|
Originally Posted by flyinbob
(Post 18718847)
Trying to interpret numbers on an airline of 2 merged lines is difficult at best, convoluted at worst. You cannot look at these numbers and tell how many high revenue passengers have bailed, what new business is in, how routes compare to pre-merger. I doubt anyone at WHQ is dancing in their cubicle, but I wouldn't look for anyone jumping from their windows either. Much more time will be necessary to tell whether this merger will succeed or be a huge failure (still my bet).
RNE, I'll stake my reputation on it (such that it is). |
Originally Posted by FlyingNut724
(Post 18720649)
Here is my read of the May over May numbers ...
PRASM +0.3% (Compare to Delta +6%) (Compare to US Air +6%) (Compare to LUV + 5to6%) Seat Miles +0.4% (Compare to Delta -0.9%) (US Air +0.5%) Load Factor -0.1% (Compare to Delta +0.2%) (US Air -1.1%) On board Passengers -0.5% (Compare to delta -0.6%) (US Air -0.9%) Nothing for UAL to be proud of.... |
"United Upgraded On Solid Outlook"
According to this analysis, UA is upgraded from "underperform" to "neutral." I think you can interpret it two ways: 1) UA's March-May performance (or the lack thereof) was expected, and perhaps it was better than expectations; 2) the "neutral" recommendation suggests that the jury is still out on UA's long-term prospects. I believe there's an element of truth in both. Mind you, UA had stated earlier that they deliberately reduced bookings (via pricing, etc.) in advance of the March 3 cutover, so the reduced PRASM is in some ways exactly what UA had planned. |
Originally Posted by sinoflyer
(Post 18733030)
"United Upgraded On Solid Outlook"
According to this analysis, UA is upgraded from "underperform" to "neutral." I think you can interpret it two ways: 1) UA's March-May performance (or the lack thereof) was expected, and perhaps it was better than expectations; 2) the "neutral" recommendation suggests that the jury is still out on UA's long-term prospects. I believe there's an element of truth in both. Mind you, UA had stated earlier that they deliberately reduced bookings (via pricing, etc.) in advance of the March 3 cutover, so the reduced PRASM is in some ways exactly what UA had planned. Second, the "we cut traffic" line is a rather odd fairy tale UA invented. Their traffic numbers went up, not down (so that is not evidence they gave up bookings, instead they are selling all they can) and then their involentary bump numbers went dramatically up - and lead all carriers. So more tickets sold more bumps does not equal forgoing sales. it was just something they made up to try to cover their bad performance. No excuse this month. :o |
Originally Posted by spin88
(Post 18733171)
Second, the "we cut traffic" line is a rather odd fairy tale UA invented. Their traffic numbers went up, not down (so that is not evidence they gave up bookings, instead they are selling all they can) and then their involentary bump numbers went dramatically up - and lead all carriers. So more tickets sold more bumps does not equal forgoing sales. it was just something they made up to try to cover their bad performance. No excuse this month. :o
The traffic cut was an interesting one. Anyone who dug into it would see right through it. Not only what you mentioned, but prior to the cutover they even said they were not overbooking for that weekend. So 3-ish days of no overbooking should would barely make a blip on a report covering an entire quarter. |
Originally Posted by spin88
(Post 18733171)
...the "we cut traffic" line is a rather odd fairy tale UA invented. Their traffic numbers went up, not down (so that is not evidence they gave up bookings, instead they are selling all they can) and then their involentary bump numbers went dramatically up - and lead all carriers....
|
Originally Posted by channa
(Post 18733214)
The traffic cut was an interesting one. Anyone who dug into it would see right through it. Not only what you mentioned, but prior to the cutover they even said they were not overbooking for that weekend. So 3-ish days of no overbooking should would barely make a blip on a report covering an entire quarter.
I'm sure this will be discussed on the 2Q earnings call, but I would imagine a drop in over-bookings would take 25-40bps off PRASM growth. Another factor to consider is that China yields have fallen into the crapper, and UA has substantially more exposure to China than any other US carrier. Japan, on the other hand, has been relatively robust, which is helping DL. The trends were reversed after the tsunami... |
Originally Posted by sinoflyer
(Post 18733030)
"United Upgraded On Solid Outlook"
According to this analysis, UA is upgraded from "underperform" to "neutral." I think you can interpret it two ways: 1) UA's March-May performance (or the lack thereof) was expected, and perhaps it was better than expectations; 2) the "neutral" recommendation suggests that the jury is still out on UA's long-term prospects. I believe there's an element of truth in both. Mind you, UA had stated earlier that they deliberately reduced bookings (via pricing, etc.) in advance of the March 3 cutover, so the reduced PRASM is in some ways exactly what UA had planned. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 1:56 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.