Etihad, the national airline of the United Arab Emirates, has reported a loss for the FY2017 at $1.62bln down from $1.95bln.

The airline has carried a total of 18.6 million passengers with an average LF at 78.5%. The carrier during the year took delivery of 12 new aircraft (2 A380, 9 B789 & 1 A330F).

Etihad Skycargo has reported a 6% capacity redection.

The carrier is currently in a restructuring phase which has started with the top management last year. The carrier is also dropping unprofitable routes and retiring aircraft. Dar es Salam is the latest destination to be dropped by Etihad along with Edinburgh and perth amongst others. The airline will launch flights to Barcelona on 21NOV18

source: etihad.com

Just a small point but I don't believe Etihad is or classes itself as the national airline of UAE. Abu Dhabi alone maybe.

Reported Years:
Year I Profit/Loss I Load Factor
2012: 42 million LF: 78.0%
2013: 62 million LF: 78.0%
2014: 73 million LF: 79.4%
2015: 103 million LF: 79.4%
2016: (1.87 billion) LF: 78.6%
2017: (1.62 billion) LF: 78.5%

juliuswong wrote:

Reported Years:
Year I Profit/Loss I Load Factor
2012: 42 million LF: 78.0%
2013: 62 million LF: 78.0%
2014: 73 million LF: 79.4%
2015: 103 million LF: 79.4%
2016: (1.87 billion) LF: 78.6%
2017: (1.62 billion) LF: 78.5%

That is absolutely shocking. What the "H" has happened? Sorry I haven't been following the topic before.

Hubris can be a terrible thing for a business.

Right-sizing and concentrating on yield is the only way out for them. This unfortunately does mean their orderbook will be untenable. The 777X looks to be favourite for the chop, with the A350 at least partially behind it. The A359 looks redundant, with the A35K possibly replacing the 773ER and improving yields.

Etihad's Apartment on the A380 still seems to me like a guaranteed money-loser so maybe this will be replaced by a more conventional First Class product.

However the new management goes at this excessive cost issue, it's right-sizing that is most important. The 789 will be a saviour for this business. It can do so much and so much cheaper too.

How much of these losses are attributable to the nonsensical approach to save idiocies such as AZ, AB and such like ?

Fleet on Order as at 14th June 2018:
Airbus A321neo- 26
Airbus A350-900- 40
Airbus A350-1000-22
Boeing 777-8- 8
Boeing 777-9-17
Boeing 787-9- 22
Boeing 787-10- 30
Boeing 777F- 1

Exclusive: Etihad Airways in talks to cancel, defer Boeing 777X orders - sources
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/exclusiv ... nance.html

terrificturk wrote:

How much of these losses are attributable to the nonsensical approach to save idiocies such as AZ, AB and such like ?

Not the stuff you are looking for but this is enough to make you fall off your chair......
"Air Berlin, which Etihad has a 29 percent stake, posted a record loss of €781.9 million loss ($824 million) last year. Eithad also had a 49 percent stake in Alitalia, the other major European carrier to declare bankruptcy last year; in April last year, the Italian carrier said it was losing half a million euros ($533,000) a day."

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/transpor ... financials

Virtual737 wrote:

Just a small point but I don't believe Etihad is or classes itself as the national airline of UAE. Abu Dhabi alone maybe.

They do and always have. Etihad thought process is that Abu Dhabi is the nation’s capital, therefore they are the defacto national airline of the UAE.

terrificturk wrote:

How much of these losses are attributable to the nonsensical approach to save idiocies such as AZ, AB and such like ?

At this stage, the only thing that counts is not throwing good money after bad.

Etihad Airways has to start making money. Etihad Aviation Group needs to show profitability as well. No more comic book superhero routines and angel investing into half-dead airlines.

This means a long hard look at every single nook and crevice of the airline, from the multibillion dollar orderbook to the cost of a can of Coke in a vending machine on the Etihad Campus.

If Emirates can be profitable from its first year and not need huge cash injections, then this is going to piss off the Emir and his people no end. Time for some tough love at EY.

I don't know why for example they are running double daily A388's into JFK (some days EY101 is a B77W, it is true) at the same time QR is sending a B77W and an A359. That doesn't even include EK's A388 flights, but they aren't EK.

Bricktop wrote:

I don't know why for example they are running double daily A388's into JFK (some days EY101 is a B77W, it is true) at the same time QR is sending a B77W and an A359. That doesn't even include EK's A388 flights, but they aren't EK.

Apparently one of the JFK flights is an early victim of the cuts

juliuswong wrote:

terrificturk wrote:

How much of these losses are attributable to the nonsensical approach to save idiocies such as AZ, AB and such like ?

Not the stuff you are looking for but this is enough to make you fall off your chair......
"Air Berlin, which Etihad has a 29 percent stake, posted a record loss of €781.9 million loss ($824 million) last year. Eithad also had a 49 percent stake in Alitalia, the other major European carrier to declare bankruptcy last year; in April last year, the Italian carrier said it was losing half a million euros ($533,000) a day."

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/transpor ... financials

Thank you for that quote... we know AB and AZ have been getting hundreds of millions of Euros every quarter in the last 3 or 4 years to keep them afloat - esp. AB.... with a proper exchange rate (not what that newspaper calculates), it would even be more red ink in their report.... so I reckon altogether it well add up to 1bn € a year since all these were part of the Etihad Group.

I just don’t know why questions were asked from the owners at every quarter. Money was just being pumped out and with nothing to show for it.

Channex757 wrote:

No more comic book superhero routines and angel investing into half-dead airlines.

Of course, that's what the problem was, the half-dead investments. This strategy was very "effective" for Swissair.

I also never understood what a premium airline would gain having a partner airline like Air Berlin. I remember being transferred from Etihad flight to Air Berlin aircraft once and was like day and night.

James Hogan Bio from knighthoodcapital.com: -

James Hogan is the founder and Executive Chairman of Knighthood Capital. He recently served as President and CEO of the Etihad Aviation Group, which he built into a US$20 billion multi billion dollar losing enterprise, achieving failing to achieve the mandate from his shareholders of building a world-class diversified aviation and travel group.

Over recent years he also held positions as Vice Chairman and Board member of Alitalia, Airberlin, Jet Airways and Air Serbia; Vice Chairman of the Executive Committee of the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC); and as a member of the IATA Board of Governors various loss making and bankrupt airlines that he stupidly invested his employers money in.

Kinghthood Capital - WE HELP OUR PARTNERS IDENTIFY, DEVELOP AND RELEASE
THE REAL VALUE IN THEIR BUSINESS ASSETS.

kurtverbose wrote:

James Hogan Bio from knighthoodcapital.com: -

James Hogan is the founder and Executive Chairman of Knighthood Capital. He recently served as President and CEO of the Etihad Aviation Group, which he built into a US$20 billion multi billion dollar losing enterprise, achieving failing to achieve the mandate from his shareholders of building a world-class diversified aviation and travel group.

Over recent years he also held positions as Vice Chairman and Board member of Alitalia, Airberlin, Jet Airways and Air Serbia; Vice Chairman of the Executive Committee of the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC); and as a member of the IATA Board of Governors various loss making and bankrupt airlines that he stupidly invested his employers money in.

Kinghthood Capital - WE HELP OUR PARTNERS IDENTIFY, DEVELOP AND RELEASE
THE REAL VALUE IN THEIR BUSINESS ASSETS.

Post of the week !!

Carlos01 wrote:

juliuswong wrote:

Reported Years:
Year I Profit/Loss I Load Factor
2012: 42 million LF: 78.0%
2013: 62 million LF: 78.0%
2014: 73 million LF: 79.4%
2015: 103 million LF: 79.4%
2016: (1.87 billion) LF: 78.6%
2017: (1.62 billion) LF: 78.5%

That is absolutely shocking. What the "H" has happened? Sorry I haven't been following the topic before.

I think the loss of the AA code shares / interline really hurt them. Plus they had too much capacity on many routes. You could grab seats from JFK-BOM for $800 even one week away and even during relatively peak times. So doesn't surprise me they kept load factors up but lost money. Unclear if these are operating losses or also include investment losses. That said, we know EY is cutting flights, so at a min a good portion are operating losses.

Could always put some crew on secondment (lease) to Emirates to ease their pilot shortage?

CaliguyNYC wrote:

Carlos01 wrote:

juliuswong wrote:

Reported Years:
Year I Profit/Loss I Load Factor
2012: 42 million LF: 78.0%
2013: 62 million LF: 78.0%
2014: 73 million LF: 79.4%
2015: 103 million LF: 79.4%
2016: (1.87 billion) LF: 78.6%
2017: (1.62 billion) LF: 78.5%

That is absolutely shocking. What the "H" has happened? Sorry I haven't been following the topic before.

I think the loss of the AA code shares / interline really hurt them. Plus they had too much capacity on many routes. You could grab seats from JFK-BOM for $800 even one week away and even during relatively peak times. So doesn't surprise me they kept load factors up but lost money. Unclear if these are operating losses or also include investment losses. That said, we know EY is cutting flights, so at a min a good portion are operating losses.

For sure, losing AA has to have hurt EY. I believe AA stopped code sharing with QR as well but with QR being in oneworld, AA flyers would be much more inclined to still fly QR and earn miles, use status perks, etc. We've flown QR multiple times when their fares were identical to EY or EK because we're AA members. I don't doubt others will do the same.

In my very uninformed opinion it seems EY has neither the network nor scale of EK, nor the alliance feed of QR. I'm not sure shrinking to profitability will help them - I have a feeling all that will do is enable EK and QR even more.

Virtual737 wrote:

Just a small point but I don't believe Etihad is or classes itself as the national airline of UAE. Abu Dhabi alone maybe.

Actually they do and always have classed itself as the national airline of UAE, in fact they often state it in the airport boarding calls and announcements and in the past they have even had their check-in agents say that as part of their greeting.

Are these operating losses of the main airline itself, or are these losses of their european airlines problems?

9w748capt wrote:

CaliguyNYC wrote:

Carlos01 wrote:

That is absolutely shocking. What the "H" has happened? Sorry I haven't been following the topic before.

I think the loss of the AA code shares / interline really hurt them. Plus they had too much capacity on many routes. You could grab seats from JFK-BOM for $800 even one week away and even during relatively peak times. So doesn't surprise me they kept load factors up but lost money. Unclear if these are operating losses or also include investment losses. That said, we know EY is cutting flights, so at a min a good portion are operating losses.

For sure, losing AA has to have hurt EY. I believe AA stopped code sharing with QR as well but with QR being in oneworld, AA flyers would be much more inclined to still fly QR and earn miles, use status perks, etc. We've flown QR multiple times when their fares were identical to EY or EK because we're AA members. I don't doubt others will do the same.

In my very uninformed opinion it seems EY has neither the network nor scale of EK, nor the alliance feed of QR. I'm not sure shrinking to profitability will help them - I have a feeling all that will do is enable EK and QR even more.

You are right, qr being in one world makes a huge difference. Even without code share, I would gladly fly them for the qualifying miles. Ey never had that.

xwb777 wrote:

Etihad, the national airline of the United Arab Emirates, has reported a loss for the FY2017 at $1.62bln down from $1.95bln.

The airline has carried a total of 18.6 million passengers with an average LF at 78.5%.
source: etihad.com

So last year for every passenger they carried they lost 87$!!!
WOW, just WOW!

P1aneMad wrote:

xwb777 wrote:

Etihad, the national airline of the United Arab Emirates, has reported a loss for the FY2017 at $1.62bln down from $1.95bln.

The airline has carried a total of 18.6 million passengers with an average LF at 78.5%.
source: etihad.com

So last year for every passenger they carried they lost 87$!!!
WOW, just WOW!

Shrug. Their losses are probably comparable to the US majors when they were losing $billions year upon year.

xwb777 wrote:

Etihad, the national airline of the United Arab Emirates, has reported a loss for the FY2017 at $1.62bln down from $1.95bln.

So why is it that their results needed to be audited again? AA/DL/UA were charging that it was way worse than this? LOL. Looks pretty honest (-ly bad) to me.

Not at all surprised, we all know how the ME3 gets their money to avoid losses. Only now they're no longer pitching in to avoid the losses. XD

scbriml wrote:

P1aneMad wrote:

xwb777 wrote:

Etihad, the national airline of the United Arab Emirates, has reported a loss for the FY2017 at $1.62bln down from $1.95bln.

The airline has carried a total of 18.6 million passengers with an average LF at 78.5%.
source: etihad.com

So last year for every passenger they carried they lost 87$!!!
WOW, just WOW!

Shrug. Their losses are probably comparable to the US majors when they were losing $billions year upon year.

Ehmmm.... no! The US majors losing 87$ for each passenger they carried would mean that EACH year they would be losing around 15 BILLION dollars. E-A-C-H Y-E-A-R!
You can not sugarcoat the calamity that EY's finances are.

scbriml wrote:

P1aneMad wrote:

xwb777 wrote:

Etihad, the national airline of the United Arab Emirates, has reported a loss for the FY2017 at $1.62bln down from $1.95bln.

The airline has carried a total of 18.6 million passengers with an average LF at 78.5%.
source: etihad.com

So last year for every passenger they carried they lost 87$!!!
WOW, just WOW!

Shrug. Their losses are probably comparable to the US majors when they were losing $billions year upon year.

EY is still a relatively small airline. Even before the mergers the US6 dwarfed EY’s current size. They were no where close to losing this amount of money in relative terms.

juliuswong wrote:

terrificturk wrote:

How much of these losses are attributable to the nonsensical approach to save idiocies such as AZ, AB and such like ?

Not the stuff you are looking for but this is enough to make you fall off your chair......
"Air Berlin, which Etihad has a 29 percent stake, posted a record loss of €781.9 million loss ($824 million) last year. Eithad also had a 49 percent stake in Alitalia, the other major European carrier to declare bankruptcy last year; in April last year, the Italian carrier said it was losing half a million euros ($533,000) a day."

http://www.arabianbusiness.com/transpor ... financials

Air Berlin and Alitalia losses are not reflected in Etihad‘s books. What is reflected are the writeoffs of their investment (shares), some contractual obligations and intercompany loans.

I know there's a lot more to it, and yes, it is selective quoting, but still. I found this quote somewhat remarkable to see the words "capacity discipline" and taking delivery of "two Airbus A380s" in one single paragraph. That might have something to do with their "issues" . . .

Etihad claims overhaul progress but losses remain high

FlightGlobal wrote:

. . . Etihad has been exercising "capacity discipline", it says, concentrating on point-to-point traffic. It took delivery of 12 aircraft last year – including two Airbus A380s . . .

I worry about the next downturn in this industry. We are witnessing the beginning of one. I just hope it isnt as bad as history tends to be when one hits.

No doubt Eithad will be okay, and of course will find it's way back to profit. What caused this?

scbriml wrote:

Shrug. Their losses are probably comparable to the US majors when they were losing $billions year upon year.

As plane1mad said a few posts up, Etihad's numbers are significantly worse, proportionally.

F9Animal wrote:

I worry about the next downturn in this industry. We are witnessing the beginning of one.

More like a house of cards starting to wobble.

goboeing wrote:

F9Animal wrote:

I worry about the next downturn in this industry. We are witnessing the beginning of one.

More like a house of cards starting to wobble.

There is a glut in two regions as far as I can tell.

High transfer hubs suffer in downturns. Think DL at CVG. There are healthy airlines growing and unhealthy at a house of cards moment.

For the ME3, bypass is happening. Some is geographically better located hubs, e.g. ET in Ethiopia.

It will be far worse for them when the new IST opens.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

goboeing wrote:

F9Animal wrote:

I worry about the next downturn in this industry. We are witnessing the beginning of one.

More like a house of cards starting to wobble.

There is a glut in two regions as far as I can tell.

High transfer hubs suffer in downturns. Think DL at CVG. There are healthy airlines growing and unhealthy at a house of cards moment.

For the ME3, bypass is happening. Some is geographically better located hubs, e.g. ET in Ethiopia.

It will be far worse for them when the new IST opens.

Lightsaber

My admired poster, do you have shares in IST airports? You are always banging on about the IST impact when it happens, and the implied adverse effect it will have on EK (and maybe others). If you are o sure, give us some substantive stuff to back that up, please

sassiciai wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

goboeing wrote:

More like a house of cards starting to wobble.

There is a glut in two regions as far as I can tell.

High transfer hubs suffer in downturns. Think DL at CVG. There are healthy airlines growing and unhealthy at a house of cards moment.

For the ME3, bypass is happening. Some is geographically better located hubs, e.g. ET in Ethiopia.

It will be far worse for them when the new IST opens.

Lightsaber

My admired poster, do you have shares in IST airports? You are always banging on about the IST impact when it happens, and the implied adverse effect it will have on EK (and maybe others). If you are o sure, give us some substantive stuff to back that up, please

Conversely, what would be the reason for the new IST to NOT impact the ME3? My assumption is he is basing it partially on one of the most fundamentally simple facts: Geography.

I think there will be a lot of deferrals, rather few cancellations. I am sure Boeing would prefer the 777X to the deferred vs cancelled, but would be happy to have 787 slots back.

I too think IST will affect the ME3, along with the direct flights bypassing the hubs.

sassiciai wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

goboeing wrote:

More like a house of cards starting to wobble.

There is a glut in two regions as far as I can tell.

High transfer hubs suffer in downturns. Think DL at CVG. There are healthy airlines growing and unhealthy at a house of cards moment.

For the ME3, bypass is happening. Some is geographically better located hubs, e.g. ET in Ethiopia.

It will be far worse for them when the new IST opens.

Lightsaber

My admired poster, do you have shares in IST airports? You are always banging on about the IST impact when it happens, and the implied adverse effect it will have on EK (and maybe others). If you are o sure, give us some substantive stuff to back that up, please

No shares in any airport. What are you looking for? The old IST is at capacity. It has high O&D. The new IST opens with room to double traffic with no EU limitations. IIRC, open skies to USA.

Better geography for US/EU to Africa, worse for China to Africa.

EK will survive. But for growth, they have little potential until they move to DWC. When? DXB losses a runway next year for maintenance.

EY is low O&D. We know this as the figures are impossible to find. Basic PR is tout good numbers. We know they are losing $1.5B per year.

QR is also losing money and is in a regional spat. They too have a low fraction O&D.


But the game shifts with TK and ET reaching economies of scale.

When has a low O&D hub done well in a downturn? Usually they are dehubbed with little chance if recovery.

Think CVG vs. DTW
STL vs. ORD & DFW
RDU vs. ATL

I believe EK will thrive. Partially as they had no choice but to almost halt expansion. Partially as they have the regional HQs.

A growing competitor always reduces yeild.

I think ET will have as big of an impact once it gets a new hub. But that hub is years away.

We have a major new airport opening 10/31. How could that not impact the region?

If Navi Mumbai was more ambitious (open with 2 runways and grow to 5) and opening sooner, I would make the same comments.

If certain Navi Delhi airport concepts go forward, I would make similar comments.

If LHR magically gained a runway, I would make similar comments caviated (further away).

If EK and EY could magically move over to DWC tomorrow with rail and road improvements to both city centers, I would be talking ME2.

It is a region starved for preferred time capacity at a high I&D hub. Relax such a constraint an industries shift. Rapidly.

When the 797 approaches EIS I'll make more noise.
I am of the opinion the NEO and MAX tremendously increase the business opportunities of a high O&D hub with room to expand at the most desired flight times.


Lightsaber

Raptormodeller wrote:

Not at all surprised, we all know how the ME3 gets their money to avoid losses. Only now they're no longer pitching in to avoid the losses. XD

Maybe you can tell us where it gets the money from. The financial reports were provided, and even DL had to shut up and go back to business with no excuses. Waiting for your enlightenment, data and facts tho...

Raptormodeller wrote:

Not at all surprised, we all know how the ME3 gets their money to avoid losses. Only now they're no longer pitching in to avoid the losses. XD

I was waiting for this. You have no idea what you are talking about. You mean like Delta, AA and UA and the BILLIONS of dollars they have been given over the years to stay afloat. The BILLIONS of dollars the US3 and others have lost over the years??

runway23 wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

Just a small point but I don't believe Etihad is or classes itself as the national airline of UAE. Abu Dhabi alone maybe.

They do and always have. Etihad thought process is that Abu Dhabi is the nation’s capital, therefore they are the defacto national airline of the UAE.

747m8te wrote:

Virtual737 wrote:

Just a small point but I don't believe Etihad is or classes itself as the national airline of UAE. Abu Dhabi alone maybe.

Actually they do and always have classed itself as the national airline of UAE, in fact they often state it in the airport boarding calls and announcements and in the past they have even had their check-in agents say that as part of their greeting.

I stand corrected. Apologies, especially to the OP.