Southwest Airlines Doubles Quarterly Profit

slushie

Still here.
http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1153313077.html
July 19, 2006
US discount carrier Southwest Airlines on Wednesday said second-quarter earnings more than doubled as it overcame rising jet fuel costs with higher fares and aggressive hedging.

Southwest said net profit rose to USD$333 million from USD$144 million in the same period a year earlier.
Operating revenue increased about 26 percent to USD$2.45 billion from USD$1.94 billion.
"We generated higher recent yields to offset significantly higher jet fuel prices," Southwest Chief Executive Gary Kelly said in a statement.
The company has responded to rising jet fuel prices with higher fares, which have also given rivals room to raise their fares and improved the outlook for the struggling airline industry.
Kelly said the company remains committed to low fares despite recent price increases.
Earnings were boosted by gains from Southwest's jet fuel hedging program, which has allowed the airline to secure fuel at favorable rates. Southwest said the program generated a cash benefit of USD$225 million in the quarter.
The airline, which said it is 73 percent hedged for the remainder of 2006 at about USD$36 a barrel, expects its fuel costs to be higher than the second-quarter rate of USD$1.42 a gallon and substantially higher than the 95 cents a gallon paid in the third quarter last year. Jet fuel currently costs over USD$2.20 a gallon.
The expiration of some hedging contracts is exposing the airline to higher costs. Its hedging cover falls to USD65 percent in 2007, 38 percent in 2008, and 34 percent in 2009. The rates at which it is hedged also becomes less attractive in the coming years.
"While we cannot control the price of energy, we have insured ourselves with years of price protection that will allow us time to make the necessary changes," Kelly said.
In the short term, the trends appear positive. The company said that third-quarter bookings are "strong" and the increase in operating costs, excluding fuel, should be less than the 4.9 percent rise in the second quarter.
Given current trends, Kelly said the company should "easily exceed" its goal of increasing earnings by 15 percent for full-year 2006.

(Reuters)
 
I really liked this part:
The company has responded to rising jet fuel prices with higher fares, which have also given rivals room to raise their fares...

99% of us would have guessed that WN would have been the one that needed to raise rates first. if any of the other airlines did it, everyone else would have just held their collective breath and waited for it not to work.

But this move actually sets a wave in motion in the industry.
 
slushie said:
But this move actually sets a wave in motion in the industry.

Because their prices were typically the lowest, so to match them prices only go up. Makes sense to me.
 
wheelsup said:
Because their prices were typically the lowest, so to match them prices only go up. Makes sense to me.
Y'know, I find often that they aren't the lowest fare when I travel (which is a lot lately) but they do have the most flexibility. For example, if I need to get down to Austin on short notice, SWA is about $190 for the roundtrip, purchased, say, day before or same-day. Now, I might be able to fly on AA cheaper, but the fare is utterly restricted.

The beauty of SWA to business travelers is that full-fare (which means refundable and changeable w/o fees) is much LESS than other airlines full-fares and more FLEXIBLE than discount fares.

In my opinion, this is where SWA's real value lies.

If I have to go somewhere and I have to pay $400 for one of two tickets, I'm going with the fewest restrictions. If there is a $200 ticket (half the price) and has 2X the restrictions, I'm STILL taking the $400 ticket.

I'm curious what their per-passenger profit is. I've always heard from people who worked there that it was something like $3.55 and the magic number was $4.80-something. My numbers may be off but I know they're something like that.

Another interesting bit is that SWA is the only airline where most of the passengers actually like flying with them. Even the Executive Platinum guys on AA don't seem too happy right now. Maybe Kelleher just trained us to be happy with less, but I still will fly SWA over anyone else given half a chance.
 
Pay attentio, everyone - Southwest will feel the pain. They suck. Their hedging days are over. They can't make a profit forever.

etc, etc, etc . . . :sarcasm:
 
What?!!?1

Hang on......

In order to make a profit... you increase revenue.....

What?!?! why not just ask for paycuts?!?!??!



hats off to swa. bout time someone has their head out of their ass. (although SWA has for bout half a century:).... proof that texas owns again....AA hasn't filed for bk so shaddup :))
 
meritflyer said:
As GWB said once "God bless the United States and dont mess with Texas"

Probably his greatest speech ever.

no nukeulars
no terrerrrizts
no Al kaieeedas
no "axis of evil" lawl
 
Frog, you forget the "war on Terra." Unless we're fighting on the moon or Mars, I think any way is a war on Terra. :)

One thing SWA has going for it is the APPEARANCE of being the lowest cost. A lot of travellers automatically assume SWA is the lowest, check the website and book it without checking. It wouldn't surprise me if SWA's marketing counts on this. I would. It's smart.
 
kellwolf said:
Frog, you forget the "war on Terra." Unless we're fighting on the moon or Mars, I think any way is a war on Terra. :)

One thing SWA has going for it is the APPEARANCE of being the lowest cost. A lot of travellers automatically assume SWA is the lowest, check the website and book it without checking. It wouldn't surprise me if SWA's marketing counts on this. I would. It's smart.
ROFL!!! I needed that one. Thanks, Kellwolf.

I think this shows how much influence SWA has on the industry. And let's not forget the other Texas airline that's doing pretty good itself: CO.

Neil
 
WestIndian425 said:
And let's not forget the other Texas airline that's doing pretty good itself: CO

I was expecting AA after the colon but I guess all airlines headquartered in Texas are doing pretty good.
 
Any word on SWA moving their headquarters to Phoenix? Phoenix was gonna give them all kinda tax breaks and incentives to move here. Or now that they came to an agreement with DFW about the Wright Ammendment is it a mute point of moving from DAL?
 
Maximillian_Jenius said:
Any word on SWA moving their headquarters to Phoenix? Phoenix was gonna give them all kinda tax breaks and incentives to move here. Or now that they came to an agreement with DFW about the Wright Ammendment is it a mute point of moving from DAL?

You mean a moot point? :)

I'm wondering if they used PHX as the "other girl" to make DAL jealous...
 
Nick said:
I was expecting AA after the colon but I guess all airlines headquartered in Texas are doing pretty good.
Yeah...Frog Flyer did mention AA earlier. With all of these reports coming in, I'm looking forward to see how those Georgia, Illinois, Colorado, Michigan, NY, and Arizona carriers are doing.

Incidentally, I just realized that I used the wrong 3-letter identifier for SW....it should be LUV. :)

Neil
 
Back
Top