AMR: Cleared for Takeoff

FA Mikey

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
4,421
301
miami
goldwatermiller08.com
story here

Standard & Poor's sees mostly clear skies ahead for the world's largest airline, thanks in part to improved pricing conditions

We at Standard & Poor's believe American Airlines, as the largest airline in the world, is well positioned to benefit from improving U.S. airline industry fundamentals. We think reduced industry capacity and the recent rash of U.S. airline bankruptcies is leading to a change in how airlines price their product, which, along with what we see as strong demand, is driving a sharply improved revenue environment.


At the same time, actions by its parent company, AMR Corp. (AMR; recent price, $23), to cut costs and leverage its revenue base over a smaller base of employees should drive a decrease in unit costs, excluding fuel. We expect the company to return to profitability in 2006, although rising oil prices create a risk. We also expect AMR to be strongly profitable in 2007.

While the stock has had a strong run in the past year, we don't think the current share price fully reflects what we see as AMR's earnings potential. We see significant opportunity for capital appreciation for the stock, driven by an improved industry environment, rising revenues, and ongoing cost cutting. While we strongly recommend purchase of AMR stock, ranked 5 STARS (strong buy), we note that the shares will likely remain very volatile.
 
Let's hope not. Having a mainline fleet of 700+ aircraft is assinine in today's pricing and fuel environment.

I'd much rather see a profitable 500 aircraft fleet than to be growing for no other reason than to maintain seat-mile or market share parity with the other big carriers.
 
I strongly disagree with the last sentence of this article. I don't feel that declaring bankruptcy gives other airlines any advantage.
 
Ah, let me get this straight.

AA fly's LESS a/c, cuts the "overall" schedule, and has MORE a/c than ever in the desert.

THEN, S+P comes along, touting AA to return to profitability ! (Which is OK with me)

SO, WHO wants to be FIRST, to "opine", that an Airline CAN NOT "SHRINK" to profitability ?????????????????????????

(For the record, "I" have always contended, that under the right circumstances, that it "WAS" possible) !!!!!!!!!!!!!

NH/BB's
 
You called it in previous posts. :up:

If you can selectively "fire" your least profitable (or largest money-losing) passengers while contracting, then you should be able to shrink to profitability, at least theoretically. Maybe AA will be able to pull that off, especially if it can chop its fixed costs at the same time.
 
There's a difference between shrinking to profitability and shedding excess weight and/or thinning out the schedule.

Most examples of shrinking to profitability by other airlines have involved cutting out entire pieces of the network thru city closings. Other examples involved pulling mainline out of short haul markets and backfilling with regionals.

What I'm advocating is thinning out some of the rampant overscheduling, and possibly pulling back in a few of the backwaters where AA serves no other role than that of a community lifeline.

Just looking at DFW, AA is clearly overscheduled in a few markets:

Examples: 17x DFWORD, 17x DFWLAX, 14x DFWLGA, 12x DFWDEN, 11x DFWATL, 11x DFWDCA, 10x DFWSEA

Sure, frequency is important, but these are markets where AA has little to no meaningful competition. What's the tradeoff in terms of aircraft ownership, facilities, etc? How many junk seats is AA left to sell after they get the handful of full fares for each of these almost hourly flights?...

19x ORDLGA is almost equally absurd, but at least there you've got a higher demand for day-trips since it is between two of the top three business centers in the US...
 
You called it in previous posts. :up:

If you can selectively "fire" your least profitable (or largest money-losing) passengers while contracting, then you should be able to shrink to profitability, at least theoretically. Maybe AA will be able to pull that off, especially if it can chop its fixed costs at the same time.

==========================================================

Well FWAAA, I suppose that you, FM, and I are all "kinda' right".

AA mainline IS shrinking !!!!!!!!

BUT, since AMR is virtually the only legacy left, that own's it's regional, the "dinero"($$$) still flows back to AMR !

NH/BB's
 
I cannot possibly see how ORD-DFW is overserved. That makes no sense at all. Thats a huge market, and most times the flights are 100% full. A lot of revenue passengers are forced to connect to get between ORD and DFW. Thats probably the only reason XNA stays mainline.
 
most times the flights are 100% full. A lot of revenue passengers are forced to connect to get between ORD and DFW.

Well, it's pretty obvious that being full and being profitable can be mutually exclusive.

Anyone being "forced" to connect over XNA or any number of cities is doing it to get the cheaper fares. It's the same thing with flying MIA-DFW or MIA-ORD -- people route over ATL even though there are seats available at higher fare buckets...
 
...keep in mind that a lot of the overshceduled markets mentioned are also to reposition planes. That's why you see airlines flying 777's between hubs. The demand isn't necessarily there, however, the need for the plane is.
 

Latest posts