airt

Members
  • Content Count

    313
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

airt last won the day on November 23 2013

airt had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

31 Excellent

About airt

  • Rank
    3

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. If Tim gets his wish I don't think it will be long before AC/WJ have multiple suitors at their ridiculously low valuations which just might make his mission that much more difficult.
  2. He posted an interesting hypothesis on avcanada a few weeks ago in the WestJet forum. Pretty much the same reaction he gets here most of the time...no one wants to believe it. Our loss...
  3. Defcon You got it Pontiac... Fastest typist wins
  4. We have ISIS claiming they did it. We have the Russians claiming it was a "technical fault" called in by the pilot. Problem is , both sources are highly unreliable. I agree with Dagger. A modern airliner falling from the sky at cruise altitude is highly unusual.
  5. IFG Risk mitigation...exactly Even though I could realise a 6 figure gain on the currency conversion , I won't because I did it to insure against the possibility or more likely in my view the probability of the C$ moving towards it's 50 year mean. I did it to protect my costs far into the future. I'm not sure how far in the future that WestJet could have hedged back in 2011 but in reading Lakelad's post it appears they use some sort of rolling mechanism rather than the "all in" , one time strategy. The rolling strategy is safer but limits savings as well as losses of course. I just felt that a
  6. CanadaEH WJ hedged fuel very favourably in the late 90's when oil was kissing $10/bbl. I believe that was Clive's decision at the time and it really helped us out in the early years as oil ramped up.
  7. moeman True. I did not mean to criticise AC. I am critical of WJ's decision not to hedge.
  8. Lakelad We are talking currency hedges but the fuel hedge information is interesting Hedging is always a dangerous game but sometimes the stars align and the downside risk is very low. That is what I believed in 2011 with the C$vsUS$ and acted accordingly. I must admit I never felt the C$ would go to .75 but here it is. If anyone but the Conservatives get the nod in October it would not surprise me to see the C$ break through .70
  9. FCPAIR I have not looked at the AC statements but I highly suspect that AC did not due to the fact that they were just emerging from a battle against CCAA.2 when the C$ was above par in early 2011 and probably did not have the ability to do so. I have found no reference to WJ hedging but unlike AC at the time they had over a billion in cash and would have had the ability to do so.
  10. seeker Actually , I did. A VERY large amount. Since I have a place in the US and spend many US$ it was a no brainer. The same no brainer it should have been for companies that have HUGE US$ exposure and C$ revenue with a history of C$.trading well below par. As for the Apple shares , bought those @ 45 , sold at 75. THAT was a HUGE mistake.
  11. The big question is why did AC and WestJet not hedge US$ when the C$ was par and above? Huge mistake.
  12. They have to get the money somewhere to pay for all their green programs and cancelled power plants. Government out of control.
  13. dagger Buzz is obviously not involved with the WestJet union drive. Buzz involving himself in the discussion without the facts proves that the "union side" of which he is a major member is a homogenous position , at least for him. Just side with pro union , facts be damned.
  14. no you can't assume...you can count on it My point in bringing up this topic is to illustrate the misinformation by the union side to justify their position at all costs. Those were some pretty big falsehoods that Buzz propagated.