More Airplanes for Porter

[pointyertoes]

TORONTO/July 16, 2008 – Porter Airlines is exercising two existing options for Bombardier Aerospace Q400 aircraft. This represents aircraft 13 and 14 in the Porter fleet from an original order of 10 firm and 10 options.

The two aircraft are valued at approximately $52 million U.S. based on list prices. Six Q400s are delivered and currently in service. Within one year, the fleet will double in size to 12 aircraft and the full order of 20 is expected to be delivered in less than two years.

“Porter is continuing its steady, successful growth curve with the confirmation of this order,” said Robert Deluce, president and CEO of Porter Airlines. “We’ve been able to maintain a full level of customer service while adding aircraft, employees and destinations at a time when many carriers are making difficult decisions about the future.”

Porter was recently recognized by Bombardier for achieving 99.59 per cent dispatch reliability, the highest in the world for all Q400 operators.

“The Q400 continues to serve Porter well as the ideal aircraft for our regional routes,” added Deluce. “The passenger comfort, fuel efficiency and reliability help us deliver a unique passenger experience.”

“Final assembly for the Q400 aircraft is done at Bombardier’s Toronto site, so Porter Airlines’ operation is an ideal showcase for the airliner,” said Gary R. Scott, President, Bombardier Commercial Aircraft. “The lower CO2 gas emissions and quiet operation of the airliner make it ideally suited to the Toronto City Centre Airport and similar downtown airfields such as London City Airport in the United Kingdom. The Q400 aircraft is truly a 21st century turboprop.”

Total firms orders for the Q400 aircraft now stand at 308, with 200 delivered as of April 30, 2008.

Porter operates a 70-seat version of the Q400, one of the most fuel-efficient aircraft in its class, burning less fuel per seat than most regional and narrow-body jets. With leather seating, extended legroom and a 667 km/h cruising speed, the Q400 sets new standards for comfort, fuel efficiency and low emissions.

[dashx]

http://www.bombardier.ca/en/corporate/m ... 0d80033b30

wow copy and paste. How cool is that?

[Thomas Magnum]

Way Cool

[Squid]

Taken from another forum from a guy who knows numbers and airlines. Good gig at 36% load factor on outbound flights (prob 36% inbound too). While it lasts imo. Just the messenger.



It's math time gang!!!


In 2007, Porter ran 9x daily to YUL and 9x daily to YOW weekdays.

So that's ((5/7)*365)=260.7 days with 18 departures a day = 4,693 departures with 70 seats per departure = 328,500 seats.

On weekends, they ran 5x to YOW and 4x to YUL.

So that's 52 weekends with 9 departures a weekend = 468 departures with 70 seats per departure = 32,760 seats.

So, excluding any other charter flying, and their Tremblant stuff, they had 361,260 seats departing from YTZ in 2007.

According to the TPA, a publicly owned entity, audited by Deloitte, the TPA show that they collected $1.983m in AIF's at $15 a head. It's all there under item 14.

$1.983m divided by $15 a head amounts to 132,200 heads.

So........132,200 heads divided by 361,260 seats equals a l/f of , um er oh dear.......with advance fares at or below the competition......with fully allocated casm well over 30 cents.......well, I think we get the hang of it now, now don't we......

[Valhalla]

Taken from another forum from a guy who knows numbers and airlines. Good gig at 36% load factor on outbound flights (prob 36% inbound too). While it lasts imo. Just the messenger.

There's an awful lot of assumptions there. Wait till the end of the year when the employee profit share numbers comes out - it's audited by a third party and is currently projected to be around 10% of years salary for 2008. And by the way, the Q400 breaks even around 25-30% load factor (the fuel surcharge more than takes care of increased fuel costs), so even if 36% was correct - which it's not, it's still a money making load.

But people have been predicting the demise of Porter since before it started, so I'm sure this one will not be the last.

[pointyertoes]

It's interesting to note that this 'mathematician' is using numbers TPA numbers from when Porter was less than a year old and had only 2 destinations.
Even assuming that his calculation of our load factor is correct for that time period (a big assumption, since he has no idea how Porter pays the TPA), the fact is that within less than a year the airline beacame profitable.
Since then the average load factor to all destinations has increased dramatically.
It's also interesting to note that there has been no problem securing financing for 14 airplanes and Porters' growth is continuing according to plan even as legacy carriers with load factors in the high 80%s are failing to make a profit and are slashing capacity.

[Squid]

I understand your assumption in the financing of new a/c, however Jetsgo had no troubles financing them too. I wouldn't count on that as a barometer of health. Not to mention things are much different up here in the great white.

[bmc]

Taken from another forum from a guy who knows numbers and airlines. Good gig at 36% load factor on outbound flights (prob 36% inbound too). While it lasts imo. Just the messenger.



It's math time gang!!!


In 2007, Porter ran 9x daily to YUL and 9x daily to YOW weekdays.

So that's ((5/7)*365)=260.7 days with 18 departures a day = 4,693 departures with 70 seats per departure = 328,500 seats.

On weekends, they ran 5x to YOW and 4x to YUL.

So that's 52 weekends with 9 departures a weekend = 468 departures with 70 seats per departure = 32,760 seats.

So, excluding any other charter flying, and their Tremblant stuff, they had 361,260 seats departing from YTZ in 2007.

According to the TPA, a publicly owned entity, audited by Deloitte, the TPA show that they collected $1.983m in AIF's at $15 a head. It's all there under item 14.

$1.983m divided by $15 a head amounts to 132,200 heads.

So........132,200 heads divided by 361,260 seats equals a l/f of , um er oh dear.......with advance fares at or below the competition......with fully allocated casm well over 30 cents.......well, I think we get the hang of it now, now don't we......

What kind of yield are they getting? What's their break even load factor?

[V1RotateV2]

Oh man, here we go again.

Would an airline that, according to your math is struggling and loosing money, firm orders for more aircraft delivered 2009 and hire 30+ pilots now with plans for 70 more within the next 12 months?

I understand your assumption in the financing of new a/c, however Jetsgo had no troubles financing them too. I wouldn't count on that as a barometer of health.

We are talking brand new, highly demanded Q400s @ 25M a piece, not old fuel burning scrap that lessors or owners were happy to see go, even to less than promising buyers. You wouldn't be too picky about who buys or finances your 1971 Pontiac, while you still have a lien on it, right?

From another post: "Anyway, I guess that we can wait a few months and find out what the real situation is. Either an IPO will put all the information out in the open or the profit sharing for the employees will give an indirect indication of what the audited results were for the past year."

Chill out. Personally I am convinced that Porter is doing well and will survive this recession and oil prices while growing. Not many airlines can say that.

[Squid]

C3 took some pretty expensive a/c too.

[rudder]

If the Porter numbers were so rosy they would be public. They are not.

So c'mon Porter - make your numbers public.

[Troubleshot]

If the Porter numbers were so rosy they would be public. They are not.

So c'mon Porter - make your numbers public.

Companies historically go public to generate cash toward major purchases or to expand, Porter has solid backing so going public may not be required at this stage of the game. Also an IPO with an airline may not generate much money given current economics.

[EI-EIO]

Interesting that even the Red Star could be persuaded to run a Porter friendly article
http://www.thestar.com/article/461422

Of course it did involve fawning at various pseudo-celebrities...

Apparently BOS or MDW are in the cards from a Porter expansion.
http://www.thestar.com/article/461764

Would DET be worth looking at as an alternative to DTW?

[bmc]

If the Porter numbers were so rosy they would be public. They are not.

So c'mon Porter - make your numbers public.

Why should they? Are they publicly traded? I'm asking because I don't know.

Why are some of the posters so angry with Porter? I don't live in Canada so I don't know what's going on. I do get the sense that some people feel they should not be allowed to exist. What's that about? Don't like competition?

[Four1oh]

BMC, they are not public, they are private. They tell the world how great things are, but it's up to us to believe them based on nothing, really. It's just more of the same story we all have seen, over and over. What makes me annoyed is that i've been around long enough to smell a bullshit story when I hear one. Yes, it's possible that Porter is profitable, and it's also possible to turn a profit on any plane with 36% load factor... IF you charge high enough for a ticket. I could show you a profit with 1% LF if I could just find a fool rich enough to pay enough for a ticket! So, for someone to say that a Q400 has a break even LF of 25%-30% makes me laugh, as there would be Q400's everywhere... where do you get your numbers Vahalla? If anyone's making an assumption it's you buddy. The guy that posted the simple little math quiz did it based on hard facts. All he did was calculate how many departure fees/year were collected divided by seats/year were departing YTZ. It doesn't get any easier than that to come up with a 36% LF. If Porter wants us all to buy their bullshit, show us the profit on 36% LF.
I have no problem with Porter personally, but if it looks like a dud, sounds like a dud, smells like a dud...

[Airband]

Why are some of the posters so angry with Porter?

In the WJA world there is but one god.

.

[Valhalla]

where do you get your numbers Vahalla? If anyone's making an assumption it's you buddy. The guy that posted the simple little math quiz did it based on hard facts.

I've been there at Porter since day 1 and have seen the passenger numbers grow to where I can confidently call bullshit. And I'll be enjoying my profit share cheque at the end of this year, just like I enjoyed my bonus last year. That will be the only hard fact regarding profitablity that you're going to get because Porter is not obligated to submit financials being a private company.

The "hard facts" as you call it, are loosely based, and don't include flights that departed and arrived at airports away from YTZ. For example, in 2007, as the numbers are based, we operated YHZ-YUL flights and YHZ-YOW flights throughout the year that we're packed - probably our busiest route.

And in case you really need an education regarding your question as to why Q400's aren't everywhere (I did catch your sarcasm, by the way) - the Q400, like every other commercial turbo-prop, was designed for and make most economic sense on short routes where a jet spends far more of its time in climb than cruise (in case you didn't know, a turbo-prop is much more fuel efficient at low altitudes versus a jet.) But on longer legs, the fuel burn at higher cruising altitudes of a jet versus turbo-prop start to make more sense. Maybe you should find out why Horzon, in this new world of $150/barrel oil, is trading in their brand new CRJs for an all Q400 fleet?

[Four1oh]

where do you get your numbers Vahalla? If anyone's making an assumption it's you buddy. The guy that posted the simple little math quiz did it based on hard facts.

I've been there at Porter since day 1 and have seen the passenger numbers grow to where I can confidently call bullshit. And I'll be enjoying my profit share cheque at the end of this year, just like I enjoyed my bonus last year. That will be the only hard fact regarding profitablity that you're going to get because Porter is not obligated to submit financials being a private company.

The "hard facts" as you call it, are loosely based, and don't include flights that departed and arrived at airports away from YTZ. For example, in 2007, as the numbers are based, we operated YHZ-YUL flights and YHZ-YOW flights throughout the year that we're packed - probably our busiest route.

And in case you really need an education regarding your question as to why Q400's aren't everywhere (I did catch your sarcasm, by the way) - the Q400, like every other commercial turbo-prop, was designed for and make most economic sense on short routes where a jet spends far more of its time in climb than cruise (in case you didn't know, a turbo-prop is much more fuel efficient at low altitudes versus a jet.) But on longer legs, the fuel burn at higher cruising altitudes of a jet versus turbo-prop start to make more sense. Maybe you should find out why Horzon, in this new world of $150/barrel oil, is trading in their brand new CRJs for an all Q400 fleet?

'loosely based facts'? What the hell does that mean? And, comparing a Q400 to an RJ? 2 airplanes, to different missions. There's also damn good reason why AC also dumped the RJ's not to mention a few American airlines. There's also a damn good reason AC doesn't have Q400's. What's your point? I'm more interested in your claim to a BELF of 25-30%...
Argue all you want about the other departure airports, but I'm not interested.
Need I also point out LeBlancheque claimed immense profitability right down to the last minute of operation? How could anyone prove otherwise? Unless Porter shows some real numbers, I don't really give them any credit(no pun intended)

And before you get your panties too knotted up, I have no problem with them, really I don't. Just don't try and feed us bullshit(if it is) and expect us to swallow it hook, line, and sinker.

[Valhalla]

What's your point? I'm more interested in your claim to a BELF of 25-30%...
Argue all you want about the other departure airports, but I'm not interested.

My numbers are based on internal Porter stats. But for you, some light reading from Bombardier: http://q400.com/q400/en/turbo.jsp

The average Porter fare is much higher than $100, if you are reading the BELF charts at the bottom of the link...

[Four1oh]

ok, so you claim to have inside info on the company's performance. That may change thing(may). Second, thanks for the sales pamphlet. I'm sure it will help sell more Q400's.

I checked a one way flight from ytz-yow for monday, and the average fare price for the whole day is $113 bucks. The low fare is $89 and the high was $149. One way ytz-yul was $89 bucks all day except one flight, which was priced at $109.(average $92)

I admire your fierce defense of your airline, as i'm the same way. I stand by my opinion. Cheers.

[bmc]

Four1oh...thanks for the answers.

Looking at departure fees from one airport is a clever way to get a sense of loads from one airport. Given today's fuel prices, I think it would be a challenge to get away with a 30% B.E.LF.

That aside, why the anger towards Porter? So what if they're planning on growing? If they are the financial straits that you believe, you should be rejoicing that they are overextending themselves to the point of going bankrupt, right?

Why should they publish their numbers? They're privately owned. What's the big deal? I still don't understand your anger. Did they not give you a chief pilot job or something?

[Four1oh]

I'm not angry. Just tired of all the crooks in this industry, I guess. I'm trying to get through that I don't really care either way about the existence of Porter. I'll say again that I'm just annoyed that any clown can stand up and make claims as to the profitability of their private business without having to legally substantiate the claim.

[bmc]

I'm not angry. Just tired of all the crooks in this industry, I guess. I'm trying to get through that I don't really care either way about the existence of Porter. I'll say again that I'm just annoyed that any clown can stand up and make claims as to the profitability of their private business without having to legally substantiate the claim.

There certainly is no shortage of people wanting to enter the glamour business of airlines. I assume that Porter has succeeded in making a go of the island airport. Toronto Island is a pain in AC's side insofar as if they wish to compete, they would be spreading their operation over two airports. Twice the cost to serve the same market. If nobody served the island, everyone would fly out of Pearson.

The people running Porter seem to be doing a good job. I don't buy the argument that they shouldn't exist because someone did some math calculations on the back of an envelope about airport improvement fees. They should exist as long as they are profitable and run a safe operation that serves the public. If anything, them building a market at the island educates the Toronto public that the Island is very convenient. Let them build it up and start your own operation to steal it from them.

So what if they order more airplanes. If they want to stretch themselves financially and you believe your numbers, they're not going to last, right? At some point, they won't have the cash to pay for the planes. right? And if your wrong, let them grow. They'll hire more Canadian pilots, buy more Canadian airplanes. Power to them.

[Valhalla]

I'll say again that I'm just annoyed that any clown can stand up and make claims as to the profitability of their private business without having to legally substantiate the claim.

Wasn't that what "that guy" did in predicting the (un)profitability of Porter?

[Four1oh]

actually, no, it doesn't look that way to me, but I see what I'm up against here, so, sure dude, whatever ya say. cya.