Hope?

The Ronin

Senior
Sep 17, 2002
497
0
Economy Set for Best Growth in 20 Years
2 hours ago
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer
The economy appears headed for a banner year despite a springtime spike ...More...

WASHINGTON - The economy appears headed for a banner year despite a springtime spike in energy prices and a recent increase in interest rates.

In fact, many analysts are forecasting that the overall economy, as measured by the gross domestic product, will grow by 4.6 percent or better this year, the fastest in two decades.

There were strong 4.5 percent growth rates in 1997 and 1999, when Bill Clinton was president and the country was in the midst of a record 10-year expansion.

But if this year's growth ends up a bit faster than that, it will be the best since the economy roared ahead at a 7.2 percent rate in 1984, a year when another Republican president _ Ronald Reagan _ was running for re-election.

"We are moving into a sweet spot for the economy with interest rates not too high, jobs coming back and business investment providing strength," said Diane Swonk, chief economist at Bank One in Chicago, who is predicting GDP growth of 4.8 percent this year.

President Bush is highlighting the improving economy at every opportunity while Democratic challenger John Kerry has focused on what he calls a middle class squeeze of rising health and tuition costs and laid-off workers forced to take lower-paying jobs.

Who will win on the all-important pocketbook issues? Economists aren't sure.

"It is unclear whether voters will remember the past year and the better jobs created during that period or the past four years," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com. "It will be a close call and that is one of the reasons the election could be so close."

Assessing the economy at midyear, most private economists are sticking with the optimistic forecasts they had six months ago, even though inflation, driven by surging energy prices, rose higher than expected and the Federal Reserve started raising interest rates last month.

"We are looking for a darn good year despite the fact that we had a big jump in oil prices and interest rates are going up faster than people thought would occur," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's in New York.

Offsetting those drags on the economy has been stronger growth in Japan and China, which helps U.S. exports, better-than-expected consumer spending and much better job growth than analysts were expecting as the year began.

The economy has now created 1.5 million new jobs since last August, compared with a loss of 2.7 million jobs in the previous 29 months, when the country was struggling with a string of blows from a collapsing stock market to a recession and terrorist attacks.

Even with the 10 months of consecutive job gains, Bush is still facing a 1.2 million jobs deficit, from the last peak for employment in March 2001.

However, many analysts anticipate the economy will generate around 200,000 jobs per month over the next six months, a pace that would be enough to erase his deficit figure by the end of the year. That would enable him to escape being the only president since Herbert Hoover in the Great Depression to have lost jobs while in office.

Although the economy created only 112,000 jobs in June, after averaging 304,000 jobs for the previous three months, analysts expect strong job growth the rest of this year.

They predict the unemployment rate _ stuck at 5.6 percent for most of this year _ will improve gradually, to 5.3 percent by December, as a strengthening job market draws people back into the labor force.

Analysts also are optimistic about inflation in the months ahead, noting that oil prices recently retreated from peaks above $42 per barrel in June, and regular gasoline have declined from highs over $2 a gallon in late May. If the trend continues, inflation pressures will be eased.

The Bond Market Association's economic advisory committee, made up of economists from large financial institutions, is predicting that consumer prices will rise 3.1 percent for all of this year, a significant moderation from the 5.1 percent rate of increase through May.

The group projects overall GDP growth will be at a 20-year high of 4.7 percent, based in part on a belief that the Fed will keep to its pledge of moderation in future rate hikes because of the absence of inflation pressures.
 
I know, I know....just someones OPINION, but I sure hope this is the trend and direction. Some good news or optimisim could be used theses days, and hope for some of us that other careers will maybe be more readily available and economically advantageous. :up:
 
I wouldn't have the polka band strike up "Happy Days Are Here Again" just yet. Note the posting about crude oil futures nearing $40/bbl again. Not that we are going to see $1.50/gal gas again, but if it pushes over $2.00/gal that will push jet fuel to new highs as well. The cost of gas will put brakes on the economy and the cost of jet fuel will put ALL the airlines in a world of hurt. I read somewhere that even WN is not fully hedged any more.
 
I would say that is good news in an industry that really needs any good news it can get.

The big number to watch out for is quarter over quarter improvement in YIELDS and UNIT REVENUE - more than any other single factor revenue is what has hit this industry the hardest.
 
More than any other factor, the economy decides airline success. You can look at oil or other things, but the absolute biggest is the economy. This has been proven in several studies of the industry (see Richard Doganis). A rising tide lifts all boats (and Boeings).
 
Until this industry TRULY restructures itself, including lowering costs considerably to compete with the now dominant LCC's, nothing will change. Thus far, the industry has avoided the major transformation that is truly necessary to ensure survival. United now has a second golden opportunity to make the painful decisions that are necessary to truly compete against the Frontier's, JetBlue's, Southwest's and Air Tran's of the world. Let's hope we don't squander it this time around.
 
The Gopher said:
More than any other factor, the economy decides airline success. You can look at oil or other things, but the absolute biggest is the economy. This has been proven in several studies of the industry (see Richard Doganis). A rising tide lifts all boats (and Boeings).
Aaah, but the link between GDP growth and industry revenue growth has gone. This was one of the very few strategic issues that Rono (!!) actually correctly diagnosed.

I think the overall link between GDP growth and industry growth is still their in macro terms. The scaling factor though has changed a lot due to LCC growth, security hassle factor etc. Until fuel prices change (or UA et al change business model), it's only going to be the LCCs that succeed in the current industry environment, as they are the only ones with financial resources to capture the growth (aircraft acquisition etc.) and have low enough costs to overcome fuel prices. The High cost carriers can't expand to capture growth, so are left hoping that yields increase as they constrain capacity. But because most travelers (exception PineyBob) will take a low price SW or B6 option when available, and an LCC is now an option on almost all routes, I just don't expect to see a significant yield increase happen. The historical RASM trend for decades has been a steady decline. The late 90s everyone agrees was dot.com-fueled blip. In the early 70s, in regulation, with no LCC competition, fares could be raised to cover increased costs. Neither of those conditions exist to allow that to happen now.

Summary: growing economy good for LCCs; unlikely to help UA and others -- still need to fix the business model.

PS It's _Rigas_ Doganis I think
 
To add futher....

In the legacy environment, revenue was determined by the ability of carriers to extract the maximum average fare from their key markets. This was done by developing sophisticated revenue managment techniques and investing in fortress hubs and moving up the "S-curve" to acheive the optimal balance of volume and yield (oligopoly pricing). Revenue strength was acheived by increasing network coverage and attaining market dominance in hubs and focus markets. In this environment, might made right and the natural evolution for carriers was to grow organically or by acquisition.

The problem was that those pesky LCCs came along and decided to focus on the consumer who was not too happy about having their value extracted. This time, the LCCs had a solid low cost base and critical mass that they could not be forced out of key markets.

A totally new model, of bottom-up pricing. Give the customer a basic product, price it consistently and make a reasonable markup over your baseline cost. A basic idea that has been executed over and over again in other industries before it got to airlines.

Fast forward to today, the whole fundamental pricing technique that supported the higher cost basis is gone. Its the LCCs that set the prices now, and the network carriers can only match. Whats worse, many LCCs build their operations on point-to-point traffic, whereas a network carrier builds thier schedule based on connections. When an LCC comes into the market, its depressing the core high yield (non-stop) markets, because LCC pricing and operational structure is built around single flight segments, and O&D flows are a by-product.

Rising fuel costs affect all carriers, but since the LCCs are now setting prices in many markets, they are in the driver's seat. LCCs can adjust their pricing and move along the demand curve and make less money, whereas the majors just lose more as their costs increase.

Thats why you need to follow unit revenue (yield x load factor). You want to see trends of being able to recapture some sort of a revenue premium over LCCs. If not, you have to go back to the drawing board and look at your cost structure.