Jump to content


Donating Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral
  1. The trouble is the notice does not say whether the funding status going on the Balance Sheet is the "Solvency" basis calculation or the "Going Concern" calculation. The most recent Pension Status Report I can find is for January 1st 2005 and it is: Solvency basis deficit: $1.4 Billion Going Concern basis Deficit: $99 Million So knowing which figure gets added to the Balance Sheet might help to determine the impact. Anyone have a more recent Pension Status Update??
  2. Isn't it a question of whether the tap to the European taxpayer's cash gets turned off? Governments have been known to back a dead horse for a considerable time in the National Interest. I suppose more tax dollars will only enhance the US/Boeing position on unfair subsidies.
  3. Luggage Lighter October 12th, 2006 A passenger who packed a propane lighter in the shape of a handgun in his luggage won't likely be doing that again. Security staff at the Penticton Airport spotted the banned item yesterday during an X-ray of the man's carry-on bag. The luggage was destined for an Air Canada Jazz connector flight that was delayed by 20 minutes before departing for Vancouver. R-C-M-P officers questioned the 42-year-old Manitoba resident before allowing him to board the plane -- without the lighter. CFJC News (Good thing he didn't have toothpaste or shave cream)
  4. Perhaps Porter is going to use the "Mesa/Ryan Air" Business Model noted below!! Hawaiian Airlines is charging that startup carrier go!, a Mesa Air Group subsidiary, is trying to drive competitors out of business in the Hawaii market. Mesa counters that go!'s smaller share of the overall market in Hawaii means that its impact cannot be as consequential as Hawaiian claims. "If it wasn't clear to everyone before, it should be now that Mesa is trying to eliminate competition in Hawaii," wrote Hawaiian Airlines President and CEO Mark Dunkerley in a statement issued Sept. 22. "Evidence of Mesa's true motives was revealed in court last week, and while Mesa has done much in the news media to obscure that evidence, they didn't refute it in court." Hawaiian and Mesa are locked in a legal battle that began last February when Hawaiian filed suit claiming Mesa used proprietary information to bolster its startup proposal for go! (ATWOnline, Feb.15). Mesa filed a countersuit charging Hawaiian with violating antitrust laws. Mesa had access to confidential information when it expressed an interest in acquiring Hawaiian more than two years ago at a time when that carrier was in Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization. Last week, go! inflamed matters by offering $19 fares for some of its inter-island travel, but other fares are priced as high as $79. The Mesa subsidiary operates four 50-seat CRJ200s. "How do you put someone out of business with less capacity? We can't put them out of business with only 8% of the market," Mesa CEO Jonathan Ornstein told ATWOnline. "We are trying to carve a niche. They added more capacity than we have." Ornstein said he intends to add five or six larger aircraft, either Embraer 195s or CRJ900s, to the market next year. He said the go! subsidiary is modeled after highly successful LCC Ryanair. "There is a business model that says you can give away tickets and still make money," he said. by Sandra Arnoult
  5. Yes... Terrible, isn't it. Only $188 Million operating profit in three months. And that with fuel up another $100 milion from a year ago. What a difference a quarter makes. Q1 results and nothing but doom, gloom, and sarcasm from the usual sources. Q2, hardly a peep from the chorus and certainly not a kind word of any sort. I guess things stay pretty constant around here.
  6. CNW Group Portfolio E-Mail ACE AVIATION HOLDINGS INC. Transmitted by CNW Group on : August 11, 2006 06:00 Ace Aviation Holdings Inc. reports second quarter net income of $236 million and operating income of $181 million; announces plans to surface shareholder value Second quarter overview - Net income of $236 million compared to net income of $169 million in the second quarter 2005. - Operating income of $181 million compared to operating income in the 2005 quarter of $178 million. - EBITDAR for the quarter of $434 million, an improvement of $39 million from the 2005 quarter. - Passenger revenues up $188 million or 9 per cent, driven by a 3 per cent yield improvement and 5 per cent growth in traffic. - Fuel expense increase of $101 million or 19 per cent over the prior year's quarter. MONTREAL, Aug. 11 /CNW Telbec/ - ACE Aviation Holdings Inc. (ACE) today reported net income of $236 million for the second quarter 2006 compared to net income of $169 million in the 2005 quarter. ACE reported operating income of $181 million for the quarter, despite a fuel expense increase of $101 million or 19 per cent over the second quarter of 2005. Operating income increased by $3 million compared to the second quarter of 2005. Net income includes foreign exchange gains of $107 million (2005 losses of $53 million). The 2006 quarter also includes a pre-tax gain of $100 million ($83 million after tax) on the sale of 3.25 million shares of US Airways. The non-recurring items in the 2005 quarter, principally related to the initial public offering of Aeroplan, amounted to $161 million ($143 million after tax). Passenger revenues were up $188 million or 9 per cent reflecting increases in all markets due to a 3 per cent improvement in passenger revenue per revenue passenger mile (yield) and a 5 per cent growth in passenger traffic, as measured by revenue passenger miles (RPMs), on a capacity growth of 3 percent. Unit cost, as measured by operating expense per available seat mile (ASM), rose 6 per cent from the same period in 2005. Excluding fuel expense, unit cost was up 4 per cent and included the effect of growth in non- ASM producing businesses. EBITDAR(1) for ACE amounted to $434 million, an improvement of $39 million from the second quarter 2005, reflecting improvements in all segments with the exception of ACTS. EBITDAR for Transportation Services, Aeroplan and Jazz were up $22 million, $8 million and $29 million, respectively, while ACTS showed a decrease of $20 million. "I am pleased to report a strong second quarter from both an operating and financial perspective," said Robert Milton, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, ACE Aviation Holdings Inc. "Air Canada's revenue performance remains positive with the airline reporting a $188 million or 9 per cent increase in revenues over the previous year. This growth was achieved without the benefit of domestic traffic and yield gains derived from Jetsgo's demise in March 2005, and despite the negative impact of a strong Canadian dollar on revenues in international and transborder markets. "Record fuel costs continued to impact the airline's cost performance with oil prices now hovering around US$75 a barrel on the WTI index. "Both Aeroplan and Jazz provided value to their investors during the quarter. Aeroplan reported another strong performance in the quarter with record gross billings as well as a 23 per cent increase in operating income over the previous year. ACE's loyalty marketing company recorded $44 million in distributable cash. The increase in distributions announced in May will become effective in the third quarter. "I am also pleased at the strong results achieved by Jazz since it became a publicly traded company in February. Our regional carrier reported a profit of $35.6 million for the quarter and recorded over $33 million in distributable cash to its investors. This solid performance clearly reflects the stability inherent in its Capacity Purchase Agreement with Air Canada. "ACE's wholly-owned Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (MRO) business, ACTS, reported a modest operating income in the quarter and I am encouraged by the progress being made by the new leadership team. The changes being fast tracked by the new team are starting to pay off and I remain positive on the prospects and value of this business. "ACE's investment in US Airways has proved to be highly successful and our original investment of US$75 million has tripled, yielding over US$206 million in net proceeds to date and a remaining stake valued at US$20 million," said Mr. Milton. PLANS TO SURFACE SHAREHOLDER VALUE ---------------------------------- ACE also said today that its Board of Directors has completed a review of progress on the implementation of its strategic plan. A key feature of the review is the adoption of plans to surface value for ACE shareholders over the medium and longer term by further illuminating the value of its subsidiaries. The Board has identified the following initiatives, market conditions permitting, to create further value: - Launching of an initial public offering (IPO) of a minority stake in Air Canada in late 2006; - Commencing a process in late 2006 to monetize ACTS; - Pursuing opportunities that realize the value of its investment in Aeroplan and Jazz. In connection with these plans, ACE intends, subject to shareholder and Court approval under the Canada Business Corporations Act, to enter into a plan of arrangement. The plan would provide the Board of ACE with the authority to reduce the capital of the Corporation up to an aggregate amount of approximately $2 billion over time, but without any maximum time limit. A special meeting of shareholders will be convened in October 2006 to review the proposed plan of arrangement. "The Board has reaffirmed its strategy to maximize shareholder value by surfacing the underlying value of the subsidiaries. "The IPOs of Aeroplan and Jazz in June 2005 and February 2006 were very successful. Since then, both businesses have developed well as stand-alone businesses with outside investors and have delivered strong financial results. We expect both Air Canada and ACTS to benefit in a similar way as we move ahead. "The execution of the initiatives above should facilitate unlocking the value of ACE's assets which is not being adequately recognized by the market," concluded Mr. Milton. (1) Non-GAAP Measures EBITDAR is a non-GAAP financial measure commonly used in the airline industry to assess earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and aircraft rent. EBITDAR is used to view operating results before aircraft rent and depreciation, amortization and obsolescence as these costs can vary significantly among airlines due to differences in the way airlines finance their aircraft and other assets. EBITDAR is not a recognized measure for financial statement presentation under GAAP and does not have a standardized meaning and is therefore not comparable to similar measures presented by other public companies. Readers should refer to Consolidated Highlights or ACE's Quarter 2 2006 Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) for a reconciliation of EBITDAR to operating income (loss). For further information on ACE's public disclosure file, including ACE's Annual Information Form, please consult SEDAR at www.sedar.com and EDGAR at www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml
  7. Seems it's still not good enough for some people....... Air Canada under fire for Heathrow flight cuts Last Updated: Friday, July 21, 2006 | 11:09 AM NT CBC News Air Canada's decision to cut some of its flights between St. John's and London, England, is drawing heavy fire from the city's business community and a federal cabinet minister. Two months ago, Air Canada announced that in September, it would drop its daily, non-stop service between St. John's and London's Heathrow airport. However, after widespread protest — including a threat from St. John's city council to boycott the airline — Air Canada announced Thursday that it will begin offering three flights a week in April 2007, five flights a week in May 2007, and daily flights between June and September. Company spokeswoman Isabelle Arthur said the move makes economic sense for the airline. "During the summer, we can operate this route and it is viable," said Arthur. "Unfortunately, the economic conditions and market demands during the wintertime do not enable us to offer the service at that time." St. John's Board of Trade president Ray Dillon denounced Air Canada's decision to provide a reduced service. "The flight will be less frequent and the aircraft won't be large enough to handle our regular cargo needs," said Dillon. Federal Fisheries and Oceans Minister Loyola Hearn, the MP for St. John's South-Mount Pearl, also criticized the airline's decision. He said the reduced service is not an adequate response to the public outcry over the initial announcement that the flights would be cancelled. "I don't see anything about what will happen between now and April," said Hearn. "Nor am I enthused with the company coming in saying, 'We'll provide the service during the peak tourism time and make money and, you know, who cares what's going to happen to the people who are interested in commuting during the rest of the year.' To me, this is not at all satisfactory." Hearn said if Air Canada is no longer interested in providing regular service, another carrier can be found.
  8. I suppose in its simplest form all business is business risk vs. reward (profits). It seems the accountants at Westjet have determined that when it comes to servicing Kamloops the risk is greater than the potential reward. The proposal is to off-load the risk onto the Kamloops taxpayers (revenue guarantee) while still collecting the reward. Perhaps Kamloops should counter by taking on some of the risk but demanding a percentage of any profits. Then we would likely see Westjet as the one saying No, No.
  9. TV7 News Headlines WestJet Proposal Shot Down July 18th, 2006 Doesn't look like WestJet will be coming to Kamloops any time soon. WestJet told the city they wanted a $150,000 a month revenue guarantee to fly here. Mayor Terry Lake says it's too rich, and the city isn't interested in pursuing that option. Lake says Air Canada isn't demanding any revenue guarantees and they've stuck by Kamloops all these years, so it doesn't make sense to abandon them. He says WestJet already gets passengers from Kamloops who drive to Kelowna, and they don't see any reason to come here at this point without the huge guarantee.
  10. Who said they have to drive the truck? I did not say In-Flight had to resolve the problem themselves, internally. I said In-Flight is responsible for the in-flight customer service product. There are many venues within in-flight for raising issues and getting them resolved. I am simply saying that if in-flight staff and management don't step up to the plate to get problems recognized and resolved, who will? I get tired of hearing: It's someone elses fault. It's someone elses problem. I'm just a worker here. There's no point is saying anything because nothing will improve. It's always been like that, so it always will be. Most of the people I know in In-flight are not afraid to raise issues and are successful with getting things fixed. Not everything, and maybe not 100% fixed, but improved ?? Absolutely.
  11. It sounds like you are saying the problem is someone else's to resolve. On-board customer service is the responsibility of In-Flight. Both In-Flight management and In-Flight staff. That includes ensuring the tools are available to provide the service. To say crew have no control is a cop-out. You are simply saying there is a problem, but you want nothing to do with resolving it. You say there is no time to check what's available and what is not. Excuse me, but I thought it was the In-Flight department who determines what needs to be done and when it needs to be done. Are you suggesting some other department is responsible? If so, what department are you thinking of? If it isn't resolved by the combined efforts of In-Flight management and staff - who do you think is going to resolve it? Accounting? In-Flight needs to take some collective responsibility for the part it plays in the organization. Not just complain and hope someone else deals with it.
  12. You speak as if there are investment options available to individuals that are different than those available to DB Pension investment boards. An individual may be able to select something with more risk - and it could just as easily become the worst mistake of their lives. A bad downturn in the markets negatively affects both entities. Many individuals with DB plans are also contributing to RRSPs and other investments as fallback/self protection. There are many costly elements of DB pensions that people may be prepared to give up or water down if the alternative is the loss of the plan altogether. Things such as early retirement provisions and some of the more elective type medical provisions. I was amazed at some of the GM provisions. But at the end of the day, when I see Government staff, politicials, Police, Teachers, Firemen etc clamouring to trade in their defined benefit plans in order to take advantage of the great DC plan alternative then I might believe you are on to something. But I won't be holding my breath.
  13. I have a lot of compassion for both the family and the dog. Like PP I will not subject our dogs to air travel if there is an alternative. We are driving from Montreal to Vancouver next month for just that reason. It will take significantly more time and cost quite a bit more but that is the way it will be. But I am really disappointed with the Halifax Airport. I am sure the local SPCA could have rounded up the dog but there is probably some rigid rule in place against letting their staff roam around. There is a lot of land besides runways around the airport and they could have come to some arrangement to have the SPCA accompanied by Airport staff for safety purposes. The Airport seems to have just abandoned the dog to its eventual fate, lost, hungry and scared. As for the groundhandling staff, the article says the dog was loose and bolted from the hold when the door was opened. I don't see what they could have done differently.
  14. “Air Canada staff and kennel service staff were on-site trying to retrieve the dog on numerous occasions,” says a safety report on the incident. “Investigation revealed that the kennel staff failed to secure the latch on the flight kennel.” Who are "Kennel service staff"? Air Canada employees or Airport employees? (Not that it matters much since Air Canada will attract all the blame, regardless).
  15. I don't quite see the necessity for an apology from AC. AC was not allowed to have the fare on the Agents's website due to specific "me too" language in the Sabre contract. Even though Sabre is not able to display all of the fare components correctly. It looks as if the contract language has been altered to remove the "me too" language so that the fare can now be legally displayed on the Agents website while not in Sabre. I think you could make a case for an apology from Sabre, given that they started the whole mess in the first place!
  • Create New...