Cathay Pacific Announces Huge Loss For First Half Of 2017

Cathay Pacific has been struggling financially lately, as they face increased competition from both Gulf carriers and low cost carriers. This has brought their yields way down. The fact that they have pretty sparsely configured planes doesn’t help either (though that’s soon changing).

Just how bad are things? Cathay Pacific today revealed their results for the first half of 2017, and they’re significantly worse than expected. Per the South China Morning Post, Cathay Pacific reported a 2.05 billion HKD loss for the first half of the year (262 million USD), compared to a profit of 353 million HKD during the same period last year (45 million USD).

The airline had forecast a loss of 1.2 billion HKD for the period, though they even performed significantly worse than that. This is the company’s first time having a loss in the first half of the year since 2012, and as a result, the airline won’t be paying any dividends to shareholders.

While total revenue is up marginally, their costs are up significantly, and their yields (the amount passengers pay per flown mile) are down by 5.2% compared to the same period last year. Cathay Pacific’s chairman (who just got the job as of May 2017), is expecting that the second half of the year won’t be much better, meaning that the airline will see losses for two years in a row for the first time ever (in 2016 they lost 575 million HKD, or 73 million USD).

Here’s what Cathay Pacific’s chairman, John Slosar, said about the prospects for the airline:

“We do not expect the operating environment in the second half of 2017 to improve materially. In particular, the passenger business will continue to be affected by strong competition from other airlines and our results are expected to be adversely affected by higher fuel prices and our fuel hedging positions.  However, the outlook for the cargo business is good and we expect robust demand and growth in cargo capacity, yield and load factor in the second half of this year. We expect to see the benefits of our transformation in the second half of 2017, and the effects will accelerate in 2018.

“We are addressing the industry challenges through our corporate transformation and by expanding our route network, increasing frequencies on our most popular routes and buying more fuel-efficient aircraft. This will help us to increase productivity and to reduce costs while improving the quality of our services to customers. We continue to enhance our high standards of customer service and are proud of the quality, dedication and professionalism of our staff.

“The new management team is acting decisively to make Cathay Pacific and Cathay Dragon better airlines and stronger businesses, delivering more to customers with improved productivity. We are confident that we are on the right track to achieve strong and sustainable long-term performance, with a leaner, more competitive business, while enhancing the brand and the quality of services that our customers deserve and expect. These services are always delivered by our people, who remain dedicated in these volatile times. I would like to thank them for their hard work and commitment.

In addition to decreased yields, the airline largely attributes their losses to increased fuel costs:

Total fuel costs for Cathay Pacific and Cathay Dragon (before the effect of fuel hedging) increased by HK$2,871 million (or 33.4%) compared with the first half of 2016, reflecting a 31.5% increase in average fuel prices and a 1.6% increase in consumption.  Fuel is the Group’s most significant cost, accounting for 30.4% of total operating costs in the first half of 2017 (compared to 29.1% in the same period in 2016). Fuel hedging losses were reduced.  After taking them into account, fuel costs increased by HK$1,678 million (or 12.7%) compared with the first half of 2016.

There was a 2.8% increase in non-fuel costs per available tonne kilometre. Excluding fuel and one-off items, the increase was 0.5%. Cost savings offset higher aircraft maintenance, depreciation and finance costs.

There are a few other things they blame for the losses:

Several special factors affected the results in the first half of 2017. In March, the European Commission issued a decision finding that a number of international air cargo carriers, including Cathay Pacific, had agreed to cargo surcharge levels prior to 2007 and that such agreements infringed European competition law and imposed a fine of Euros 57.12 million (equivalent to approximately HK$498 million) on Cathay Pacific. Although an application has been made to the General Court of the European Union to annul the decision which led to the fine, the full amount of the fine has been recognised.

In March, Air China announced the completion of the issue of 1.44 billion A shares.  As a result, Cathay Pacific’s shareholding in Air China was diluted from 20.13% to 18.13% and a gain of HK$244 million was recognised on the deemed partial disposal.  In April, Cathay Pacific disposed of its entire interest in Travelsky Technology Limited at a profit of HK$586 million. In the first half of 2017, Cathay Pacific commenced a three-year corporate transformation programme intended to address the fundamental challenges that it is facing in the current airline industry environment. In May, as part of this programme, we announced a reorganisation of our head office. The amount of the associated redundancy costs (HK$224 million) has been recognised in staff expenses.

Bottom line

While Cathay Pacific is cutting some jobs and making fairly minor changes, I suspect we’ll soon see a more radical transformation, because it’s clear their current strategy isn’t working very well. While I don’t think they’ll go as far as Malaysia Airlines has in transforming, clearly there’s a lot more work to be done on the road to profitability.

Conversations (31)
The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.
Comment as a member

Membership is free and takes no more information than commenting as a guest. Earn status points for good contributions, and see fewer ads as your status grows.

Type your response here.

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Anyone can comment, and your email address will not be published. Register to save your unique username and earn special OMAAT reputation perks!

  1. Loading comments…
Recent Comments
The latest from the OMAAT community.

The comments on this page have not been provided, reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by any advertiser, and it is not an advertiser's responsibility to ensure posts and/or questions are answered.

Joel Guest

Cry me a river. Perhaps they shouldn't charge $600 one way for Chiang Mai to Hong Kong.

0
‼ 0
O'Reilly Guest

With respect to Dr Robinson comments, to understand CX have view the lens of the parent company history. Swire been trading in China for the last 250 years, they survived the boxer revolution , Kai Tak densitys, WW2 Japanese occupation , Mao's communist China to the present China. Swire along with Jardine from Scotland where the second European traders after Marco Polo. So they know how to play the geopolitical game, they wrote the book how to do business in Indo China. There be no selling out to any Chinese carrier while. Sir Adrian is still alive. The best scernio CX returns to profit with equipment asset rationalization or shrink back to the 1970's position where served intra Asia and Australia. What Swire focus on is the asset debit ratio, this a company that detest high debit.Sir Adrian vision of a airline is for elite travelers they never want backpackers or Cheap shakers, don't expect ever to see low fares comparable to other carriers.

0
‼ 0
Charles Macgan Guest

How is adding more seats in economy going to help CX? Customers are already abandoning the carrier in droves, making the seat space tighter is just going to push them out faster. Maybe they should going the other direction and install a 2-3-2 configuration. Now that would be a competitive advantage.

0
‼ 0
Dr Michael S Robertson New Member

Further to comments from O'Reilly and ADP, I believe Sir Adrian will lose interest soon and sell out to a Chinese airline who will happily take the landing spots on offer and won't maintain the same brand positioning. HK will soon be a second rate Chinese city and it will all be a sad but faint memory.

0
‼ 0
Marco Guest

Yes, I too used to fly CX loyally in the '00s between the States and southeast Asia. But a combination of product/schedule degradations (including cabin furnishing fiascos in both Coach and Business) coupled with substantial fare increases changed the equation. Add to that a mileage program with difficult redemptions and a show-stopping hard expiration of miles, and at some point I was simply done with them. Now, I'd only fly them opportunistically based on unique schedules or as part of a deeply discounted consolidator fare involving other airlines. Better to either have a direct flight with a Stateside carrier, or a midway stopover with a crew that is genuinely respectful at virtually every turn, such as on ANA or EVA Air.

0
‼ 0

Save posts to read later

Saving posts is a member feature. Become an OMAAT member to build a reading list you can come back to from any device.

Become a member
Meet Ben Schlappig, OMAAT Founder
5,883,136 Miles Traveled

43,914,800 Words Written

47,187 Posts Published