Porter going public via IPO

[dagger]

http://newswire.ca/e...0/16/c3232.html

TORONTO, April 16 /CNW/ - Porter Aviation Holdings Inc. (Porter) today filed a preliminary prospectus with the securities regulatory authorities in each of the provinces and territories of Canada in connection with a proposed initial public offering of its shares. No existing Porter shareholders will sell shares in the initial public offering.

The underwriting syndicate is led by RBC Capital Markets Inc. and also includes National Bank Financial Inc., BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc., CIBC World Markets Inc., TD Securities Inc., GMP Securities L.P., Credit Suisse Securities (Canada) Inc., Raymond James Ltd. and Versant Partners Inc.

A copy of the preliminary prospectus has been filed on SEDAR and is available for review at www.sedar.com.

[FA@AC]

So, Dagger, I haven't looked at the prospectus, but what data will Porter have to disclose now that it has made the IPO? Its balance sheet, I presume, but how far back will it be required to go when it releases financial info, and if you have seen the balance sheet, what state does Porter appear to be in?

[Lakelad]

Porter Airlines takes a flyer

April 17, 2010 - Toronto Star

By Jennifer Wells - Feature Writer

I want to know if Bob Deluce has lost his mind.

Bob? Have you lost your mind?

Bob won't take my call. And he's usually such a nice man.

Does he not know that airlines are highly unprofitable, highly leveraged, money-sucking destroyers of capital?

Well, of course he does, which I suspect is precisely why the wily Deluce has chosen this very moment to issue shares in Porter Aviation Holdings Inc. to the public.

'Mr. Porter has sniffed an acceptance of risk in the spring air, risk that investment banks are willing to underwrite and risk that investors just might be willing to absorb.'

[Guest rozar s'macco]

Well, they do have to be just a touch bigger if they hope to displace Jazz as AC's regional partner on turboprop feed.

That would also neatly (for AC) put the Toronto island airport mess to bed, whilst creating a 2-player market for regional feed instead of the sole source supplier debacle that is the present Jazz CPA. Also, it saves AC from having to buy those Q400's for Jazz, when somebody else can just buy them themselves. Hey, just sayin'...

[blues deville]

Well, they do have to be just a touch bigger if they hope to displace Jazz as AC's regional partner on turboprop feed.

Is it their plan to displace Jazz as AC's regional partner? If/when they expand their operation, I think it will only be in selected Canadian cities which will support Porter's business traveler product.

Congratulations to Porter Airlines.....I wish them further success!

bd

[rudder]

Also, it saves AC from having to buy those Q400's for Jazz, when somebody else can just buy them themselves. Hey, just sayin'...

FYI - AC does not buy aircraft for Jazz. The Q400 order announced by Jazz a couple of months ago will be financed by Jazz.

[rudder]

http://newswire.ca/e...0/16/c3232.html

TORONTO, April 16 /CNW/ - Porter Aviation Holdings Inc. (Porter) today filed a preliminary prospectus with the securities regulatory authorities in each of the provinces and territories of Canada in connection with a proposed initial public offering of its shares. No existing Porter shareholders will sell shares in the initial public offering.

The underwriting syndicate is led by RBC Capital Markets Inc. and also includes National Bank Financial Inc., BMO Nesbitt Burns Inc., CIBC World Markets Inc., TD Securities Inc., GMP Securities L.P., Credit Suisse Securities (Canada) Inc., Raymond James Ltd. and Versant Partners Inc.

A copy of the preliminary prospectus has been filed on SEDAR and is available for review at www.sedar.com.

dagger,

Why is so much information redacted from the prospectus?

Can anybody else figure out what the monthly aircraft lease/finance costs are?

Also, Porter seem to believe that the BELF of 49% will last forever. Good luck with that

[rudder]

OK. Since nothing in life is free, what is the monthly expense associated with servicing the debt incurred to acquire the aircraft? it looks like the acquisition cost per airframe was about $19M. $19M x 18 aircraft = $342M.

[mo32a]

Finally, now bean can tell us within 90 days when they are going to go TU and end the suspense.

[Thebean]

Trim all the IPO fluff aside and what do we have?

It would appear Porter is basing their IPO on the basis of a 4.17% operating margin in 4Q 2009. When interest costs are included, that knocks it down to -.17%.

That margin places them 12th out of 18 publicly traded airlines in North America. I suspect any of the 6 airlines that fared worse than Porter in 4Q 2009 would have performed significantly better had they operated from a cosy monopoly at their hub.

For the year, Porter's 2009 operating margin including interest was -9.1% in 2009 and -2.81% in 2008 so the numbers are getting worse, not better. Even on a more meaningless straight operating margin basis, 2009 produced -3%, far worse than 2008's .59%.

Take a look at maintenence expenses, which are expensed as incurred, and note that costs on their fleet, which all remains under warranty, represent about 3.1% of total costs. Compare that to a mature airline such as Horizon with a mix of Q400's and CRJ's, who's maintenance expenses run about 8.5%.

What happens to expenses as those costs start moving towards a normalized number as aircraft come off warranty after 4 years?

Porter's breakeven load factor dipped as low as 50.3% in 4Q 2009, averaging 52.3% in the year, down from 55.1% in 2008. Their costs are almost precisely what was reversed engineered, 23.7 cents in 2009 over a 348 mile average stage length. WestJet's costs over the same asl would be about 18.5 cents.

The low break even load factor is purely a function of the yields achieved as a result of their unsustainable monopoly at YTZ.

There is no discussion of their transborder profitability, though it's pretty obvious that Chicago, with its sub 25% loads, is an unmitigated dog. It's no wonder they arbtrarily decided to stop reporting their data to the US DoT in August 2009. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts Boston isn't much better.

Consider that Horizon, operating with a similar fleet, a 330 mile ASL (vs Porter's 348 mile asl), had yields of 27.7 cents in 4Q 2009 vs. Porter's 48.14 cents. Horizon's casm was 19.5 cents vs Porter's 21.72.

The disconnect is clearly in the yields which are obviously unsustainable. High yields will attract competition like flies to a turd.

I am reminded of a quote in a report issued by Societe Generale in 1994 titled, "The Virtual Airline".

"U.S. Academic research has shown that it only takes one small operation with a few percent of the market to destroy a high fare structure on a given route".

This quote was used in the WestJet businessplan to shed light on what would happen to yields in markets where WestJet appeared. It's accuracy in this instance, and all others I can think of anywhere is remarkable.

It will occur again the nano-second Porter faces competition on the Island.

If I thought there was a buck to be made on this dog, I'd be all over it. However, I do not believe this to be the case. There may be a mild sucker bounce when it goes public, but that's about it.

It seems pretty obvious from these numbers that Porter's investors want their cash out of the enterprise before the emperor loses all of his clothes. Their first kick at the cat wasn't successful so now its plan B, IPO.

Fortunately, they'll be locked up for at least 6 months, and hopefully a year before they can extricate their cash and move on.

They have applied some lipstick and a little war paint and tarted up the best three months they could find on the books. As a business airline with a small leisure component that competes with the automobile, what quarter would you expect to have the best numbers? I'd guess 4Q. All the business traffic together with holiday season.

These numbers prove the venture, even with the unsustainable monopoly at YTZ, is a loser that produces below industry average numbers.

As I've suggested from square one, they are selling a fairy tale to dumb investors.

It is not sustainable and will suffer horribly the instant competition enters the marketplace, yields crater and the BELF soars.

Caveat Emptor

[MD2]

Trim all the IPO fluff aside and what do we have?

It would appear Porter is basing their IPO on the basis of a 4.17% operating margin in 4Q 2009. When interest costs are included, that knocks it down to -.17%.

The North American industry average operating margin including interest as an expense was 1.03% in 4Q 2009, so Porter is under achieving even on this basis.

For the year, Porter's 2009 operating margin including interest was -9.1% in 2009 and -2.81% in 2008 so the numbers are getting worse, not better. Even on a more meaningless straight operating margin basis, 2009 produced -3%, far worse than 2008's .59%.

Take a look at maintenence expenses, which are expensed as incurred, and note that costs on their fleet, which all remains under warranty, represent about 3.1% of total costs. Compare that to a mature airline such as Horizon with a mix of Q400's and CRJ's, who's maintenance expenses run about 8.5%.

What happens to expenses as those costs start moving towards a normalized number as aircraft come off warranty after 4 years?

Porter's breakeven load factor dipped as low as 50.3% in 4Q 2009, averaging 52.3% in the year, down from 55.1% in 2008. Their costs are almost precisely what was reversed engineered, 23.7 cents in 2009 over a 348 mile average stage length. WestJet's costs over the same asl would be about 18.5 cents.

The low break even load factor is purely a function of the yields achieved as a result of their unsustainable monopoly at YTZ.

There is no discussion of their transborder profitability, though it's pretty obvious that Chicago, with its sub 25% loads, is an unmitigated dog. It's no wonder they arbtrarily decided to stop reporting their data to the US DoT in August 2009. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts Boston isn't much better.

Consider that Horizon, operating with a similar fleet, a 330 mile ASL (vs Porter's 348 mile asl), had yields of 27.7 cents in 4Q 2009 vs. Porter's 48.14 cents. Horizon's casm was 19.5 cents vs Porter's 21.72.

The disconnect is clearly in the yields which are obviously unsustainable. High yields will attract competition like flies to a turd.

I am reminded of a quote in a report issued by Societe Generale in 1994 titled, "The Virtual Airline".

"U.S. Academic research has shown that it only takes one small operation with a few percent of the market to destroy a high fare structure on a given route".

This quote was used in the WestJet businessplan to shed light on what would happen to yields in markets where WestJet appeared. It's accuracy in this instance, and all others I can think of anywhere is remarkable.

It will occur again the nano-second Porter faces competition on the Island.

If I thought there was a buck to be made on this dog, I'd be all over it. However, I do not believe this to be the case. There may be a mild sucker bounce when it goes public, but that's about it.

It seems pretty obvious from these numbers that Porter's investors want their cash out of the enterprise before the emperor loses all of his clothes. Their first kick at the cat wasn't successful so now its plan B, IPO.

Fortunately, they'll be locked up for at least 6 months, and hopefully a year before they can extricate their cash and move on.

They have applied some lipstick and a little war paint and tarted up the best three months they could find on the books. As a business airline with a small leisure component that competes with the automobile, what quarter would you expect to have the best numbers? I'd guess 4Q. All the business traffic together with holiday season.

These numbers prove the venture, even with the unsustainable monopoly at YTZ, is a loser that produces below industry average numbers.

As I've suggested from square one, they are selling a fairy tale to dumb investors.

It is not sustainable and will suffer horribly the instant competition enters the marketplace, yields crater and the BELF soars.

Caveat Emptor

With all due respect your highness, your vendetta and self-righteous inane rambling against anything not Westjet is so pathetic and perhaps a clear sign of envy!

[Thebean]

With all due respect your highness, your vendetta and self-righteous inane rambling against anything not Westjet is so pathetic and perhaps a clear sign of envy!

Given the information presented, what other conclusions can be drawn?

They have had a monopoly at YTZ for 4 years, operating without any direct competition from the downtown airport of, far and away Canada's largest aviation market, Toronto, to Montreal and Ottawa as well as NYC.

If that doesn't constitute going after the cream, I don't know what does.

They have had the benefit of maintenance costs that run less than half of what a similiarly equipped airline in the US has by virture of a fleet that is, at least for a while longer, all on warranty.

With all these advantages, Porter managed to produce an operating margin of -39.6% in their year end Aug 2007, (yes, that's negative 39.6%), -2.81% in 2008, -9.1% in 2009. We don't know what they did in the 4 months from Sept-Dec 2007. They're not reported. Betcha they aren't so hot either.

All the time, their management has publicly stated they were profitable. They weren't. Not even close.

They've managed to carve out one profitable quarter, 4Q 2009, that shows 4.17% margin but when interest expenses are taken into account, that drops to -.17%, placing them 12 of 18 airlines operating in North America.

On the basis of those numbers, and with all the advantages stacked in their favor, all of which will be disappearing, they are trying to raise capital so, presumably they can continue the great airline tradition of trying to expand into profitability. It hasn't worked before and I doubt it's going to start working now.

For the record, WJ hit the annualized revenue numbers Porter achieved between 1998 and 1999, about three years into their program. That was operating 30 year old 737's going head to head with two large competitors in each and every market. In 1998, with the impact of Glen Clark's BC recession, WJ produced 10.5% margins. In 1999, 15% margins.

http://www.westjet.com/pdf/investorMedia/financialReports/WJ_AR99.pdf

So excuse me for being completely and utterly underwhelmed by Porter's numbers.

I wish any investors who choose to throw money at this venture, and there will be some, all the luck in the world.

Perhaps Plan B will be more successful than Plan A.

[rudder]

OK, so bean has had his say on the value of Porter. How about somebody else with some financial acumen make the opposing argument (if there is such an argument to be made). Please include references to information contained in the prospectus that validates the argument.

[MD2]

He who calls himself "The Bean", from the one hand you portray the image of an economics and financial guru, yet respectfully, you don't speak it! A finance guru speaks a denotative language bereft of bias, yet you speak a very connotative language filled with sarcasm and ridicule of anyone who dares to challenge the " Western cowboys". As one apt Ontario singer used to say: "that don't impress me much"! Respectfully, I doubt you know much about economics and finance. You and other "cloak & dagger" type characters are more than likely some low level managers of your said companies, possibly even paid to frequent the net, to advance the interests of the mother corporation on the cyberspace. I'm happy for you and wish you all the luck you deserve, but pardon me if I do not participate in this inanity.

As for the discussion of Porter's IPO, I am not privy to their intimate finances, but several points or rather advantages seem very unique about this enterprise which most agree:

-It has refreshed air travel and people love it.

-YTZ & YYZ are common markets and both considered TORONTO.

-Mayor of Mississauga, the city in which YYZ is situated, has flown on Porter.

-Business folks love it even more.

-The assumption that arrival of AC is somehow going to be met with cheering customers who flock to their ticket counters is a solid misconception. People generally hate flying AC unless they have no choice. Arriving at YTZ is not going to change AC's fortunes, they held a monopoly there for many years with no success. It's the dignity that Porter has brought back to air travel that people yearn after.

-Porter beats AC and WJ on markets which they all serve, and they have to match or surpass Porter's service to lure its customers. I wish them success since certainly that would be good for consumers.

-Porter has established its brand which transcends the mere convenience of YTZ.

Given the fact that AC's model of corporation is all but bankrupt and Westjet's vision is all but lost with the loss of its visionaries and its fortunes on the decline, future seems to bode well for the likes of Porter and others who are creative and resourceful. Stock markets buy potential, not what is, and the potential for Porter is much better than AC, and perhaps even better than WJ. Time will tell.

[Miles]

Bean has my vote. It all makes sense. What makes even more sense to me, is this IPO looks like it's a last ditch attempt at survival before Jazz get's back into YTZ, and hence, competition.

[Cargo Agent]

He who calls himself "The Bean", from the one hand you portray the image of an economics and financial guru, yet respectfully, you don't speak it! A finance guru speaks a denotative language bereft of bias, yet you speak a very connotative language filled with sarcasm and ridicule of anyone who dares to challenge the " Western cowboys". As one apt Ontario singer used to say: "that don't impress me much"! Respectfully, I doubt you know much about economics and finance. You and other "cloak & dagger" type characters are more than likely some low level managers of your said companies, possibly even paid to frequent the net, to advance the interests of the mother corporation on the cyberspace. I'm happy for you and wish you all the luck you deserve, but pardon me if I do not participate in this inanity.

As for the discussion of Porter's IPO, I am not privy to their intimate finances, but several points or rather advantages seem very unique about this enterprise which most agree:

-It has refreshed air travel and people love it.

-YTZ & YYZ are common markets and both considered TORONTO.

-Mayor of Mississauga, the city in which YYZ is situated, has flown on Porter.

-Business folks love it even more.

-The assumption that arrival of AC is somehow going to be met with cheering customers who flock to their ticket counters is a solid misconception. People generally hate flying AC unless they have no choice. Arriving at YTZ is not going to change AC's fortunes, they held a monopoly there for many years with no success. It's the dignity that Porter has brought back to air travel that people yearn after.

-Porter beats AC and WJ on markets which they all serve, and they have to match or surpass Porter's service to lure its customers. I wish them success since certainly that would be good for consumers.

-Porter has established its brand which transcends the mere convenience of YTZ.

Given the fact that AC's model of corporation is all but bankrupt and Westjet's vision is all but lost with the loss of its visionaries and its fortunes on the decline, future seems to bode well for the likes of Porter and others who are creative and resourceful. Stock markets buy potential, not what is, and the potential for Porter is much better than AC, and perhaps even better than WJ. Time will tell.

Most of the long-time members are aware who "Bean" really is and some are aware of who "dagger" is. I believe your wrong on who you think they are. Given your list of "advantages" we could very well say that you are "some low level manager of your said company, possibly even paid to frequent the net, to advance the interests of the mother corporation on the cyberspace."

Whom is who doesn't really matter, it is the message that is in dispute. With this IPO we should find out a little more truth about whether Porter is a viable operation. Care to dispute the numbers as published or prefer just to parrot off old cliches?

[Seeker]

As for the discussion of Porter's IPO, I am not privy to their intimate finances, but several points or rather advantages seem very unique about this enterprise which most agree:

-It has refreshed air travel and people love it.

Opinion.

-YTZ & YYZ are common markets and both considered TORONTO.

YTZ is only considered "Toronto" if you are already downtown.

-Mayor of Mississauga, the city in which YYZ is situated, has flown on Porter.

...and I'll bet every person in Canada has flown on Air Canada - so what?

-Business folks love it even more.

Business people "love it" because it's currently the only option and because they can justify the high price to their accounting guy. When a slightly lower priced Jazz flight becomes the best "price" option you'll see more traffic up the 427.

-The assumption that arrival of AC is somehow going to be met with cheering customers who flock to their ticket counters is a solid misconception.

Air Canada will do well because their fares will be cheaper and they have the Aeroplan carrot.

People generally hate flying AC unless they have no choice.

I stand at the door of the aircraft to say thankyou/goodbye to my passengers and rarely, rarely, see an unhappy person getting off the airplane. In fact, I often see people who will stop at the door and make a point of specifically thanking us for a good flight experience. People are frustrated with the ever-changing security procedures, people are annoyed with the ever-increasing taxes and fees and people get frazzled when weather delays play havoc with their day but if you think this means that people "hate" Air Canada you are a victim of your own PR.

Arriving at YTZ is not going to change AC's fortunes, they held a monopoly there for many years with no success.

Wrong. Air Canada had plenty of success with the island flights however the cost of providing that operation is higher than the cost of providing it from Pearson so someone decided to scale the island flights back and drive the passengers into using the Rapidair product with the expectation that it would increase effeciency.

It's the dignity that Porter has brought back to air travel that people yearn after.

-Porter beats AC and WJ on markets which they all serve, and they have to match or surpass Porter's service to lure its customers.

Which market is that? The only route overlap I can think of is YUL (or is it YOW) to YHZ. Selling alot of tickets on that flight are you?

I wish them success since certainly that would be good for consumers.

-Porter has established its brand which transcends the mere convenience of YTZ.

And you back up this claim with the huge profits Porter has been making.

Given the fact that AC's model of corporation is all but bankrupt...

Actually, we've been bankrupt one and a half times but that's just an accounting exercise - there will always be an Air Canada.

....and Westjet's vision is all but lost with the loss of its visionaries and its fortunes on the decline,

Westjet is a mature corporation now and it's growth has slowed a bit but it's fortunes are hardly on decline. 98% of the companies out there would love to be dealing with the relatively simple things that Westjet has on it's plate.

...future seems to bode well for the likes of Porter and others who are creative and resourceful. Stock markets buy potential, not what is, and the potential for Porter is much better than AC, and perhaps even better than WJ.

Time will tell.

Well, you got that part right anyway.

[John S.]

Mr. Carty can't be too proud of those numbers.

According to the Barrick 2010 Management Proxy circular he's not only the Chairman of Porter Airlines Inc. but also chair of Virgin American Airlines, a director of Hawaiian Holdings and CHC Helicopter Corporation (& several others) plus a past Chairman and CEO of AMR Corp. All companies of which have had poor results at one time or another while he's been on the team. And then there was Canadian. . . . .

If this were a debate I'd award points to bean (for quoting figures and making acceptable assumptions) and a demerit to MD2 (for mentioning the Mayor of Mississauga.)

[Guest]

He who calls himself "The Bean", from the one hand you portray the image of an economics and financial guru, yet respectfully, you don't speak it! A finance guru speaks a denotative language bereft of bias, yet you speak a very connotative language filled with sarcasm and ridicule of anyone who dares to challenge the " Western cowboys". As one apt Ontario singer used to say: "that don't impress me much"! Respectfully, I doubt you know much about economics and finance. You and other "cloak & dagger" type characters are more than likely some low level managers of your said companies, possibly even paid to frequent the net, to advance the interests of the mother corporation on the cyberspace. I'm happy for you and wish you all the luck you deserve, but pardon me if I do not participate in this inanity.

As for the discussion of Porter's IPO, I am not privy to their intimate finances, but several points or rather advantages seem very unique about this enterprise which most agree:

-It has refreshed air travel and people love it.

-YTZ & YYZ are common markets and both considered TORONTO.

-Mayor of Mississauga, the city in which YYZ is situated, has flown on Porter.

-Business folks love it even more.

-The assumption that arrival of AC is somehow going to be met with cheering customers who flock to their ticket counters is a solid misconception. People generally hate flying AC unless they have no choice. Arriving at YTZ is not going to change AC's fortunes, they held a monopoly there for many years with no success. It's the dignity that Porter has brought back to air travel that people yearn after.

-Porter beats AC and WJ on markets which they all serve, and they have to match or surpass Porter's service to lure its customers. I wish them success since certainly that would be good for consumers.

-Porter has established its brand which transcends the mere convenience of YTZ.

Given the fact that AC's model of corporation is all but bankrupt and Westjet's vision is all but lost with the loss of its visionaries and its fortunes on the decline, future seems to bode well for the likes of Porter and others who are creative and resourceful. Stock markets buy potential, not what is, and the potential for Porter is much better than AC, and perhaps even better than WJ. Time will tell.

I can't help but laugh at Bean being being called a low level manager in one breath and then a visionary in another.

As the saying goes..."In God we trust, for all others, show us the data."

We've finally seen some of the data and the Deluce myth of profitability has officially been shattered.

[chockalicious]

As the saying goes..."In God we trust, for all others, show us the data."

A great saying used by one specific leader quite a bit!! Don't out yourself unintentionally

[Guest ACSideStick]

MD2;

You glossed over a major point which is a real DISADVANTAGE of Porter, and that is the moment anyone every gets on a Dash 8, no matter the Series number, they immediately look at their watch and figure out how long they will have to put up with being on this little crappy plane (no matter how new or sophisticated)(also no disrespect to those who fly them, as I did, it is just the reality). There is no getting around the fact that no body likes skycheck, nobody likes small bins, nobody like sitting with their arms folded while there neighbor uses the arm rest, nobody likes the thought of needing to use that lav. And nobody like those "whirling blades of Death" as Clive Beddoe described them years ago.

That all being said, they do it because they have been till this point, very short flights that they can "put up with" because of the convienience. Don't delude yourself into believing people can't wait for the experience. I rode from YVR to YYJ last week and thought no big deal on a Dash, it's only for 14 minutes. I repacked my bags, so as to move all my valuables (Laptop, Cell phone, handheld GPS, Serrangetis, passport, mouse, and second pair of eyeglasses) into a much smaller handbag which I can carry onto a dash so that none of it could get broken or stolen on my short flight. I went to the washroom before we boarded so that I wouldn't need to get up at all and off we went. The flight was great, but don't kid yourself if you think I wouldn't rather have been on a 767 or EMJ.

Since the arrival of on demand video, I have regularly seen people not get up at the end of the flight because they are trying to get to the end of a movie or show. I have had people ask if they can stay for just a couple more minutes to finish. All of this is with thier fullsized carryons, car seats, boardable strollers and even their dog. I've even seen passengers wanting to stay onboard awhile to let their kids finish naps.

BTW Both Dagger and Bean are not who you think they are. Both of these Gentleman are experts in this industry, and this forum is a sounding (venting) board for them. If you don't like what they say, don't listen at you own peril.

It sounds to me like you might work for Porter. It doesn't bother you at all that Deluce has, yet again, been continuosly making up lies and fairytales about your companies success?

Both of these posters who you slag have been revealing Porters financials for years to within pennies of the actual non released results without ever having seen the financials. I would say they have a clue or two about the business.

[props2you]

He who calls himself "The Bean", from the one hand you portray the image of an economics and financial guru, yet respectfully, you don't speak it! A finance guru speaks a denotative language bereft of bias, yet you speak a very connotative language filled with sarcasm and ridicule of anyone who dares to challenge the " Western cowboys". As one apt Ontario singer used to say: "that don't impress me much"! Respectfully, I doubt you know much about economics and finance. You and other "cloak & dagger" type characters are more than likely some low level managers of your said companies, possibly even paid to frequent the net, to advance the interests of the mother corporation on the cyberspace. I'm happy for you and wish you all the luck you deserve, but pardon me if I do not participate in this inanity.

As for the discussion of Porter's IPO, I am not privy to their intimate finances, but several points or rather advantages seem very unique about this enterprise which most agree:

-It has refreshed air travel and people love it.

-YTZ & YYZ are common markets and both considered TORONTO.

-Mayor of Mississauga, the city in which YYZ is situated, has flown on Porter.

-Business folks love it even more.

-The assumption that arrival of AC is somehow going to be met with cheering customers who flock to their ticket counters is a solid misconception. People generally hate flying AC unless they have no choice. Arriving at YTZ is not going to change AC's fortunes, they held a monopoly there for many years with no success. It's the dignity that Porter has brought back to air travel that people yearn after.

-Porter beats AC and WJ on markets which they all serve, and they have to match or surpass Porter's service to lure its customers. I wish them success since certainly that would be good for consumers.

-Porter has established its brand which transcends the mere convenience of YTZ.

Given the fact that AC's model of corporation is all but bankrupt and Westjet's vision is all but lost with the loss of its visionaries and its fortunes on the decline, future seems to bode well for the likes of Porter and others who are creative and resourceful. Stock markets buy potential, not what is, and the potential for Porter is much better than AC, and perhaps even better than WJ. Time will tell.

Its all well and good to have a product people love (and congrats to the employees at Porter for that), but if at the end of the day you can't make money on it you're in trouble.

[Guest]

A great saying used by one specific leader quite a bit!! Don't out yourself unintentionally

I heard many years ago at a Six Sigma training session. Now I'm curious!

[Seeker]

BTW Both Dagger and Bean are not who you think they are. Both of these Gentleman are experts in this industry, and this forum is a sounding (venting) board for them. If you don't like what they say, don't listen at you own peril.

I was nodding my head in agreement...until you got to the "gentlemen" part. At least for one of them - .

[rudder]

Regardless, it is a "bought deal" so the only parties that will lose if there is no belief that the deal is properly valued are the group of underwriters.