share holders might be surprised by how much wages have gone up in the 2nd half of FY21 after the initial dip :scared:
Printable View
share holders might be surprised by how much wages have gone up in the 2nd half of FY21 after the initial dip :scared:
NTA as at 31 December was 97 cents per share and I would think its materially lower by the time they try and raise capital, perhaps about 80 cents I think they will try and raise capital at somewhere very close to NTA, maybe cheeky enough to try at $1 and play the fiddle that they're in recovery mode and will soon be thriving.
I see no viability to their business model for several years so as mentioned before as I don;t mix investment activities with philanthropic activities I have no interest in participating.
I only post to bring some realism to this thread. Disc: I have been in and out as an investor in AIR for more than 30 years. There are times to be an investor in AIR and there are times to stay out. In my opinion one is best to avoid any investment in AIR for the foreseeable future.
Beagle, absolutely agree. I have been in and out of this for circa 30 years. At one point a fund I was investment manager for was one of the larger insti holders. IMO AIR's go forward business model is unknown. They will need a freight component but how is an issue.The govt can't keep propping up it up when the a/c are not freight aircraft but mixed revenue. There is no chance of conversion or new buys or old. So dilemma because if NZ loses or seriously degrades that freight capability then NZ exporters are in Big Trouble in Little China territory. Long haul, imo, is effectively gone to any meaningful level. Short haul has lesser but no means insignificant challenges but hard to see it anywhere near 2019 levels for at least another 5 years.
The directors(and auditors) have to sign the accounts of soon as a going concern I presume. Problem is there is no business clarity at all. It is losing money even with subsidies. At some point the WTO may be pressured over the subsidies because long term they are illegal.I wonder how far AIR/GONZ can push it.
At $1.00 there will be a big shortfall and Govt underwrite will be called. At 50 was where I pitched it 12 months ago but maybe 75 is right given the Labour Govt approach to life. They would like to buy all of it actually but with the lack of money bailing out AIR or paying nurses is a no brainer.
Agree Beagle. AIR sure don't paint a picture of how much IP is walking out the door to jobs paying market rate. Backfilling roles using consultants at 2x or 3x rate of incumbent staff rather than paying said staff is not a good way to retain talent
1. Extremely expensive and time consuming.
2. Try getting a slot. I guess it will be 2025 first availability for slot.
Loss about $450m this year and about the same for last year
No mention of buying electric planes for domestic routes
http://nzx-prod-s7fsd7f98s.s3-websit...146/348529.pdf
I liked the bit about them being EBITDA positive.
Defer to survive, probably won't have Beagle going on about how young the fleet is for quiet a few years.
NTA goes to zero depending on how the tax treatment flows through to NTA.
giving staff shares before a rights issue !!! lol
i ran the very first Air New Zealand Staff Share scheme when Brierley owned most of it - beck in the early 90's. The staff paid about $2.14 per share from memory. Obviously a very different capital base now
ok so not issued until 4th quarter but this is crazy. they're losing a billion dollars in the next few years and they give staff a bonus
That aircraft is owned by airwork.They have contracts with various organisations including Fed ex and DHL etc...they also fly a 737 to Melbourne several times a week, as well as 737's around NZ and for Toll in Aussie.
Air's 777-200s are gone won't return...they will ethier be sold scrapped or returned to the lesser.
777-300s would say there is significant uncertainty over the future of these aircraft too.
Have heard through the grapevine that they have been quite impressed with the freight carrying capacity and performance of the 787's.
That's how I see it too. I think they will try and carry the tax losses as a credit and try and make the balance sheet look less stretched. Tax losses are of course only worth something as an offset against future taxable profits and I think its anyone's guess when they might be profitable again. FY23 is probably another sizeable loss would be my guess.
I think its crystal clear the capital raise is just a donation or lets call it a tax payment to the Govt to help maintain critical transport infrastructure. Sheet the cost back where it belongs I reckon. The Govt is still collecting hundreds of millions per annum in PAYE and GST from AIR so let them fund the airline from that !
Pretty easy to find more worthy cases for one's philanthropic activities than AIR.
Throw a dart at the share market page from the Herald to find a better investment, you can't miss !
I'm not aware of that mate, (not following closely anymore as its not worth my time). I would think it could only be deferred with Govt agreement. If they're doing that they really are incredibly desperate.
Giving staff shares just before a capital raise is a bit of a laugh...talk about a hospital pass !
I think where this is going is all this information is a warm up (stating the obvious, please forgive me), for the capital raise which nobody will want to underwrite so the Govt will have too. They'll end up with a much larger shareholding. Down the track it won't be a good look for Cindy and Co to be wearing massive losses from a listed company so there's only two ways to conceal / fix that, either massive price rises passed onto customers or nationalize the airline.