1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Economy

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by TigerVols, May 14, 2020.

  1. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    Fuel? You want the planes to have fuel now? Ha! As if the entire global economy isn’t a chimera built on lies and unicorn wishes. Nobody has really been able to afford a tank of fuel since we went off the gold standard. Only when every last plane goes nose down into a box canyon can we begin to readjust and unwind this irrational expectation everyone who makes less than me has that they should live under a roof supported by four walls and not dine on the maggots crawling out of their open sores! Fools! If only they would listen.
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2023
    2muchcoffeeman likes this.
  2. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    At the risk of triggering Ragu, I'd put at least some part of it on Wall Street's becoming fixated on meeting the profit predictions for the next quarter, perhaps two, to the detriment of long term strategic planning and investing in R&D. Between top executive's concern with their bonus and stock options and the mantra of "we owe it to our stockholders to maximize profits" (which I can't help but suspect is at least in part a pious justification for focusing on their own personal bonus, stock options, and buying back stock which helps both) , investment in that aspect of running a business has become far less emphasized than in the past.

    Note that I responded to this before seeing Ragu's posts further down this page from Azrael's quote and that I wasn't thinking about SWA. I understand that funds are spent on research without any guarantee of ROI, but there are many cases of unexpected discoveries catching lightning in a bottle to a company's benefit and profit. Cutting that budget helps the bottom line in the short term but makes developing such new products and techniques much less likely to lift a company's future prospects.
     
  3. LanceyHoward

    LanceyHoward Well-Known Member

    Southwest Airlines reported 13.7 billion dollars in cash at the end of Q3. They can come up with a billion for a new computer system.

    Airline earnings have fluctuated a lot over the last couple years due to the pandemic and the government subsidies that airlines such as Southwest received. But in the years before the pandemic Southwest was earning over two billion dollars a year. In 2019 Southwest earned 2,3 billion after tax and the company decided to buyback two billion dollars of shares.

    As long as country has publically held companies there will be pressures on management to increase earnings. I think what happened at Southwest is that they were holding their systems together with shoestrings. Since the systems worked the company kept procrastinating on upgrading systems and instead allocated capital in ways that more visibly and immediately increased earnings per share. But what happens is that if the company keeps growing operations become more complex and the shoestrings on the system break. That is what happened at SouthWest. t will not be the first or last time that occurs.
     
  4. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    Its net cash position is what matters, not cash on hand. You have to balance that cash with its liabilities, which are significant, and an environment in which the funding costs on its debt that it is going to need to roll over are rising. I'm not going to look, because it's not even a worthwhile discussion, but they are likely staring at having to refinance a significant amount of debt in the next year or so and are staring at funding costs that have the potential to cripple the company. So even its net leverage position is likely in jeopardy.

    Even if that wasn't the case, what it can and can't "afford," isn't the point. If it could "afford" to buy a bitcoin mining operation or a chain of newpspapers that loses money, the question would still be whether that makes sense.

    The airline business has been a crummy way to try to make money, and Southwest in particular had hit a wall in terms of its business model giving the explosive growth the company had once seen. It's a company that earns a fraction of what it was earning a decade ago. Which is likely why the company has been focused on controlling costs more than ever.
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2023
  5. goalmouth

    goalmouth Well-Known Member

    Southwest's computer problems align with Boeing's 737 Max catastrophe. That's what happens when Big Aviation (and other business) is allowed to essentially self-regulate.
     
  6. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    Yeah, but the bottom line is that SWA's business model requires precise scheduling of planes and aircrew to maximize time that the planes are in the air and moving their customers. There are multiple ways to keep track of the location and availability of both planes and employees, and SW has not bought into any of them. The fact that their aircrew was calling in to give their location and availability and to get direction on where and when the company wanted them and spending as much as six to eight hours on the phone holding says that these systems have been neglected severely.

    You want to talk about cash on hand versus liabilities? How much money in making their customers whole and future ticket sales did that incident cost them in a day?
     
  7. The Big Ragu

    The Big Ragu Moderator Staff Member

    No, I don't want to talk about their cash on hand versus their liabilities. Somebody else chimed in to say what they could "afford" based on a cash on hand position. I would never have come up with something like that, and I was just pointing out that nobody prudent (even their crummy management) makes spending decisions that way. And even if they had a big net cash position (which they don't, especially when you take into account their rising funding costs), it still has zero to do with the best use for any cash they might have.

    You are muddling things. The cost of their fiasco has nothing to do with that.

    If you want to argue that they would have been better off using a billion dollars of the debt the company has accumulated beefing up their systems, it's a conversation you should have with the actual owners of that company. They are likely very unhappy about a lot of things with regard to how that company has been managed. ... but honestly I doubt many people who actually have had equity in that company (as opposed to people on a message board who don't) are questioning that they were profiting way more from the financial engineering of buying back stock than they would have from spending a billion dollars on an operation that not only hasn't been growing, but is a shell of what it was a decade ago in terms of profitability.

    The bottom line just might be that Southwest Airlines isn't a viable business, the way you are imagining it. It needs to contain costs to exist, in a way that may be incompabile with not having blowups like this whenever there is a weather event or some other thing that goes wrong.
     
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2023
  8. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    I’ll make sure to bring it up next time we play racquetball at the club. Meantime, is it still OK if people say things on a message board?
     
    2muchcoffeeman and sgreenwell like this.
  9. doctorquant

    doctorquant Well-Known Member

    Sigh.
     
    Azrael likes this.
  10. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    It's OK.
     
  11. dixiehack

    dixiehack Well-Known Member

    We're so sorry Uncle DocQuant
    But the kettle's on the boil
    And we're so easily called away
     
  12. LanceyHoward

    LanceyHoward Well-Known Member

    Southwest has a cash position of 13.7 billion dollars. Current liabilities are 10 billion but about half of that is the liability generated from their frequent flyer program. Unless it violates debt covenants it should have the ability to draw down at least some of that cash. I don't think it is in risk of violating covenant because it just restarted its dividend that they suspended for the pandemic (the government required them to suspend the dividend to receive pandemic aid.)

    Airlines have been battered by the pandemic and Southwest hs not completely recovered. They have about three billion dollars of debt due in 2025 that carries an average interest rate of about 3.25%. If they refinance at 9.25% annually in 2025 that would only cost about 200 million a year against a when they currently are booked a billion dollars of earnings pretax through the first three quarters of 2022.

    I understand you point about cheap money causing corporations to make crazy decisions and pay their dividend with additional debt. GE may be the most prominent example. And perhaps Southwest has reached a stage where it will no longer grow rapidly. But I think they are still a solid company generating enough of a profit to reinvest in their business and roll over their debt.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page