Etihad Posts $1.5 Billion Loss, Considers Cancelling 777X Orders

Last week Ben wrote about the sad decline of Etihad Airways. This exact topic has been on my list of topics to write about since Day 1 of joining the team, but I couldn’t have said it better myself. When they released their A380 product and their new ‘Flying Reimagined’ marketing campaign, they were absolute game changers.

Now, I know they are still around but have no real desire to fly them again, especially when I can chase products like QSuites.

I would be amazed if Etihad does not eventually merge with Emirates.

Well the news for Etihad continues to worsen.

Huge Annual Loss

Etihad has released their most recent annual reports and has recorded a loss of 1.5 billion USD in 2017. Although the loss is lower than the 2 billion USD loss they recorded in 2016, for any airline, this is a huge disappointment.

Etihad blames this loss on:

  • rising fuel costs (which all airlines are suffering from, though many other airlines do well in spite of that);
  • the costs of implementing its ambitious cost-cutting program; and
  • the disastrous performance of its Etihad Airways Partners investments, especially airberlin and Alitalia

You may recall that Qantas posted an enormous loss back in 2014, and then embarked on a major cost-cutting and restructuring exercise. Fortunately for them, this worked spectacularly well and the airline is now extremely profitable, and bold CEO Alan Joyce is very respected in the airline industry. While I have high hopes for Etihad’s cost cutting initiatives, they are far more severe than Qantas’ ever were, and may actively turn customers away from choosing them as a premium airline.

Interestingly passenger numbers did not increase at all, and average load factors were only 78.5%. As a guide, of those airline who publish annual load factors, all of the top 30 airlines had load factors of over 83%.

At least if the current loss has reduced by 25%, it shows that the plan is working, but they still have a long way to go to return to profitability, and I’m not sure how many more cuts their customers can endure before they start to look elsewhere. Etihad managed to cut costs by 7.3% while its revenue rose by less than 2%.

I’ll be very interested to see if their load factors have dropped further next year, though chances are that they’re addressing that by cutting some capacity.

There’s not much I can say about Etihad Airways Partners that hasn’t already been said. Etihad wasted hundreds of millions of dollars investing in unprofitable airlines that continue to be unprofitable, causing Etihad to lose most, if not all of their investments.

Boeing 777X Orders

While Emirates and Qatar have been rapidly expanding and adding new destinations, Etihad has not. I’ve realised I’ve hardly seen a new Etihad destination in years, while they’ve continued to cut routes and reduce frequencies. They have only received a handful of new aircraft over the past 12 months, and these have been mostly to replace retired aircraft, rather than growing their fleet.

Etihad is a launch customer of the long-awaited Boeing 777X model, which will eventually replace the very popular Boeing 777-300 model. Etihad has 25 777X aircraft on order, which have a list price of $426 million each.

Qatar and Emirates are also launch customers of this model.

Reuters is now reporting that Etihad is considering cancelling, or deferring some, or all of their 777X orders. Etihad has 160 aircraft on order (both Airbus and Boeing) worth tens of billions of dollars, but given their financial troubles you have to wonder when they will take any of these.

Bottom line

Deferring aircraft orders when an airline is under intense financial strain is a sensible option. Qantas deferred their 787 orders for years, as Alan Joyce remained firm that the airline would not spend money on new long-haul aircraft until the airline returned to profitability.

This was a prudent decision and worked well, and Qantas is now making record profits.

A big difference between Qantas and Etihad’s turnaround strategies, is that Qantas only made very minimal cuts to the customer experience, that were hardly noticed by passengers and turned few away. The cost cutting at Etihad has been so severe already that it is tarnishing their good name and reputation so much, that they may struggle to retain their customer base.

Do you still consider Etihad an aspirational airline?

Conversations (34)
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.

platy Guest

@ Dennis "I don’t think you really understand what it takes to deliver what you expect". Incorrect. Yes, I do know exactly what it takes to deliver. I have worked as a writer and editor. "the Sydney Morning Herald...gets people to pay money to read articles" Factually incorrect. The SMH (Fairfax) has a generous amount of online content which is free. Fees kick in after a certain amount of articles read per month. In many case, their content may not even be sourced in house (e.g. content reproduced and rewritten from other sources). The Guardian's content is entirely free and offers well researched material. "I’d like to see you live by example and spend your time researching so deeply that it will take you a couple of days to assemble an article" Actually it can be done far more quickly and efficiently than you propose, especially if you are writing to a narrow field of expertise (as is supposedly the case herein). I do this myself professionally and been repeatedly re-engaged as a consultant to do just that. "he’s not getting paid thousands per article, like professional journalists/contributors can." I'll take a wager that you don't have any idea what the rate of pay is for an article on this blog so your argument is based on presumption. In any case, professional Journos are probably earning far less than you imply. Whatever their rate of pay, they still have to attempt to meet certain standards, which include not making statements, which are unsubstantiated or potentially libellous. "it’s a great website that gives excellent information on our favourite topic." Absolutely. And I wasn't suggesting otherwise. So don't mount a counter argument against something I haven't claimed. We agree on that point. Perhaps two articles attempting to trash Etihad in a matter of days is editorially misguided? "I’d like to see you live by example and spend your time researching so deeply that it will take you a couple of days to assemble an article, while trying to present information for readers and earn some money too!" I can and I do. For corporate gigs with billions of dollars of funding on the line. It shouldn't take a couple of days to research the substance of the scope of the article under discussion especially for someone claiming an extensive experience and expertise. "Don’t forget you are reading this with no financial input." An article on this blog will do no favours for its owners if a libel case is invoked by careless content. Surely you would agree that you can't go about publishing statements without fact or foundation? Would you publish a statement that QF is cancelling flights because of poor loadings without a source or source document to back up your claim? "As for QF’s call wait times, I agree with you there." So then you agree that the article was factually incorrect in making the claim that the cost cutting at QF has had no impact on customers?! Do you think that the article's core argument is correct (Etihad bad, QF good), well presented (factually backed up) / well argued, unbiased (when the author starts off by saying they'll never fly an airline again?!). "But having lived in the US for over a year now, this is normal for any American company, so QF probably followed their model" We're talking about an airline not any American company. Whereas I don't I've in the US, I do ring a range of airlines fairly regularly. My calls are answered within minutes by American Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Singapore Airlines, Avianca, Virgin Australia, United, Hawaiian, etc. The two outliers in my recent experience are QF and Air New Zealand.

0
‼ 0
Dennis Gold

@platy, give @james a break here. I don't think you really understand what it takes to deliver what you expect. No disrespect to OMAAT or James here, but this is not the Sydney Morning Herald, which gets people to pay money to read articles (plus receiving considerable advertising revenue). James has to write an article almost every day which is easier said than done. And let's face it, he's not getting paid thousands per article, like professional journalists/contributors can. At the end of the day, it's a great website that gives excellent information on our favourite topic. I'd like to see you live by example and spend your time researching so deeply that it will take you a couple of days to assemble an article, while trying to present information for readers and earn some money too! I know this because I am also a contributing writer and have written for airline blogs/websites in the past. Don't forget you are reading this with no financial input. As for QF's call wait times, I agree with you there. But having lived in the US for over a year now, this is normal for any American company, so QF probably followed their model.

0
‼ 0
Paolo Diamond

In addition to @Paul’s comments on the QF comparison: The Qantas turnaround is not based on the profitability of the international division ( all they have done there is minimise the ( previously astronomical) losses. The real money for QF comes from the ‘rivers of gold’ domestic routes ( MEL-SYD-BNE), among the busiest sectors in the world; and from the frequent flyer program. Etihad has neither.

0
‼ 0
flyingdr Guest

I just flew EY SYD-ATH. Outstanding service, great sophisticated hard product, makes Emirates look clownish by comparison with their 2-3-2 non-flat seats and all that bling. I think EY is not charging enough for J, at least ex-Aus. Full J on both flights but cheaper by thousands than QF or EK.

0
‼ 0
platy Guest

James, seriously, if you can't muster an analysis which does anything more than skim the surface, with ridiculously unsubstantiated statements, leave the travel writing to a real journalist or stick to the usual trite reviews, etc. You are WAY OUT OUT OF YOUR DEPTH FELLA!!! Apart from just plain bad writing, you'll end up getting your employer a law suit if you're not careful. One of your previous articles potentially defamatory about QF consolidating flights out of CBR due to low loadings. Did that get pulled?! Your statement "Qantas only made very minimal cuts to the customer experience, that were hardly noticed by passengers and turned few away" is absolute nonsense. For example, QF cut 250 call centre staff (ironically their salaries equaling the bonus of your hero, Joyce): call wait times now can approach the hour mark - no serious business makes its customers wait that long to make a sale. I ring many airlines and QF is the worst for call wait times. The supposed call back option not always offered. Have you read the feedback on the SIN lounge situation on AusBT? How do you expect QF to compete with SQ with substandard premium product, lack of daytime flights back to Australia, an overcrowded lounge, a fraction of the flight schedule, etc., and a patch up piecemeal of codeshares? Have you considered the insanity of Joyce promoting a capacity war with VA? That was plain idiocy! You have NO DATA to make your claims about no pax loss to QF. if you have, publish the data!!! That would be a GREAT STORY!!! Even QF probably doesn't account for pax loss - it's customer service feedback process simply won't be sampling lost pax. As for EY...stating that you have "no desire to fly them again" is just plain stupid. So you're justifying your article on a personal / emotional position and denying yourself direct experience? As a travel writer?! Nuts. I recently flew SYD-AUH and AUH-CDG in F on AA points and there was nothing wrong the service or hard product. It was the equal of any in the market. Excellent and enjoyable. You really think that Joyce is doing good job at QF? Have you factored in the blatant contradiction in your statements - no new aircraft, but it's ok for JQ to have new aircraft and short older A330s to QF?! The misadventures in Asia with JQ? The huge fleet renewal problem he has created? The risk of the EK agreement falling over? Has EY written off its misadventures - to what extent to they account for the supposed losses? Where's the analyses of that? Do have any idea about the relative wealth and relationship between the emirates of Abu Dhabi and Dubai? Have you seen the progress to the new airport at AUH? Your ignorance is astounding! Like I said, you are way out of your depth.

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