Forbes Article on Trainer

Discussion in 'Delta Air Lines' started by jcw, Jan 30, 2015.

  1. jcw

    jcw Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,053
    Likes Received:
    2,716
    • Like Like x 5
  2. WorldTraveler

    WorldTraveler Corn Field

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    21,710
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    not really because they didn't get some of the basic facts right... let's see if you can find them.

    garbage in, garbage out.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. jcw

    jcw Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,053
    Likes Received:
    2,716
    WOW
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. commavia

    commavia Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2004
    Messages:
    814
    Likes Received:
    2,056
    My head certainly just exploded ... from laughter
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. jimntx

    jimntx Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2003
    Messages:
    10,812
    Likes Received:
    3,263
    Well now, JCW everyone knows that Forbe's  magazine is full of incompetents and communists.  The fact that they would even suggest that Delta had done something wrong proves that.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  6. WorldTraveler

    WorldTraveler Corn Field

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    21,710
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    communists or incompetents, or not, the article is factually wrong.

    DL never said that it was being insulated from higher CRUDE prices. It was being insulated from crack spread, which is in fact increasing, not decreasing.

    again, DL's CURRENT higher fuel prices are due to hedging losses while the refinery was profitable.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. jcw

    jcw Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2004
    Messages:
    2,053
    Likes Received:
    2,716
    That's interesting - when someone writes a negative article about DL - it's said they have the facts wrong - however if there is a negative article on AA it's considered accurate
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. WorldTraveler

    WorldTraveler Corn Field

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    21,710
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    no, if they have the facts wrong, they are wrong.

    the most notable is that the article says that DL had a 9 cent cost advantage to other airlines before Trainer and still does.

    that is categorically false.

    second, the author makes no attempt to look solely at fuel hedges vs. the refinery. Every carrier except AA hedges; DL is the only carrier that has a refinery. If you want to look at the benefit or failure of the refinery, you look SOLELY at the refinery's profitability and contributions to DL's bottom line. The author didn't do that.

    third, the author incorrectly states a number of things about the movement of prices including crack spreads.

    The author thru together an article based on very poor logic and even worse research.

    It has nothing to do with DL or any other carrier. it is just a poorly thought out article
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. robbedagain

    robbedagain Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2003
    Messages:
    10,617
    Likes Received:
    2,664
    have you EVER considered the FACT YOU ARE WRONG???????   STOP ACTING LIKE A KNOW IT ALL bec you make yourself look like the biggest jack@$$ of all time on here   
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. WorldTraveler

    WorldTraveler Corn Field

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    21,710
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    The crack spread is a factual number. it is either rising or it is stable or it is stable.

    The article says it is falling when it is not.

    No, the author is wrong on the facts and doesn't use even halfway decent logic to argue the point.

    What Dl gains or loses with the refinery has nothing to do with fuel hedges; he makes no distinction between the two.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Dog Wonder

    Dog Wonder Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Messages:
    13,768
    Likes Received:
    3,827
  12. WorldTraveler

    WorldTraveler Corn Field

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    21,710
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    I don't even have to click on the link to know it is another show of intellect from one of forum's finest.

    meanwhile, the author failed to provide any compelling logic that anything other than DL's hedging strategy is the problem.
     
  13. FrugalFlyerv2.0

    FrugalFlyerv2.0 Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,930
    Likes Received:
    3,414
     
    [​IMG]
     
     
     
    But these are facts:
    DL paid $180 million to purchase the refinery in 2012 and the operation suffered a $63 million loss.  Then DL tossed in $52 million in 2014 to result in a $116 million loss.  Finally, in 2014 the refinery was marginally profitable, but only after DL sunk in another $40 million.
     
    That is the Whole Truth!
     
    Your garbage in garbage out comment (post #2) is more appropriate to some most of your posts.
     
    I don't know why a certain DL fankid on these forums can't admit that a purchase like the refinery was a mistake.  Maybe not as colossal mistake as UAL's Allegis business strategy, but certainly not a smart move.  Now on the other hand, purchasing more LHR slots via VS is a different story, as the article acknowledges.
     
    • Like Like x 7
  14. WorldTraveler

    WorldTraveler Corn Field

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2003
    Messages:
    21,710
    Likes Received:
    10,721
    actually, you forget that DL spent a couple hundred million to reform the refinery after it bought it but got some state funding to help out.

    I'm not sure why you and others can't get thru your heads that the refinery is a long term investment no different than an aircraft.

    What people can't accept is that a vertical integration strategy can work... Allegis was a horizontal integration strategy.

    and it still doesn't change the article is built around a number of incorrect statements including that DL's fuel savings relative to the refinery is the same as it was before the refinery. DL's hedging strategy is absolutely a part of DL's fuel cost changes and the author managed to write an article right about the time that DL's fuel cost hedges are negative... but he didn't bother to write an article when DL was pulling down fuel cost gains relative to the industry from both the refinery and hedges

    The argument that DL cut costs for the competition is bogus. DL never said that its goal was to create a fuel cost advantage that no other carrier would benefit from. Supply and demand laws dictate that if DL added jet fuel to the market, it would force down the crack spread which would help competitors.

    DL's fuel prices went down by hundreds of millions of dollars - more than what they have spent on the refinery. Given the strong pricing environment and DL's ability to get a revenue premium to the industry, DL has benefitted including disproportionately because of the revenue environment. The author never bothered to factor any of that in.

    DL is going to have to take time to figure how to make the refinery work for DL, including gaining DL exclusive benefits if they can.

    I am willing to admit that Trainer was a mistake if it turns out to be. but a couple years into the project is not enough data to know for sure - and certainly if there is no intent to look at all of the factors involved.

    Despite what some say, I admit that Song and DL Express were strategic failures from the position of maintaining DL's presence in the NYC to Florida markets

    but the refinery has paid for itself in reduced fuel costs for DL.

    and given that oil prices are moving higher again today, the hedge losses that were supposed to wreak havoc on DL's balance sheet might not turn out to do that at all.
     
  15. FrugalFlyerv2.0

    FrugalFlyerv2.0 Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    2,930
    Likes Received:
    3,414
     
    [​IMG]
     
    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 3

Share This Page