Why is the industry so unstable?

intern_mike

E-175 f/o
Why is the airline industry so unstable? How is and industry that has tons of customers so volatile? Unstable gas prices? That can't be it. Are the airlines undercutting that much? It seems like everyone has to deal with it, customers and employees.
 
You see, there are some dimwitted people out there that think you can actually make money with airplanes. The time tested fact is that you can't, and the sooner people realize that the air transportation system in this country needs to be partially funded by the taxpayers the better.
 
I'm going to sit back for this one.

But, my opinion is that for nearly a decade now the airlines have failed to actually charge how much their products cost. Instead, they charge a 20-30% of what their product cost . . . Plus, throw on fuel prices from the past 5 years, and it just throws fuel on the fire. . . no pun intended. Just my 2 cents.
 
Why is the airline industry so unstable? How is and industry that has tons of customers so volatile? Unstable gas prices? That can't be it. Are the airlines undercutting that much? It seems like everyone has to deal with it, customers and employees.


Can you clarify what you mean by unstable?? Are you referring to airlines filing for bankruptcy, passenger loads changing, hiring trends, etc???
 
I'm going to sit back for this one.

But, my opinion is that for nearly a decade now the airlines have failed to actually charge how much their products cost. Instead, they charge a 20-30% of what their product cost . . . Plus, throw on fuel prices from the past 5 years, and it just throws fuel on the fire. . . no pun intended. Just my 2 cents.
That's just it. It's like they're undercutting each other. They, hell everyone suffers. Why not just increase the price to fly. People would still fly. It's either that or a Greyhound.
 
Exactly. A steady progression to maybe 70-80% of the product costs over a year, blame it on fuel costs, whatever. . . watch the profittability of these airlines skyrocket. We have to quit letting them trying to do it on the cheap. Safety matters.
 
Opinion only.

You're dealing with multi-million dollar pieces of equipment, that need hundreds of thousands of dollars of fuel (per day) and a vast network of trained professionals from pilots to dispatchers to mechanics to even the people ensuring the security of the operation.

But the general public only wants to pay $85 to fly from SNA to JFK, "Friends Fly Free!" and I can't believe I checked a bag in Copenhagen, connected in JFK and now I've got to wait 10 minutes for it to arrive at the carousel in San Diego...This is preposterous!
 
the air transportation system in this country needs to be partially funded by the taxpayers the better.

You've got to be kidding!

That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard you say.

Maybe you dont already know, but the airlines are ALL subsidized, or "partially funded", in one way or another. Who do you think pays for that?

Taxpayers.
 
Either way you go, the 'taxpayers' are going to pay.

Hell, look at the subsidies some cities give "Low Cost Carriers" to serve their town? Who pays for that?

Sweetheart deals for air service...

Municipally-sponsored fuel hedges...

Tax breaks...

Essential Air Service grants...

The taxpayers have always and will always pay for air service.
 
Can you clarify what you mean by unstable?? Are you referring to airlines filing for bankruptcy, passenger loads changing, hiring trends, etc???

I'm gonna say it's the hovering so close to bankruptcy. That throws everything off. Why cant they just stabalize (be realistic about the cost to fly). if they all did that then the standard would be set. Don't tax it, the people will pay.
 
Either way you go, the 'taxpayers' are going to pay.

Hell, look at the subsidies some cities give "Low Cost Carriers" to serve their town? Who pays for that?

Sweetheart deals for air service...

Municipally-sponsored fuel hedges...

Tax breaks...

Essential Air Service grants...

The taxpayers have always and will always pay for air service.

Exactly! Should the govt fund each company or industry that is volatile?

*coughbiotechcough*
 
American can either have a vast network of airlines or a vast rail network. By the economics of both, the taxpayer is always going to foot the bill to a certain extent.
 
Why is the airline industry so unstable? How is and industry that has tons of customers so volatile? Unstable gas prices? That can't be it. Are the airlines undercutting that much? It seems like everyone has to deal with it, customers and employees.

While the true answer to this question will continue to elude even the most brilliant economists, allow me to offer my explanation:

First, you must understand that our highly evolved industrial economy relies VERY heavily on energy. But not just any energy... I'm talking about CHEAP energy. Believe it or not, the price of fossil fuels in the U.S. is still rather low relative to the price in other western countries. So, when the price of energy (oil) increases, economic activity slows. I will elaborate on this point.

When gasoline prices rise, consumers complain. So much in fact that most people miss the big picture. In reality, consumer spending on gasoline is a microcosm within the larger world of energy consumption in the U.S. You see, consumers can make short-term changes in their consumption habits. Businesses that rely on energy cannot do this as easily. Factories, electricity plants, transportation companys, and... yes, airlines are often faced with little choice but to pass additional energy costs to their customers. Sometimes they cannot successfully do this; in these cases the profit incentive ceases to exist and investment capital goes away (businesses close down and new ones do not take their place). Either way, a dominoe effect is activated that slows general economic activity.

Airlines receive this impact twice... one in the form of a depressed economy, and next in the form of higher fuel prices. The bottom line is squeezed from both sides (revenue and expense). (Not to say that airlines are the only businesses subject to this relationship... however air travel does appear to be historically more volatile to economic fluxuations than many other industies and airlines rely more heavily on low-cost energy more than many other industries). As a result, airlines (like any other business under similar circumstances) must choose to reduce production. That's when jobs are lost and pay is cut. If the profit incentive disappears altogether, businesses will close their doors.

The general question at hand asks about the "stablity" of the airline industry. If we assume that a 100% "stable" industry is always economically viable, is plentiful with jobs, and the profit incentive is ever-present, then perhaps this post will serve to explain one man's view as to why the airline business does not enjoy this level of "stability".

DISCLAIMER: I'm not saying this is good or bad. Also, notice that I am only addressing the question with the energy issue. Obviously air transportation is a complex business, and more variables contribute to it's economic viability (or lack of). However, I believe the most significant of these issue is, indeed, the price of energy.
 
What'd you major in again, Matt?

Let's just say I'll never forget how to prepare a statement of cash flows, never want to hear the word "widget" used again in a break-even analysis, and I can do things with MS Excel that Billy Gate's didn't think possible. :)
 
First of all, you can make money with airplanes, witness FedEx and UPS.
Second, the issue is not any of the reasons above. European carriers are operating in a higher cost environment with similar results as the U.S.

The problem in the pax industry is very simple. The pax industry has certain routes that are very lucrative, and certain routes that are not. While the entire airline would, ordinarily, make some profit, that would be based on them making an economic (not just accounting) profit on some routes, which tend to subsidize some of the others that are either being developed or are close to break even.

Anytime you have a company making an economic profit, you invite competition. The cable companies were doing that, and it made it economically viable to launch satellites to compete with them, for example.

In the airline industry, it's not hard for someone to convince a few investors to support a plan to operate on only the routes where there is economic profit. The problem is that these new upstarts, by design, cherry pick the profit. This forces prices down for competition, often below the total costs (usually somewhere between the fixed and variable numbers). Profit is gone. Upstart is around for a while, but most of the time cannot keep up, so goes out of biz. This allows that route to go back to making profit for a short time until the cycle repeats.

Fortunately for FedEx and UPS, the above scenario is not viable!
 
I had someone tell me the other day that Airline pilots today are nothing more then glorified bus drivers. We know thats not the case, but I think the general public see's pilots becoming more and more like bus drivers as word gets out about airplanes flying themselves etc. Not really part of the original topic, but I think the public's perception has a lot to do with what they are willing to pay for airfare.

No industry is perfectly stable. Running your own business isn't perfectly stable either. I now rely on consumers who need wood flooring work. Luckily wood floors are extremely popular right now and I'm swamped with work until the new year, but we have our months when things slow down and don't look so good. Every business relys on the economy, but air travel traditionally has been a low profit industry. Low cost carriers don't help the situation either. And certainly our bankruptcy policy is ridiculous, allowing airlines to file Ch. 11 whenever they screw up and start to tank. You should get one shot under Ch. 11 to get your act together, if you can't it should be good bye.

I'd rather take my chances running my own business on this economy then working for some corporate A-holes trying to run it. Who's to say the industry will ever get better. Keep in mind I don't really know a whole lot about the economy or what actually goes on there, this is just my outside looking in opinion after researching flying for an airline.
 
Good points, Seagull. But the question addresses industry volatility (relative to other industries), not long-term profitability. There is no doubt that money can be made in air transporation. However, no carrier can be completely insulated from industry risk. Even the most successful carriers experience industry peaks and troughs.
 
Good points, Seagull. But the question addresses industry volatility (relative to other industries), not long-term profitability. There is no doubt that money can be made in air transporation. However, no carrier can be completely insulated from industry risk. Even the most successful carriers experience industry peaks and troughs.

For the reasons I stated. However, you're wrong that "no carrier can be completely insulated from industry risk", unless you mean that it is the same as any other biz, as FDX and UPS are as stable as any biz you can think of.
 
Back
Top