term bonus theory!?

...well, some pilots actually possess degrees in economics. Why don't you try addressing the facts I raised pertaining to SW airlines? (oh, I get it...that example doesn't fit your narrow-minded prejudice against pilots. got it).

While you're certainly correct that airlines can indeed thrive while paying livable wages, it needs to be said why. Delta, United, American, Southwest etc.. do not pay what they pay because they WANT to, they pay that because they HAVE to.

Why do they HAVE to? Because the pilots (and other employee groups) are extremely organized and maintain their leverage. Something that has taken many years and in some cases some hard lessons. They have hard fought contracts that protect agains management threats and strategies as well as potential management threats.

Never forget why management and "leadership" is there. To make money. Only two ways to do it. Make more, or spend less. Strong labor unions ensure one of those options is more or less off the table.

Mole: the facetious comment is directed at Asturias56. It's why I quoted his post and not yours..

....ah, noted. Apologies, would help if I read the comment more carefully... :rolleyes: