Airline Finance PDF

Airline Finance
Third Edition
PETER S. MORRELL
Cranfield University, UK
ASHGATE
Contents
Airline Finance
vi
Appendix 5.1 Tenn Loan Repayment, Book Profit and Manufacturers'
Pre-payments
109
Equity
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
113
113
1I5
117
119
124
126
Finance
Share Issues
Equity Finance for Start-up Airline
Foreign Ownership Limits
Share Trading and Stock Market Listings
Initial Public Offering (IPO)
Mergers and Cross-Investment
7 Airline Privatisation
7.1
Full Privatisation through Flotation - British Airways
7.2
Full Privatisation through Trade Sale and Flotation - Qantas
7.3
Gradual Privatisation - Lufthansa
7.4
Partial Privatisation - Kenya Airways
7.5
Full Privatisation and Trade Sale - Iberia
7.6
Gradual Privatisation and Acquisition - Air France
7.7
The Results so Far
129
131
135
137
139
142
142
145
8 Airline Financial Planning and Appraisal

8.1
Budget Preparation and Control
8.2
Working Capital Management
8.3
Financial Planning
8.4
Start-up Airline Business Plan
151
151
156
160
171
9 Risk Management: Foreign Currency and Fuel Price

9.1
Exchange Rate Volatility
9.2
Airline Trading Exposure to Currency Movements
9.3
Airline Balance Sheet Exposure to Currency Movements
9.4
Airline Foreign Exchange Risk Management
9.5
Fuel Price Exposure
175
175
178
183
184
189
10 Aircraft Leasing
10.1 Finance Lease
10.2 Operating Lease
10.3 Japanese Operating Lease (JOL)
lOA Wet Lease
10.5 Sale and Lcaseback
Appendix 10.1 Lease Rental Calculations
Appendix 10.2 Lease vs Buy Decision
195
197
200
203
204
204
206
207
11 Aircraft Securitisation
11.1 Equipment Trust Certificates
11.2 ALPS 92-1 Securitisation
211
212
213
215
11.4
11.5
11.6
11.7
Airplanes 96 Securitisation
ALPS 96-1 Securitisation
More Recent Securitisations (2005/2006)
Conclusions
vii
215
216
217
217
12 Airline Bankruptcy
12.1 North America
12.2 Latin America
12.3 Europe
12.4 Australasia
12.5 Summary
219
219
223
224
226
227
13 Industry Financial Prospects

13.1 World Airline Traffic and Financial Forecasts
13.2 World Airline Capital Expenditure Projections
13.3 World Airline Financial Requirement Forecasts
229
229
231
232
Bibliography
Glossary oj Terms
Index
235
239
251
List of Figures
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
l.l
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
Figure 2.1
List of Tables
ICAO scheduled airline traffic growth vs world GDP growth

ICAO scheduled airline financial results
ICAO scheduled airline financial results as per cent revenues
Operating result as per cent revenues by region of airline
NetJoperating margins by type of carrier (average of
2003/2004/2005)
Passenger load factor trends by major world region
Airline return on invested capital (ROIC)
Actual and break even load factors for ICAO scheduled airlines
World airline stock index vs top share indices, 1995-2006
13
Aircraft lease classification guidelines
55
88
89
Table J.l
Table 2.1
Table 2.2
Table 2.3
Table 2.4
Table 2.5
Table 2.6
Table 2.7
Table 2.8
Table 2.9
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Income statement valuation ratios for selected airlines by region

Balance sheet valuation ratios for selected airlines by region
Figure 6.1
Ryanair (Dublin) vs Nasdaq (ADR) share price
120
Figure 7.1
Figure 7.2
Figure 7.3
Figure 7.4
Figure 7.5
British Airways' share price trend vs UK market

Qantas Airways' share price trend vs Australian market
Lufthansa share price trend vs the German market
Air France share price trend vs the French market
Air France-KLM post merger interim structure
137
139
140
145
146
Figure 8.1
NPV vs discount rate: A330-300 vs B777-200
170
Figure 9.1
Figure 9.2
Figure 9.3
Key currency exchange rates vs US dollar, 1983-2005
Selected Asian exchange rates vs US dollar, 1997/1998
Cost of hedging vs eventual spot rate
179
184
189
Figure 10.1 Number of airlines owning and leasing aircraft
]98
Figure 11.1 Aircraft financing spectrum
214
World airline productivity
Table 2.10
Table 2.11
Table 2.12
Table 2.13
Table 2.14
Table 2.15
Table 2.16
Table 2.17
Table 2.18
Table 2.19
Table 2.20
British Airways' Group consolidated income account

British Airways' operating accounts
British Airways' turnover/profit by area of sales
American Airlines' consolidated statement of operation
Lufthansa Group consolidated income statement
British Airways' Group balance sheet
British Airways' Group non-current assets

Airline depreciation example
Depreciation rate comparison for 2005/2006:
ShortJmedium-haul aircraft
British Airways' Group current assets
British Airways' Group current liabilities

British Airways' Group non-current liabilities
British Airways' Group capital and reserves
Balance sheet comparison: Assets, 2005/2006
Balance sheet comparison: Liabilities, 2005/2006
British Airways' group cash flow statement
Summary cash flow statement comparison, 2005/2006
Value added statement for British Airways Group
Cash value added statement for British Airways Group
AAdvantage award distribution in 2005
Table 3.1
Table 3.2
Table 3.3
Table 3.4
Table 3.5
Table 3.6
Table 3.7
Table 3.8
Table 3.9
Table 3.10
Table 3.11
Table 3.12
Table 3.13
Table 3.14
Table 3.15
Table 3.16
British Airways Group Operating ratio/margin

British Airways Group - Net profit margin
Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)
Return on Equity (RoE)
British Airways Group Interest cover
British Airways Group - Debt/equity ratio
Effect of gearing on ratios
British Airways Group - Current ratio
British Airways Group Quick ratio
British Airways Group - Dividend cover
British Airways Group Market capitalisation
British Airways Group - Earnings per share (BPS)
British Airways Group Price/earnings ratio
British Airways Group - Nct asset value per share
British Airways Group Equity valuefEBITDAR
Key financial ratios for major airlines, 2004/2005
11
22
23
23
24
25
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
39
40
41
43
44
45
52
58
59
60
61
62
62
64
65
66
66
67
67
68
69
69
72
Airline Finance
Table 4.1
British Airways' valuation criteria
Table 4.2
Selected airline debt ratings, June 2001 and December 2004
List o/Tables
89
90
Table 9.7
Table 9.8
Scheduled world airlines balance sheet long-term financing

Hypothetical example of manufacturer's support for aircraft
finance
Table 5.3
Top 10 operating lessors and their fleets - end 2005
Table 5A
Examples of European Investment Bank lending to airlines
Table 5.1
Table 5.2
Table 6.1
Table 6.2
Table 63
Table 6.4
Table 6.5
Table 6.6
Table 6.7
Table 6.8
Venture capital interests in LCC/start-up airlines, early 2000s

International passenger airlines with stock market listings
Major world stock indices
AMEXAiriine Index (XAL), July 2006
Constituent airlines of the MSCI world airline index (July 2006)
British Airways' Performance Share Plan comparator airlines
Airline IPOs taking place between 2000 and 2006
Major airline cross-border investments in other airlines
(June 2006)
94
102
108
109
118
122
123
124
125
125
127
129
Table 7.2
Table 73
Table 7.4
Table 7.5
Table 7.6
Table 7.7
Table 7.8
Table 7.9
Government share holdings (per cent) in top 20 international
airlines, 2005
British Airways' and Laker Airways' liabilities
British Airways' privatisation factsheet (1987)
Initial post-privatisation British Airways share distribution
Qantas Airways' post-offer share distribution
Qantas Airways' privatisation factsheet (1995)
Lufthansa shareholding - 1996 and 1997
Kenya Airways' pre-privatisation financial data
Kenya Airways' post-privatisation results
132
134
135
136
138
138
141
142
143
Table 8.1
Table 8.2
Table 83
Table 8A
Table 8.5
Table 8.6
Table 8.7
Table 8.8
Route profitability analysis

Typical airline management accounts - Budget 2006
Example of airline cash budget
Aircraft investment appraisal cash flow forecasts (US$ million)
Example of accounting rate ofretum
Example of payback period
Financial evaluation of alternatives
Start-up airline business plan
155
156
157
163
164
165
169
172
Table 9.1
Table 9.2
Table 93
Table 9A
Effect of exchange rate depreciation on profits of exporter airline 181
Effect of exchange rate depreciation on profits of importer airline 182
SAS revenue and cost currency breakdown in 2005 (per cent)

182
Impact of currency changes on Qantas after-tax profit for
1995/1996
183
Table 9.5
Table 9.6
Asian airline US dollar mismatch

Fuel surcharges announced by major airlines in 2004
184
191
Table 7.1
Percentage of 2004 fuel needs hedged at 31 December 2003:
US m:ijors
FY2004/2005 fuel needs hedged at YE2003/2004:

Largest non-US carriers
Table 10.1
Leased aircraft shares by region for selected airlines
Table 10.2
Typical operating lease terms
Table
Table
Table
Table
11.1
11.2
113
11.4
xi
194
195
199
204
ALPS 92-1 aircraft portfolio

ALPS 92-1 bond amounts and interest rates
Airplanes securitisation - Aircraft numbers and values
Airplanes securitisation - Bond amounts and interest rates
2]6
216
217
218
Key US airline Chapter 11 entry and exit
222
Table 13.1
World air traffic and GDP forecasts
Table 13.2
Air traffic forecasts by region: Airbus vs Boeing
Table 133
lATA shortlmediumterm forecasts
Table 13.4
Commercial jet aircraft delivery/retirement forecasts
Table 13.5
Boeing airplane demand by region (2004-2023)
232
232
233
234
235
Table 12.1
Preface
The purpose of the book is to provide, as far as possible, a broad understanding of

all areas of airline finance. To do this, it has been necessary to sacrifice some detail,
but sometimes accountants and industry specialists will be directed to other texts
to explore more complex topics further. In many cases, however, these other texts
do not
at least in an air transport industry context. This significant gap, at
least at the level of the non-specialist, is the main reason for this book. While there
are obviously numerous financial management, corporate finance and related texts
available, none of these provide explanations, as this book does, for some of the
ofthe airline industry (for example, the accounting treatment of frequent flyer
programmes or the various aircraft leasing options available). Furthermore, none of
them provide worked examples based solely on the air transport industry.
It is hoped that each area of airline financial management will be discussed in
sufficient depth to satisfy both those in the industry without any financial background,
and newcomers to the industry perhaps with some knowledge of finance. No prior
knowledge is required of, for example, accounting, economics or statistics to gain
considerable benefit from the book. In a few cases, notably in the chapters on
investment appraisal and aircraft leasing, mathematical formulae have been used,
but in such cases they are based on relatively simple compound interest concepts,
and generally confined to a separate appendix at the end of the chapter.
The opening chapter describes the financial trends for the airline industry as a
whole, with developments for the major regions and airlines also contrasted. This
is followed by a step by step analysis of an airline's financial statements. British
Airways has been chosen as an example because of the way it presents its published
financial statements with sufficient clarity and detail for the reader to obtain a good
understanding. Other airlines' accounts are also introduced to contrast different
approaches, especially the AMR Corporation (the parent of American Airlines) and
in the following chapter to compare financial performance and ratios.
The valuation of an airline as a whole, its route rights and airport take-off and
landing slots are dealt with next, covering the techniques applied both in equity
IPOs (Chapter 6) and airline privatisation (Chapter 7). First sources of finance are
discussed and the institutions that specialise in airline financing. This is followed
by a new chapter on equity finance that looks at way start-up airlines are financed.
The application of some the key techniques in financial analysis are then explained
and applied to the airline industry, supported by practical examples faced by airline
planners. The role played by hedging and derivatives in the airline industry is
introduced in the next chapter, again supported by actual airline examples. Fuel price
hedging has been expanded in this third edition, both because of its close relationship
with currency hedging, also because of its more widespread use by airlines and
greater relevance. Leasing is examined in some detail, and aircraft securitisation is
explained, as well as a new chapter on airline bankruptcy before concluding with
xiv
Airline Finance
an evaluation of the financial prospects of the industry. Wherever possible, the

links between the various elements of airline finance will be highlighted, although
the textbook nature of the book will ensure that each chapter and tODic could be
consulted separately.
Finally, it would be impossible to mention all those who have contributed,
knowingly or otherwise, to the book. Over the past years, MSc students ofair transport
management at Cranfield University have made numerous valuable comments,
pointed out errors, and generally provided the motivation for the development of
much ofthe material presented here. Over the same period, airline industry executives
attending one week airline finance short courses at Cranfield University have done
the same, albeit from a different perspective. Special thanks must also be extended
to senior airline industry experts who have given up their precious time to contribute
to those courses (and my understanding of the industry), in particular more recently:
Ian Milne of British Airways; Alan Robinson ofALM; John Ludden and colleagues
from GECAS; Kevin Jones of ECGD; Alan Meldrum and colleagues from KPMG,
and Andrew Lobbenberg, a former colleague now with ABN Amro.
I am also grateful to all my colleagues in the Department of Air Transport at
Cranfield's College of Aeronautics for their help in discussing both industry trends
and the more specific concepts included in this book.
Chapter]
Industry Financial Performance
1.1
World Airline Financial Results
The airline industry has over the years been buffeted by both economic cycles and
threats from terrorism and epidemics. Following seven years of good profitability
that stemmed from a relatively long world economic upswing between 1994 and
2000, it suffered a severe setback in the 2000s with the post 'year 2000' downturn
and the aftermath of 9111. Cumulative net losses of the world's scheduled airlines
amounted to US$20.3 billion between 1990 and 1993, but this was followed by
almost $40 billion in net profits between 1995 and 2000. This highlights the cyclical
nature ofthe industry, and the need to treat with caution comments after the Gulf War
recession and 9111 about the continued ability of the industry to finance expansion.
Since the end of the early 1990s recession, the airlines' balance sheets have been
considerably strengthened, even allowing for the replacement of large numbers of
noisier aircraft that did not meet the current Chapter 3 standards. ICAO figures show
the debt/equity ratio for the world's scheduled airlines declining from a high of
2.90: I at the end of 1993 to 1.42:1 at the end ofl999. This had deteriorated to 2.46:1
in 2003, before improving somewhat to 2.41: 1 in 2004. 1
Clouds appeared on the horizon in 1999, with the price ofjet fuel jumping from
40 cents per US gallon a barrel to 75 cents in January 2000. This led to a drop
in operating profits, although net profits were maintained largely due to the sale
of aircraft and non-core investments such as holdings in IT and communications
companies. The dollar price of fuel in 200 I was still well below its high in 1981.
At that time fuel expenses rose to just under 30 per cent of total airline operating
expenses. In 2000, they were still only 12 per cent of the total, even after recent
sharp increases. This has been helped by substantial advances in fuel efficiency.
For example, British Airways has reduced its average fuel consumption in terms of
grams per revenue tonne-km from around 440 in 199011991 to 345 in 1999/2000
(or by an average of2.6 per cent a year), and is on track to meet its target of 306 g
in 2010. 2
As stated above, the fuel price started increasing alarmingly in early 1999; a
further advance occurred at the end ofsummer 2000 to a high of 107 cents, before the
price fell back to around 75 cents by the end of 2000. 3 The next period ofinstability
was in 2004, when prices ranged from a low of 92 to a high of 157 cents per US
leAO: Tables A-4 from Financial data.
2 British Airways, (2000), Social and Environmental Report 2000.
3 Lufthansa Cargo Website, (200 I). Retrieved from www.lufthansa.com average ofspot
fuel prices for Rotterdam, Mediterranean, Far East Singapore, US Gulf and West Coast.
Airline Finance
gallon. In the following year the range rocketed up to 119-223 cents, and the 2005
high of 223 cents was again reached in August 2006.
Preliminary estimates for 2005 suggest that the recovery is continuing, and in
2006 even some of the ailing US legacy carriers reported profits. However, the
cyclical pattern looks like recurring once higher oil prices start to affect consumer
and business spending. Their impact on airlines in 2005-2006 could be mitigated by
passing on some of fuel cost increases to consumers, against a background of strong
demand. The danger is the combined impact ofweak demand and continued high oil
prices. The other difference this time is that more airlines are privately owned, and
subsidies might be not be forthcoming. However, the re-nationalisation ofMalaysian
Airlines and Air New Zealand (see Chapter 7) suggests that air transport may still
receive special treatment.
16.0
14.0
+-1-----
12.0
1001---
B.O
~
0.0 J----___\___
it 1.
_
40
_ -III,.\-\
1\
..
15,000
20
0.0
+-1- - - - - - - \ -
10,000 41-111!13:1--
2.0
4~
L----------------------------------------i
1987 1968
t
'"
5,000
<J)
::>
Figure 1.1
ICAO scbeduled airline traffic growth vs world GDP growth

5,000
Some economists link any sudden and substantial rise in fuel prices to an economic
recession about 18 months later. This appeared to be happening in 200 I, as the downturn
in the US economy began to have a serious effect on Asian exports, especially for
countries such as Taiwan and Federation of Malaysia. The impact of declining GDP
for the major world economies such as the US, EU and Japan has in the past led to a
downturn in traffic (Figure 1.1). The first ever decline (as opposed to large reduction in
growth rate) in world air traffic growth in 1991 was due to the combined effects of the
Gulf War and the world economic recession, with asecond in 2001.
Figure 1.2 shows the cyclical nature of past financial results for the world's
scheduled airlines. As mentioned above, the impact of rising fuel prices on costs
resulted in a deterioration in operating results for 1999 and 2000, and a slowing of
the recovery in 2004/2005. Other cost items such as flight crew salaries also rose
sharply for some airlines in 2000/2001, but this has been cushioned to some extent
by lower distribution costs. The Asian financial crisis of 199711998 can be seen to
have had little effect on the fortunes of the world's airlines, but a significant impact
on a number ofAsian carriers (see Figure 1.4). The SARS health threat of2003 was
more local, affecting carriers such as Cathay Pacific most severely.
The difference between the operating and net profit is caused by net interest paid,
gains or losses on asset sales, taxes and subsidies, and provisions for restructuring.
Interest paid is the largest of these items, and this has declined in the second half
of the 1990s due to the combined effects of falling interest rates and lower debt
outstanding. Profits from asset sales also make a good contribution in some years,
generating over $2 billion in both 1998 and 2003.
-10.000
-15,000 ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1988
Figure 1.2
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
ICAO scheduled airline financial results
Subsidies approved by the European Commission for payment to just five European
airlines (Olympic Airways, TAP Air Portugal, Iberia, Air France and Aer Lingus)
between] 992 and 1997 totalled US$8.94 billion, or almost 17 per cent of the sum of
the airlines' three previous years' revenues. 4 On the basis that they were paid in equal
instalments over the 5 years, 1992-1997, this would have amounted to $1.8 billion
a year. By 2006, two of these airlines had been successfully privatised, and a third
radically transformed into a profitable airline expected to be privati sed by 2007. The
5
last two, TAP and Olympic, are still loss-making and defy efforts to privatisation.
4 Cranfield University (1997), Single Market Review, 1996: Impact on Services - Air
Transport, Kogan Page for the European Commission.
5 Unable to sell the airline, they both split offground handling services with the intention
of privatising that separately.
Airline Finance
ICAO stress that published operating and net results are susceptible to 'substantial
uncertainties'. 6 This is particularly the case with thc net results, which are the small
differences between estimates of large figures (revenues and expenses). Just under
15 per cent of revenues and expenses are estimated for non-reporting airlines.
20.000
' - 1-
12.0
10.0
-----~-.-.--
8.0
..I!:
6.0
.,'~"
4.0
p::
15,000
;j!.
.,.,
2.0
~"
0.0
10,000
1'"'"
0
5,000
'"
3
-2.0
-4.0
.a.O
III Asia/Pacific ---I

IIIEurope
f-~--------
-- ......_________--------i
. III North America :
.a.O
-5,000
-10,0
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1998 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
-10,000
Figure 1.4
SQuroe,lCAO
15,000 ,--I--------------------------------~
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
Figure 1.3
ICAO scheduled airline financial results as per cent revenues
The increased use of operating leases over the second part ofthe 1980s has tended to
switch the emphasis ofcosts from non-operating interest pn loans or finance leases to
rentals, included in operating expenses. Thus, net interest paid would have increased
further, had this trend not occurred. rCAO report that the share of aircraft rentals in
operating expenses has increased from 5.3 per cent in 1994 to 7.4 per cent in 2004,
despite the interest rate element of the rentals down.sharply over this period.
The operating margin for the world's scheduled airlines only exceeded 5 per cent
twice during the 1980s. This improved marginally to just three years in the 1990s
(Figure 1.3) and none between 1998 and 2005. Smaller airlines would require higher
margins to survive than larger, and two relatively small airlines, Gol ofBrazil and Jet
Airways of India, were amongst the top five world airlines in 2005 both with ratios
of 22 per cent. Southwest, now a US major, achieved 18 per cent in 200 but was
down to 10 per cent in 2005, and two Asian airlines, Singapore and Cathay Pacific,
have traditionally been among the leaders of the larger world airlines. 7
6
7
ICAOJournal, 18 (July/August 1996).
Pinancial Analysis: The Airline Rankings (2001), Airline Business, September, p. 62.
Operating result as per cent revenues by region of airline
Source: The World of Civil Aviation, lCAO
Figure 1.4 shows the financial margins for the world's airlines according to the region
in which they are based. It shows that the North American airlines were hardest hit
by the Gulf War recession, with a number going out of business, and the remainder
surviving by obtaining new equity and debt finance. As mentioned above, some of
the European airlines were more fortunate in obtaining govenunent support. Asian
based airlines were the least affected by the Gulf War recession, and experienced
much better margins than airlines of other regions in the early 1990s. European
airlines as a whole broke even, but the US airlines were mainly responsible for the
large world airline operating losses of the early 1990s. The US airline problems
in fact began before the Gulf War and early ] 990s recession. Their unit costs and
capacity both rose strongly in 1989 and 1990, resulting in a large loss in 1990.
A similar picture emerged after 9/11 with the North American airlines most badly
affected. The European airlines recovered fairly quickly in 2002, but were hit in
2003 by the strength of the Euro, the Iraq War and SARS on Far Eastern routes.
The recovery ofAsian economies, and the Asian airlines, from the region's 1997
financial crisis has been remarkable. The 18 members of the Association of Asia
Pacific Airlines (AAPA) reported collective after-tax profits of US$1.88 billion for
1999/2000, a four-fold increase from the previous year. This contrasted with their
combined loss ofUS$1.21 billion in ]997/1998, only two years previously.8 This
recovery stemmed principally from the bounce back ofthe economies of the region,
but also from the success of implementing cost controls (apart from fuel costs which
rose by 20.2 per cent) and a significant increase in staff productivity. Only two of
Orient Aviation, December 2000/January 2001, p. 16.
the 16 AAPA member airlines submitting data did not make an operating profit in
1999/2000: Malaysia Airlines and Royal Brunei Airlines.
In the USA, a Commission reported to the President and Congress in August 1993
on the state ofthe airline industry.9 In addition to the accumulation oflarge amounts of
debt, the Commission attributed some ofthe airlines' problems to the weak economy
and government policies. The latter had imposed large tax increases on airlines at
thc beginning of the 1990s, as well as the costs of modernisation of airports and
the air traffic control system. They recommended that the President should appoint
an airline advisory committee, and that the Department of Transportation be more
closely involved with monitoring and regulating the financial state of the industry.
They also suggested various changes to the Chapter 11 bankruptcy provisions,
which had perhaps conferred unfair cost advantages on a number of airlines which
had sought this protection from their creditors.
The Europeans reacted in a similar way, albeit a little later, to the early 1990s
problems of the industry. The European Commission appointed a committee in
1993, which included five airline representatives (out of 12) as opposed to the US
Commission's two (out of IS). In their early 1994 report, the European 'Committee
of Wise Men' made the following financial recommendations: 1O
Tolal
C<Itgo
Leisl..ll'e
Re9ional
Low cost
Independent
Flagearrier
Major
-4
.!J
10
12
p""",nt <A operating r_nue9
SO<Iroe; AIrliIIo_
Figure 1.5 Net/operating margins by type of carrier (average of

2003/2004/2005)
The EU should work towards easing the ownership and control restrictions in
bilateral agreements.
The EU should try to maintain and improve the access of European airlines
to credit insurance.
The European Commission should try to expand the number of financing
options available to airline management
OO.Or-----------------------------------------------------~1
78.0
76.0
74.0
By the time that these two reports had been digested, the industry recovery was
well under way, and little government action of this nature was required. Post 9111
in 2001, the US airline industry was again in major crisis, and this time a direct
transfusion of money was required (see Chapter 12).
Figure 1.5 gives an idea of the profitability of the various business models in
the early 2000s. The best financial results were achieved by the regional airlines,
especially those based in the US,ll and LCCs, with the leisure (mainly those European
airlines formerly called 'charters') next best. Majors are the network carriers with
annual revenues of over US$2 billion, and these were adversely affected by some
of the large US carrier losses. Flag carriers are the mainline, largely government
owned, network carriers that do not fit the other categories, while 'independents' are
airlines like Virgin Atlantic that are owned by private interests.
Airline Finance
~ 72.0
~
70.0
-1-1----------
"--V
+----
If.
68.0
+-....:;.---~~;;rl:~~----=----------
68_0
--:-""iaIPacffic (AAPA)
I _ _ _ _ _~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
64.0
...
Europe (AEA)
U~l ____
~~I
~I
1969 1990 1991
~
1992 1693 1694 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
20051
__ .J
Figure 1.6 Passenger load factor trends by major world region

9 The National Commission, To Ensure a Strong Competitive Airline Industry, (1993),
Change. Challenge and Competition, A Report to the President and Congress, August,
pp.12-18.
10 Expanding Horizons, A Report by the ComiteS des Sages for Air Transport to the
European Commission, (January 1994), pp. 29-31.
11 Many ofthese contract with US majors to operate their lower density routes on a cost
plus basis that gives them a reasonable return at much lower risk.
Source: Boeing, AEA, AAPA and Air Transport World Data
One of the key drivers in the subsequent airline recovery was load factors, although
yield and cost trends were also clearly important. Figure 1.6 shows that the US
carriers' passenger load factor was both the lowest and recovered the most. It is
noticeable that load factors have converged for the airlines ofthe three major regions,
Airline Finance
Industry Financial Peiformance
reaching an effective ceiling given the nature of the service offered and the variation
of demand by day, week and season.
Figure 1.7 shows airline return on capital over two five-year periods. It includes
30 airlines with strong coverage in each region, and together accounting for 64 per
cent of the world market. Return on capital is defined as operating profit after taxes
and adjusted for operating leases l2 expressed as a percentage of end-of year invested
capital. The decline from the first period to the second was most marked for US
airlines and to a lesser extent the European ones. However, none of the regional
groups exceeded the weighted average cost of capital (WACC), which the lATA
study assumed to be 7.5 per cent for the airline sector as a whole.
The degree to which operating costs are fixed depends on the time scale, and three
periods can be identified:
8 . 0 , - - - - - - - - - - - ...- - - - - - -
_. _. _. _. _. _. _. _. _. _. _. _~!ig!':e;I:~ve~e. ~o~.o!C.:'!'~~I_rt:'~58_etc!: ~ ..5~. _. _. _. _.
7.0
1 - 1-
--_._-
_. _. _._
a. The medium term: once the schedule has been determined, the costs associated
with operating flights are relatively fixed, i.e., aircraft related costs (capital),
flying, technical and other skilled staff and general overheads.
b. The short-term: once the airline has committed to operate the flight, all the
medium-term costs are fixed, as well as airport charges, fuel, ATC and certain
flight related variable costs (e.g., wear and tear on landing gear and tyres).
c. The very short-term: once the airline has committed to carry passengers on the
flight, additional costs become fixed, i.e., ticketing materials, in-flight food,
agent commissions and fuel required to lift extra payload.
The additional costs in point b are often described as variable costs, while the
additional costs in point c marginal or incremental costs. As long as the flight is not
traffic and revenues can be increased at very little extra cost, but once additional
flights need to be scheduled, costs start to escalate. Conversely, when there is an
unexpected reduction in demand, induced by an economic recession or an event such
as the Gulf War, airlines find it difficult to shed costs: aircraft cannot be sold, and
staff contracts are difficult or expensive to break.
Many airlines have recently been trying to reduce this fixed cost burden by
outsourcing and hiring part-time staff to meet traffic peaks. This allows them to
return some aircraft to lessees, and adapt staff to levels of demand. There may be a
trade-off in paying more for contracted out services during periods of traffic growth
(and lower profits) against lower costs and reduced losses or higher profits in periods
of recession.
6.0
5.0
?f'.
~ 4.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
Total
us
Europe
Asia
63
Figure 1.7
Airline Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)
62 ~~~--. "1 illJt:SfeaKe\Jen ut" \;;'11
Source: Value Chain Profitability, lATA Economics Briefing No. 04, June 2006
6' f------
6<)f- ..~---.
].2 Factors Affecting Financial Results

09
Airline financial results are highly sensitive to small changes in either costs or
revenues because of the historically high level of operational and gearing that has
prevailed. Once the relatively high interest charges have been covered, increases in
revenues or reductions in costs flow through to large improvements in net results,
and vice versa. Financial gearing might be expected to decline somewhat in the
future, as more assets are financed by operating leases, rather than with debt.
Airlines also display high operational gearing. This is caused by the fixed nature
of operating expenses and relatively small margins on sales; this results in large
swings in operating results, in the same way as described above for net results.
1~
58
51
56 .
55
54
53
Figure 1.8
12 Thc intcrest component of operating leases is removed from aircraft rental expenses
and added back into EBITA.
Source: leAD
Actual and break even load factors for ICAO scheduled airlines
11
Airline Finance
World airline financial results reflect the difference between the break-even and
actual load factors. The former can be described as the ratio of unit costs to unit
revenues (yields). This ratio remained surprisingly constant at around 58 per cent
over the whole of the 1980s, dipping only in 1987 to just under 57 per cent as a
result of reduced fuel costs. In the 1990s, both yields and costs declined, but the
faster reduction in the latter at least until 1998 resulted in a gradual fall in break even
load factor to just above 56 per cent in 1998. The continued decline in yields in the
face of increased fuel costs pushed up the break even point above 60 per cent in the
first half of the 2000s (Figure 1.8). The cause of declining yields was both increased
competition and overcapacity that in less regulated industries might be removed by
consolidation or market exit.
Overcapacity Can be alleviated by grounding uneconomic aircraft. Some of these
are subsequently brought back into service, but others are eventually broken up for
spares or scrapped. The number of parked aircraft doubled to around 1,000 in the
year following the GulfWar, as traffic declined and deliveries accelerated. This figure
included a certain number that are parked even in good years on a short-term basis,
either between operators or for majorre-fits. It also included some brand new aircraft
that went into storage direct from the factory. There were still 730 aircraft parked at
the end of 1995, but, of those, 45 were Stage I and 230 Stage 2 aircraft, neither of
which were likely to enter service because of the cost involved in hush-kiting them
to meet current, more stringent, noise requirements. 13 A similar pattern emerged after
9111 with 668 aircraft, or 6 per cent ofthe total lATA member airline fleet parked by
2005, down from 2002.14 The average age of parked aircraft in 2005 was 23.6 years
suggesting that many of these aircraft (such as B727s and early B737s) will never
return to airline service.
Based on an estimated 1.3 million staff employed by the world's airlines, the
average net assets per employee was US$183,000 in 2002 (see Table 1.1). This had
increased from about $50,000 per employee in 1986, or by over 8 per cent a year,
compared to the US consumer price index increase of 3 per cent a year. Between
1999 and 2002, net assets per employee advanced by 4 per cent a year versus the
general price index rise of 2.6 per cent a year. Inclusion of operating leased aircraft
(at 7.5 times annual rental expenses) would increase the rate of growth between 1995
and 1999 and reduce it slightly between 1999 and 2002. On this basis it is clear
that the industry is becoming more capital intensive although increasing less rapidly
than in the early 2000s. This is caused by a combination of reduced staff numbers,
increasingly expensive aircraft, and investment in new teclmology. It is also due to
the outsourcing of the more labour intensive airline activities, for example ground
handling and catering. Investment and outsourcing together led to strong growth in
labour productivity of4.8 per cent a year between 1985 and 2002, but only 2.7 per cent
a year from 1999 to 2002. On the other hand, fuel efficiency gains accelerated over
the latter period, as the late 1990s aircraft orders were introduced into the fleets.
10
1.3 Asset Utilisation

The airline industry appears to be a relatively labour intensive one in terms of the
share of labour costs in total operating costs. T~ese are between 25-35 per cent
for the major scheduled airlines in North America and Europe, while capital costs,
including depreciation, rentals and interest charges, amount to just over 15 per cent.
This is not surprising, since it is a service industry that requires a substantial number
of customer contact staff, particularly on the passenger side of the business.
However, the industry could also be described, at the same time, as capital
intensive. A new Boeing 747-400 aircraft cost around US$200 million in 2005, and
an increasing quantity of capital is required in the form of computers, component
test equipment, ground handling automation and in other areas.
[CAO reported net fixed assets (after depreciation) ofUS$262 billion in 2004 for
the world's scheduled airlines, compared to around $60 billion in 1985. One dollar
of fixed assets produced 2.2 revenue tonne-lans (RTKs) in 1985, but this had fallen
to 1.75 RTKs by 2002, increasing somewhat to 1.88 RTK by 2004.
13 Boeing (1996), Current Market Outlook, p. 4.
14 lATA World Air Transport Statistics, 2003 and 2006.
Table 1.1
World airline productivity
RTKs per employee (000)

RTKs per litre offuel (index*)
Aircraft hours per year
Net assets
* Index, 1965 100
Source: ICAO Cir 304 AT/127 and author using ICAO data
The average size of aircraft operated has been largely unchanged from 1985 to 2002,
both for international services (36 tonnes) and domestic and international services
combined (26 tonnes). However, the aircraft have been operated over longer sectors
such that aircraft productivity in terms ofATKs per aircraft has increased in line with
average sector length.
The average price of aircraft has increased at an average of 8 per cent a year
between 1970 and 1995, based on the 1970 price of a B737-200 of US$4 million,
and the 1995 price of the equivalent B737-500 of$28 million. This was faster than
the rate of inflation of consumer prices in industrial countries, and has provided the
stimulus for airlines to increase the utilisation of their aircraft. However, the price
of a new B737-500 only increased marginally to $30 million by 2000, reflecting
increased competition from Airbus and the slower increases in the consumer and
producer price indices. Heavier discounting of new prices were evident in the period
immediately after 9/11, with prices only starting to pick up again in 2003/2004.
Average aircraft utilisation for the world's airlines increased from just over 2,000
block hours per aircraft in 1985 to 3,000 hours in 2002, or by 1.9 per cent a year
12
Airline Finance
(Table 1.1). However, a small dip occurred in the early 2000s, as a response to the
unexpected downturn in traffic and a situation of overcapacity.
F-"Msc,WortdAirl-i
1.4 Key Financial Issues
15 IATAJKPMG (1992), Accounting Policies, Disclosure and Financial Trends in the

International Airline Industry, August, p. 25.
--l
350,
JOO
As the industry approaches another downturn, it will be interesting to see ifthe same
issues are as relevant as previously. Certainly, many more airlines are now privately
owned (see Chapter 7) and thus might not be expected to receive the amount ofstate
aid that they were given in the early to mid-1990s. Two national flag carriers went
out ofbusiness in the early 1990s in Europe, and a number ofmajor US airlines have
been in intensive care. On the other hand, two previously privati sed flag carriers
in Federation of Malaysia and New Zealand were re-nationalised, and government
support has continued to two or three more medium sized EU carriers.
Thus, exit does not seem quite as free yet as other industries, and the track record
of existing airlines and other hurdles do not seem to deter new entrants unduly, at
least for charter and LCC types of operation. Some rationalisation has taken place
among network carriers through the bankruptcies mentioned above and the mergers
of America West and US Airways, Air France and KLM and Lufthansa and Swiss.
Bankruptcies and cross-border investments have also occurred in Central and South
America. In other world regions, however, the national carrier is still the norm, more
than likely to be still majority owned by its government.
Figure 1.9 shows how the major quoted airline stocks have performed against
the world stock indices. The returns to shareholders should also include dividends
paid, which are not reflected in these trends. Since airlines on the whole do not pay
dividends and major industrials do, the comparison tcnds to overstate the airlines'
performance, which has only beaten the Japanese index.
A survey of a cross-section of25 large and small airlines based in North Amcrica,
Europe and Australasia identified the most critical issues facing the industry. IS Each
airline finance director was asked to give the five most important financial issues,
and those mentioned by more than six of the 25 airlines are stated hereafter.
Interestingly, debt/equity ratios were only mentioned as critical by four airlines
and return on investment by three. The control of costs and the price of new aircraft
are largely economic issues and not included in this book, although the financial
planning aspects of fleet planning are (Chapter 8). Access to capital markets is
considered in Chapters 5,6,7, lOand 11, while foreign exchange exposure is covered
in Chapter 9. Fuel price exposure is also discussed after exchange rates, since the
two require similar approaches, and fuel prices can also have a major impact on
airline profits.
13
2501-
L'"I,
'fTSE100
;;=;~~;=-:=~=J_ __;":.~~.~~'~.~.[""'I l '!--, . . . . ~-.t-~rI\\...w~
....., ,""
!'
..IV
Iii
150
'!l;"
:..~;;;,.;f1O!\!~~"4\\,\h"_"S~I . . . . . . . ,"-,"."""
200
:;
\/ ..
...A!\. '\ -'"
....;I\:
".v
-'---~~:..J"i"T-~~'~:"\\I\=;'";;;;;;"~7'!'"~-"
100
50
i~"/",<P/#~"'?,#~I'/",~~'l.f~1'~J'/#~F'l'~~'// // / // / // /
Figure].9
World airline stock index vs top share indices, 1995-2006
Issue
Control of costs
Access to capital markets
Foreign currency exposure
Fleet replacement and price of new aircraft
Industry losses and inconsistent profitability
Cost of funds/low yield on surplus funds
Number ofairlines
identifying as critical
15
13
9
8
7
More recently, airlines have devoted much management time to the formation
of alliances, some tactical, but many of a more strategic nature which require
the blessing of the regulatory authorities. This is arguably the easiest way for an
airline to expand in scope and achieve the critical mass to compete against larger
airlines and airline groups. Other ways, such as merger and acquisition can run into
regulatory obstacles more quickly. Minority stakes or airline cross-investments were
often used to re-affirm alliance commitments, but these have not always worked very
well (e.g., KLMlNorthwest and British Airways/US Air). However, the maximum
stake permitted by foreign airlines has been creeping up from 25 per cent in many
countries to 49 per cent in some. This may be expected to be further relaxed, and thus
valuation techniques tor airlines, as well as slots and route rights, should increase
in importance (Chapter 4). For this, and many of the other topics discussed above,
an understanding of airline financial statements and ratios is required, and these are
addressed in the next two chapters.
Chapter 2
Airline Financial Statements
2.1
Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to provide an understanding of airline financial statements.

The statements that are covered are the profit and loss or income statement, the
balance sheet, and the cash flow statement. The value added statement and Cash
Value Added (Economic Value Added) is also explained, although they are not
widely used by airlines. While there are a number of introductory texts on financial
statements (e.g., ILO, 1995 and Reid and Myddleton, 2005), as well as more detailed
texts (e.g., Holmes and Sugden, 2004), they do not address specific airline industry
aspects such as the treatment of frequent flyer programmes and aircraft leases. These
will be discussed in this chapter, with the following chapter addressing the evaluation
of airline performance by financial ratios.
There are considerable variations in the presentation and format ofairline accounts
world-wide, as well as the details provided in published reports. The statements of
British Airways (BA) will be used throughout this and the next chapter as examples.
This is because the published accounts of this airline:
are in the English language.
provide a reasonable amount of detail and supporting notes.
reflect many of the more recent recommendations and standards from
accounting bodies.
were also shown in summary form according to US GAAP principles,
illustrating how sensitive an airline's net profit is to accounting principles.
The financial statements of the AMR Corporation, which consists largely of the US
major, American Airlines and its commuter airline subsidiaries, will also be presented
and contrasted with BA. This will allow comparison between two major international
airlines, incidentally both members of the same one-world strategic alliance, but
based in different continents and applying different accounting standards.
The British Airways and AMR accounts will be compared, however, wherever
possible with those of other airlines which use different accounting conventions and
present the data in different formats.
The accounts describe the financial position of the airline at a particular moment
or between two points in time. They are thus central to evaluating the performance of
the management of the airline's finances. They enable the management and owners
of an airline to answer two main questions:
Is the airline operating at a profit?
16
Airline Finance
Will the airline be able to meet its financial commitments as they fall due, and
so not have to close down because of lack of funds?
The system of accounts is not, however, ideally suited for management tasks such as
pricing or product costing and planning, or for deriving economists' measures such
as value added.
The record-making part of accounting is usually called book-keeping, performed
by a double-entry system. The purpose of this chapter is not to explain how this is
done, but rather how to make use of the published results of this system at a more
general level. This analysis and interpretation of the published accounts of airlines
could be the aim ofthe following interested parties:
Shareholders;
Banks, other debt holders and creditors;
Financial analysts;
Industry regulators;
Employees.
Many airline managements are secretive about their financial data, and only release
the minimum required by company law or stock exchange rules. Past data on
yields and costs, even after some degree of aggregation, is considered to be useful
to competitors. Government owned airlines are usually run as legally constituted
corporations, and generally do publish annual accounts in some form, even though
they may only be available a considerable time after the end of the financial year
(for example through the ICAO statistical reporting programme). Airlines with stock
market quotations are usually required to release financial information which is
timely, in sufficient detail, and available to all at the same time. British Airways, for
example, announce their results for the year ending 31 March in May of each year
and publish their annual report and accounts in June. AMR report for a financial year
ending 31 December, and their annual report is usually published in February.
Publicly quoted airlines generally control the release of information through an
investor relations department, which in the case of British Airways also publishes a
newsletter (Investor) circulated to all shareholders. This department also coordinates
any special shareholder deals, such as the BA scheme whereby those owning
a minimum of 200 ordinary shares receive 10 per cent off BA tickets (subject to
various travel restrictions).
The directors of an airline will contract with a firm of auditors to examine the
books and annual financial statements of the company on behalf of the shareholders.
They will then issue a report which will conclude with their opinion as to whether
the accounts give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the company or group
on a certain date, and whether they comply with company legislation. The way the
auditors are hired (by management rather than directly by shareholders) has led to
criticism of the objectivity of their opinions in certain cases. One answer to this has
been for boards to appoint an audit committee composed largely of non-executive
directors. However, it could be argued that these directors owe their position to the
executives in the company in the same way as the auditors.
17
Individual accounts will be available from the airlines (with an increasing number
now available from web sites), as well as through civil aviation authorities (e.g., in
the UK and Brazil), and from inspection of copies filed with governments as a result
of company legislation (e.g., UK Companies House). Sources giving the financial
results and balance sheets of a number of different airlines in broadly comparable
format are:
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), Financial Statistics,
Series F.
Stockbroker and finance house airline industry reports (distribution tends to
be restricted to their clients).
Datastream and other on-line data bases.
The last two cover only airlines with publicly quoted shares, which have sufficiently
large daily trading turnover (and thus interest from institutional investors). The first
is not consistent in coverage from year to year, and is only available more than a year
after the end of the financial year (and from 2005 only in electronic fonn).
The financial year of an airline usually runs from January to December (almost
all US and many other world airlines) or April to March (British Airways and many
airlines based in British Commonwealth countries). Some airlines have recently
changed their year-end to bring them into line at least with others in the region: Delta
Air Lines changed from end June to end December. Air France moved away from a
calendar year bas is to a financial year ending at the end of March from 199411995.
2.2
Profit and Loss Account (Income Statement)
The Profit and Loss Account or Statement of Earnings summarises the revenues and
expenses of the airline for the accounting period:
Revenue Conversion ofreal assets into cash. Under the accrual basis ofaccounting,
cash receipt'> are allocated to the period in which the related service took place.
Expenditure Conversion of cash into real assets. Expenses are charged to Profit
and Loss Account in the same accounting period as the one in which the related
revenue is recognised. Certain large expenses will need to be charged over a number
of years, since these assets will provide the potential to gencrate revenue over a
period that extends well beyond the current accounting period:
Aircraft and other fixed assets.
Major aircraft and engine overhauls.
Software development costs.
Slots and new route start-up costs.
Goodwill through the acquisition of other companies.
Airline Finance
This process of allocation is called depreciation for tangible assets such as aircraft,
and amortisation for intangible assets such as goodwill, software or the rights to
routes or slots.
and 26 million from UK/Europe. The UK and Europe have historically broken even
or made a small loss, but they provide valuable feed to the other regions, and the
key focus is network profits. However, UK/Europe profitability has deteriorated in
the early 2000s, possibly in part the result of a large increase in low cost carrier
operations from the UK to Europe. The data are no longer provided, but BA reported
that UKlEurope was showing a positive but small operating profit in 200512006.
The remainder of the profit and loss or income statement includes finance costs
(e.g., interest payable), finance income (e.g., interest received) and any profits or
losses from the sale of fixed assets. Table 2.1 above shows that in 200512006 BA's
interest charges declined along with their debt reduction. Cash and equivalents
recorded on the balance sheet rose from 1.882 million at the end of March 2005 to
2.44 billion at the end of March 2006, although finance income remained roughly
the same. This cash was equivalent to 125 days of cash operating expenses (total
operating expenses less depreciation) compared to only 95 days for the previous
year end. Note 8 to BA's accounts shows that most of the profit from the sale of
assets came from its sale of the London Eye in 2005/2006 (26 million) and its
disposal of its minority interest in Qantas (86 million) the year before.
It also includes the share ofprofits from associates, which in BA's case amounted
to 28 million in 2005/2006 from investments in Comair (a South African regional
airline) and Iberia. An associate or associated undertaking is one where a company
has a participating interest in a long-term investment. Participating means that it is
able to influence the operational and financial decisions of its investment. This is
usually considered to be in cases where between 20 per cent and 50 per cent of the
voting shares are held. Where more than 50 per cent are held, the investment will be
classed as a subsidiary and consolidated in the group accounts.
Under the old format, BA would have reported one-off restructuring costs (for
example, staff redundancy schemes) under non-operating items. Now they are
reported under the relevant item in operating costs (i.e., redundancy under' employee
costs').
The importance of income from associates should not be underestimated: in
August 2001, BA's share price fell by lOp to 315p following a report from Qantas
that its profits would be 60 million lower as a result of ticket discounting in the
domestic market in response to two low cost new entrants. l
BA's income statement includes a number of new items that now need to be
reported under lAS and IFRS regulations. Part of the unrealised gains or losses from
fuel hedging is shown (19 million), and retranslation charges or credits on currency
borrowings: these resulted in a net charge of 13 million, largely from US$ and
Japanese Yen loans. The US$ strengthened by around 8 per cent over the financial
year, increasing the sterling equivalent of the dollar loans and hence the charge to
the income statement. Previously, this charge was taken from reserves (shareholders'
funds on the balance sheet) and did not affect profits.
18
2.2.1
British Airways Group
British Airways (BA) only reports the Group profit and loss account, which includes
the parent company and any subsidiary controlled by the parent (generally companies
in which the parent owns over 50 per cent of the ordinary share capital). They do,
however, report separate balance sheets for the Group (which totals all assets and
liabilities from the parent and subsidiary companies) and the Company (only assets
and liabilities of the airline operating company).
The Profit and Loss Account or Income Statement can be divided into:
Trading or operating account.
Profit and loss account or income statement.
Appropriation account or statement of earned surplus.
The trading or operating account generally excludes interest paid or received, and
any gains or losses from sales of assets, which appear in the profit and loss account.
From the presentation of BA's operating account in Table 2.1 it can be seen
that some detail is provided of the breakdown of both revenues and expenses. The
importance of cargo in scheduled service revenues can also be calculated (6.9 per
cent in 2005/2006 compared to 8.1 per cent in 1994/1995). This report replaced the
previous one that confined the breakdowns of both revenues and expenses to the
notes to the accounts. The large increase in 'other revenues' occurred mainly as a
result of the inclusion of fuel surcharges on air fares and cargo rates. Most airlines
include these in passenger and cargo revenues but they could be identified separately
or netted ofl:' against fuel expenses.
BA's 2005/2006 operating profit recovered with a 27 per cent increase from the
previous year with both passenger and cargo yields up, as well as a 0.8 per cent point
improvement in passenger load factor. It was also helped by keeping unit costs in
check, in spite of the large increase in fuel costs.
Note 3 to the accounts gives a geographical analysis of both turnover and
operating profit, which in percentage terms is shown in Table 2.3. Many airlines will
show the regional distribution of turnover, but none now show the same for profits.
The network airline business accounted for 93 per cent of BA's 2005/2006
revenues, with the regional airline business 4 per cent and other non-airline activities
with only 3 per cent. The latter comprised insurance, the London Eye and Air Miles
Travel Promotions. Table 2.3 shows how important 'The Americas' are to BA's
revenues, with the US probably accounting for a large part of this region. In previous
annual reports BA gave a breakdown of operating profit for the same regions. This
was discontinued since almost no other airline reported this, and it was thought to be
commercially sensitive. For the last year that this was reported (2004/2005), 347
million of BA's operating profit came from the Americas, 224 million from Africa!
Mid East and India, offset by a loss of 5 million from the Far East and Australasia
The Times, London, (17 August 2001).
19
20
Table 2.1
Airline Finance
British Airways' Group consolidated income account
Table 2.2
million for year ended 31 March
2006
Traffic revenue
7,318
Passengers
6,820
Cargo
498
Othcr revenue (including fuel surcharges)
Depreciation, amortisation and impairment

Aircraft operating lease costs
Fuel and oil costs
559
Handling charges, catering and other operating costs
955
Selling costs
449
Finance income
19
221
93
-18
Retranslation (charges)/credits on currency borrowings
- 13
Profit/(loss) on sale of fixed assets and investments
27
Share of post-tax profits in associates
28
Profit for the year
467
The other new and significant item in the income statement relates to pensions: an
additional amount has to be deducted from profits to make a contribution to the
shortfall in pension scheme assets compared to actuarial assumptions on pension
obligations that is not already reflected in 'employee costs'. It should be added that
under IFRS BA now include the cost of share options granted to employees (since
2002) under 'employee costs', 1.8 million being introduced in 2005/2006 for the
first time.
Finally, the statement of changes in equity shows the addition of the net income
after any dividend payment, new shares issued and the various items that contributed
to the net change in reserves. BA last distributed a dividend for the financial year
2000/2001 amounting to 193 million, giving retained losses of 79 million
respectively. Paying out more than was earned in the year is highly unusual for
an airline, and few US airlines pay dividends even in good years. BA, however,
reckoned that a significant number oftheir shareholders (for example pension funds)
would not invest in their shares without such continuity of dividend payments.
However, since then BA has suspended dividend payments.
2.2.2
AMR Corporation
16
Earnings per share (pence)

Basic
40.4
Diluted
39.8
Source: British Airways PIc Aruma] Report, 2005/2006
UK/Europe
The Americas
Africa, Middle East and India
Far East and Australasia
Total
18
Financing income and expense relating to pensions
Minority interests included in above
British Airways' turnover/profit by area of sales
1,632
Landing fees and en route charges
Finance costs
Passenger revenue
Cargo revenue
Other revenue
Total revenue
Operating expenditure
Table 2.3
473
Fuel derivative gains
British Airways' operating accounts
112
Engineering and other aircraft costs
Currency differences
21
American Airlines (and other US carriers) show the past three years' operations
whereas SA, other Europe~n and Asian airlines usually show only two years,
although they generally include summary information for the past five to ten years
in an appendix.
23
Airline Finance
Ofinterest in Table 2.4 is American's success in reducing travel agent commission

costs, in a year when their operating revenues increased by just over 10 per cent;
these costs have declined by 22 per cent since 1994, the year before American took
the initiative to cap the payments agents received for each transaction (which was
followed by almost all other major US domestic carriers).
AMR's aircraft fuel costs can be seen to have risen by 41 per cent in 2005,
significantly less than the increase in the spot price for jet kerosene on the US West
Coast of just over 70 per cent. This difference can be explained by their hedging
policy (a more general treatment of which is found in Chapter 9).
Singapore Airlines (year to end March 2006). With the exception of Lufthansa,
these values were broadly in line with the findings of a 1992 survey which showed
the average per cent of cost for depreciating a B747 to be 6.8 per cent for Asian
airlines, 5.1 per cent for European airlines and 4.2 per cent for North American
airlines. For Boeing 737s the percentages were 8.2 per cent, 5.6 per cent and 4.2
per cent respectively (KPMG/IATA, 1992).
Singapore Airlines armounced in 200 I that it would change its depreciation policy
starting with the 200112002 accounts. Their policy for aircraft would change from
straight-line depreciation over 10 years to 20 per cent residual value to 15 years to
10 per cent residual value. They had last revised their policy in 1990, and this change
was to bring them more into line with other airlines. It would also be expected to
boost 200 1/2002 profits by S$265 million (around US$160 million).
22
Table 2.4
American Airlines' consolidated statement of operation
2.2.4
Passenger revenues
Cargo revenues
Other revenues
Total revenues
Wages, salaries and benefits
Aircraft fuel
Commissions to agents
Depreciation and amortisation
Other rentals and landing fees
Aircraft rentals
Food service
Maintenance: materials and repairs
Other operating expenses
Total operating expenses
BA now include broadly similar items in their income statement as the US airlines in
their statements of operations, although the expense breakdowns differ somewhat.
Until 200512006, BA only gave the split of costs by item in a note to the then profit
and loss statement. AMR already accounted for the value of stock options in their
2005 statements, but only if the price ofthe option was above the market value of the
stock on the date of grant. From 2006, AMR will adopt new guidelines that require
the applieation of the Black-Scholes option pricing model for calculation of their
cost. Had they applied this in 2005, their loss would have increased by $42 million.
2.2.3
British Ainvays and AMR compared: Income statement
BA's depreciation charge for 2005/2006 amounted to 5.1 per cent of average
gross fixed assets (fleet, property and equipment) employed during the year. This
compared with 4.8 per cent for American Airlines (year to end December 2005),
6.6 per cent for Lufthansa (also for calendar year 2005), and 6.2 per cent for
Lufthansa Group and other airlines: income statement
The presentation ofLufthansa's group consolidated income statement is also prepared

under IFRS, but has less detail in the main statement. However, footnotes show the
breakdown in revenue, and other costs items. Traffic revenue for 2005 comprised
11 ,314 million from the carriage of passengers and 20 per cent or 2,590 million
from freight and mail. Changes in stocks are included as a separate item, in addition
to the cost of materials purchased from outside suppliers. This approach is adopted
by many European airlines, but not by BA, US or Asian carriers.
Lufthansa gives a cost breakdown in footnotes to the main income statement. In
2005, the total cost of materials and services (9.0 billion): 4,591 million for the cost
of materials, of which 2,662 million was for fuel; and 4,416 million for services,
2,542 was for airport and en-route navigation charges, and 142 million from operating
leases. The income statement also includes the financial (non-operating) result broken
down into income from subsidiaries and a<;sociates, net interest and asset write-downs,
minority interests and taxes.
Table 2.5
Luftbansa Group consolidated income statement
milli()l1Lyearto end December

Traffic revenue
Other revenue
Total revenue
Changes in stocks and own work capitalised
Other operating income
Cost of materials/services
Staff costs
Depreciation, amortisation and impainnent
Other operating expenses
24
Airline Finance
With the growth ofaircraft operating leases, an increasingly important inconsistency

is the treatment of aircraft ownership costs. With owned aircraft, depreciation
is treated as an operating cost and interest on any related finance is not. If the
same aircraft is acquired under an operating lease, both depreciation and interest
(combined as the rental cost) are included as operating costs. This distorts operating
profit comparisons.
Other potential areas of distortion are depreciation policies, major maintenance
of aircraft (which may be all included as an expense in one year, or capitalised and
amortised over a number of years), and foreign exchange gains or losses. These may
be further explained in the notes to the accounts. British Airways specifY only a
range of operational lives and residual values of their aircraft used for depreciation
purposes in the notes to their accounts, but they do give the percentage rates of
depreciation (which combine life and residual).
Lufthansa provide another example of the effect on operating profit of a change
in depreciation policy: in 1992 the airline changed its policy from depreciating its
aircraft over 10 years to a residual value of 5 per cent, to one of 12 years to 15 per
cent (see Table 2.8 for example). This would have reduced the charge on a US$140
million B747 from $13.3 million to $9.9 million. The overall effect ofthe change was
to increase Lufthansa's 1992 group profits by DM392 million (US$250 million).
Japan Airlines reduced their depreciation charge in April 1993 by Y17,842 million,
thus reducing their operating loss for 1993/1994 to Y 29,627 million; this they did by
increasing the useful lives ofall aircraft except B74 7-400s from 10 years to 15 years
(international) and 13 years (domestic),3
Agents' commission is generally recorded as an expense,4 but some airlines
deduct it from revenues. Frequent flyer points or credits can also be treated in a
number of ways, the most common being to defer the incremental costs of providing
the free travel awards. BA uses this approach for its Executive Club and Airmiles
loyalty programmes, including incremental passenger service charges, security,
fuel, catering and lost baggage insurance in accrued costs, Alternatively, a part of
the revenue can be deferred and recognised when the free travel is provided (for a
fuller explanation of how FFPs are accounted for, see Appendix 2.1 at the end ofthis
chapter),
cent in Ireland to almost 40 per cent in the US, Germany and JapanS) is made in the
profit and loss account, even though this is not the tax actually charged for that year.
This method in theory provides a better comparison of after tax profits over time.
However, it can be argued that the full applicable rate will never be paid, as long
as the airline continues to invest in new aircraft and tax allowances of some sort
continue to be available. This leads to the view that partial provisioning would give a
better picture ofnet profits over time, based on the assumption that there will always
be sizeable investment allowances against tax. The problem with this approach is
the fact that investments often decline sharply, for example during recessions, and
that tax allowances can also change significantly. For this reason, the UK standards
board have recently come down in favour of full provisioning, Clearly, the choice
of method makes a large difference to an airline's reported earnings per share, a key
indicator for investment analysts.
Extraordinary items should also be given careful consideration for the following
reasons:
Goodwill arising from the acquisition of another company can be capitalised

and amortised over a number of years (thus including its effect in the profit and loss
account) or written off against retained earnings or reserves (and thus not appearing
in the profit and loss account at all),
Finally, there are two ways of treating corporation tax: either full or partial
provisioning. The first way assumes that profits will eventually be taxed, and that
any generous tax allowances applicable in the year under question will only defer the
tax liability to future years. A full provision for corporation tax at the applicable rate
(the marginal rate in 2005 being 30 per cent in the UK, and ranges from only 12 per
2 Lufthansa Annual Report and Accounts (1995).
3 Japan Airlines Annual Report, 1995-1996.
4 This was the case with British Airways, which included commissions under
selling costs.
25
Treatment of ordinary or exceptional items as extraordinary (or vice versa)
can make a very significant difference to earnings pcr share and other financial
ratios.
They may signal important changes in the nature of the business.
They may give clues to the quality of management, and the future profitability
of the airline.
There are two major traditions of accounting practice: one represented by the US,
UK and the Netherlands whose emphasis is on providing information for investors
and the capital markets, and the other, represented by Gcrmany, France and Japan,
which was driven by tax assessment requirements, and where banks rather than equity
investors have tended to be more important in financing. 6 The first group produces
one confidential set of accounts for the tax authorities, and publishes another for
investors. The emphasis is thus on showing a good profit performance to investors,
The other group are more concerned with minimising tax payments, and thus try to
minimise declared profits. This group did not need to provide detailed information
to investors, since they are likely to be large banks with seats on their board and
access to detailed management accounts. Indeed, they see the provision of too much
detail in published accounts as possibly conferring some advantages on competitors.
The globalisation of capital markets and wider airline share ownership has led to a
convergence of the two traditions,
There are also a number of significant differences between the UK and US
accounting rules: BA made an after tax profit of 267 million in 2000/2001 under
US GAAP rules, but an after tax profit of 473 million according to UK rules. The
difference was largely due to the treatment of deferred taxation (144 million) and
foreign exchange losses (72 million). Under the UK rules, certain aircraft operating
5 The Economist, (June 2006), p. 29.
6 McKenzie, W. (1994), The Financial Times Guide to Using and Interpreting Company
Accounts, Pitman Books.
Airline Finance
lease costs have been capitalised and shown as depreciation and interest; under US
rules these would appear as an increase in operating expenditure (a reduction in net
profits of I09 million), some ofwhich would be offset by a reduction in depreciation
(increase in net profit) of 23 million and a reduction in interest expense of 57
million.
Airlines such as BA (up to financial year 2005/2006), Cathay Pacific, Singapore

Airlines and AirAsia adopt the net asset format approach, albeit with some differences
in the order of the main items, while the account format is used by all US and most
European carriers. The first does not have a total assets line, whereas the second does.
Qantas and Air New Zealand publish accounts in a format that combines elements of
each. Assets and liabilities are described in more detail in the next two sections, with
examples taken from British Airways PIc Annual Report, 2005/2006, followed by a
comparison with the AMR Corporation. BA changed to an account format with their
adoption of IFRS for their latest financial year.
26
2.3
Balance Sbeet
The balance sheet (also called Statement of Financial Position) provides a classified
summary at a particular date (end of the financial year or quarter) of where an airline
has acquired its funds (liabilities) and how it has deployed those funds (assets). It
also shows whether the funds have been borrowed on a long term basis (for periods
of greater than one year), or short term basis (less than one year). The balance sheet
shows the position at a particular date, while the Profit and Loss Account shows the
results of transactions occurring between two dates.
The balance sheet can be presented in Account format or Net Asset format.
Account format generally shows assets and liabilities on separate pages each with
their own total, while the Net Asset format shows them on the same page with a total
of assets less current liabilities.
The balance sheet shows what the airline owes as liabilities, and what the airline
owns as assets. These must balance, or in other words total assets must always equal
total liabilities (as shown by the items in italics below):
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
Current assets
Fixed assets
(Property and cquipment)
Other non~current assets
Total assets
2.3.1
27
Assets
Fixed assets These are the physical and financial items that are intended to be used
for the longer term operations and business of the airline. They should not therefore
vary much from day to day. They can be converted into cash, but not always easily
or at short notice. They can be divided into:
Tangible assets: Physical property, plant and equipment (e.g., aircraft, engines
and related parts)
Intangible assets: Long~term financial investments, goodwill. oatents. route
rights, slots, etc.
Fixed assets will include aircraft and spares, including rotables (repairable items),
but not expendable spare parts, which are shorter life items and generally included in
current assets (stocks). They are generally valued at historical cost less depreciation
accumulated up to the date of the balance sheet.
Advance and option payments in respect of future aircraft purchase commitments
are recorded at cost and shown separately under the tangible assets heading. BArecords
these under 'progress payments'. On acquisition ofthe related aircraft, these costs are
transferred to the cost of aircraft (fleet) and depreciated only from that date.
It should be noted that the values stated in the accounts at a particular date are not
intended to reflect the market or realisable value of the assets at that date. They will
also not reflect the replacement cost of those assets. Some airlines do re~value the
balance sheet cost of their assets, as British Airways did to their Tristar fleet in 1992
(reduced their value to zero), and their properties periodically. Otherwise, tangible
assets are valued at cost less accumulated depreciation.
Table 2.7 shows an overall decline in non-current or long~term assets (after
deducting depreciation) of 5 per cent compared to the previous year. Intangible
assets (goodwill) were set off against reserves up to 31 March 1998. After that date,
where the cost of an acquisition exceeded the balance sheet values of such assets,
under UK rules, the difference could be capitalised (as an intangible
and
written off over a period not exceeding 20 years. This has now been modified to an
annual decision on impairment based on the likely future cash flows that the asset
will generate, rather than an automatic amortisation. Much of this amount came
from BA's acquisition of CityFlyer Express, a Gatwick-based franchise. BA paid
76 million for the airline compared to its net assets of 16 million, giving rise to
60 million of goodwilL Other intangibles refer to software development.
28
Table 2.6
Airline Finance
British Airways' Group balance sheet
Table 2.7
29
British Airways' Group non-current assets
million at 31 March
Intangible assets
Fleet
Property
Equipment
Totalfixed assets
Investments: in associates
Employee benefit assets
Other investments and financial assets
Total non-fixed assets
Total non-current assets

Current assets
Expendable spares and other inventory
Trade receivables
Other current assets
Other current interest-bearing deposit"
Cash and eash equivalents
Total current assets and receivables
Total assets
Shareholders' equity and liabilities

Issued share capital
Share premium
Jnvestment in own shares
Other reserves
Minority interests
6,606
974
302
7,882
131
137
122
390
8,505
83
685
458
1,533
907
3,666
12,174
283
888
690
213
Total shareholders' equity
2,074
Non-current liabilities
Interest bearing long-term borrowings
Employee benefit obligations
Provisions for deferred tax
Other provisions
Other long-term liabilities
3,602
1,803
896
135
Total non-current liabilities
6.668
Current liabilities
Current portion oflong-term borrowings
Convertible borrowings
Trade and other payables
Current tax payable
Short-term provisions
Total current liabilities
Total equity and liabilities
232
479
Intangible assets:
Goodwill
Landing rights
Other
Total
Tangible assets
Fleet
Property
Equipment
Total tangible assets
Investments in associates
Other investments
Employee benefits
Other financial assets
Total non-current assets
Landing rights or slots (all at London Heathrow Airport) have been 'purchased' from
other airlines over the years, although this is technically not permitted. Thus, a deal
is described as an exchange of an attractive slot for an off-peak one, with a payment
made by the airline gaining the valuable one.
Depreciation is deducted from all tangible assets except land to account for
the decline in the useful value of the asset due to wear and tear and economic
obsolescence. The asset's historical cost is spread over its expected useful life, at the
end of which it is often given a residual value of between 5 per cent and 40 per cent
of its cost. The life or depreciation period and the residual value together define the
rate of depreciation of the asset. The example in Table 2.8 selects an aircraft life and
residual value that together are identical to BA's 2005/2006 policy of depreciating
its B747-400s by 3.7 per cent a year.
The depreciation for the year will also be included as an operating expense in
the trading (profit and loss) account. The cost of intangible assets was also spread
over its expected future life (from anything between five and 40 years), and is called
amortisation:
75
UAL Inc acquired Pan Am's Pacifie route rights and other assets in 1986; total intangible
assets acquired in this deal amounted to US$384 million, which were amortised over
40 years to zero residual value.?
56
3,432
]2,174
Straight line is the most common method of depreciation. Alternatives are the
progressive or regressive methods, and depreciation according to the number of
2,822
Source: British Airways' Group Annual Report, 2005-2006

7
VAL Inc., (1986), Annual Report.
30
Airline Finance
landings) ofaircraft usage. 8 The regressive (or declining
hours or cycles (take-offs and

balance) approach is similar to that taken by some tax authorities in calculating
capital allowances, whereby a given percentage is applied to the depreciated value.
This would result in a net book value that corresponds more closely to actual aircraft
values, particularly in the early years of its life. However, it produces higher charges,
and lower profits, in the earlier years of aircraft operation, whereas management
may prefer the reverse. Rather than charging a fixed amount every year, a (fixed)
percentage of the remaining value of the asset is charged every year. For example, a
10,000 asset depreciated at 25 per cent a year will be depreciated by 2,500 in the
first year, but by 25 per cent x ( I 0,000-2,500) in the second year. Compared to the
straight line method, depreciation is more heavily weighted towards early years.
Table 2.8
31
much the same benefit every year, the best matching is provided by charging the
same depreciation every year. If not, linking annual depreciation to aircraft hours or
cycles would be better.
It should be noted that for airlines in some countries such as Switzerland, extra or
supplementary depreciation is charged in good years, but only normal depreciation
in years when losses are reported. This is driven by tax considerations, and results in
a distortion of profitability over time or comparisons with other airlines.
The table below supports the view that US airlines tend to depreciate their fleet
slower than the European airlines. There was little difference between US network
carrier, AMR, and low cost airline, Southwest. However, BA applied a much faster
rate of depreciation to their short/medium-haul fleet than Ryanair, largely through
their lower residual values (although these are not published).
Airline depreciation example

Table 2.9
B747-400: Cost: US$150 million (ex spares); depreciated over 23 years to 15 per cent residual
value (or 3.7 per cent a year); straight-line method
Annual Charge: {$150 million - (I5 per cent x $150 million}} + 23
Depreciation rate comparison for 2005/2006: Short/medium-haul

aircraft
$5.543 million
Southwest
B737-700
Life (years)
Residual %
Rate: %
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
11.1
25
15
3.4
Source: Airline annual reports
16.6
22.2
105.3
110.9
116.4
122.0
127.5
127.5
* Residual value; ** Rounded to one decimal place

Although the reducing balance method may track more closely the actual the
market value of an asset, the straight line method is generally preferable as it fits
more closely with principle ofmatching. In the airline context, ifthe aircraft provides
8 Almost all airlines use straight-line depreciation for their aircraft now. However,
between 1988 and 1993, SAS depreciated their fleet by applying an increasing annual rate to
the eost of its aircraft: thus 2 per cent was taken in the first year, and increasing this by one
third of a per cent per cent in each subsequent year. The aircraft were fully depreciated to zero
residual value after just over 19 years. Japan Air Lines still use the deelining balance method
for their older B 747s and DC lOs.
The other category of long-term or non-current assets is minority investments in

other companies (the majority owned ones will have been consolidated: their assets
combined with those of the airline in question9 ): these are not depreciated, but
included at cost, market value (where there is stock market trading and a listing) or
a value estimated by the directors.
Current assets Current assets generally include cash, marketable securities and
those assets that can in the normal course of business be turned into cash in the near
future, at least within one year of the balance sheet date. Cash includes petty cash
and bank: deposits of less than one year term. Marketable securities may be short
term government securities or other secure short-term investments for which there
is a good secondary market to allow sale at short notice. These are both valued for
balance sheet purposes at cost or current market value, whichever is the lower.
Trade receivables The used to be described as 'debtors' and are amounts due
from customers to whom goods were already shipped, or services provided. For
an airline, these would consist largely of credit card companies, travel agents and
tour operators, since passengers are usually asked to pay in full before travel. Travel
9 Those assets owned by minority shareholders are recognised under 'shareholders'
equity' or 'capital and reserves'.
Airline Finance
agents are generally allowed one month's graee after which they are expected to pay
the airline, but this could be increased to twice monthly. From experience there will
be some customers who will fail to settle their invoices (resulting from bankruptcy),
and an allowanee will be deducted from aecounts receivable to allow for these bad
debts. These will be assumed by credit card companies (themselves much less likely
to fail), but airlines will be required to pay for this by providing a eash deposit or
letter of eredit to the credit eard company (in addition to the fee for its collection
services).
Deferred charges are similar to prepaid expenses, in that the payment is made in
advance of receipt of related benefits, for example for office relocation costs. But
herc the benefits are usually considered to be ofa longer tenn nature, and the deferred
charge spread over a number of years. Deferred charges would thus nonnally be
included under fixed or long-term assets.
32
Expendable spares and other inventories These will consist of raw materials,
expendable or consumable spares, other supplies, work-in-progress (semi-finished
products) and finished products. Since an airline's final output (seat-kilometres or
available tonne-kms) cannot be stored, the last item is not relevant to the airline
industry. Work-in-progress could, however, relate to aircraft or spare parts which are
overhauled by the maintenance department. Raw materials and other supplies will
consist of fuel stocks, maintenance, operations, office and other items of limited life.
They will be valued at cost or market value, whichever is the lower. Some airlines
deduct an allowance for expendable spares obsolescence, writing down parts that
have not been used for two or three years by anything between 10-33.3 per cent.
The third and fourth items in this part of the BA balance sheet are sometimes
called Quick Assets, since they are likely to be convertible into cash within a
very short period, probably within one month. Inventories are not so easily sold,
and debtors cannot be realised much faster than the credit tenns allowed without
damaging commercial relationships. Table 2.10 shows an improvement in BA's
quick asset position.
BA had almost 2.5 billion in relatively liquid funds at end March 2006 compared
to only 936 million at the end of March 200 I. Trade receivables would nonnally
be expected to be related to turnover, and for BA these declined from 853 million
at end March 2001 to 685 million at end March 2006. A further amount of 458
million is reported as prepayments (or prepaid expenses) and accrued income, which
would include such items as rents or rates paid in advance. Here the airline has the
contracted right to goods or services which have yet to be delivered.
Table 2.10
British Airways' Group current assets
Expendable spares and inventories

Trade receivables
Other current assets
Interest bearing deposits
Cash at bank and in hand
Total current assets
685
458
1
907
3,666
2.3.2
33
Liabilities
Current liabilities This item generally includes all debts that fall due in the
12 months after the balance sheet date. They are what the airline owes to other parties
within this period, and are settled by drawing on the liquid resources that the airline
owns or is likely to own in this period, namely the current assets. Thus, a comparison
of current assets and current liabilities is an important step in balance sheet analysis.
The difference between the two is described as 'working capital' .
Current portion oflong-term borrowings Those parts of the longer-term financial
arrangements that fall due in the coming year.
Convertible borrowings Represented the principal outstanding on convertible
capital bonds issued by BA in June 1989 with due date in 2005. Thus, these were
expected to be repaid in June 2005, but in the event all holders converted to ordinary
shares priory to expiry, since the conversion price was lower than the market price
ofthe equity.
Trade and other payables The accounts payable by BA to its regular suppliers
from which it has bought goods and services. The largest category of supplier is
likely to be an oil company which has delivered aviation fuel, and grants the airline
a given number of days' credit. Airports and air navigation authorities are also likely
to be major creditors.
Table 2.11
British Airways' Group current liabilities
Current portion of long-tenn borrowings

Convertible borrowings
Trade and other payables
Current tax payable
Short-term provisions
Total
Current tax payable This is corporation and other taxes, duties and social security
payments payable to the government within the next 12-month period.
Short-term provisions Amounts owing to parties who have provided services, such
as employees, but who have not yet been paid (they are likely to be paid by the end
Airline Finance
of the month}. For outside services such as legal advice or consultancy, while the
work has been completed, no invoice has been submitted, otherwise this would be
recorded as trade creditors.
Provisions These are defined as amounts which are retained to provide for any
liability or loss which is either likely to be incurred, or certain to be incurred but
uncertain as to the amount or the date on which it will arise. Major examples ofthis,
usually faIling into the latter category, are accelerated depreciation or write-downs
on aircraft, pensions, retirement benefits, severance pay and legal damages.
BA had in the past provided for legal claims made by Virgin Atlantic Airways
against them, but an outstanding claim was not considered by the directors to give
rise to liabilities that would 'not
rise to a material effect' on the accounts.
BA's provisions are mostly for deferred tax, related largely to fixed assets and
pensions. Other provisions relate mostly to aircraft leased to Eastern Airways and
Swiss International, allowing for writing down the value ofthe aircraft and restoring
the aircraft to return conditions. These have a current element, and will be gradually
used up to 2011.
34
Sales in advance of carriage These unearned transport revenues, shown in the

BA accounts under 'Trade and other payables', are a significant source of short
term finance for many airlines ( I ,045 million for BA at end March 2006), and are
included under current liabilities. This is where a ticket has been issued and payment
either received or expected, but the service is only deliverable at some time in the
future (the ticket validity is unlikely to exceed a period of 12 months). BA increased
this item by 19 per cent over 2005/2006, while revenues only climbed by 5 per cent.
The main reason for this was the incidence of the Easter peak travel period in April
in 2006 Gust after the financial year end) and in March in 2005.
Overdrqfts (not used in either year by BA) are short-term loans from banks, which
can usually be drawn upon, as and when necessary, up to a maximum figure (in BA's
case up to 46 million and 20 million) and would generally not be secured against
any of BA's assets.
Non-current (long-term) liabilities Under current liabilities, an item was described
as the current part of long-term loans, leases and hire purchase commitments. All the
remaining sums owed by the airline under this heading will be placed under long
term or fixed liabilities. A breakdown is given in Table 2.12.
Table 2.12
British Airways' Group non-current liabilities
Interest bearing long-term borrowings

Employee benefit obligations
Provisions for deferred tax
Other provisions
Other long-term liabilities
Total
Interest bearing long-term borrowings This covers the principal ofloans and capital/
finance leases that is repayable one year or more into the future. Shorter tenn operating
leases are treated as an annual operating expense, since the airline does not own the
aircraft, nor does it have a long-term contractual commitment. Long-term financial
leases, although similar in terms of ownership, are a long term commitment and
are usually required to be included in the balance sheet, as in BA's case above (see
Appendix 2.2 at the end of this chapter for a full treatment of leases). Of BA's total
of 3.60 billion outstanding as at 31 March 2006, 1.03 billion was from bank and
other loans, 1.42 billion from finance leases and 1.15 billion irom Hire Purchase
arrangements. Most of the reduction from the previous year came from repayment of
the latter. and no new long-term loans were taken out during the last financial year.
35
Other long-term liabilities For BA these consisted largely of accruals and deferred
income. These accruals are expenses for which invoices have not yet been received,
and will subsequently move to creditors in current liabilities. Deferred income is
income received during the current financial year, but the services have not yet been
provided. Sale of mileage credits to non-airline businesses is an example of this:
these are reduced as and when the air miles are used accompanied by an addition to
'other revenues' in the income statement.
Shareholders' equity or funds The total equity interest that all the shareholders
have in the airline is called the shareholders' equity or funds, and is equal to the
airline's net worth (total assets less short and long-term liabilities). This is separated
for legal and accounting reasons into three categories:
Capital stock, called up or issued share capital.

Capital surplus (share premium) or capital reserves.
Accumulated retained earnings or deficits, revenue or other reserves, or profit
and loss account
Table 2.13
British Airways' Group capital and reserves
Issued share capital

Share premimn
Investment in own shares
Other reserves
Total
Minority interest
Total eqlli!L
Capital surplus consists of any adjustments which do not arise as a result of trading
activities. These include the revaluation of fixed assets, currency gains or losses,
Airline Finance
premiums on the issue of shares and the capitalisation of goodwill. In some countries
a part of retained earnings is required by law to be transferred into capital reserves,
which cannot be distributed to shareholders in the form of dividends.
Even larger differences between the two airlines are found on the liabilities side
ofthe balance sheet. AMR has not produced a net profit since the 2000 financial year,
and thus its stockholders' equity is now severely depleted and negative. It was last
positive at the end of December 2003, but only by a small margin. The significance of
negative balance sheet equity is that the airline is technically insolvent, even though
it has not entered either Chapter 11 or Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings. This may
be because in practice it could obtain sufficient cash from the sale of its assets to
cover its outside liabilities; from the accounts this is not the case, but some of the
aircraft may fetch more than their book balance sheet values. This is impossible to
tell, but a similar exercise carried out at the end of June 2005 by Air New Zealand
valued their fleet at NZ$I.224 billion on their books and only NZ$764 million on
the open market.
36
Capital stock, or issued (called up) share capital This represents the nominal value
of the share capital or issued share certificates, and is the proprietary interest in
the company. There may be more than one class of shares issued (e.g., Air New
Zealand has class A shares for nationals, class B shares for foreign nationals, and one
Kiwi share owned by the government with special rights). The share capital may be
divided into ordinary and preferred, the latter having priority over the former in the
distribution of dividends (and assets in the case of liquidation following bankruptcy),
but only up to fixed maximum amount.
Share premium, capital surplus or capital reserves This includes the amount paid
by shareholders over the par or nominal value ofthe shares (share premium account),
re-valuations of fixed assets, currency gains or losses and capitalised goodwill
(revaluation reserves).
Investment in own shares This practice was not permitted in some countries.
In the UK it was allowed from 1999. BA originally accounted for these purchases
in the open market as an investment (assets), but recently switched to recording a
negative entry under reserves.
Accumulated retained earnings, revenue or other reserves These are the net profits
or losses, after payments of dividends to shareholders, accumulated from previous
years' operations. From 200512006, BA describes these as 'other reserves'. Their
change from the previous year total reflects the retained profit for the year adjusted
for (reduced) hedging activity. In 2005, BA moved to the IFRS treatment of pension
deficits which involved moving well over 1 billion from reserves to 'non-current'
liabilities.
Minority interest This reflects that part of total shareholders' equity that is
attributed to the minority shareholders in the consolidated subsidiary companies that
are not 100 per cent owned by BA. This would include the company established to
jointly own the Iberia shares, with the AMR Corporation holding 10 per cent, and the
minority shareholders in the London Eye (now sold).
2.4
Balance Sheet Comparison: BA vs AMR
The BA Group balance sheet is compared with that of the AMR Corporation in
Table 2.14, first looking at their assets and then liabilities. AMR's total revenue in
2005 was 36 per cent higher than BA's. Their total assets were also significantly
higher, especially in terms of equipment and property and other assets. BA's current
assets were greater than AMR's thanks to over US$4 billion in cash and other liquid
funds. BA also had a much larger portion of equipment and property (mostly aircraft)
financed under capital leases.
Table 2.14
37
Balance sheet comparison: Assets, 2005/2006
Current Assets:
Cash/short-term investments
Receivables
Inventories
Other
Total current assets
Equipment and property:
Owned
Under capital/finance lease
Aircraft purchase deposits
Other assets:
Route acquisition, slots and gates
Other
Total assets
3,814
991
515
844
6,164
17,249
1,019
278
* as at 31 March 2006 and applying US$1.74/; ** as at 31 December 2005

The reasonAMR continues trading normally with negative equity is that the creditors
preferred this to forcing bankruptcy procedures. The airline generated just over
US$I billlion in cash in 2005, and the situation was improving. Aircraft lessors were
being paid and their aircraft were flying.
BA on the other hand still had strongly positive equity, albeit reduced by the
pension deficit provision it had to make for its latest financial years. BA, however,
still had over $6 billion in debt and capital leases outstanding at end March 2006,
whereas AMR had just under $1 billion.
AMR's outstanding long-term debt and capital leases were over double BA's,
with capital leases and hire purchase arrangements contributing only 7 per cent
vs 71 per cent for BA. The other difference between the two is the make-up of
the liabilities, and the fact that BA's current assets less current liabilities (working
capital) was positive, while for AMR it was negative. However, a much larger part
Operations or operating activities:
ofAMR's liabilities was air traffic liability, or sales in advance of carriage, and much
of this is repayable in kind rather than cash, given the restrictions on many advance
purchase tickets and FFP liabilities.
Table 2.15
Balance sheet comparison: Liabilities, 2005/2006
Investing activities:
Purchase and sale oftangible fixed assets.
Purchase oftrade investments.
Current Liabilities:
Financing or financing activities:
Accounts payable
1,078
Accrued liabilities
2,388
Air traffic liability
3,615
Other
1,239
Total current liabilities
8,320
Changes in borrowings.
Change in short-term bank deposits.
Issue ofshares or other securities.
Table 2.16
British Airways' Group cash flow statement
13,456
Debtlcapitalleases
9,197
Other liabilities, provisions, credits
- 1,478
Stockholders' equity (deficit)
29,495
Total liabilities
2.5
Dividendy receivedfrom associates.
Net return on investments and servicing offinance (interest charges).
Tax.
million
* as at 31 March 2006 and applying USSI.74/; ** as at 3]
39
Airline Finance
38
December 2005
Cash Flow Statement
The cash flow statement explains major changes in the balance sheet which occurred
over the financial year in terms of cash flowing in and out of a company. Both the
UK and US now both use the term cash flow statement to describe these changes,
with the UK previously using the term sources and applications offunds or funds
flow statement, and the US formerly presenting a statement ofchanges in financial
position. It is usually shown in the annual report and accounts of US and UK airlines,
and some European airlines (for example, KLM, Swissair, Air France and Lufthansa
since 1998).
Neither the profit and loss accounts nor the balance sheet provide information
directly on the cash position of the airline, and how the cash was generated for
payments for aircraft and repayments of loans. This is shown in the cash flow
statement. While an airline might be operating profitably over the year as a whole, it
would still be possible for it to be forced to cease trading if it did not have sufficient
cash to meet its invoices from suppliers and repayments on loans. This possibility is
all the more likely in an industry such as air transport which is highly seasonal and
is characterised by relatively high operational and financial gearing.
The cash flow statement will be explained here with reference to British Airways
(BA), and therefore current UK practice. However, the statement is presented in
a similar way in the US and by some European and Asian airlines. The statement
shows ca<;h movements under three main headings:
Net cash inflow from operations
Interest, dividends and tax paid
Net cashflowfrom operating activities (A)

Purchase of property, plant and equipment
Purchase of intangible assets
Sale of property, plant and equipment
Purchase of investments
Sale of investments
Interest and dividends received
Increase in interest bearing deposits
Net cash flow from investing activities (B)

Proceeds from long-term borrowing
Repayments of borrowing
Capital element of finance leases
And HP agreements repaid
Exercise of share options
Other
Net cash flow from financing activities (C)
Net increase in cashlcash equivalents
1,339
-275
8
9
-7
73
100
402
- 510
-64
-415
21
14
- 472
357
* less progress payments refunded

BA's cash flow statement has been summarised in Table 2.16. Cash flow statements
can be confusing where net amounts are shown, for example 'Net cash from investing
activities'. It is thus important to remember that a positive amount indicates an inflow
41
Airline Finance
of cash, and a negative amount an outflow. Thus, BA's negative net cash flow from
investing activities reflects greater outflow than inflow, whether towards purchase
of aircraft (under 'property, plant and equipment') or interest bearing deposits. BA's
cash flow statement, however, avoids confusion by separating purchases and sales
wherever possible.
BA generated 1.339 billion in cash from its operating activities in 2005/2006,
after paying out 268 million for interest and tax (no dividend being paid). The
main source of its cash from internal operations was its operating profit of
705 million and added back depreciation, amortisation and impairment (a non-cash
item in operating expenses) of 717 million. An increase in trade and other payables
also give them a boost of 150 million. This came from a longer delay in settling
their invoices for goods and services provided by others.
BA invested only 275 million in fixed assets, mostly new aircraft, although this
was offset by refunds of progress payments made since the contracts were signed.
The need for new financing was further reduced by the net cash inflow of 78 million
from the sale of BA's share in the London Eye.
After investments and disposals, the airline still had a positive cash inflow, as it
had in the previous loss-making year. The positive inflow of cash was mainly used
to payoff capital leases and other borrowings, still leaving a net addition to liquid
funds of 357 million.
Cash flow statements are similar to funds flow or sources and application of
funds statements in that they use balance sheet differences between two points in
time (e.g., between the beginning and end of the financial year). But they differ in
adjusting these differences to eliminate all credit and accrued items.
A summary of the interpretation ofBA's cash flow statement is as follows:
show the financing activities before the investments made, and therefore give a figure
of what was available for investment after changes in bank loans, rather than before.
Cash flow statements may be examined over a period of a number of years to
see how an airline has financed its capital expenditure. One airline could also be
compared with another, but this may be difficult resulting from different ways of
presenting the information in difterent countries.
Summary cash flow statements are presented in a similar way for BA (2005/2006
turnover ofUS$15.2 billion) and the AMR Corporation (2005 turnover $20.7 billion).
The three main activities are compared in Table 2.17.
40
The net cash inflow from operating activities increased in 2005/2006,
principally from an increase in cash operating profits, helped by an increase
in trade and other payables.
The net cash required for investments increased from 302 million to
510 million, most of which was needed for interest bearing deposits (in both
years).
An increase in cash balances even after the repayment of almost 0.5 billion
of debt and finance leases.
In theory, all items found in this statement can be derived from the profit and loss
statement and the balance sheet, but in practice there is often not enough detail
shown to be able to do this, as with the example above of changes in short-term bank
deposits. In BA's case, one of the notes to the accounts provides a reconciliation
of operating profit (from the P&L statement) to the net cash inflow from operating
activities (from the cash flow statement).
BA's cash flow statement is in the UK recommended format of presenting the
data. There are, however, a number of different ways of presenting these data, both
with regard to netting off certain items and in terms of the ordering. Thus, interest
paid and received may be shown separately, or as one net figure. Some statements
Table 2.17
Summary cash flow statement comparison, 2005/2006
Cashftowfrom operating activities (A)

Capital expenditures
Other investing activities
Cashftowfrom investing activities (B)
681
-858
- 1,539
Re-payments on long-term debt

and capital lease
Proceeds from long-term borrowings
and capital leases
Issues of stock/shares
Cashftowfromfinancing activities (C)
- 1,131
1,252
223
533
Net increase/(decrease) in cash

18
* year ended 31 March 20()6 and converted at the average rate for the 12 month period:$I. 79/;
** year ended 31 December 2005

BA generated more than double AMR's cash provision from internal sources for the
latest year, on lower total revenues. BA was thus able to be net repayers of loans (and
repaid some of its more expensive debt early), whereas AMR needed to increase
net borrowing. Both airlines kept capital expenditures well under control with most
of AMRs other investing going towards interest-bearing short-term deposits. Both
carriers re-paid a substantial amount of debtJcapitalleases, but AMR took out a very
similar amount of new borrowing, as well as issuing new common stock. Without
raising any new money, BA was still able to add US$639 million to cash.
The Lufthansa Group generated just under 2 billion in cash from operating
activities, almost all of which was used to buy assets. It repaid 305 million oflong
term borrowings and took out almost the same in new debt.
42
Airline Finance
2.6 Value Added Statement

British Airways do not include a value added statement in their annual report and
accounts, although they do give the essential ingredients to allow such a statement to
be constructed (Table 2.18). The statement views the company from an economist's
standpoint, and relates output to inputs of labour, capital and materials. In this way it is
possible to see how much additional value has been created by the firm, after deducting
all the goods and services bought in from other firms. This has special relevance in
today's climate of the contracting out of an increasing part of the firm's activities.
Many interesting conclusions can be drawn from Table 2.18. First, the amount
spent on purchasing goods and services from other firms increased by 12 per cent,
compared to a 5 per cent rise in staff costs and 3 per cent fall in depreciation. This
somewhat simplistic comparison does not necessarily suggest a shift to outsourcing.
For the latest financial year, 56 per cent of turnover was bought in from other firms
or government entities (69 per cent in 198511986), compared to the group results
of 54 per cent for Singapore Airlines, 62 per cent for American Airlines, and 50
per cent for Lufthansa. The trend over time is not a good guide to thc degree of
outsourcing, since the large increase in fuel price would itself shift value added
to outside suppliers. The cross-sectional comparison gives some indication but is
similarly distorted by higher wage costs in some countries.
Table 2.18
Value added statement for British Airways Group 10
Turnover
Cost of goods and services
Value added by the group
Add investment income/profit from
Sale of assets and other adjustments
Value added available
Applied to:
Employees (salaries, etc.)
Government (taxes)
Suppliers of capital:
Dividends
Interest paid
Minority interests
Retained in the business
- Depreciation
- Retained profit
Value added
Estimated/rom in/ormation in the Income Statement
10 The Times, London, (17 August 2001).
BA distributed 60 per cent of their 2005/2006 value added available to employees

compared to 63 per cent in 1995/1996, and 54 per cent for Lufthansa in 2005, 86
per cent for American Airlines in 2005, and only 45 per cent for Singapore Airlines
in 2005/2006.
2.7 Cash Value Added

Cash Value Added (CVA) is designed to measure the shareholder value that the airline
is adding, after providing for an economic return to long-term capital investors. It is
similar to Economic Value Added (EVA), originally developed by the US firm Stem
Stewart & Co, and is increasingly being used by firms, and more recently airlines
such as BA and Lufthansa.
The starting point for eVA is cash flow, or EBITDAR, earnings before interest,
tax, depreciation, amortisation and rentals. This is operating revenues less cash
expenses, plus income from associates, dividends and interest received. However,
the BA example below does not add in interest received. EVA takes as a starting
point Net Operating Profit after Tax (NOPAT), which is similar to EBITDAR but
after deducting tax.
From EBITDAR, tax is deducted, and an asset replacement charge designed to
reflect the economic cost of replacing assets. For BA's 1999/2000 financial year,
this resulted in a sustainable cash profit, before the capital charge deduction, of
466 million (see Table 2.19).
Table 2.19
136
3,904
2,346
153
o
221
16
717
451
3.904
43
Cash value added statement for British Airways Group
Operating revenues
Operating costs (less lease rentals and depreciation)
Other income
Asset replacement charge
Tax on the above
Sustainable cash profit
Gross assets at current cost
Capital charge
eVA
Source: British Airways Factbook, 2001
The asset replacement charge is where CVA departs from many of the ratios used
in the past. This is the economic depreciation charge for assets that are owned, or
on finance or operating leases. Its starting point is total depreciating assets: gross
fixed assets from the balance sheet are adjusted for inflation and combined with the
present value ofleased assets. This is similar to replacement cost. For property and
aircraft under operating leases, the annual rentals are multiplied by seven to give an
estimate of present capital value.
Airline Finance
44
The difficult part is inflating the historic costs of aircraft to current replacement
values on a like-for-like basis. It appears that BA is currently taking equivalent new
aircraft, since they are then depreciating the values over an average asset life of
22.5 years. This would imply, for example, that the historic balance sheet gross
value of a B737-200 would be replaced by the new cost of a B737-200. Since these
are no longer in production, in this case they would presumably take a B737-500,
which is similar in most respects, but presumably has lower fuel costs. They did
not apparently take the replacement cost of a B737-200, of similar vintage and
operating characteristics. This latter approach would give roughly the right fuel and
maintenance costs (which have already been assumed under cash operating costs),
but the economic life would need to be 22.5 less the aircraft's vintage.
The annual asset replacement charge (379 million in 1999/2000) is calculated
by finding the annual amount, which, if discounted over the asset's economic life
using the weighted average cost of capital (WACC which for BA was 7 per cent) as
discount rate, would equal the total of depreciating assets.
From the BA figures published, it is difficult to determine the basis for the tax
charge, but this appears to have been the full UK rate oftax (30 percent in
applied to the cash profit.
The figure for gross assets at current cost is the total of depreciating assets
plus debtors and stocks less provisions and non-interest bearing liabilities. This is
equivalent to shareholders' funds and external liabilities, and this total (17.241 billion
in 1999/2000) was multiplied by WACC to arrive at the capital charge.
The total of the asset replacement charge and the capital charge amounted to
1.586 billion according to BA's figures. This compares with the conventional
accounts figures for 1999/2000 of depreciation (648 million), interest paid (357
and rentals (318 million), or a total of 1.323 million.
2.8 Progress Towards Greater Accounting Standardisation

The increasingly global nature of the airline bl,lsiness, together with a growth in
airline privatisation, alliances and cross-shareholdings, is focusing attention on
the wide variety of accounting principles used, and the differences in quality and
quantity of financial data reported. This chapter has only described some of the
more obvious difi'erences, and the problems that they generate in inter-airline
comparisons will be explored further in consideration of financial ratios in the next
chapter.
The first authoritative survey of airline accounting policies was carried out by the
accounting firm, KPMG, in association with lATA. I I Questionnaires were sent out
to 25 airline finance directors between May and July 1992. The sample covered six
airlines in Australasia, 11 airlines in Europe, three airlines in North America and five
in other world regions. The survey's findings fell into four main areas:
11
Accounting Policies, Disclosure and Financial Trends in the

August.
Inl1u.<trv
I~
45
Accounting for fleet assets and related financing transactions.

General accounting issues and disclosures.
Treasury and foreign currency.
Trends and developments.
The survey concluded with a recommendation that a single body be created to
research and recommend policies for the international airline industry. This
would encourage airlines to adopt recommended accounting policies, and lobby
international accounting standards bodies to take into account airline interests.
Following this proposal, lATA established a sub-committee of its finance committee
to produce accounting guidelines in a number of areas. So far, the following have
been examined:
Foreign currency accounting.
Frequent flyer schemes.
Depreciation.
Recognition of revenues.
Maintenance costs.
Segmental reporting.
Accounting for aircraft leases.
Discussions on the first topic focused on the translation oflong-term foreign currency
borrowings. An Exposure Draft was published which summarised the conclusions to
the sub-committee's discussions. 12 This identified two markedly different accounting
treatments of such borrowings, but did not recommend one in preference to the
other. They did, however, say that whichever method were used, a comprehensive
explanation should be included of the accounting policy used, and its effect on the
profit and loss statement.
The second guideline l3 issued on frequent flyer programme recommended that
the incremental cost approach was the most appropriate technique, if 'an airline can
establish quantitatively that passengers flying as a result of awards under the FFP
are incidental to the passenger revenue process ' (see Appendix 2.1 for more detailed
discussion of this).
The third guideline l4 described what should be taken into account when
determining the cost of an airline's fleet, the useful life of aircraft and the residual
value. It did not, however, recommend on aircraft lives or residual values, but
did endorse the suitability of the straight-line method of depreciation 'in most
circumstances' .
12 Ibid., (1994), Airline Accounting Guideline No.1: Explanatory Foreword and

Translation ofLong-term Foreign Currency Borrowings, Effective 1st August.
13 Ibid., (1995), Airline Accounting Guideline No.2: Frequent Flyer Programme
Accounting, Effective 1st June.
14 Ibid., (1996), Airline Accounting Guideline No.3: Components of Fleet Acquisition
Cost and Associated Depreciation, Effective 1st May.
46
Airline Finance
The fourth guideline l5 examined the recognition of revenue and recommended

that unearned revenue should be carried forward and included in current liabilities,
agent commissions should be included as a cost of sales and recognised at the
same time as the associated revenues, but that revenues should be recorded net of
discounts. Unredeemed coupons should be recognised as revenue in the light ofairline
experience, with perhaps a write-back period of 18-24 months from the date of sale.
The fifth guideline on accounting for maintenance costsl 6 was originally published
in 1996, but was revised in 1999. It suggested that routine maintenance costs are
treated as expenses as and when they are incurred, but that heavy maintenance and
overhauls are accounted for on an accruals basis, rather than deferred and amortised.
For a large airline, they might be expensed as incurred ifthis resulted in a fairly even
reporting over a number of years.
The guideline on accounting for leases endorsed the concept of economic
ownership in account~ for leases, and suggested that the existence of options
required careful consideration (see also Appendix 2.2 at the end of this chapter). It
also argued that any lease structure under which the lessor is in substance merely
a provider of finance and is not compensated for the risk of ownership should be
treated by the airline as a finance lease.17
The guideline on segmental reporting considered that the segmentation of an
airline's business should be viewed as a function of product or service rather than
geography, which should be secondary. A more extensive allocation of costs and
assets could, however, be made if the segmentation were by geographical region. IS
It could be concluded, however, that these lATA initiatives did not bring any real
benefits, regardless of whether they succeeded in persuading airlines to standardise
their accounts. The real test is whether airlines can more easily access the world's
capital markets, especially the huge US market. To do this, it could be argued that
they need to comply with the US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (US
GAAP). Even the International Accounting Standards (lAS) does not yet meet US
requirements, although they have moved much closer. An important step was taken
in Europe, where companies that are listed on EU markets have to adopt most of the
lAS for accounting periods on or after I January 2005. Thus, with the increasing
convergence of lAS with US GAAP, larger EU companies are moving closer to US
requirements. From the beginning of 2007, all companies whose shares are traded
on mainland Chinese stock exchanges will need to apply the Chinese Accounting
Standards System, largely in line with lAS. 19
15
AccountinJ;; Guideline No.4: Recognition QlRevenue, Effective
1st
16 Ibid.,
Airline Accounting Guideline No.5: Accounting for Maintenance
Costs.
17 Ibid., (1997), Airline Accounting Guideline No.6: Accounting for Leases QlAircrafi
Fleet Assets.
18 Ibid., (2000), Airline Accounting Guideline No.7: Segmental Reporting.
19 The Wall Street Journal. Europe, (12 July 2006) XXIV, No. 1l3.
Appendix 2.1
47
Frequent Flyer Programme Award Accounting
Frequent Flyer or Loyalty Programmes (FFPs) allow passengers to accumulate

points each time they travel with a certain airline, or FFP partner airlines. These
are earned under most schemes each time a passenger buys a first or business class
ticket, and for some airlines eeonomy class tickets. Once a threshold is reached, the
points or miles can be exchanged for:
A free ticket.
A free companion ticket.
An upgrade to a business or first class ticket.
Other non air travel awards.
These would be valid on the flights of the sponsoring or any participating airline. It
is likely that many of the points earned will be redeemed at some time in the future.
There will therefore be a future liability to the airline that must be accounted for;
otherwise profitability in the period the points are earned will be
and profits for some future period understated.
FFPs were adopted by airlines to differentiate their brand from other airlines,
and thus to increase market share. This effect is reduced once all their competitor
airlines have similar programmes, although the total market will probably have
been stimulated by their introduction. Airlines will also compete through their FFP
special offers, more generous upgrades, or longer validity periods. Traffic
on new or problem routes, or flights in off-peak periods, can also be stimulated by
offering double or triple FFP points for those services.
The effect ofFFPs on profitability depend on the adoption ofblackout dates over
Christmas or peak holiday periods during which no awards will be granted. This is
to ensure that seats are not occupied by FFP award passengers that would otherwise
have been sold to revenue generating passengers. It is generally assumed that any
such displacement is minimal. Airlines sometimes demonstrate the negligible
likelihood of the displacement of fare paying passengers by giving figures of seat
faetors, or the percentage ofFFP award passenger-kms in total passenger-kms. For
US airlines this latter figure has increased from around 3 per cent in 1991 to between
6 per cent and 10 per cent in 2005. United reported 1.9 million miles redeemed in
2005, 70 per cent of which for travel within the US and Canada. This amounted to
6.6 per cent of United's total passenger-miles, down from 9.0 per cent in 2003. For
Northwest, the miles redeemed on Northwest's flights were 7.3 per cent of total
passenger-miles, or 8.9 per cent including those redeemed on partner airlines. British
Airways recorded only 1.4 per cent oftotal traffic travelling on awards in 1993/1994,
increasing to 2.1 per cent in 2000/2001 and 3.2 per cent in 2004/2005, dropping back
to 2.8 in 2005/2006.
There arc three possible approaches to FFP accounting. The first trcats the
redemption ofthe points as a contingent liability, on the basis that it is impossible to
quantify accurately the timing and amount of awards. This was rejected by lATA's
Aceounting Policy Task Force because FFPs are specially designed to stimulate
traffie, and there is a high probability of a future liabilitv being incurred.
48
Airline Finance
The second method is called the incremental cost technique. This recognises the
future liability in providing for the future costs of carrying those passengers that
have passed the points threshold (for example 25,000 miles for American Airlines)
and are likely to be granted an award. This is done through the profit and loss
statement by increasing passenger services (or other) expenses by the incremental
costs ofcarrying the award passengers at a future date. The same amount is recorded
in the balance sheet as an accrued liability. When the passenger is eventually carried
under the award, the incremental cost of carrying that passenger is deducted from
expenses (since there is no matching revenue for this period), and the liability in the
balance sheet extinguished. This means that the operating profit in each year is not
distorted by the FFP award.
Incremental costs used to include only the cost of in-flight catering, fuel,
reservations, passenger taxes, fees and insurance, and ticket and baggage tag
delivery, and would be calculated for each class of service. No contribution to
overheads or profit is included in these costs. However, many airlines (such as
BA) now impose a separate charge for airport charges, insurance and security and
fuel surcharges. Any government taxes would also be extra. In-flight catering is
now much reduced and in some cases charged to the passenger. These would be
paid by any passenger using free mileage allowance, and thus incremental costs
are probably now lower than they were. It also means that the value of FFP miles
to passengers has been reduced. Few airlines provide data on what they include in
incremental costs. At end December 2005, Delta Air Lines recorded a liability of
US$291 million for 7 million expected FFP redemptions, giving an average cost of
US$42 (Delta Form 10K Report, 2005). This compared with US$35 at the end of
2004 and US$23 for end 2003.
The third method is called the deferred revenue technique. This defers a certain
proportion of the revenue earned from the sale of the tickets which conferred FFP
points until the award is granted and used. The proportion of revenue is normally
based on the yield derived from a discount fare ticket with similar restrictions to
the award ticket. This amount is also recorded, in current liabilities, and added to
revenues when the passenger uses the award. Some airlines account for their own
FFPs in this way, and American Airlines uses this method for mileage credits or
points sold to other airlines and companies participating in its FFP (although it uses
the incremental cost method for credits earned by its own members).
Most airlines use the incremental cost method because:
date20 ), and the redemption experience of the airline. Airlines either consider only
those members who have reached the threshold for awards, or they account for a
liability as the qualifYing miles are flown. From the 1992 IATAlKPMG survey, in
fact two-thirds (6) of the airlines used the latter approach, even though it must be
difficult to estimate how many with fewer points will eventually reach the threshold.
Only one-third (3) of airlines used the first approach.
TWA assumed in 1991 that 80 per cent ofthe potential awards outstanding would
be translated into free tickets, a similar level to that adopted by United and Delta.
By 1996, however, Delta had reduced their estimate to 66 per cent, partly because of
the acquisition of Pan Am's frequent flyer members, many ofwhich were considered
to be dormant. Delta's marketing department may wish to activate these 'dormant'
accounts by promoting loyalty to their own services, but the downside of this would
be the incremental costs of providing free tickets that otherwise might not have been
requested.
By 2000, Delta had increased their estimate of the share of award holders who
will actually use their awards for travel to 75 per cent, somewhat lower than United's
82 per cent for the same year. European airlines do not give such estimates, nor do
they divulge marginal costs.
Canadian Airlines International provoked a rush to cash in frequent flyer points
in December 1996 by issuing a warning that they may have to stop service if their
unions and creditors failed to agree a restructuring. Award requests were running at
over 50 per cent normal levels, but they could easily be accommodated since this
was the low season for the carrier and many seats were available. This provided a
solution for the FFP liabilities, which had risen to rather a high level, but caused
alarm amongst creditors which had not been desired.
Some airlines have been encouraging FFP members to use their awards for
merchandise rather than flights. This avoids any dissatisfaction that might arise in
failure to obtain a flight at the right time and to the preferred destination. Airlines
need to continue to apply tight restrictions, but still value the FFP programmes as a
competitive tool. Table 2.20 shows that product redemptions are still a small part of
overall redemptions.
The discussion so far has focused on airline frequent flyer schemes. Airlines also
sell air miles to non-airline businesses, and frequent buyers on non-airline goods and
services probably now account for more miles than frequent flyers. These are sold by
airlines for between one and two US cents a mile, with 25,000 miles needed to eam
a US domestic trip. As mentioned above, the airline would incur the marginal cost of
up to US$1 00 for a ticket sold for US$250-500,21
They consider the displacement of revenue generating passengers by award

passengers to be insignificant.
The share of free ticket award passengers is not material in the context oftotal
passengers.
For both the last two methods, it is necessary to estimate the number of future awards
likely to be granted under the FFP. This will depend on the thresholds established,
the future cut-off when points must be redeemed or lost (e.g., Swissair had a two
year limit, and US carriers such as United and Delta introduced a three-year expiry
49
20 Membership can be reactivated by means of a payment or the purchase of a qualifYing

flight.
21 The Economist, (24 December 2(05).
50
Table 2.20
Airline Finance
Appendix 2.2 Accounting for Finance and Operating Leases
AAdvantage award distribution in 2005
American Airlines flights

Upgrade awards
Product redemptions
Flights on other airline and other awards
Total
51
7.9
21.0
100.0
Source: AAdvantage website (American
These air miles schemes are generally accounted for by the deferred revenue
approach, while the same airline would probably use the deferred cost method for
their own scheme. American Airlines takes part of the revenue from air miles' sales
to the revenue in the income statement ofthe year in which they are sold to cover the
cost of administration; the remainder is deferred and recognised over the following
28 months (the period of time AA expect the miles to be used).
Operating or short-term leases are almost always accounted for by including the
actual rental payments as an operating expense as it is incurred, or equalised over
the term of the lease (see Chapter 10 for a detailed description of both operating and
finance leases).
There are a number ofways of accounting for finance leases, with the majority of
airlines using the following method:
Calculate the present value of future lease or rental payments, using as the
discount rate the implicit interest rate applied to the fair value of the asset
to arrive at the rental amounts; if this is not known then the lessee's cost of
borrowing may be used.
Add this present value, or aggregate of the capital elements payable during
the lease term, to the fixed tangible assets on the balance sheet, and depreciate
the leased aircraft in exactly the same way as for a similar owned aircraft, i.e.,
over the same period and to the same residual value.
Record the present value of future lease payments as a liability on the balance
sheet (long-term obligation together with a current portion under current
liabilities), reducing this each year by the appropriate part of the lease or
rental payments made.
Separate the lease payments into interest expenses and depreciation, or a
reduction in the lease liability, for inclusion in the profit and loss statement
(instead of rental expenses).
An alternative way of capitalising the value both of the asset and the liability is to
take the fair market value (adopted by six out of 18 airlines in the KPMG/IATA
survey), or to take the lower of the present value and the fair market value (four out
of 18 airlines).
One or two airlines use a different value for the finance lease asset and the long
term lease liability, the difference being added to, or subtracted from, the interest
expense over a given period. In the second step shown above, some airlines depreciate
the leased asset over a different period to that which owned aircraft are depreciated.
Almost all the airlines in the survey calculated the interest portion of the payment on
an actuarial or effective yield basis over the lease term.
As will be demonstrated in Chapter 10, it is becoming more and more difficult to
distinguish between operating and financeicapitalleases. The following criteria are
used by most airlines, and conform to their national accounting guidelines:
Substantially all the risks and benefits of ownership are transferred from or
to lessee.
The term ofthe lease is equal to or greater than a certain portion of the asset's
estimated useful life.
The present value of minimum lease payments exceeds a certain proportion
of the asset's fair value.
Ownership of the asset will be transferred to the lessee at the end of the lease
term, possibly for a very small eonsideration or residual value payment.
A irline Financial Statements
52
The UK rules for accounting for leases define a financial or capital lease which
requires to be placed on balance sheet as:
Ownership transferred at the end of the lease term
a lease that transfers substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership of an asset to
the lessee. It should be presumed that such a transfer of risks and rewards occurs if at
the inception of a lease the present value of the minimum lease payments amounts to
substantially all (normally 90 per cent or more) of the fair value of the leased asset.
The US rules classifY a lease as a capital lease if either ownership is transferred to

the lessee, or there is a bargain purchase option, or the lease tenn covers 75 per cent
or more of the remaining economic life of the aircraft, or the present value of the
minimum lease payments is more than 90 per cent of the aircraft's fair value.
The international accounting standard bases its recommendation for inclusion of
a finance lease on balance sheet on economic rather than legal ownership. In many
European countries and Japan, finance leases were often excluded from the balance
sheet because the airline did not have legal title or ownership. In the UK and US,
however, these leases are capitalised and placed on the balance sheet.
A more difficult problem occurs with extendible operating leases, which usually
have a lease tenn that covers the economic life of the aircraft, but give the lessee
airline the opportunity to break the lease at no penalty (walk away from the deal)
at various intervals over the tenn. British Airways have a number of aircraft leased
in this way, and originally left them off balance sheet. However, from March 1995
onwards, they decided to place these on balance sheet, in line with latest UK financial
reporting guidelines. The effect was to add 870 million to tangible fixed assets and
905 million to borrowings (at 31 March 1995). This also boosted operating profit
for 199411995 by 53 million, since the interest payable part of the rental payment
(54 million) would have been transferred to non-operating items. It would also
have reduced net profit in the earlier years of the lease tenn, but increased net profit
in later years. This is because an equalised rental charge would have been replaccd
by depreciation and a declining interest charge over the lease tenn.
The IATAlKPMG guidelines have already been discussed in Section 2.8 above,
and these are summarised in the diagram shown in Figure 2.1, which is quite widely
used in decisions on whether a particular lease structure should be considered as a
finance or operating lease.
53
Yes
No
Lease term for major part of asset's economic life

Yes
No
Lease contains bargain purchase option and/or

prohibitive penalties on termination
I
Yes
No
Lessor regards lease essentially as a financing

transaction - ie lessor is compensated based
on lender's rate of return
Yes
No
Present value of minimum lease payments greater

than or substantially equal to asset's fair value
Yes
No
Operating lease
Classification ofa Lease
Figure 2.1
Aircraft lease classification guidelines
Figure 2.1 represents examples of situations in which it could be inferred that

substantially all ofthe risks and rewards of the ownership have been transferred. See
also Glossary ofTenns for definitions.
Source: Airline Accounting Guideline No.6 (IATAlKPMG)
Finance lease
Chapter 3
Airline Financial Ratios

The previous chapter explained in some detail the individual items in an airline's
profit and loss account, balance sheet and cash flow statement. Some idea can be
gained of the airline's size, capital structure, profitability and the financing of its
investments from an examination of these figures and the notes attached to them.
However, performance ratios will need to be calculated to be able to assess past
trends of a particular airline or to compare different airlines. These could be helpful
in evaluating a shareholder's investment in an airline, or in an assessment by banks or
lessors before entering into a loan or lease agreement. The ratios can be categorised
under the following headings:
Performance/earnings.
Risk or solvency.
Liquidity.
Market valuation or investment.
The first group of ratios are designed to evaluate how the airline is trading, whether
in relation to turnover, assets or equity, while the second deal with the risk of the
firm being unable to meet its financial commitments overall, and continue trading.
The third provides a measure of the airline's ability to meet its short-term financial
commitments. The last group are concerned with value, and are based on the market
price of the airline's shares or bonds and can thus only be calculated for companies
that are traded on a stock market.
Some ratios use only profit and loss account data, some use only balance sheet
data, and some combine data from each of these statements. The latter need to take
into account the fact that balance sheet items are measured on a particular date,
whereas profit and loss account items are summed over a particular period (usually
one year). The balance sheet items may need therefore to be averaged over the same
period.
The next part of this chapter explains how the more important and widely used
ratios are calculated with reference to British Airways' last two financial years.
In some cases it was impossible to compute comparable ratios for the previous
year, as a result of the change in accounting rules in 2005. This affected equity in
particular. The ratios for 2005/2006 were also compared with those for AMR using
2005 data. Ratios for a selection of major international airlines are then compared,
before concluding with some of the principal problems with interpretation and
comparison.
56
3.1
Airline Finance
Performance/Earnings Ratios
Operating Ratio
The operating ratio is defined as operating revenue expressed as a percentage of

operating expenditure; operating margin is an alternative expression that is similar
to margin on sales.
Table 3.1
Operating revenues ( million) A

Operating expenses ( million) B
Operating profit/(los) ( million) - C
Operating ratio (per cent) A' 1001B
~ C' 100/A
Operating ratio/margin
705
109.0
8.3
The operating ratio or margin gives an indication of management efficiency in

controlling costs and increasing revenues. However, it can be distorted by changes
in depreciation policy, or a switch from ownership of aircraft (involving both
depreciation and interest charges, only the first of which is shown under operating
costs) to operating leases (all of which annual cost is shown under operating costs).
Ignoring these distortions, BA achieved a higher operating ratio in 2005/2006 than
the 2004 ICAO preliminary world average of 103.5 per cent, and was also ahead of
the 2005 lATA international scheduled average operating margin of23 per cent.
For comparison, the AMR Corporation made a margin of -0.4 per cent in 2005,
a small improvement from the -0.8 per cent in 2004.
An alternative fonnulation of this ratio that avoids the operating lease/owned
aircraft distortion is operating profit (after interest charges) expressed as a percentage
of operating revenues. BA's interest expense (before capitalised interest) was 223
million in 2005/2006: adding this to operating expenses would have resulted in a
decline in operating ratio from 109.0 per cent to 106.0 per cent, or a fall in margin
from 8.3 per cent to 5.7 per cent (both for 2005/2006).
The possible distortion from a comparison of operating margins is clearly shown
with AMR and Continental Airlines. Only 24 per cent of the former's fleet was on
operating lease in 2005, whereas for Continental it was 77 per cent. Continental
reported an operating margin of -0.3 per cent in 2005, which became -0.4 per cent
if interest expense were deducted from operating profit (added to operating loss). In
AMR's case, the margin increased from -0.4 per cent to -5.1 per cent, after accounting
for almost US$I billion in interest expense (US$41 0 million for Continental).
It is difficult to define a satisfactory target for this ratio (pre-interest), since it will
depend on the airline's tax rate, financial gearing and other non-operating factors.
A recent lATA study! suggested a minimum operating margin of between 9 per cent
Value Chain Profitability, lATA Economics Briefing No. 04, June 2006, p. 21.
57
and 10 per cent to meet their cost of capitaL Delta Air Lines has in recent years used
a target of 12.5 per cent, BA have a target operating margin (or EBIT margin) of 10
per cent for financial year (FY)2007/2008 (also a longer tenn corporate target across
the business cycle), while Finnair apply a lower target of the same ratio of 6 per
cent, without specifying year. Lufthansa aim to achieve a total EBIT of 1 billion by
FY2008 (without specifying a ratio).
An alternative measure of operating profit increasingly used is EBIT, EBITDA or
EBlTDAR (also called EBlTDRA). EBIT is earnings or net profit before deducting
interest and tax (and before other items are added or subtracted such as profits from
associates or gains from the sale of assets). This is effectively another word for
'operating profit'. Iberia uses the EBlTDAR margin for their target of 16 per cent by
FY2008. EBlTDA is EBIT with depreciation and amortisation charges for the year
added back to give a proxy figure for cash flow.
The last, EBlTDAR is EBITDA with rental expenses added back. EBlTDA and
EBlTDAR can be substituted for operating profit (or EBIT) in the above to calculate,
for example, the EBITDA margin, instead of the operating margin. They have the
advantage ofbeing free of distortions from depreciation policy or method of aircraft
financing. But they present a new distortion in that they total disregard capital costs
and their relationship to other operating costs.
Net Profit Margin
The net profit margin is after tax profit expressed as a percentage of operating
revenue or turnover.
Table 3.2
British Airways Group - Net profit margin
Operating revenues ( million)

Profit after tax ( million)
Net
This ratio was calculated for the world airline industry as a whole in Chapter I
(Figure 1.3). BA's 2000/200 I ratio was the same as the margin for the industry,
while for 2005/2006 the industry achieved a -0.8 per cent margin. This ratio has the
advantage over the operating ratio or margin in that it is free of the operating lease
distortion. However, the margin for a particular year may be increased or reduced by
large asset sales, restructuring costs or asset write-downs.
Return on Invested Capital (Capital Employed)
Return on invested capital (ROle) is the pre-tax profit before interest paid as a
percentage of average totallong-tenn capital employed. For some airline accounts,
the figure for interest paid or payable is not given. Here the ratio could be calculated
before net interest. Some airlines define this ratio as operating profit as a percentage of
Airline Finance
capital, but it is more logical to include any income from asset sales and investments
to show the profit available to provide a return for the two classes of long-term
capital providers, debt holders and shareholders.
Some investment banks use what is known as NOPAT for the numerator and
the denominator to include short-term debt and add back accumulated amortisation
to goodwill. NOPAT is defined as ERIT plus interest received (income) together with
the goodwill amortisation that has been added to the denominator. ERIT can also be
reduced by the full tax rate.
The ratio can be calculated with or without minority interests, but if they are
included (as in the example above), they should be included in both numerator
and denominator of the ratio. Capitalised interest has been subtracted from interest
payable, to reflect interest on lending for current, rather than future operations.
used), but the year end position is easier to calculate, and provides a similar ratio
unless there have been major changes in a..'lsets over the year.
58
Table 3.3
Profit before tax and interest payable (US$ million)2

Average shareholders' equity (US$ million)
Average long-term debt (US$ million)
Av. long-term capital employed ( million)
Return on
Return on Equity
Return on equity is the net profit after interest and tax expressed as a percentage of
shareholder's funds. The numerator is before deducting minority interests and the
denominator includes the capital belonging to these interests. This percentage gives
an idea of how successful the airline's management is in using the capital entrusted
to it by the owners of the company, or equity shareholders. It is sensitive to method
of financing. Similar comments apply as for the return on capital employed, in terms
of marked year to year fluctuations.
Table 3.4
Return on Invested Capital (ROIC)
- 1,030
13,490
12,460
nJa
I. Converted into US dollars at average rate over 2005/2006 of US$I.791

2. Profit/loss before tax olus interest expense (i.e., adding back interest expense)
This percentage gives an indication of how successful the airline or group is in

its investment of all the long-term capital under its management. It can move up
and down significantly from year to year, so that more valid comparisons between
airlines or industries might be better made using averages over a number of years.
Comparisons are also distorted by greater use of aiI:craft and other assets on short
term operating leases.
While BA does not publish a figure for return on capital, Austrian Airlines modify
the above formulation using earnings before interest (and not tax) and dividing by
long-term and short-term debt less cash and cash equivalents (the denominator thus
identical to the numerator of the net debt to equity ratio see below). SAS use
CFROI which is adjusted EBITDAR divided by a non-book measure of asset value
(see below) for their 20 per cent targct. Air France-KLM have a target ROCE of 7
per cent that it aims to achieve by FY20 IO.
A less common way of calculating return on investment is employed by
Lufthansa. Profit is defined in the same way as Table 3.3, but investment is taken to
be the balance sheet total assets or total liabilities (including current liabilities and
provisions). Taking total liabilities may be too broad a definition, since it includes
such items as accounts payable, which do not demand a return in any strictly financial
sense. Lufthansa also use total assets at the year end, rather than using an average
over the year. Averaging gives a better ratio (ideally a weighted average should be
59
Return on Equity (RoE)
Profit after tax and interest (US$ million)

Average shareholders' equity (US$ million)
Return on
I. Converted into US dollars at average rate over 2005/2006 ofUS$I.791
AMR's ratio could not be calculated for 2005, since both profit and equity were
negative. This makes the ratio meaningless. The ratio is usually calculated after tax,
but some airlines (Austrian Airlines and Lufthansa in 2005) take profit before tax.
Target rates of return on equity are generally around 15 per cent and this is
currently used by a major German bank, while the insurance company Hannover Re
uses 12 per cent. A French utility uses a range of 10-15 per cent, and the bank ABN
AMRO set a target of an average of 20 per cent for their future performance over
2005-2008. In 2005, the UK based low cost carrier, easyJet, adopted a RoE target of
15 per cent to be achieved within three years. Meeting the target would give senior
staff an award of shares equivalent to their total annual salary. The agreement also
allowed for smaller awards for smaller gains in RoE from its 2004/2005 level of7.4
per cent.
As with ROIC, this ratio can be calculated both with and without minority
interests. They have been included in the table above.
3.2 Risk or Solvency Ratios

Interest Cover
Interest cover is the profit before net interest payable and tax divided by net interest
expenses.
Table 3.5
Airline Finance
60
Interest cover
Profit before tax and net interest ( million) (A)

Net interest payable ( million) (B)
Interest cover
128
5.8
This is the formulation used by BA, defining it as the number oftimes that the profit/
(loss) before tax and excluding net interest payable covers net interest payable. This
ratio is one of the more important ones, showing the ability of the airline to meet
the interest payments on its debt. Without a clear margin of cover (well over 1.00),
there will be little profit remaining for distribution to shareholders or ploughing
back into the company. Banks and investors generally look for interest cover of at
least 2.5:1, while an lATA industry capital needs study suggested that it should be
not less than 1.5. The UK airports group, BAA, sets in internal target of 3.5 for its
long-term plans, and BA more than achieved a substantial margin above this target
in both years.
Some investment banks use the above formula using only interest payable.
However, it is not always possible to calculate this, since many airlines show only
net interest, without any breakdown between income and expense.
An alternative used by SAS is operating profit plus interest income divided by
interest payable. For BA's FY2005/2006, this would mean a slightly lower cover of
3.6. AMR had negative profit before tax and net interest in 2005, and thus had no
cover for its net interest payable of $808 million.
Interpretation of such trends as well as comparisons with other airlines needs to
take into account key variables such as depreciation and leasing policies.
BA believes that the formulation shown in the table above is useful to investors
when analysing their 'ability to meet its interest commitments from current earnings'
(BA's Form 20K submission to the SEC for 2005/2006).
Finally, another way of approaching interest cover is to take the cash flow from
operating activities before interest paid from the cash. flow statement and relate that
to interest paid. That would give a 7.3 times cover for BA in 2005/2006. For AMR it
would have been 2.1 times covered for FY2005.
Debt/Equity Ratio
The debt/equity ratio, or gearing, is the long-term debt or borrowings divided by

shareholders' funds.
Table 3.6
British Airways Group - Debt/equity ratio
Long-term debt ( million)

Stockholders' equity ( million)
)pht/"rI111tv ratio
61
BA's gearing has fallen below the 2: 1 level, in spite of a large movement of
1.8 billion from equity to pension provisions. Under the UK GAAP accounting
rules, its debt/equity would have been close to I: 1 at the end of FY200512006. As
with the ratios discussed above, operating leases will also affect this one. Leaving
this aside, BA's debt/equity ratio of2.01 at the end of March 2000 was higher than
the ICAO world airline figure of 1.32 at the end of December 1999, and by 2004
(the latest year for which complete ICAO data were available) BA was well below
the industry average of 1.76 (before inclusion of pension liabilities). Comparisons
over a longer period of time would show the marked cyclical effect on this ratio,
with latest cyclical downswing causing a marked deterioration for the ICAO world
airlines from 1.42 in 2000 to the 2003 position of 2.46.
It is also common to find gearing expressed by the long-term debt as a percentage
oftotal capital employed: thus, BA's end March 2006 gearing would be 3.602 billion
expressed as a percentage of (3,602 + 2,074) billion, or 63.5 per cent.
A better measure ofdebt to equity, however, should include all outside liabilities,
rather than only long-term ones, and debts should be net of any cash and deposits
shown as current assets. In this form it can also be called the solvency ratio. BA
define this ratio as net debt to total capital, with net debt being the sum of all loans,
finance leases, hire purchase arrangements and capital bonds, net of short-term
deposits and cash less bank overdrafts. Total capital is capital and reserves plus net
debt. This approach produces an end March 2006 net debt to capital ratio of 44.2 per
cent compared to the above 63.5 per cent, or a net debt to equity ratio of 0.79 vs 1.74
in 200512006. Another definition of net debt (used by SAS) is interest bearing debts
minus interest bearing assets; this would be difficult to calculate using published
data, but would in any case be very close to the BA definition.
The lower the debt/equity or solvency ratio the greater the firm's capacity for
borrowing more outside finance, due to the lower risk to potential lenders. Banks
sometimes include a covenant or condition on loans requiring the debt/eqUity ratio to
be kept below a certain ratio (say, 2: 1) otherwise the borrower would be in default.
The impact of debt/equity ratios or gearing is illustrated by the hypothetical
example in Table 3.7. An airline which is more highly geared will display a larger
variation in return on equity (the measure used by existing and potential shareholders).
Thus, in good years the rate of return will be higher than that of the lower geared
airline, other things such as profit and total capital employed being equal. In bad
years, however, the return will be worse than the lower geared airline. Conversely,
the lower geared airline will produce smaller variations in return on equity.
Southwest Airlines has one of the best financial records of any US airlines, and
has consistently kept its long-term debt between 20 per cent and 30 per cent of total
capital throughout the second half of the 1990s, or a debt/equity ratio averaging
0.35: 1.2 Even at the lowest point in the last recession (1991), Southwest's debt/equity
was still only 0.97: 1. At the end of2005, Southwest's equity was 47 per cent of total
liabilities and its debt/equity back down to only 0.21: I.
Southwest Annual Report, 1999.
Airline Finance
62
Table 3.7
Effect of gearing on ratios
Capital and reserves ()
Long-tenn debt ()
100,000
Total capital ()
500,000
Debt/equity ratio
0.25
Pre-interest profit: year I ()
30,000
Average capital and reserves ( million)
10,000
Net profit after interest () I
20,000
Return on capital employed (%)
Return on equity (per cent)
Pre-interest profit: year 1 ()
Average capital and reserves ( million)
Net profit after interest ()1
Return on capital employed (%)
Return on
4
5
60,000
due. Airlines' current liabilities often include significant amounts relating to sales in
advance of carriage (in BA's casc 1,045 million at the end of March 2006). These
might be excluded when calculating the current ratio, since they are mostly non
refundable claims on the airline. Such an adjustment was not necessary for BA's
ratio at end March 2006, but it was more appropriate to AMR. This US airline's
current assets totalled $6,164 million at the end of December 2005 compared with
current liabilities of $8,320 million. This gave them a current ratio of 0.74, well
below industry nonns. However, they had $3,615 million of air traffic liability in
current assets: these included some refundable tickets, but many that were not in
addition to a sizeable FFP liability that is not reimbursable. Excluding this from
current liabilities leads to an adjust figure of $4,705 million and an adjusted current
ratio of 1.31.
Table 3.8
British Airways Group - Current ratio
- 10,000
50,000
10
12Yi
I. Interest assumed to be 10 per cent of long-tenn debt
Swissair, or its parent company that was then called SAir Group, suffered a sharp
deterioration in financial fortunes in 2000: worsening profits and large provisions
in 2000 resulted in the debt/equity ratio deteriorating from 1.01:1 at end December
1999 to 4.68:1 at the end of2000.'
Austrian Airlines uses shareholders' equity as a percentage of total assets (and
liabilities) for their target. It has a medium-tenn target of keeping this above 25 per
cent. It was only 17.7 per cent at the end of December 2005, with BAjust below this
figure at end March 2006. Lufthansa has a medium~tenn target to raise its percentage
from 23.5 per cent in 2005 to above 30 per cent. Lufthansa also has a target band for
its net debt to equity ratio (gearing) ofbetween 40 per cent and 60 per cent (004-0.8),
but from 2004 it included pension provisions in the calculation.
3.3
63
Liquidity Ratios
Current assets ( million)

Current liabilities ( million)
Current ratio
If the current ratio is too high (well above 1.00), it suggests that the business is
generating more cash than can be profitably re-invested for longer tenn expansion.
The airline may, however, be building up a war chest for acquisition of other
companies, or be expecting a period ahead of bunching of aircraft deliveries.
Liquidity covenants may be applied to bank debt, especially in cases where
the airline does not have a high credit rating. For example, American Airlines has
borrowed on the basis ofbeing required to keep it liquidity equal to or above US$1.25
billion, or risk default. A covenant that requires a current ratio of 1.5 or above could
also be applied in some cases.
A small number of airlines include rotatable items, or those spare parts that can
be repaired and reused, as current rather than fixed assets. Other airlines would do
the same with repairable items, which can only be repaired and reused a limited
number of times (e.g., tyres). These airlines would thus have inflated stock levels,
and current ratios which would not be strictly comparable with the majority of
airlines.
Current Ratio
Acid Test/Quick Ratio
The current ratio is the ratio of current assets to current liabilities.

A ratio of l.00 is nonnally considered for industry in general to be broadly
sound. Any ratio falling substantially below this level indicates that the business
may not be generating adequate cash to meet short-tenn obligations as they become
The ratio ofliquid assets to current liabilities. The purpose of this ratio is to identifY
current assets that can be easily and readily converted into cash. There are no rules
or targets on the desirable level of this ratio, but BA has a comfortable margin of
liquidity.
BA's quick ratio improved to a healthier level at the end ofFY2006, although the
same adjustment for sales in advance of carriage applies here. Removing this non
cash liability would give BA a quick ratio of around unity.
The SAir Group Annual Report, 2000.
Table 3.9
Airline Finance
64
British Airways Group - Quick ratio
Liquid or quick assets ( million)
Current liabilities ( million)
ratio
3,432
0.71
AMR's end 2005 cash and short-term investments amounted to $3,814 million
compared to $4,705 million of current liabilities excluding its air traffic liability.
This results in an adjusted quick ratio of 0.81, lower than might be expected, but no
cause for alarm.
Another test that investors make is the number of days of cash operating
expenses that the cash and short-term investments would cover (see 8.2.3 for this
calculation).
6S
This is a useful ratio for investors to evaluate their investment in BA ordinary

shares compared to other investment opportunities. But it only takes account of
dividends returns, and not of expected future capital gains. BA's yield on 26 July
2001 was 4.4 per cent compared to the yield on the companies in the Financial Times
all-share index of2.6 per cent. No calculation has been possible between 2001 and
2006.
Yields on firms in the services sector (3 per cent) tended to be lower than those
in the general industrial sector (4.4 per cent). Higher yields tend to compensate for
slow or variable growth in eamings per share, as was the case for BA.
Market capitalisation Market share price per share multiplied by the number of
shares outstanding.
Market capitalisation will change in line with changes in share price, and the
number of shares issued. Normally, the share price would be depressed by any large
new issue of shares. Market capitalisation is shown for other airlines in Table 6.2.
3.4 Stock Market Ratios

Table 3.11
British Airways Group - Market capitalisation
Pe~rormance
Dividend cover
payable.
Table 3.10
Net profit attributable to shareholders divided by dividend
British Airways Gronp
Dividend cover
Profit for the year ( mIlliOn)

Dividend payable ( million)
Dividend cover
There are no rules as to how
the level of dividend cover should be. Some
investors, such as pension fund managers, require an adequate and continuing
income stream, but others perhaps driven by rates of taxation look for capital gains.
In a capital intensive industry, or one that requires the frequent application of new
technology, it is prudent to keep the dividend cover high. In general, cover should
exceed 1.00 by an adequate margin, and an earlier lATA study adopted a target of
2.00.
BAchose to maintain its dividend per share (l7.9p) in 199912000 in the face ofa
net loss for the year, following profitable trading throughout the 1990s, including in
the aftermath of the Gulf War recession. A dividend was also paid in the following
year, despite very low cover.
Dividend yield Dividend per share expressed as a percentage of the cost or market
value of one share.
Shares issued at end of year (million)

Share price () at year end
Market
Earnings per share Profit after tax attributed to the parent company shareholders
(i.e., after allowing for minority interests) divided by the number of ordinary shares
issued.
The absolute value and growth in this ratio has traditionally been a key target for
the management of quoted companies, and one of the most important benchmarks
for investment analysts. While it is still in widespread use, increased emphasis is
now being placed on cash based ratios (see Equity valuelEBDRIT above), as well
as measures of economic value added. lhis is because, like many other ratios, it is
susceptible to distortion by one-oft'items.
Table 3.12
Earnings per share (EPS)
Weighted average no. shares (million)

Net profit for the year ( million)
Basic earnings oer share
The ratio has the advantage over measures such as net profit by itself. This is because
a company could increase net profit merely by acquiring another profitable company
67
Airline Finance
by issuing new shares. Earnings per share, however, would not automatically
increase.
Earnings per share can also be calculated on a fully diluted basis. This allows for
the future issue offurther shares for employee share options, and from the convertible
capital bonds. This would have increased the number of shares issued by BA over
2005/2006 to 1,138.5 million. Profit would also be increased by 2 million to allow
for the elimination of convertible bond interest (for only part of the year). The net
result of these changes would be to reduce BA's earnings per share to 39.8 pence in
200512006 on a diluted basis.
BA used this metric in their share option plan between 1999 and 2006: options
were granted ifEPS increased by more than 4 per cent above the retail price index
(averaged over three consecutive years).
earnings growth, or any substantial gains from sales of aircraft at higher than book
values.
66
Price/earnings ratio Market price per share divided by earnings per share.
The price/earnings (PIE) ratio shows how many years of current earnings are
necessary to cover the share price. However, the stock market is always looking
ahead, and if earnings are expected to increase strongly over the next few years
this will push up the share price and result in higher PIE ratios as measured against
current or latest historical figures. That is why growth or high technology shares
often have high PIE ratios. To take some of this effect into account, the PIE ratio is
sometimes calculated on a prospective basis, using a forecast of earnings per share
for the year ahead.
It can be seen from Table 3.13 that BA's share price increased faster than earnings
in 2005/2006, but its PIE is still well below the 20 plus levels achieved by the fast
expanding low cost carriers.
Table 3.13
British Airways Group - Pricelearnings ratio
Market price per share

Basic earnings per share (p
Pril',,/p"'1"n;nCT" ratio
40.4
8.7
Table 3.14
British Airways Group - Net asset value per share
Book value of assets ( million)
Total creditors ( million)
Net book value of assets ( million)

Shares issued at end of year (million)
2006
12,174
10,100
2,074
1,130.90
Net asset value per share ()
1.84
Market price per share

Ratio of market to book value
3.53
1.92
Operating Cash Flow Multiples

An operating cash flow multiple is the ratio of the market value of debt and equity
to EBDRIT (earnings before depreciation, rentals, interest and tax); an alternative
formulation is based on the market value of equity alone. These multiples are
used by investment banks to try to avoid the accounting biases that can distort the
conventional ratios described above. They also use the market, rather than book value
of shareholders' equity, which is an improvement (but only applicable to airlines
with a market quotation for their equity). The main disadvantage of these ratios is
that by avoiding accounting bias they are also removing the effect of efficiency in
the use of capital. Airlines that operate very new high cost aircraft have these aircraft
related costs removed from cash flow, which gives them an unfair advantage over
those that have traded low capital costs for high fuel and maintenance costs. One
bank does try to adjust for maintenance cost variations, but this involved some fairly
heroic assumptions in the absence of detailed data.
Table 3.15
British Airways Group - Equity valuelEBITDAR
* for latest 12 month period

Value
Net asset value per share Total assets less outside liabilities divided by total number
of shares outstanding. This is the book (not market) value per share.
The book value of net assets per share gives only a very broad indication of
the break-up value of the airline, depending on whether the assets were re-valued
recently and the rate of inflation. BA re-value their properties from time to time, and
have written down certain aircraft types. The market value has moved much in line
with book value over the past year or so, reflecting limited opportunities for high
Profit before tax and interest payable ($ million)

Depreciation, amortisation and rentals ($ million)
EBDRIT ($ million)
Average market value of equity ($ million)
Value/EBDRlT
1. Converted into US dollars at average rate over 200512006 ofUS$1.79/
1,755
1,851
3,487
1.88
68
Airline Finance
The market value of equity in Table 3.15 has been calculated by taking the average
of the share price times the number of shares issued at the beginning and end of
the year. This information is given in the annual report. The EBITDAR can also be
used in any of the other ratios described in this chapter, which involve measures of
operating or per-tax profit. Market value to EBITDAR is an alternative to the more
traditionally used price-earnings ratio (see Tab Ie 3.13).
The numerator in the above ratio can also include debt and other liabilities, or
'Enterprise value'. This is what it would cost to buy the airline free of debt and
other liabilities (such as pension fund deficits). This is in contrast to the equity value
which values the airline with these liabilities. Ideally the market value ofdebt should
be included, but in practice most debt is not traded and thus book debt is used (see
4.3.2).
Other Ratios
Other measures which may be used, such as the average collection period, will be
discussed in the chapter on working capital. Stocks/spare parts can also be expressed
as a percentage of investments in aircraft and equipment.
The self-financing ratio is defined as internal sources of funds expressed as a
percentage of the increase in fixed assets. Basing the ratio on the cash flow statement
described in Section 2.5 would mean cash flow from operating activities expressed
as a percentage of cash required for investing activities. This would have been a
healthy 177 per cent for BA in 2000/2001 and 96 per cent for the AMR Corporation
in 2000. Clearly, a ratio that is substantially below 100 per cent over a number of
years would imply a deteriorating financial position.
Turnover to capital employed ratio Turnover or operating revenue expressed as a
ratio of average net assets employed (long-term debt plus shareholders' funds). In
general, the higher the ratio (BA 0.90 in 1999/2000 and 1.53 in 200512006) the better
the utilisation of assets. There are however dangers in comparing airlines with other
industries, and between airlines where there are, large differences in off-balance
sheet financing of assets (e.g., operating leases) or in degree of outsourcing. BA's
2000/2001 ratio of 0.91 looked somewhat low compared with American Airlines'
2000 ratio of 1.56, taking into account the percentage of their respectively fleets
financed off-balance sheet of 33 per cent for BA and 25 per cent for American.
American's ratio in 2005 was 1.66, not as far above BA's ratio as previously.
fJ Value This gives an indication of the degree of risk in investing in airline shares.
It is based on the capital-asset pricing model (CAPM), and can only be calculated for
airlines with stock market quotations for their shares. The approach usually taken is
to examine the relationship between airline stock market returns and the returns to
the market relative to a risk-free rate. Major stock market indices such as S&P500
are taken as a proxy for the market, and long-term government bonds for the risk
free rate. Dividend income should be included in the data on total returns, and most
analysis covers the previous five-year period. The PValue is the coefficient determined
69
from the regression of airline versuS market returns. In the earl y 1990s, values were
generally between 1.2 and 1.6, with reasonably good correlation coefficients.
An earlier study examined the airline industry as a whole and found that airlines
had a ~ value of 1.80, compared to retailing with 1.45, construction with 1.30, drugs
and cosmetics with 1.15, banks and oil companies with 0.85 and energy utilities with
0.60. 4
More recent studies have shown some deterioration in the degree of correlation
s
(e.g., BA), with ~ Values often close to or below one. For example, Qantas had a
value of 1.51, Singapore Airlines 1.33 and Lufthansa 1.21. The corresponding values
from Datastream were 0.86, 0.92 and 1.14.
This implies that some airline stocks are less volatile than the 'market,' and
thus less risky, it also suggests some analysts are making a significant number of
adjustments to the figures. However, this may be because the market has become
more volatile, following the inclusion of a greater weight of IT and telecoms
companies.
~ Values are used in determining the cost of equity capital in Weighted Average
Cost of Capital (WACC), which is discussed in more detail in 8.3.3. This is in turn
used as the discount rate in Cash Value Added (CVA) calculations (see2.7 above), as
well as in the appraisal of new investments. Lower betas imply lower discount rates
and the acceptance of more capital investment proposals.
3.5 Inter-airline Comparison of Financial Ratios

So far in this chapter, examples of ratios have been given for only 2 years of data
for British Airways to assist in an understanding of how they can be calculated in
practice. Some comparative figures have also been shown for one or two other major
international airlines, in particular AMR. In this section, the comparison will be
broadened to include some of the major airlines from North America, Europe and
Asia.
The comparisons are shown in Table 3.16 for the 2004 calendar year for the
majority of airlines, April 2004 to March 2005 for some airlines, and years ending
in September (Thai) and June 1999 (Qantas) for two airlines. Given the variations
in the ratios over the economic cycle, a stricter comparison would have adjusted
the figures to the calendar year. Most of the major airlines were profitable, having
recovered from 9/11 (for the US, and to a lesser extent, European airlines) and SARS
(for some of the Asian airlines). Ratios were not calculated for some airlines because
of negative results or negative equity, either of which produces meaningless figures.
There are numerouS problems associated with comparisons such as these, which have
been discussed earlier. They are also summarised below. In spite ofthese problems,
it is considered worthwhile presenting a view of the financial position of the major
world airlines after some recovery had occurred.
4
5
Rosenberg, B. and Guy, J. (1988).
Morrell, p.s. and Turner, S.A. (2002).
70
Table 3.16
A irline Finance
Key financial ratios for major airlines, 2004/2005
(Financial year end)
Cathay Pacific
(December 2004)
JALGroup (March 2005)
Korean Air
(December 2004)
Malaysia Airlines
(March 2005)
Qantas Group (05 June)
SlA Group (March 2005)

Thai Airways
AMR (December 2004)
Continental
(December 2004)
Delta Air Lines
(December 2004)
Northwest
(December 2004)
Southwest
(December 2004)
U AL (December 2004)
US Air (December 2004)

Air Canada
Air France (March 2005)
Alitalia (December 2004)
Austrian Group
(December 2004)
British Airways
(March 2005)
Iberia (December 2004)
KLM (March 2005)

Lufthansa (December
2004)
SAS (December 2004)
Virgin Atlantic
(December
71
Operating Ratio
Return on
Equity' (%)
15.5
17.4
n/a
9.5
n/a
11.9
13.6
26.1
5.3
12.1
4.8
nla
nla
n/a
n/a
nla
nla
8.9
11.3
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2.3
Asian airlines such as Cathay Pacific, Singapore Airlines and Thai Airways
International have traditionally achieved operating ratios of between 110 per cent
and 120 per cent. However, only Cathay and Thai achieved this for 2004/2005, and
only by a small margin. Singapore Airlines' ratio was well below past levels but
reasonable good by airline standards. Malyasian Airlines had been privatised in
1994, but sold back to the govemment in 2001 in a poor financial state. Its operating
result was positive but very low, faced with uneconomic fares on domestic routes,
poor productivity and growing LCC competition.
]n other world regions, only Southwest in the US reached a reasonable level,
with the remaining majors still in deep financial trouble. Apart from BA, the main
European airlines were scarcely above break even, in a year when fuel price rises
were combined with adverse currency trends and weak yields, with Alitalia and
SAS making a loss. Continental and Iberia have a much higher percentage of their
fleet off-balance sheet, and thus high rentals, which tends to depress operating ratio
relative to net profit margin.
3.5.1
Return on Equity
Return on equity, rather than investment or assets, has been chosen to reduce the
distortion arising from off-balance sheet assets. More highly geared Asian airlines,
such as Thai and JAL thus generated a relatively high return on equity, commensurate
with the risk taken by shareholders. On the other hand, three relatively highly geared
airlines in Europe, Austrian Airlines, KLM and Air France, recorded low returns on
equity. Only Iberia, Lufthansa and BA generated the levels of return that investors
might expect In the US, Southwest's RoE was somewhat low, but it also has very
low gearing. None of the other US carriers made a net profit upon which to base a
meaningful return.
Debt to Equity Ratio
n/a
8.5
14.4
2.8
28.9
6.8
13.5
nla
1.8
0.4
nla
n/a
4.1
2.1
This ratio is still considered one of the most important ones for an assessment of
risk and solvency, although some analysts now rely more on the less problematical
interest cover. Ideally net debt to equity should be calculated, but some sources (such
as ICAO) only allow the more traditional debt/equity to be determined.
From Table 3.16, only Iberia, Lufthansa and Virgin Atlantic had satisfactory
ratios, with Alitalia and Austrian too high. It is notable that the latter were still partly
owned by their respective governments. Four ofthe US airlines had negative equity,
and thus the ratio could not be calculated. Of the others, the very low level for
Southwest has already been mentioned. Northwest and Continental had levels that
would indicate near-insolvency, and Northwest subsequently filed for Chapter 11.
Most of the Asian airlines had satisfactory debt/equity ratios. The exception was
the privately owned JAL, which has made poor returns over the past few years. JAL
did not have very large cash balances to use to offset against their debt.
72
Interest Cover
This ratio was calculated as operating profit divided by interest expense (which for
many airlines was effectively net interest). Interest cover varied widely amongst the
sample airlines shown in Table 3.16. None of the European airlines had comfortably
high levels, but Austrian, BA and Virgin were adequately covered. In North America,
Southwest had no problem with this ratio, given its low debt and interest costs. The
other airlines all made an operating loss for the year, and were unable to cover their
interest. If depreciation were added back to operating profit to give cash operating
profit, only AMR would have covered interest expense. Some of the remainder
were even recording negative cash operating profits. All the Asian airlines except
Malaysian and JAL showed excellent cover, while Korean indicated that it received
more interest than it paid.
3.6
Airline Finance
73
These and other possible distortions will affect most of the ratios to a greater or
lesser degree, although some, such as interest cover, will be less affected than others,
such as debt/equity ratio. An attempt to address most of these areas, together with
many airline examples, was made in a special report published by Airline Business
in 2004.6
Ratio Analysis Used to Assist Judgement

It is impossible to generalise as to whether one particular ratio by itself is good
or bad. For example, a high quick ratio shows a strong liquidity position, but the
firm may not be earning a high enough return on its total assets. The airline analyst
should therefore use a number of ratios together. In a study ofthe performance ofUS
firms over a 20 year period, Peters and Waterman used six indicators to identify 43
excellent companies. They were asset growth, equity growth, market to book value,
7
return on capital, return on equity and return on sales.
Interpretation Problems
Distortion ofComparative Data

Inflation affects comparative profitability, primarily through depreciation, which is
usually based on the historic cost of assets. Seasonal factors will also distort ratio
analysis, and many balance sheet amounts will be sensitive to the choice of financial
year end in relation to the point in the seasonal cycle. For example, BA's financial
year ends at the end of their low season, which means that many ratios will be lower
than would be the case for their second quarter results. SAS changed in 1987 from
reporting annual financial results to the end ofSeptember, to a calendar year basis. Air
France has also changed from a calendar year to a financial year ending 31 March.
Window Dressing
Balance sheets are only a snapshot on a particular date and firms can employ
techniques to make their position look better on that day. Sometimes profit and loss
accounts can be made to look worse.
Differences in Accounting Treatment

Different depreciation periods will affect the comparability of ratios, as well as
whether aircraft leases are on or off balance sheet. Writing off route rights or slot
acquisitions against reserves will increase the debt/equity ratio. Other distortions
are the capitalisation of interest payments (or turning an expense into an asset), and
different treatment of foreign exchange gains and losses. Earnings per share can be
distorted by the definition of extraordinary items, and the way taxation is accounted
for will affect in particular the debt/equity ratio. Many of these have already been
discussed, but the three areas of major concern can be summarised as follows:
Asset lives and cost (capitalisation of interest on advance payments,
manufacturers' credits, historical cost vs. market value), and residual values
used for depreciation.
Treatment of leased aircraft, or more generally whether aircraft financing is
on or off-balance sheet.
Accounting for foreign exchange gains and losses, and the treatment offoreign
exchange hedging and foreign operations.
6
7
Milne, I.R. (2005). Bridging the GAAP, Airline Business, July.

Peters, T.J. and Waterman, R.H., Jr (1982), Search ofExcellence.
Chapter 4
Airline Valuation
Airline accounts are not expected to show how much the airline is worth or even
the value of its fixed assets. Fixed assets are generally included at their original
historical cost, less an allowance for depreciation. It is unlikely that this book value
of tangible assets at a given date would coincide with the market or re-sale value of
the same assets. The last part of the previous chapter highlighted these differences
in terms of the stock market value of an airline and its relationship to the book value
of its assets.
This chapter will expand on this, and introduce the further issue of the absence
of sizeable intangible assets such as route rights and slots in most airline accounts. It
will first examine how these might be valued for international airlines, and then go
on to review various approaches to valuing all or part of such airlines. This problem
is faced by advisers to governments on the privatisation of their national airlines,
which is the subject of Chapter 7.
4.1
4.1.1
The Valuation of Intangible Assets

Route or Traffic Rights
An airline's intangible assets would include mainly its route/traffic rights, and the
rights to take-off and landing slots at congested airports. They might also include
items such as brand value, and management and staff experience and training.
Scheduled airlines operate international air services using traffic rights granted
to them by governments. Most of these rights are still negotiated bilaterally between
two countries, with each country designating one or more carriers to take advantage
of the traffic rights that the designating states have negotiated.
The negotiation of these rights was originally pursued according to a quid pro
quo approach, with countries exchanging routes of comparable value. This was later
to become the doctrine of an equal exchange o/economic benefits, which dominates
most bilateral negotiations today. For one country to negotiate effectively with
another, it needs to evaluate a complex web of options, which would encompass fifth
and even sixth freedom rights in addition to third and fourth freedomsY It would
also need to consider the so-called soft rights, including such areas as transfers of
foreign exchange, and the opcning of sales offices, as well as increasingly code
sharing and ground handling.
Doganis, R. (2002), Flying off Course: the Economics of International Airlines,
London: Routledge. Third edition.
76
Airline Finance
Most governments view these traffic rights as government property, and if an

airline ceases to operate or goes into liquidation they revert to the state. For example,
the UK's Civil Aviation Authority considered the possible sale or franchising ofroute
rights before the privatisation of British Airways, but took the following view:
Route licenses are not property. British Airways did not purchase its licenses .... Insofar
as the state, through the licensing of air services, gives airlines an opportunity to operate
profitably, thesc opportunities remain at the disposal of the state. 2
On the other hand, when one scheduled airline acquires another as a going concern,
it has usually acquired its traffic rights in addition to its tangible assets, existing staff
and other contractual obligations and arrangements.
Any premium paid for the airline might be thought of as goodwill, but this
would probably include the value of traffic rights. This was the case when British
Airways acquired British Caledonian, and it was also the case more recently when
British Airways acquired CityFlyer Express. In both cases British Airways inherited
a substantial number of scheduled routes out of Gatwick Airport, which were not
returned to the state for re-allocation, although the competition authorities made
various stipulations relating to market entry by other airlines. In the case of the
CityFlyer take-over, British Airways were capped on the share of slots that they
could hold at London Gatwick Airport. 3
A stricter definition of goodwill would be the amount by which the value of
a business as a whole exceeds the value of its individual assets less its liabilities.
Assets, here, should include all intangible assets such as traffic rights, airport slots,
concessions, patents or trademarks. But it is difficult in practice to separate the
goodwill and other intangible asset elements in any premium paid for an airline,
since intangible assets are not valued and placed on the balance sheet.
In the USA, there was a considerable debate in 1982 when Braniff's Latin
American routes were purchased by Eastern Airlines. But the Department of
Transportation (DoT) finally approved the deal, with Judith Connor, then Assistant
Secretary at DoT, proposing that 'this freedom to d,eal in what had once been valuable
gifts from government should be made a permanent right'.4
United Airlines acquired the Pacific Division of Pan American World Airways
in 1985, including aircraft, route rights and valuable slots at Tokyo's Narita Airport.
The transfer was opposed by the US Department of Justice, but was approved by
the Transportation Secretary after an evidentiary hearing. Out of the total price of
US$750 million, it was estimated that only $365.8 million was accounted for by
aircraft and other tangible assets.s
2 CAA (1984), Airline Competition Policy, CAP500, Civil Aviation Authority,

London.
3 Jasper, C. (1999), BA CityFlyer take-over approved, Flight International, 28 July-2
August
4 Howard, B. (1982), The Iron Lady at DOT, Forbes, 7 June,
5 Fisher, F.M. (1987), Pan-American to United: The Pacific Division Transfer Case,
Rand Journal o/Economics, 18, No.4, winter.
Airline Valuation
77
Billions of dollars were spent by US airlines in purchasing traffic rights from

other US carriers during the 1980s, and the US Government no longer questions
these route rights aspects of any deal, but is rather concerned with its competitive
consequences. In the 1990s, however, very liberal open skies agreements, and the
promise of further liberalisation, reduced the importance of such acquisitions (see
4.1.2).
In other parts ofthe world, there have been few complete take-overs of scheduled
airlines up to the late 1990s (see 6.6 for events since then), apart from the British
Airways deals mentioned above and Air France's acquisition of UTA and Air Inter,
both of which were within national boundaries. 6 In all these cases, the traffic rights
have been transferred with the sale, although some routes have had to be handed back
at a later stage following government (or European Commission) investigations of
the anti.competitive implications of such deals. However, the practice ofbuying and
selling route or traffic rights by themselves has so far only been observed in the US,
although Air Canada did attempt (unsuccessfully) to buy all the international traffic
rights held by Canadian Airlines International in 1993. However, in January 2000
Air Canada purchased the entire company, including all slots and route rights.
The value of traffic rights ean only be realised once they are exercised by an
airline. Some airlines can make more use of such rights than others, perhaps due
to their greater marketing presence, or the fact that they complement their existing
route strueture and provide greater opportunities to feed traffic to other routes. 7
Thus, the value of these rights can only be realised in conjunction with the
production process, which is the carriage of passengers and cargo. In this respect
they are similar to brands, which, although they can also be sold separately, only
have value when applied to a particular produet or service. The establishment of
brand value involves considerable expenditure in improving product quality and
consistency across the network, as well as communication to the marketplace. The
successful brand should result in an airline achieving and sustaining both above
average yields and load factors.
.
Virgin Atlantic Airways franchised their brand to the Greek scheduled airline,
SEEA, and the Irish carrier, Cityjet. These two independent airlines used the Virgin
brand in conjunction with services they operated between London and Athens and
Dublin respectively. In the first case, there was limited opportunity to feed traffic to
Virgin Atlantic services, and, in the second case, none at all. SEEA services were
taken over by Virgin upon the airline's demise, and the Cityjet arrangement has been
terminated. Virgin Blue holds a license from Virgin Enterprises for its operations
6 The acquisition of a controlling interest in an airline outside the country of the

purchasing airline was considered highly unlikely under the present international regulatory
system, since it would put at risk all the traffic rights granted to that airline under its existing
bilateral agreements. That is now changing at least within the EU.
7 For example, Continental Airlines were given approval to operate the Seattle-Tokyo
route in 1988, hoping to generate US$126 million in annual revenues. They actually only
managed to generate US$28 million in revenues in 1989, and in late 1990 sold the route
to American Airlines for US$150 million. American clearly expected significantly higher
revenues than Continental could generate.
Airline Finance
Airline Valuation
in Australia which expires at the end of 20 15. In return it has contracted to pay an
annual fee ofA$l 00,000 or 0.5 per cent of gross sales, whichever is the greater.
In accounting tenns they would both be considered as intangible assets, since
no physical equipment or facilities are involved. In the US, where airlines have
acquired route rights they are general included in their balance sheets and amortised
over 40 years. 8 This latter figure is presumably based on their likely future useful or
economic life. In other parts of the world, the premium arising on the take-over of
another airline (including traffic rights) would either be written off against reserves,
or amortised in a similar way.
The second of the above categories refers to management skills in combining

routes into an effective and profitable network. Strategic issues are also relevant,
as well as the efficiency of the airline in controlling costs and enhancing revenues.
For example, some ofPan-American's loss making international routes were turned
into profit by the management of airlines that acquired them (helped by far better
domestic feed).lo These factors are clearly difficult to quantify, but can be captured
indirectly through their effect on the first group of factors mentioned above.
The third category relates to the characteristics of the transaction. These would
depend on the type and timing of the transaction: whether it was incremental to an
airline's network or the acquisition of a division or airline; whether it was combined
with other assets such as slots or aircraft; its timing in the economic cycle; and
whether it was a distress sale. Some of the US route rights acquisitions, especially
those bought from Pan Am, concerned a large number of routes comprising the
regional operations of the vendor. These would include both aircraft and slots.
Others related to only a few international routes, but usually connecting with one
of the hubs operated by the purchaser, and therefore having strategic importance.
Often there were no serious competing bids, which together with a distress sale
resulted in a bargain price being accepted. The AMR Corporation acquired TWA
from Chapter II bankruptcy in April 2001 for $625 million in cash, and agreed to
honour over $3 billion in debt. There was no other bidder for the airline, although
both Continental and Frontier bid for TWA's Washington National slots, and Galileo
bid for the airline's shares in Worldspan.
Sometimes one serious competing bidder pushed up the price significantly, as
in the case of SAS bidding against British Airways for British Caledonian. A large
premium was also thought to have been paid by American Airlines to acquire TWA's
London Heathrow routes and slots in December 1990, following United's purchase
of Pan Am's Heathrow rights in October of the same year.
78
4.1.2 Factors Determining the Value a/Traffic Rights

A large number of factors may contribute to the value oftraffic rights on a route, but
they might be grouped in three main categories: 9
Route characteristics.
Management characteristics.
Transaction characteristics.
The first refers to the existing and expected level of traffic on the route, the degree to
which it fits an airline's existing network, as well as the mix oftraffic and variation in
demand by season, month, day or hour. The existing degree of economic regulation
of the route will be important, and will dictate the degree to which frequency can
be increased, and market-based air fares introduced. It will also indicate the number
of competitors on the route, reflected in the air services agreement between the
countries at each end of the route. Competition and the ability to add frequency
might also be constrained by the availability of slots at airports (e.g., Tokyo Narita
and London Heathrow).
Under perfect competition, with open skies and little economic regulation, the
value of route rights would be expected to fall to close to zero. The more regulated
the routes, the greater the potential for earning 'monopoly profits, the discounted
present value of which would be the value of the rights. Under the present system
of licensing air carriers, these monopoly profits do not have to be paid to the state in
the fonn ofpublic franchise fees. Liberalisation of air services agreements is seen in
many countries as the preferred way to introduce competition and reduce monopoly
profits. However, even in more liberal countries such as the US the bilateral system
stilI gives route rights considerable value, which accrues to the carrier rather than the
government. At present, there seems little likelihood of a world-wide introduction of
open skies, so that these traffic right values will continue, albeit reduced by increased
competition, or the prospect of greater competition.
8 KPMG/IATA (1992), Accounting Policies. Disclosure and Financiul Trends in the

International Airline Industry, KPMG in Association with lATA, Geneva.
9 Hai, N. (1994), An Evuluation of Scheduled Airline Traffic Rights, MSc thesis:
Cranfield University, England.
4.1.3
79
Rights to Airport Slots
A growing number of capital city airports are suffering from runway congestion at
peak periods. At such times, demand for take-off or landing times (slots) far exceeds
the available supply. Examples of this are the slot controlled or 'high density'
airports in the US (New York Kennedy and La Guardia, Washington National and
Chicago O'Hare), London Heathrow and Frankfurt in Europe, and Tokyo Narita in
Asia. Some additional capacity can often be obtained by improved air traffic control
techniques or technology, but badly needed extra runways are usually ruled out
because of environmental restrictions or lack of green fields for expansion. New
airports are sometimes possible (e.g., Hong Kong Chep Lap Kok or Munich), but
these take considerable time and money to build.
Slots are allocated by a system of historical precedence or 'grandfather rights' .
An airline that has used a slot in the previous season can use it again in the next
corresponding season. Since airlines need both take-off slots at the origin airport
10 AAE (1990), Pan Am: What Will it Sell Next?, The Avmark Aviation Economist,
April.
Airline Finance
Airline Valuation
and landing slots at the destination airport to be able to offer a viable service, this
procedure needs to be coordinated internationally. This has historically been done
through the airline trade association, lATA.
To try to allow greater competition than would be available through this system
of self-regulation, the European and US authorities have both introduced legislation
to provide a pool of available slots for new entrants, as well as stricter 'use it or lose
it' rules. However, many observers do not think these regulations go far enough, and
do not allocate sufficient and timely slots to new entrants to allow them to operate at
competitive frequencies on short to medium haul routes.
rt is generally thought that it is the airports or government, rather than airlines,
that own slots. US legislation denies the existence ofany right ofownership of slots,
but the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) does allow airlines to exchange, sell
or lease the slots that it has allocated to them. I I In the US the sale or lease of slots to
another airline needs to be accompanied by access to gates and passenger handling
facilities which are usually owned or controlled by the vendor or lessor.
The European Commission's proposal for a Regulation amending their previous
rules on the allocation of slots at Community airports defines slots as 'entitlements
to depart or arrive at an airport on a specific date and time', and avoids assigning
their legal rights to either airlines or airports. It adds in paragraph 12 that 'slots
are allocated as public goods, based on certain rules, to the most deserving air
carrier' Y
In Europe and other parts of the world, slots can be exchanged but not bought or
sold. Unofficially, however, trading does take place, although not on a large scale.
Legalised slot trading was suggested by British Airways as a solution to the demands
for increased access to Heathrow Airport by US carriers, in return for their approval
oftheir June 1996 proposal for an alliance with American Airlines.
over its useful life. The present value of the net benefit stream, discounted at an
appropriate rate, would then be the value of the traffic rights. 13 This approach is
difficult to apply in practice, principally because:
80
4.1.4
Valuation Methods
The value of an airline's intangible assets and goodwill could be inferred from a
comparison of its total market capitalisation and the market value of its net tangible
assets. The value ofthe traffic rights would then need to be separated from the other
items ofgoodwill or intangible assets. For this method ofvaluation, the airline would
also have to be quoted on a stock market, and a market price would have to found for
all tangible assets. However, the market capitalisation of an airline that did not have
a share price quotation could be estimated by applying the price-earnings ratio of a
comparable airline which was quoted.
A discounted cash flow approach could also be used, given that the purchase of
traffic rights could be seen as an investment which produced a stream of net benefits
II Haanappel, P.P.C. (1994), Airport Slots and Market Access: Some Basic Notions and
Solutions, Air and Space Law, XIX, No. 4/5, pp. 198 199.
12 Commission of the European Communities (2001), Proposal for a Regulation ofthe
European Parliament and of the Council amending. Council Regulation (EEC) No.95/93
of 18 January 1993 on common rules for the allocation of slats at Community airports,
COM(2001)335, Brussels 20 June.
81
The useful life would be difficult to estimate, but judging by the accounting
treatment of such rights would probably be over a long period.
Future revenues and costs would be impossible to forecast with any precision
over a relatively long period principally due to uncertainties relating to the
future economic regulation of the industry and the economic environment.
Re-investment requirements would need to be considered, and possibly the
tenninal value of the assets.
A final method of valuing traffic rights is to analyse them as a function of one or
more causal variables, and calibrating the resulting model against actual prices
paid by airlines for route rights. These variables were discussed above, and can be
grouped as:
Revenue or income related variables.
Traffic or traffic related variables.
The transactions used for the model would almost entirely be limited to various
US deals, and thus the model's relevance to other parts of the world might be
questionable. At its simplest level, this approach implies that ifAmericanAirlines pays
US$195 million for TWA's Chicago-London route which carries 190,000 passengers
a year, then Pan Am's North Atlantic services which carry around 3.7 million
passengers would be worth around US$3.9 billion, or 20 times as much. 14
Rather than trying to forecast variables such as revenues or income over the
useful life of the investment, current year or one year ahead projections can be used.
This type of approach is often used by financial institutions in the fonn of a pricel
earnings (PIE) ratio. This was described in Section 3.4 in its application to valuing a
company, but it could also be applied to a single or group of investments.
Thus, the value of the traffic rights would be the product of the current (or
projected) year net profit or earnings from the route and a PIE ratio. The ratio
used should be based on the market ratio for an airline operating similar services.
For example, Pan Am sold its Internal Gennan Services to Lufthansa in 1988 for
US$300 million. Given that Pan Am made an estimated US$43 million operating
profit on the route in 1987, this purchase price implied a PIE ratio of around seven,
which was thought to be an undervaluation according to some observers. IS
Relating actual or potential earnings from a route to its value in this way requires
the choice of a PIE ratio, which can only be inferred from data produced by deals of
13 Key, S.L., cd. (19!i9), The Ernst and Young Guide to Mergers andAcquisitions, New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
14 AAE, supra.
15 AAE, supra.
82
Airline Finance
a similar nature. However, it is often impossible to obtain estimates even for latest
year's earnings at the level of individual or even groups of routes.
The valuation of slots has received attention as a result of proposals in Europe
for the introduction of slot trading (see 4.1.3 above). The implications of such a
change for BA's balance sheet and return on capital were explored by equity research
analysts using two methods of slot valuation. 16 They suggested one approach based
on previous slot trades by US carriers and another based on the treatment of landing
and en route charges as operating leases, and calculating their discounted present
value (over an unspecified number of future years at a 9 per cent discount rate).
Under the first method, they valued BA's Heathrow and Gatwick slots at around 1
billion, and under the second method at 710 million. The first method was based
on an average price per slot of 4,200 (5,000 at Heathrow and 2,500 at Gatwick),
compared to their estimated slot prices of 1 0,200 and 17,200 paid by United and
American respectively. The US airline prices probably included at least 50 per cent of
the total of 11,000 annual slots in the peak period, but was also based on some fairly
crude assumptions on the part of the total consideration paid that was attributable to
the slots at the US end of the routes. No value appeared to have been assigned to the
route authority as a separate asset from the slots. The early 1990s going rate for US
slots was thought to be around $1.5 million a year, or $4,100 for each slot. 17 A later
estimate of 2 million a year ($3.2 million), or 5,500 ($8,800) a slot, was made by
Continental Airlines in connection with the proposal for BA to relinquish some of
their Heathrow slots. 18 KLM recorded a gain of US$25 million in their 199711998
accounts relating to the 'sale' by KLM UK of the Heathrow slots used for their four
daily flights to Jersey.19 This was equivalent to $8,560 (around 5,800) per slot.
Swiss International Airlines 'sold' eight daily slots at Heathrow to BA for SFR43
million in the first Quarter of their 2005 financial year.20 These slots were originally
used to secure a loan from BA to Swiss in the second half of 2003. In US dollar
terms this amounted to just under $5m per take-off/landing slot over a full year. In
early 2004, Qantas paid what was probably the highest price for Heathrow slots to
f1yBe: A$47.3 million for two slot pairs, or an average ofUS$16 million per annual
take-off/landing s10t. 21 BA was reported to have been outbid by their alliance partner
in this caseY The high price reflects competitive bidding, as well as the likelihood
of all the slots being in the peak period. The deal exceeded the previous high price
paid in 2003 ofUS$21 million or $10.5 million per pair by BA to United for two slot
pairs at the airport. 23 United also leased slots at Heathrow to the Indian carrier, Jet
Airways, for three years.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
HSBC James Capel (1996), British Airways: Selling SlotM, November, pp. 31-33.
Doganis, R. (1992), The Airport Business, Routledge, p. 109.
Travel Weekly, 5 (15 January 1997).
Flight international, 8-14 July 1998.
Swiss International Financial report for the first half of 2005.
Qantas Annual Report (2005).
BA Outbid for Heathrow Slots Package, Financial Times, 21 January 2004.
Virgin, United Airlines in Heathrow Deal, Financial Times, 7 November 2005.
Airline Valuation
83
Most of the deals for slots at the US slot constrained airports have been on a
lease basis, although buying and selling there is legal. Average slots prices between
1990 and 1997 were around US$l million, with a US Airways deal in 2000 valued
at just under $1 million per air carrier slot, and much lower for commuter slot. The
same source also highlighted the large variation in value between peak and off-peak
period, the difference at New York, La Guardia Airport being four times. 24
4.2
The Valuation of Tangible Assets
Tangible assets cover both the fixed or physical assets of an airline and the long-term
investments in other companies or airlines. The first consists largely of aircraft and
related spares, but also buildings, land, vehicles and equipment. The second could be
in shares of quoted companies, in which case valuation can be based on the market
price. In the case of unquoted companies, the approach described in 4.3 below could
be taken. This section will focus on tangible fixed assets, the balance sheet valuation
of which was described in the previous chapter as historical cost less accumulated
depreciation. Depreciation rates, however, can vary markedly for the same aircraft
type, according to the policies adopted by the airline.
For airlines with stock market quotations, the market capitalisation will show
investors' valuation of the airline as a whole on a day-to-day basis, but this will
include intangible assets, management strength and business prospects, or what has
been described as the airline 'franchise'.
A way to separate the value of the fleet and other tangible assets would be to
examine the market value for these assets according to used aircraft transactions.
There are three problems with this: first, there are very few transactions involving
airline ground facilities; second, aircraft are far from commodities and it would be
difficult to find a comparable market transaction in terms of aircraft age, number
of hours flown and cycles completed, time to major overhaul and modifications
incorporated; and third, the used aircraft market is cyclical which makes modelling
aircraft price behaviour problematic.
One way of avoiding these problems is to estimate the replacement value for
each aircraft in an airline's fleet. If aircraft are no longer in production, such as
the DC 10-30, then the nearest equivalent, the MD-ll, is taken. A standardised
depreciation rate is then applied to the replacement values to allow for the fleet's age.
One finance house has used a straight line depreciation method over 20 years' useful
life to a residual value of 10 per cent. They then deducted depreciation according to
the average fleet age in years, weighted by replacement costs, to arrive at the current
market value of the airline's f1eet. 25 A major problem with this approach is that the
new replacement is likely to incorporate lower fuel, maintenance and possibly crew
costs, such that a higher profit stream would be generated.
24 Flight and Slot Valuations under Alternative Market Arrangements, William Spitz,
GRA. Paper to German, Hamburg: Air Transport Association Workshop (16 February 2005).
25 Warburg, S.B.C. (1996), Airline Valuation Guide, September.
84
4.3
Airline Valuation
Airline Finance
The Valuation of the Airline as a Whole
A market price per share would be available for an airline which is quoted on a stock
market. Given the total number of shares issued, this would give a market valuation
for the airline as a whole, or market capitalisation (see Section 3.4). Such valuation
would change by the minute, by the hour or day, depending on supply and demand
for the shares. This in turn would be determined by changes in investors' desire to
hold shares in general (versus cash), and their wish to hold shares in the sector and
the company.
The share price quotation will consist of a bid and offer price. For a share like
British Airways which has a daily turnover of an average of some 2 million shares
per day, the spread between the two will be around Y:!-l per cent. For other airlines
which are quoted on a stock market, but whose shares are rarely traded, the spread
will be very much larger. The shares of these airlines might not be traded very often,
either because very few shares have been issued to the public (e.g., Cyprus Airways
or China Airlines), or because private owners wish to hold on to their shares (as was
the case with Malaysia Airlines before re-nationalisation). Where turnover is low,
the stock market will not be a very efficient method of valuation.
However, investment bank analysts assume that the stock market is not efficient
and their clients can make money by trading the shares. They estimate their own
values for companies which are then divided by the number of shares issued and
compared to the market price. This results in a recommendation to investors in the
form of 'buy', 'hold', 'add' or 'sell'. The stockbrokers tend not charge their clients
for their detailed analyses of companies, but make their profits on the subsequent
commissions earned on any share trading. This is a controversial area with some
proposing that share analysis should be performed by completely independent
companies that might charge for their advice. Investment bank valuation is usually
based on a combination of ratio analysis and the Discounted cash flow (DCF)
method. These will be described starting with DCF.
4.3.1 Discounted Cash Flow (DCF) Method

The first method of valuing an airline's value is often described as a 'three-phase
DCF'. The first phase is the initial period over which detailed forecasts for the
airline are prepared. This would be at least three years into the future, and probably
not more than five. The second phase is characterised by investment opportunities
and the potential for expansion over the next, say, five to 10 years, while the third
phase the return on capital is expected to gradually fall towards the company's cost
of capitaL The maximum for all three phases would be 40 years. Cash flows are
forecast over each of the three periods and discounted to present values using the
airline's WACC. Total Enterprise Value is then the addition of the opening invested
capital, the DCF value and the present value of any terminal value at the end of the
period. This may be adjusted by the addition of any non-airline assets and minorities
to give an equity value, which, divided by the number of shares issued, gives a value
per share of the equity.
85
4.3.2 Ratio Method

The alternative method that is commonly used by financial advisers is the application
of price-earnings and related ratios. The steps taken to price shares using price
earnings ratios would be as follows:
Estimate the airline's earnings or net profits for the current year and at least
one future year.
Estimate the historical or projected PIE ratio for the airline, based on a
comparison of PIE ratios of similar airlines, and perhaps with reference to the
relationship of the PIE of airlines quoted in the market to the PIE ratio of the
market as a whole.
Calculate the airline's market capitalisation (earnings multiplied by the PIE
ratio).
The main problem with the above procedure is the estimation of the PIE ratio.
There are a number of distortions that could be introduced to the valuation, such
as variations in depreciation policies, off-balance sheet financing and operating
leases. Tax policies might also differ, and local markets introduce added bias to the
comparisons.
Sometimes, attempts are made to remove some of these by computing, for
example, the cash PIE ratio. This is broadly the PIE ratio with depreciation (and any
other non-cash items in the profit and loss statement) added back. But this favours
those airlines operating new fleets which are owned rather than leased. Alternatively,
depreciation could be adjusted so the same policy is applied to all airlines, but the
other distortions still remain.
An alternative technique that is now used by a number of financial advisers in
support of valuations is 'Enterprise Value,' also known as 'Firm Value'. This takes
as a starting point the company's market capitalisation and adds the book value of its
net 'debt (long-term and current portion of debt less cash and marketable securities).
This is supposed to value both the equity and debt sources of finance, and is thus free
of any gearing distortion. The market rather than book value of debt finance cannot
normally be used, since the majority of airline long-term debt is not issued against
a tradable security.
Enterprise Value (EV) improves the denominator of the traditional PIE ratio;
for the numerator, earnings are adjusted to take into account the other distortions
described above. Thus, earnings are considered before deduction of interest, tax,
depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA). An alternative formulation subtracts also
lease rental payments (EBITDAR or EBDRIT). The ratio of EV to EBITDA or EV
to EBDRIT is then used for valuation purposes, and compared with other airlines.
Some analysts also use EVISales, usually expressed as a percentage.
Figure 4.1 compares the major international airlines in North America, Europe
and Asia in terms of ratios that relate income statement measures to stock market
prices. The LCCs included have much higher ratios than the network carriers. This
is expected from the high growth prospects that they have and thus a higher market
rating. Some airlines, such as Thai perform worse on the PIE ratio compared to their
87
Airline Finance
Airline Valuation
ranking on the EBITDART his suggests high capital charges that have been removed
from EBITDAR, thus inflating this ratio. Alternatively, it might have high net debt.
business cycle (1988-1990), although the other ratios appeared to have been based
on more recent (1993-1995) perfonnance.
86
Air Asia (YE 301SJ(5)
M MIa (YE SOI6JOS)
Japan Air1ines\YE 31/3.106)
Japan Airlloei (YE 31f31OGl
SIngapore Airlines (YE 3113106)
CI!lthay Pacific (YE 3111'21(5)
Thai "'",,"Y' lYE 30ill105)
gaporeAirlltMes (YE .3113.t06)
Q, rltas Airways (YE 3016105)
31112105)
(Amoncan) (yE 311121051
J.lSluo (YE
AM
Not meaningful
I
I
eesyJ9t (Ye 30l9I05-)
'
~~,,~\:
""'"
'"
:"""
,W
M"
"""",,;
IIIIMVIBV
S o _ I (YE 31112JOO)
PIE Ratio
.--'-'--
I>MR (American) (YE
31112105)
II
Air canada (ACE 'B1
JelBlua (YE
31112J1lO)
Ryanaif (YE 31/3J061
I,
easyJet (VE
31112105)
31I:!1OO)I;;;;;;;;~r
31112105)
3113100)
6rt\i,hAllwa"
lYE
Lufll>ans.IYE
ltish Airways (YEJ1J3I06)
3O!9i05
Iberia (YE 311121(5)
Ryanafr (yE 3113f06)
IlJMa (YE
"
.EVllnvesled Capital .
Qantas AHways (YE 3018105)
Ai( Canada (ACe: '8')
"
Thai Airways lYE 30/9105)
I
laE'lIEBITDAR
Southwest (YE 31/12105,
"
catnay Pacific (YE 31/12105)
-~-
Aw Franca-Kl.M (YE
Lufthansa (YE 31/12lO5)
,I
Nt F-r.anoe-KLM (YE 3113100)
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
000
00
0.50
1.00
2M
1.50
2.50
3.00
3.50
Ratio
215.0
300
Ratio
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.1
Income statement valuation ratios for selected airlines by region
Balance sheet valuation ratios for selected airlines by region
(June 2006 stock prices and FY200S/2006.)
2006 stock prices and FY200S12006)

The opposite is true for easyJet, which has low net debt and capital charges. AMR's
ratios could not be calculated because it reported a net loss in the comparable financial
year (negative PIE ratio), and even EBITDAR was negative by a small margin.
Figure 4.2 gives two more ratios that are used by investment banks to assist
in valuing traded airlines. These combine stock market price based metrics (MV
and EV) with ones that draw from balance sheet values (Invested capital and book
value). The LeCs also enjoy a high rating using these ratios with the exception of
jetBlue. The overall ranking is identical for the European airlines and similar for
the Asian ones. Those airlines with older fleets or that depreciate aircraft in their
books at a faster rate would tend to have high MVIBV ratios, as would those with a
large number of off-balance sheet aircraft. The first two did not apply to Air Canada
(ACE) that depreciated its fleet over 20-25 years and had an average age offleet that
was somewhat lower than the IATA average. However, Air Canada had just under
half of their fleet on operating lease, and thus off-balance sheet.
In January 1996, NatWest Securities valued BA's shares at between 540p to 570p,
compared to the share price at that time of 465p. This was based on an analysis of
BA and the airline industry, as well as forecasts of BA's earnings to the year 200 I.
Table 4.2 shows the key valuation ratios that they used, calculated on forecasts of
1997/98 earnings and sales. 26 The PIE ratio over the range of values for the share
price was broadly in line with the range ofvalues over the same phase ofthe previous
26 NatWest Securities (1996), Strategic Assessment qfBritish Airways, January.
Table 4.1
British Airways' valuation criteria
P~ERatio
PIE Ratio relative to UK market
Range
1988-1990
9.1-10.9
52-74
3.3-4.6
49-61
3.5-5.1
Source: NatWest Securities, Strategic Assessment of British Airways, January 1996
Market capitalisation is the current measure of how much the airline's equity is
worth to investors. Based on the June 2006 data used in Figure 4.2, Lufthansa had the
highest valuation ofthe European airlines with 6 .5 billion (US$8.2 billion) followed
by BA with 6.0 billion and Ryanair with 5.5 billion. It may appear surprising that
the much smaller low cost airline, Ryanair, has a market capitalisation approaching
BA's. This is due to the very high rating that the market gives it (and easyJet) based
on expectations of continued vcry high growth in traffic and earnings.
Amongst the North American carriers, Southwest is by far the largest with US$13
billion, withAMR at only $4 billion. Singapore Airlincs was the largest Asian carrier
with US$9.6 billion, followed by Cathay Pacific with US$5.9 billion, and LeC Air
Asia a much smaller $0.9 billion.
88
Airline Finance
A irline Valuation
Interestingly, BA's market capitalisation was over six times that of KLM.
In August 2000, the two airlines were seriously discussing a merger, which was
reported to give KLM 25 per cent of the merged entity, implying valuing BA at only
three times KLM (KLM was believed to be negotiating for 33 per cent).27 The talks
broke down, as had a previous attempt in early 1992.
The agencies' analysis aims to evaluate the likelihood of the timely repayment of
principal and interest relating to debt securities, or dividends for preferred stock. The
analysis covers both the airline industry in general, and the particular circumstances
and prospects for the airline concerned. The latter will examine operational and
management quality, success in controlling costs, revenue and yield management, cash
flow and capitalisation and other financial issues. The two major agencies together
have over 100 analysts making detailed analyses of company financial statements,
making any necessary adjustments for variations in accounting practice.
4.4
Ratings Agencies
The two main agencies that publish ratings for quoted debt securities, including
those issued by airlines, are Standard & Poor's and Moody. A third is called Fitch.
They rate all the obligations of all industries, but will have a key role in commercial
bank regulation from 2007. They have been criticised for not predicting collapses
such as Enron and Parmalat, but their defenders argue that in these cases they are
supplied with fraudulent data. It is also argued that competition is restricted by entry
requirements, but this is being addressed in the US by Congress and the Securities
Exchange Commission (SEC).
These firms earn their revenues from companies, including airlines, which wish
to issue securities (bonds, commercial paper or preferred stock), as well as from
selling reports to investors. For example, both Standard & Poor and Moody received
US$30,000 for rating a $100 million unsecured placement of Southwest Airlines'
securities. 28
89
Investment grade:
Standard & Poor's: AAA, AA, A and BBB
(+ and indicate relative standing within each grade)
All have capacity to pay interest and repay principal, with increased
susceptibility to adverse economic conditions as grades fall.
Moody: AaaAAA, Aa, A and Baa
Speculative grade:
Standard & Poor's: BB, B, CCC
Table 4.2
Selected airline debt ratings, June 2001 and December 2004
All have speculative characteristics regarding the payment of interest and

repayment of principal, with increased vulnerability to default as grades
fall. C is highly vulnerable to non-payment, while an obligation rated D is
in default.
Southwest
British Airways
Qantas Airways
American Airlines
Delta Air Lines
UALCorp.
Northwest Airlines
Continental
Japan Airlines
Air Canada
America West
US .,
Baa2
Caa2C.A.A.2
Caa2C.A.A.2
Withdrawn
CaalC.A.A.l
Caa2C.A.A.2
nla
Note: Ranked in descending order of creditworthiness (S&P) in June 2001; investment grade
highlighted in bold letters.
Source: Standard & Poor's and Moody
27 Airline Business
28 Airline Business
(+ and -indicate relative standing within each grade)
2000), p. 21.
1995), pp. 54-7.
Moody: Ba, B, Caa, Ca and C
Standard & Poor's (S&P) rated BA and Japan Airlines much more highly back in
October 1996 than shown in Table 4.2: BA was graded A, and Japan Airlines BBB+.
While BA was still investment grade before 9111, it was subsequently downgraded.
Japan Airlines has also moved from investment grade to speculative (more
colloquially referred to as 'junk'). Swissair were also downgraded by Moodys from
Baa3 Gust investment grade) to Ba3 (speculative) following their 2001 difficulties.
As the above table shows, only two ofthe maior rated airlines were rated investment
grade by either agency.
Moody use different abbreviations, and also ranked the above airlines somewhat
differently. They gave Southwest and BA the same rating (A3) in 2001 whereas S&P
rated BAjust below Southwest Moody gave United Airlines investment grade by a
very small margin in 200 I, while S&P rated them speCUlative. TWA was rated CCC
by S&P in October 1996, the only C amongst the airlines in Table 4.4, and in 2001
90
Airline Finance
went into Chapter 11 and was acquired by the AMR Corporation. In December 2004,
Moody rated Southwest somewhat lower than it did in 200 I, although still investment
grade; this contrasts with S&P maintaining their 'A' rating in both years.
In addition to the above passenger airlines, one air cargo integrator and transport
company (UPS) was rated AAA by S&P in 2005, while another, FedEx was BBB.
Low cost airline, JetBlue was just below investment grade at BB-.
Chapter 5
Sources of Finance
Airline finance has in the past generally been readily available to the majority of
airlines, in spite of a worse record ofprofitability than many other industries, and the
cyclical nature of airline earnings. This was because of government involvement,
either directly through ownership of the national airline or through loan guarantees.
However, even privately owned airlines have found little difficulty in financing
aircraft (historically 80-90 per cent oftotal capital expenditure), due to the possibility
of re-possession and re-sale of the asset.
The origin offinance for the airlines, as for any other industry, has been individual
and corporate savings. Money from individuals would be channelled through
banks as well as pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds, investment
and unit trusts. These institutions would in tum lend to banks, which would act as
intermediaries in lending on to airlines, buy airline shares or bonds, or participate
in leasing arrangements. Corporations would place surplus funds with banks or
participate directly in aircraft leases. Leases might also attract wealthy individuals
paying high marginal rates of tax.
In the 1980s, Japanese financial institutions supplied around half of the US$20
billion per annum in loans to the air transport industry. I This share has declined
significantly in the 1990s, principally because of the gradual application to
Japanese banks of the 8 per cent capital adequacy level agreed through the Bank for
International Settlements (BIS). Those financial institutions which are most heavily
involved in lending to the airline industry will be examined in more detail later in
tliis chapter.
Airline capital expenditure can be financed internally from cash or retained
earnings or externally from lenders or lessors using a variety offinancial instruments.
It is difficult to obtain comprehensive data on the sources of finance for aircraft
deliveries. Acknowledging the dangers of taking only one year's data, jet aircraft
deliveries totalled 911 in 2004, of which 457 were narrow-bodies, 135 wide-bodies
and 319 regional jets. Taking average aircraft prices in 2004 US$ for each category
of aircraft gives a total delivered value ofUS$58 billion. leAO reported that airline
operating profits before depreciation and after interest/tax payments (approximate
cash flow) was $16 billion in the same year. They would thus have financed only 28
per cent of deliveries from cash flow leaving a further $42 billion to be financed by
banks and leasing companies. Export credit supported bank lending totalled around
Jet Finance S.A. (1995), Analysis ofthe Comparative Ability ofthe European Airline
Inc/ustry to Finance Investments, Economic Research Prepared for the Commission of the
European Communities.
Airline Finance
Sources ofFinance
$15 billion (including some operating lessors), operating lessors $10 billion leaving
more than $17 billion for unsupported lending, new equity and finance leasing.
It is possible to get a rough idea from the financial statements of the world's
scheduled airlines (published by ICAO) of how the stock of airlines assets are
financed. In the table below operating lease rentals have been multiplied by seven to
an approximate capital value:
such as F edEx. British Airways has traditionally paid a dividend, but did not pay one
from 200112002 to 2005/2006.
92
Table 5.1
Scheduled world airlines balance sheet long-term financing
93
5.2 Sources of External Finance

5.2.1
Short-term
Bank overdraft Most airlines will have a facility with one or more commercial
banks to run a deficit on their current account up to an agreed limit, which will be
based on the overall financial health of the company. This may be secured against
certain assets. The rate of interest charged will vary with market rates.
Short-term loans These will differ from overdrafts by being for fixed amounts to
be re-paid at a fixed future date. A fixed or variable interest rate will be charged, and
security or other conditions may be stipulated (such as a maximum debtJequity ratio).
Source: leAO
The figures above show the high share of operating leases, although perhaps the
amount reported to ICAO includes some finance leases. Finance leases may also be
underestimated bv being included by some airlines under long-term debt.
Trade creditors Goods and services purchased by airlines do not generally have
to be paid for upon delivery in cash, su'ch that some short-term finance will be
available. This will either be free credit, or there will be an implicit cost in terms of
cash discount foregone. This should be offset against trade debtors, where the airline
is providing short-term finance to others (see Section 8.2).
5.2.2
5.1
Long-term
Sources ofInternal Finance
Internally, generated funds come from the cash retained in the business, or net profits
(after paying interest, tax, and dividends) but before providing for depreciation.
Deferred taxes and the profits from the sale of assets will also be internal sources of
finance. For many airlines, depreciation is the largest single internal source; some
airlines, such as Singapore Airlines, have also in the past generated substantial cash
from aircraft sales. The identification of the cash available for investment from an
airline's financial statements was described in Chapter 2. The amount of retained
earnings available for capital investment will depend on:
The airline's dividend policy.
The government's taxation policy.
The proportion of capital expenditure financed from internal sources is often called
the self-financing ratio. This was examined in Chapter 3. The ratio is subject to very
wide swings from a low at the low point in the airline economic cycle, when aircraft
deliveries and investment is high and cash flow low, to a high when cash flow is
improved and investment lower.
Taxation for the world's scheduled airlines averaged at just under US$3.5 billion
over the six profitable years to 2000, or 35 per cent of pre-tax profits. Few major
airlines pay dividends, given the need to find finance for capital expenditure. No
major US airline pays a dividend apart from the more profitable all-cargo carriers
Shareholders' equity capital Finance from owners of the airline. These owners or
shareholders have the right to vote at meetings of the company, the right to a dividend
(if one is paid), and the right to a capital distribution on liquidation (if sufficient cash
is available after settling all other claims). Outside the USA and many European
yountries, many ofthe world's scheduled airlines are still more than 50 per cent owned
by their govermnents (see Chapter 7). Other categories of shareholder might be:
Other airlines.
Financial institutions.
Employees.
Other individuals.
Lufthansa's shareholding in 2005 was 30 per cent held by private and 70 per cent
institutional investors. Employees or other individuals do not generally hold shares
unless they can be traded either on a stock market, or through a special company
arrangement. United Airlines in the US used to be 55 per cent owned by three labour
unions that held shares on behalf of their members.
A large shareholder may wish to sell their holding by offering it to another
company or the public (e.g., the UK Goverrunent privatisation of British Airways).
Care must be taken to comply with company law, which grants all owners of the
same class of shares certain rights, relating both to profit distribution and share
acquisition. Certain protection may also be given to minority shareholders.
94
Airline Finance
Financing assets by raising additional equity has the advantage of improving the
relationship between equity and both output and existing debt, and permits further
borrowing. It may, however, dilute the control of existing owners and facilitate a
take-over by another company. Thus, share issues are not often used by private
companies to fund equipment purchases.
It should be added that in some countries it is possible for a company with a large
cash holding to buy back its own shares from shareholders. This would have the
effect of improving its earnings per share, a ratio that is given some weight by airline
share analysts (see Section 3.4), and possibly of strengthening its share price.
Such a buy-back was carried out by KLM and the Dutch Government in
December 1996. The government holding in KLM was reduced from 38.2 per cent
to 25 per cent, by the sale of 17.3 million ordinary shares to KLM for Fl 1.1 billion
(US$569 million).2 The price paid per share was decided on the basis of a formula,
whereby KLM would pay the weighted average of the market price over a four-day
period, less a discount of2.5 per cent. The discount would seek to quell any demands
from other shareholders that the offer be made to them.
As a result of the deal, KLM's earnings per share rose by about 20 per cent,
although its debt/equity ratio deteriorated from 0.95 to 1.3. KLM had FI 2.8 billion
(US$I.7 billion) in cash and marketable securities at the end of March 1996, and
this amount would have been almost halved as a result of the buy-back. The Dutch
Government had further reduced its stake to 14.1 per cent by the end of March 2001,
but retained the option to acquire sufficient 'B' preference shares to give it control;
this could be exercised in the event of restrictions being placed on KLM as a result
of bilateral nationality clauses. It was later sold to Air France.
It is difficult to estimate the cost of equity capital, whether from new issues or
from retained profits. While the cost ofdividends is identifiable, the key consideration
is the long-term ability of the airline to attract capital and the price that must be
to do this successfully. If the airline's shares are traded, the price-earnings ratio
indicates the approximate price level of new equity capitaL
A high price/earnings ratio (or the inverse of a low earnings yield) means a low
cost ofnew capital; thus Japanese airlines have in the past had access to cheap equity
finance as a result of their high PIE ratios. A fuller discussion of equity capital is to
be found in the next chapter.
Preference share capital This is similar to equity capital but there is a maximum
return or fixed dividend payable (as long as the airline makes a profit). It ranks
before equity shares for the payment of dividend and distribution in the event of
bankruptcy, and is therefore less risky. Preference shares can either be redeemable,
whereby the company can buy them back from shareholders at a future date, or
perpetual (in the sarne way as ordinary shares). Other features can be:
where any unpaid dividends are carried forward to the next

financial year, or non-cumulative.
Participating, where a basic dividend is paid, plus an additional variable
mount depending on how much is left for distribution after paying a dividend
to ordinary shareholders.
Financial TImes, 6 December 1996.
Sources ofFinance
95
British Airways acquired convertible preference shares in US Air as part of their

alliance link up in 1993 (see box beloW). The advantage of preference shares is that
losses (or the share of losses) do not have to be shown in the investor's profit and
loss account, where the company invested in is an associated company (i.e., the
investment is between 20 per cent and 50 per cent). Only the dividends are shown.
Bonds/debentures/unsecured loan stock These are financial securities or long-term

promissory notes which pay a fixed or variable rate of interest and a have a fixed
term. They are negotiable which means that the general public can hold, buy or sell
them in the same way as shares. Bonds can sometimes be traded on the Eurobond or
US bond markets. They are re-paid or redeemed at par on the due date. In the case of
debentures they can be secured by aftxed orfioating charge on the airline's assets.
A mortgage debenture is secured on specific land or buildings. A fixed charge is on
specific assets, a floating charge is a general charge on all assets owned.
Convertible Preference Shares: British Airways' Investment in US Air

Federal Aviation Act prohibits foreign owners from controlling more than 25
per cent of voting stock of a US airline.
July 1992:
BA announced intention to invest US$750 million in US Air (44 per cent
of equity). BA would buy $230 million in convertible preferred shares with
full voting rights. BA would also buy $520 million in form of non-voting
convertible preferred shares.
January 1993:
BA acquired US$300 million ( 198 million) of new convertible preferred
stock in US Air; this stock earns cumulative cash dividends of 7 per cent
per annum (paid quarterly), and gives BA the right to convert it into US Air
common stock at any time on or after 21 January 1997. This gives BA an
estimated 21 per cent of the voting rights in US Air (other foreign owners
hold around 4 per cent). Flight code sharing agreement was also signed.
BA also has the option to buy another $450 million of US Airpreferred
stock in two tranches over the next five years, at similar terms to the first
investment, which if fully converted would bring BA's share of equity to a
maximum of 40. 7 per cent on an undiluted basis or 31.2 per cent, allowing
for the exercise of all stock options and all other conversion rights (i.e., on
a fully diluted basis). If this option is not exercised before 21 January 1996,
US Air has the right to redeem any of the initial investment in preferred
stock (or in any event on 21 January 2008 if this had not already been
converted into common stock).
After conversion, BA will hold 24.6 per cent of voting rights on an
undiluted basis, or around 17 per cent on a fully diluted basis. BA receives
three out of 16 US Air board positions, and would thus hold veto over certain
board decisions. BA to lease and operate the aircraft and crews on US Air's
96
Sources ofFinance
Airline Finance
routes to London from Charlotte, Philadelphia and Baltimore. US Air (and

BA) remain interested in TWA's transatlantic rights and assets.
May 1993:
US Air issues a further $231 million in common stock and US Air
employees exercise rights under certain stock option agreements, and BA
exercises its pre-emptive rights to subscribe to a further $100.7 million of
new convertible preferred stock in US Air in order to maintain its share at
just under 25 per cent. This new stock is entitled to cash dividends of 0.5
per cent over LIB OR.
March 1994:
Code sharing agreement extended for a further year; US Air reports a first
quarter pre-tax loss of $200 million and predicts a worse full year result in
1994 than the $350 million in 1993.
BA indicates that it will not increase its investment in US Air unless
labour concessions and restructuring are forthcoming
March 1995:
US Air reports a net loss of $685 million. Continued uncertainty about
agreement with the unions, but British Airways considered that US Air's
cash position would continue to be adequate until such time that an
agreement could be concluded. BA consider further investment of $450
million extremely unlikely.
US Air suspend dividend on preferred stock, and BA write-down their
investment in US Air by 50 per cent, primarily because of a change in US
accounting rules.
March 1996:
US Air posts a net profit of $1 I 9 million in 1995, and achieves $500 saving
in annual non-labour costs. Labour cost reductions have yet to be realised.
BA retains its 50 per cent provision against its US Air investment.
December 1996: BA offers their stock for sale on the open market, after
deterioration of relationship with US Air following plans for link up with
American Airlines. US Air decided not to exercise their option to buy back
this stock.
May 1997:
BA realises total proceeds ofUS$625 million from the sale of its holding.
Source: British Airways 'Annual Report and Accounts, and BA News
They can be issued in various classes to finance assets, each of the classes having
difterent rates of interest and claims on the underlying assets. Debentures and bonds
are practically the same, with small legal differences.
Convertible bonds These are bonds that give the holder the option to convert to
ordinary shares within a certain time 'window'. They allow finance to be raised,
often at a time when the share price is weak, on a fixed interest basis, but with rights
attached to convert to ordinary shares at a future date, and at a given conversion rate.
They can also usually be traded on a stock market. The coupon or interest rate is
lower than would be the case for loan stock without the conversion rights.
97
British Airways issued convertible capital bonds in June 1989 entitling the
holders to interest payments of 9% per cent a year up to the maturity date of June
2005. They also had the right to convert the bonds into ordinary shares at any time
between June 1993 and June 2005 on the basis of one ordinary share in British
Airways to each 2.34 of bonds held. Many holders ran the bonds for the full term
and benefited from the attractive interest rate, in spite of the BA share price reaching
over 7 for a time.
Lufthansa issued convertible bonds totalling 750 million in January 2002,
with the relatively low interest rate of 1.25 per cent per annum, maturing in 2012.
The conversion price was 19.86 per ordinary share. These were quoted on the
Luxembourg stock exchange. In January 2006, the Lufthansa ordinary share price
was well below the conversion price; the interest paid was also by then unattractive,
such that around 700 million worth of bondholders exercised an option they were
granted to redeem the bonds.
Equipment Trust Certificates (ETCs) These are similar to a secured bond, but
arranged in the form of a lease. The airline sells the certificates to investors to pay for
aircraft, which is then owned by a Trust on behalf of the investors. This can be done
for single aircraft or multiple aircraft, and certificates issued to finance new aircraft
can be secured against aircraft already in the fleet. Lease payments are made to the
investors through the trustee. On maturity, title to the aircraft passes to the airline.
This form offinance was largely restricted to the US market in the 1990s because of
the protection it affords investors when the airline lessee enters 'Chapter 11 ' (a form
of bankruptcy administration unique to the USA - see Chapter 12). However, it has
recently become more popular in Europe, with an issue from Iberia in 1999 followed
by deals for both Air France and Lufthansa, reported to be each totalling around $1
billion. 3 The certificates are also a type of securitisation which is discussed more
fully in Chapter 11.
Term loans These are generally negotiated from banks or insurance companies,
and are easier and cheaper to arrange than bonds. They could be arranged on a
bilateral basis for smaller amounts, or on a syndicated basis for larger loans. For the
latter, a lead bank will organise a number of banks to participate in the loan, with
fees distributed according to the bank's share of total funds and depending whether
or not it is the lead bank. For this type ofborrowing there will be a closer relationship
between the lead financial institution and airline borrower. This will allow closer
monitoring of the airline's performance than for bonds or other sources of finance.
Loans are usually to finance aircraft and will often be secured against these
assets. They may be used to fund advance payments to aircraft manufacturers, which
typically begin two years years before delivery and amount to some 30 per cent of
the total cost. Banks will only lend for up to about five years years on an unsecured
basis, except to large airlines (e.g., KLM at 19 basis points over LIBOR), and have
the usual debt advantage of the tax deductibility of interest payments. If an aircraft
is to be exported to a foreign country, the loan could be offered or guaranteed by
3
Airfinance Journal, (2001), More euro EETCs on the way, July/August.
98
Airline Finance
a government backed Export Credit Agency (ECA). The agencies involved are
described later in this chapter.
France and Germany will support 95 per cent and the UK 100 per cent of the
aircraft cost (less a down-payment made by the airline, or with a commercial bank
loan, of 15 per cent). The maximum term is 10-12 years at fixed interest rates of
120-175 basis points above the lO-year government bond yields. The terms and rates
are laid down in the Large Aircraft Sector Understanding (LASU), an agreement
between aircraft exporting countries to prevent unfair competition. The 12-year
maximum term is considered much too short, especially for large high cost jets
such as Boeing 747s, but discussions between the US and European ECAs aimed at
extending this limit have not in the past been successfuL There is also an agreement
between the European ECAs and Ex-1m not to support aircraft sold to airlines in
each other's territory (although operating lessors could benefit since the aircraft
would not necessarily be operated there).
Export credit bank loans can be relatively expensive for larger creditworthy
airlines, and, in addition to interest rates at levels considerably higher than could be
obtained by many good name airlines. The following fees are likely to be charged by
banks for an Ex-1m Bank type credit to a small airline:
Commitment fees (payable on undrawn portions of the loan), say lI.! per cent
to Y2 per cent.
Management/arrangement fees on the total loan, say Y4 per cent.
Agency fees (usually a flat fee per participating bank) to coverthe administration
costs of the agent or lead bank.
There would also be a guarantee fee payable to Ex-1m Bank for the part of the loan
for which they provided a 100 per cent guarantee. This was increased from 2 per cent
to 4 per cent in 1994, but was subsequently reduced to 3 per cent. In 2004, this fee
was reduced by one-third for airlines and lessors based in countries that had adopted,
ratified and implemented the Cape Town Treaty.
An example of this type of financing was Asiana's purchase of one B 747 -400
and one B737-400 in 1996. Of the total cost of the two aircraft ofUS$195 million,
$166.5 million was financed by a 12-year Ex-1m Bank backed loan at eight basis
over six-month LIBOR, the remaining $28.5 million with a commercial 12
year loan at 100 basis points over LIB OR.
However, under LASU, agencies can offer a fixed rate alternative, whereby
airlines have the option of locking into a low fixed interest rate at least three months
in advance. When interest rates are rising, this is extremely attractive and amounts
to a one-way option (if interest rates fall, the option does not have to be exercised, at
no cost to the borrower). The airline also benefits in that the loan has no impact on
its borrowing capacity from the bank making the loan, since the bank will book the
loan against the government of the Export Credit Agency country.
Because there is an element of subsidy in export credits, rumours circulate
continuously that they will be discontinued, or made less attractive. So far, there are
no signs of this happening.
Sources ofFinance
99
Aircraft Purchase Alternative: Term Loan

The three key variables associated with a term loan are the loan amount, the
loan term and the rate of interest. The currency of the loan is also important.
The term and interest rate will depend on the airline's creditworthiness,
intended use ofthe loan (e.g., type of aircraft), and the repayment prospects.
The financial institution has a legal recourse to the recapture of its loan,
but loan defaults are an expensive inconvenience. Thus, the lender will take
a close interest in the intended use of the loan, and will require detailed
information on this (cash flow projections and loan repayment schedules),
as well as the financial health of the airline. They will need to be satisfied
that the equity base is adequate, the borrower has a long-term commitment
to the business, and financial contingencies are in place for possible business
downturns. Covenants are frequently applied in the form of ratios that must
be satisfied: if airlines to not meet these ratios (see Chapter 3 for examples)
default may follow.
One advantage of term loans was the ability to match the financing to the
expected life of aircraft. However, the economic lives of aircraft have been
increasing to the extent that this rarely now happens. The loan period could
be between 10 to 15 years, depending on airline creditworthiness.
The nominal interest rate depends on general economic conditions, as
well as the airline's creditworthiness. The London Inter-Bank Offered Rate
(LJBOR) or the US Prime Rate may be used as benchmarks for the loan. A
floating or fixed rate may be adopted. Fixed interest rates are usually slightly
higher, and tend to increase in magnitude with the lengthening of the loan
term.
Leases These are contracts between airlines and banks or leasing companies where
the airline obtains use of the aircraft without ownership. Financing is therefore
arranged by these other parties, although the aircraft specification may be determined
by the airline, and the aircraft may be delivered directly to the airline and be operated
by one airline throughout its life. Leasing is covered more fully in Chapter 10.
Manufacturer ssupport This is usually provided in the form ofdeficiency payments
or buy-back guarantees on the aircraft. It could also be in the form of a loan to the
airline or equity investment in the airline. For example, in May 1987 Boeing made a
loan of US$700 million to United Airlines in the form of 7.52 per cent notes which
could have been converted into a maximum of 15 per cent of the airline's equity.
These notes were repaid in full in January 1988, including a pre-payment premium
of$50 million.4 At the end of 1995, Continental Airlines had $634 million in secured
borrowings from engine manufacturer, General Electric and associated companies. 5
British Aerospace has in the past provided minority equity stakes in a US regional
4
5
Allegis Corporation (1988), Addressing Airline Issues. 1987 Annual Report.
Continental Airlines Annual Report (1995), p. 25.
TOO
Airline Finance
airline and a Caribbean start-up airline, as a means ofsupporting sales of its BAe 146
aircraft. Neither airline survived for very long.
An example of a deficiency guarantee related to a secured loan to an airline, on
a 'first loss' basis would be:
Table 5.2
Hypotbetical example of manufacturer's support for aircraft

finance
Outstanding debt
Net proceeds from aircraft sale
Loss on sale
Paid by manufacturer
Paid bv lender
The above table shows three scenarios for the forced sale of an aircraft in the open
market, because of a loan default or bankruptcy. Under scenarios A and B, the
manufacturer makes good the loss and the lender is not out ofpocket. Under scenario
C, the lender is required to cover part of the loss. The part paid by the manufacturer
could be a pre-agreed amount of the unamortised loan principal, or a pre-agreed
share of the sale loss. The aircraft could also be bought back by the manufacturer
for storage and later sale or lease to another airline. The manufacturer might also
be required to give technical advice on re-marketing the aircraft and/or arrange for
maintenance or refurbishment.
A survey of 20 firms involved in aircraft manufacturing estimated that their
exposure to customer financing increased by 54 per cent between the end of 1991
and the end of 1995, to US$27.8 billion. This was offset by receivable sales to banks
of $4.1 billion to reduce the end 1995 exposure to $23.7 billion, down from $25
6
billion in 1994. This latter figure was 15 per cent of total lCAO world airline debt
and equity estimated at end 1994, or 22 per cent oftotal airline long-term debt.?
More recent figures have not been published.
5.3 Institutions Involved in Aircraft Finance

5.3.1
Banks
Banks act as intermediaries between savers and users of funds. Bank loans to the
airline industry might be from money deposited with them or their own capitaL They
would appear on their balance sheet and be subject to lending limits and liquidity
ratios. Banks will have limits up to which they can lend to a particular company, a
particular country, or a particular industry. They might also underwrite debt or equity
6
7
Philippakkos, T. (1996), Support System, Ailjinance Journal, September, 42.
leAO Journal (1996), July/August, 8.
Sources o/Finance
101
issues, but this would be off-balance sheet. Some observers see banks focusing more
on off-balance sheet activities in the future, such as underwriting and fee earning
services. This has traditionally been the preserve of the smaller merchant banks,
which did not have a large balance sheet.
Many of the larger international banks have traditionally been involved in
aerospace and aircraft financing, and have often had specialist departments dealing
with this industry. Up to 1990, the big US banks, such as Citibank and Chase
Manhattan Bank headed the table of top loan providers for aircraft transactions. By
1990, however, these two names had disappeared from the top 20, and were largely
replaced by Japanese banks, such as Fuji Bank, Sumitomo Bank and the Mitsubishi
Trust and Banking Corporation. More recently, the position has been reversed, with
the Japanese Banks being replaced by the large US and European banks, and some
new entrants from the UK, such as the Halifax and Abbey National (both formerly
building societies).
An indication of the banks most involved in aircraft financing can be obtained
from those doing export credit deals. In 2004, BNP Paribas and Barclays were
offering low cost export credit backed finance to airlines such as Ryanair at rates
close to LIBOR, and happy to bid for a large number of deals. Then came banks like
Calyon (The Credit Agricole Group that incorporated Credit Lyonnais), Citigroup,
Natexis Banque Populaire and Rabobank that would be more selective, preferring
deals for relationship airlines. Other banks were that had previously had a significant
presence in aircraft finance, such as Deutsche Bank, Bank of Scotland and WestLB,
were less active in the market.s
Airlines invite banks to compete for the mandate which would give the winner
the authorisation to be the lead bank in any subsequent financing. For larger airlines,
there may be 15-20 banks competing for the lead mandate, with a further 100 or
so banks happy to accept the smaller level of risk implicit in a secondary role in
syndicate financing.
5.3.2 Export Credit Agencies

Most of the major exporting countries will have export credit agencies (ECAs)
which are either a part of government or a government supported organisation.
Their purpose is to encourage exports of goods from their countries, generally by
guarantees or insurance rather than direct loans. Thus, they are there to provide
support or complement bank lending, especially in cases where banks would be
reluctant to assume 100 per cent of the risk. This could be where the country is
high risk or low credit standing, or the purchaser of the goods is high risk, or a
combination of the two.
The export credit volume varies significantly from year to year, with just under
US$1O billion of deals reported in 2004,9 compared to $16.5 billion in 1999. For
35 percent of backing went to airlines in Asia, followed by 27 percent in Latin
8 AirFinanceJournal, December 2004/January 2005, pp. 20-21.
9 AirFinance Journal, December 2004/January 2005. Reported US$15 billion of
business done between November 2003 and November 2004, but this referred to the total
102
Airline Finance
America, 17 per cent Europe, 15 per cent Middle East and Africa, and 6 per cent
in North America. to The following are the Export Credit Agencies in the countries
which have some aircraft or aircraft component manufacturing capability, and could
therefore be involved in aircraft financing:
Ex-1m Bank (USA).
Export Credit Guarantee Department (UK).
COFACE (France).
Euler Hermes (Germany).
NEXI (Japan).
Export Development Corporation - EDC (Canada).
ESACE (Italy).
The above institutions generally provide only guarantees, although the Exim Bank
and ECGD have also lent money directly, with the actual finance being provided by
banks under syndicated loans. This is a way of spreading the risk between a number
of commercial banks, with a lead bank inviting others to participate jointly in the
financing.
Under a gentleman~' agreement, the US Eximbank does not support exports of
US aircraft to airlines based in UK, France, Germany and Spain, and the European
ECAs does not assist Airbus aircraft exports to US airlines.
Where an export of an aircraft from one country incorporates a substantial share
of airframe or components from another country, then two or more ECAs would be
involved. This would be essential for Airbus aircraft, with financing support generally
proportionate to each ECA's national manufacturer's share in the production of the
aircraft (e.g., for an A320 with rAE engines: UK 32 per cent France 32 per cent and
Germany 36 per cent; or an A321 with CFM engines 17 per cent, 52 per cent and 31
per cent respectively). Another example would be the involvement ofboth Eximbank
and the ECGD in the financing of a Boeing 757 with Rolls-Royce engines.
Eximbank (USA) Ex-1m Bank provides official support for aircraft finance through
long-term guarantees for up to 85 per cent of the US cost of aircraft exported. It also
offers loans and subsidies, but this is a small part of its overall business. It complies
with the LASU guidelines. Ex-1m Bank provided little support for aircraft exports
in the 1980s, since finance was relatively easy to obtain from US and Japanese
banks. When many Japanese sources dried up in the early 1990s, however, the bank
expanded its aircraft lending and support. For example, the agency only provided
two aircraft loan guarantees in 1988 compared to 67 during 1992/1993. 11
The agency has recently been restructured and a dedicated aviation department
established, as opposed to supporting all sectors through geographic regional
value of the aircraft, not that portion guaranteed by the ECAs; there may also have been some
double counting.
10 AirFinance Journal, Export Credit Survey, March (2001).
II Verchere, I. (1994), The Air Transport Industry in Crisis, EIU Publishing, Chapter 8.
Sources ofFinance
103
divisions. This was necessary because of the increasingly complex asset-based

financing, which now comprise around two-thirds of total bank transactions.
For the financial year ended September 1993, Ex-1m Bank provided cover
worth US$15.5 billion, of which $3.4 billion related to commercial jet aircraft. For
1993/1994, this increased to $20 billion and $3.0 billion respectively, but for the two
subsequent fiscal years aircraft activity fell to $1 billion a year. In 2000, its support
had increased again to $3.5 billion of cover for 63 aircraft, reaching $4.3 billion in
2005 on 78 aircraft. Its largest single aircraft deal in 2005 was guarantees worth
$530 million for Emirates, followed by $402 million for WestJet. Two separate deals
for Ryanair totalled $687 million.
European ECAs The three major European ECAs involved in Airbus financing
are the Export Credit Guarantee Department in the UK, COFACE in France, and
Hermes in Germany. They are estimated to support around 30 per cent of total
Airbus sales.
The ECGD insures UK exports, with aerospace now ahead of defence as the
second largest sector of the agency's business. In 199311994, guarantees for
commercial aircraft sales were issued for a total value of 1.14 billion, falling to
786 million in 1995/1996, of which around three-quarters was for Airbus aircraft,
and the rest for regional aircraft and Rolls-Royce engines. ECGD covers 100 per
cent of the principal and interest of the loan, up to a maximum of 85 per cent of the
aircraft cost. Bank commitment or management fees are not covered. Both COFACE
and Hermes cover only 95 per cent of the principal and interest on 85 per cent of the
aircraft cost, but they do cover 95 per cent of a bank's fees. Neither cover the interest
payable from the due date ofthe loan to the date of payment of a claim.
Hermes differs from the other two European agencies in being a wholly owned
subsidiary ofthe Allianz Group (in tum 76 per cent owned by German banks), acting
on behalf of the German Government. It structures its support in the form of an
insurance policy.
Spare parts are normally allowed to be added to the cost of the aircraft by
European ECAs, but only up to a maximum of 15 per cent of the aircraft cost for the
first five aircraft, and up to 10 per cent of aircraft cost for subsequent aircraft.
In 2000, the European export credit agencies provided $1.6 billion of support
for 21 Airbus aircraft, significantly less than the US Ex-1m cover.12 However, it
was thought that by 2005, the European agencies were supporting a similar value
of aircraft to the US Ex-1m Bank (i.e., almost $5 billion). The largest guarantee
provided by ECGD in FY2005-2006 was 178.4 million (over $300 million) on
Airbus aircraft for Thai Airways, covering only the value ofthe aircraft manufactured
in the UK.
NEXI (Japan) The role of this agency differs somewhat from those described
above, in that Japan does not have its own civil aircraft manufacturing programme.
It is, however, an increasingly large supplier of components and is involved with
Boeing on the B767 (15 per cent of the airframe value) B777 and B787 projects.
The agency normally finances 60-70 per cent of the aircraft cost, with the remainder
coming from commercial sources, not necessarily Japanese.
12 Airline Business, (February 2001) p. 57.
lOS
Airline Finance
Sources ofFinance
Most of the agency's business comes from import credits. It provided finance
for the acquisition of foreign aircraft by domestic airlines, for example 50 per
cent of the value of JAL's purchase of three B747-400s which were delivered in
the lack ofcustomers for some aircraft (22 aircraft were in storage in 1992) led to the
collapse ofGPA in 1993. This was after repeated attempts to raise new equity finance.
Commenting on the Group's downfall, the Financial Times stated that 'rarely can so
much have been borrowed by so few, on the basis ofso insubstantial a balance sheet' .14
The company that came to GPA's rescue in 1993 was the aircraft leasing arm
of General Electric of the US, or GE Capital Aviation Services (GECAS). GE had
acquired 22.7 per cent of GPA in 1983, and having tried to buy control, sold almost
all its stake in 1986 for a profit of almost $40 millionY When GPA's $1 billion
stock offering failed in 1992, GE purchased an 85 per cent interest in 45 of GPA's
stage 3 aircraft for $1.35 billion. Once the collapse came in 1993, it was the obvious
rescuer. Under the rescue agreement, GECAS was established to manage the GPA's
aircraft under a 15-year contract for a fee paid by GPA. OPA remained as a separate
company, retaining ownership of just over 400 aircraft at the end of 1993 (many
of these have since been removed from their balance sheet through securitisation
or sale). GE had an option to acquire 67 per cent ofGPA for between $110 million
and $165 million, which was eventually exercised. GECAS is part of the equipment
management division of GE Capital Services; the division as a whole generated
$14.7 billion in revenues in 2000.
The next largest operating lessor in terms of owned aircraft value after GECAS
and ILFC, was Aviation Capital Group, owned by a major US life insurance
company (Pacific Life), followed by Boeing Capital. AWAS, which was number
three in the mid-1990s, was originally owned by the AnsewMurdoch group, but
they were eventually sold to Morgan Stanley, and in 200 I were again up for sale.
Many of the remaining firms have Japanese shareholders, such as Orix which
acquired a portfolio solely of A320 aircraft, but has recently added Boeing 737s
104
1993.13
5.3.3
Operating Lessors
The operating lease business has until recently been dominated by two firms:
International Lease Finance Corporation (ILFC) and General Electric Capital Asset
Services (GECAS), which effectively took over the failing GPA in the mid-1990s.
At the end of 1994, these two firms owned 62 per cent of the 1,820 commercial jet
aircraft leased by 40 companies. By 2005, this had fallen to 42 per cent of the jet
flcet numbers owned by the top 50 lessors. The two companies accounted for a larger
share of total jet fleet value, 52 per cent in 2005.
ILFC started in 1973 (at the height of the early 1970s energy crisis) with the
lease of a DC8 to AeroMexico. It subsequently expanded to reach turnover of US$30
million and pre-tax income of $5.5 million in 1980. By 1985, turnover was $58
million and profits $20 million, but the fastest period of growth was the second half
ofthe 1980s, with 1990 revenues approaching $500 million and profits $124 million.
The number of aircraft owned by ILFC grew to 106 in 1990, and at the end of 2005
was 911 (see Table 5.3). ILFC's turnover in 1994 was $1.11 billion, and $2.5 billion
in 2000 (93 per cent of which came from the rental of flight equipment). Airlines in
Europe provided the largest part ofILFC's business with 45.8 per cent of the total
rentals, followed by AsiaJPacific with 20.1 per cent and the US and Canada with 19.1
per cent. It is the only lessor of the B747-400, and the only operating lessor to order
theA380 (up to mid-2001).
ILFC was originally owned by the founders, and operated until 1990 with a staff
of only 28. This gave it one of the highest ratios of turnover to employee of any US
company. In 1990, they were acquired by the large US insurance company, AIG, for
$1.3 billion with the increasing need for access to cheap debt finance that its new
parent could provide.
GPA was founded in 1976, principally as an aircraft management services
company. Initially, GPA was involved with wet leasing aircraft and some operating
leases of used aircraft. It was not until 1984 that they made their first order for new
aircraft. They then switched emphasis from aircraft trading and acquiring aircraft
for known customers to ordering aircraft purely on the basis of expected industry
growth. This culminated in a 1989 order at for 300 aircraft worth $17 billion (some
of which were options). Deliveries of these aircraft took place after the GulfWar and
subsequent world-wide economic recession (and in mid-1991 they still had 376 firm
orders outstanding). At the end of 1991, GPAhad 392 aircraft in its fleet, which were
leased to 100 airlines in 47 countries. The group's annual revenues grew from $360
million in 1986/1987 to more than $2 billion in 1991/1992, when they recorded a net
profit of$268 million. However, the financial strain imposed by faIling lease rates and
13 AirFinance Journal, (1994) Guide to Export Credits, p. 32.
to their fleet.
The average number of aircraft placed with each airline is between 3 and 4 for
most of the larger lessors. This strikes a happy medium between putting all their eggs
in one basket, and avoiding the higher operating costs which come from dealing with
too many different airlines.
Aircraft manufacturers with largish leasing subsidiaries were Boeing Capital (349
aircraft), Airbus Asset Management (56 aircraft) and BAE Systems (267 aircraft, but
mostly small jets or turbo-props). Neither of the two major manufacturers market
their leasing arms very proactively, since this would compete with their major lessor
customers.
Many of the lessors are owned by banks: In 2001, Westdeutsche-Landesbank
made an offer for BouIlioun Aviation (later sold to Aviation Capital), while Morgan
Stanley bought Ansett Aviation.
14 Financial Times, (13 May 1993) p. 24.
15 Feldman, J. (1993), The Eagle Has Landed, Air Transport World, December, p. 44.
106
Table 5.3
Airline Finance
Sources ofFinance
Top 10 operating lessors and their Beets - end 2005
A large part of the air transport lending went to Latin America and the Caribbean
(73 per cent) and Africa (20 per cent). Much of the lending in Latin America, however,
was for airport projects, including a study on the privatisation ofArgentina's airports.
In 2006, The World Bank's private funding arm, The International Finance
Corporation (IFC), financed the spares holding of Brazilian LCC, Gol (US$50
million), which has previously benefited from US$40 million of funding from its
government development bank. The IFC also provided the Mexican LCC start-up in
2006 with a US$30 million credit facility to finance its purchase of A320 aircraft, as
well as a $10 million loan for working capital.
GECAS
ILFC
Aviation Capital Group
Boeing Capital
RES Aviation
Babcock & Brown
AerCap (former debis)
GATX Capital
AWAS
107
European Investment Bank (EIB) One source of funds for airlines (and airports) is
the European Investment Bank. This was created by the Treaty of Rome establishing
the European Economic Community, in January 1958. The bank's mission is to
contribute to the European Union's balanced development. It is an autonomous
public institution and operates on a non profit-making basis.
Source: Airline Business, February 2006
Table 5.4
Airlines have mostly withdrawn from a major role in operating leases. Ansett was
uncoupled from Ansett Aviation (which changed its name to AWAS), and Swissair
had to withdraw from its joint venture with GATX (Flightlease). Singapore Airlines
and the Singapore government has ajoint venture with BoulliOlmAviation (SALE),
focusing on the Asian and Chinese markets, although it was suggested that this might
be sold through an IPO.
It can be seen from Table 5.3 that ILFC's average aircraft value is significantly
higher than that of GECAS. This is because ILFC has a higher percentage of wide
body aircraft, and no turbo-props compared to 21 owned by GECAS. Operating
lessors have occasionally acquired equity capital of customer airlines as part of a
lease deal. For example, ILFC had small stakes in Air Liberte, Air New Zealand and
American Trans Air.
5.3.4
Governmental Financing Organisations
International Bank for Reconstrnction and Development (lBRD) The IBRD or

World Bank has financed both airport and airline projects in the past. More recent
funding has gone towards privatisation studies, but it has also sponsored a study into
the feasibility of establishing a multinational airline in Southern Africa (through the
Southern Africa Development Coordination Council), as well as a study of the West
African airline, TAGB Air Bissau. Cumulative lending to the air transport sector up
to the end of June 1993 amounted to US$299 million out of total transport sector
lending of $33,604 million and total lending of $235.2 billion. 16 Thus, although
transport accounted for 14.3 per cent oftotallending, mostly on roads, air transport
was under I per cent of transport lending.
16 World Bank Development Report, 1994.
Examples of European Investment Bank lending to airlines
Iberia (1997)
Egyptair (1997)
Austrian Airlines (1999)
Aer
The EIB grants long-term loans or guarantees to the public and private sectors for
investments which help the economic development of structurally weak regions.
These are either made directly or through financial institutions. Loans normally
cover up to 50 per cent of the gross investment cost of a project, supplementing the
borrower's own funds and credits from other sources.
The RIB lending is on a project rather than asset basis, and is generally for
aircraft acquisition. The cost of loans tends to be low, and the term relatively long.
The typical loan term for aircraft has been between 12 and 18 years, significantly
longer than commercial bank borrowing. Their airport lending is even longer term.
European airline borrowers originally had to operate the aircraft only within the
European Union to qualifY for loans at small margins over LIBOR, such as the BF
3.6 billion loan for Sabena's 23 RJ70 regional aircraft, but the EIB later financed
B747-400s for both BA and KLM. Its airline lending fTOm the beginning of 1990
to the end of 2001 totalled 5,370 million, 64.5 per cent of which was to large or
second rank EU flag carriers. A total of 31 airlines benefited, only two of which were
based outside the En l7
17 European Investment Bank (2004) Evaluation ofEiB Financing ofairlines: A synthesis

report.
108
The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) The EBRD
was established by the governments of Europe and North America after the break
up of the Soviet Union to help with economic restructuring in the former eastern
bloc countries. Its role is similar to The World Bank (IBRD), but specialising in the
CIS and Eastern European countries. The European Commission also significantly
increased its lending to these countries, through its PHARE and TACIS programmes
for Eastern Europe and the CIS countries respectively (although their combined
lending to the air transport industry amounted to less than one per cent of total
lending in the first half of the I 990s).
In 1992, the EBRD invested ECU20.8 million towards a fleet replacement and
modernisation programme for the Czech national airline, CSA. The aim of this
finance was to support the privatisation process by catalysing investment from Air
France and mediating between the two partners in the project. EBRD took a 20 per
cent share in the airline and Air France 40 per cent, although the latter subsequently
pulled out and sold its share back to the Czech Government. More recent equity
finance deals are described in the next chapter. In 2006, the EBRD also helped a
Russian start-up airline, VIM Airlines, finance 12 used B757-200s through the issue
of a US$92m asset-backed senior secured loan, just under half of which was funded
by participating banks and $51.5 million by the EBRD itself. In the same year EBRD
planned to provide $20 million in funding for a Russian start-up LCC (Sky Express),
part of which would be equity along with private investors.
Otherwise, the EBRD tends to focus on project lending to airports, privatisation
studies, and technical assistance and institutional support to air transport in general.
Its total lending to airlines, airports and ATC authorities in the early 1990s only
amounted to some 2 per cent of its total lending.
international Civil Aviation Organization (IC'AO) ICAO plays a major role in air
transport training programmes and technical assistance, but does not have the funding
capability to lend or give grants for capital investment. In fact, its programmes
are largely financed from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
resources. Furthermore, ICAO tends to support projects for aviation authorities
or airports, rather than airlines. Airline training and some technical assistance is
provided through the airlines' own trade association, the International Air Transport
Association (lATA).
Other development banks Development banks such as the, the Asian Development
Bank and the African Development Bank have usually only financed airport projects.
They have, however, sometimes funded airline studies or transport sector studies
that have included airlines. IS One exception to this, however, is the Caribbean
Development Bank, which is a shareholder in the regional airline, LIAT, and has
played a major role in that airline's finances.
Appendix 5.1 Term Loan Repayment, Book Profit and Manufacturers' Pre
payments
a)
Calculation ofTerm Loan Repayment Amount
The repayment amount can be calculated from the following formula:
o
where:PV
( I (1 ')-n
PV + (l + i.s)(PMT) {. -
~l
Present value of the loan

Periodic interest rate (decimal form)
Number of compounding periods
s
PMT
Payment factors (0 for arrears!l for advance)

Periodic payment
If an airline borrows US$1 0 million at 10 per cent interest and is required to repay
the loan over 10 years, with repayments annually in arrears:
i.e.,
PV
$10,000,000
0.1
10
From above formula, the periodic payment would be US$I,627,454 annually in

arrears throughout the loan term. A lower payment of US$1,479,400 would be
required if paid in advance (i,e., with s 1).
The airline will also pay for the preparation of the loan documents, and the bank
commitment fees. There may be other conditions such as debt/equity ceilings or
minimum net working capital levels. A common practice is to amortise the loan by
making periodic payments to reduce the loan balance:
Loan amount
US$10 million
Interest rate
10 per cent a year
Loan term
10 years
Repayment
18 For example, Asian Development Bank's technical assistance to the Solomon Islands.
109
Sources ofFinance
Airline Finance
1,627,454 annually in arrears
Airline Finunce
llO
The airline is required to make the following prepayments totalling 33 per cent ofthe
aircraft price (probably the upper limit of what the manufacturer requires):
Year
627.45
690.19
759.21
835.13
918.65
1,010.51
1,111.56
1,222.72
1,344.99
1.479.49
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Since interest is deductible for tax purposes, it is important to separate this out from
the repayment of principal in the periodic payments.
Calculating Book Profit
The airline borrows US$10 million to acquire an aircraft which is then depreciated
over 15 years to 10 per cent residual value. After five years years the airline decides
to sell the aircraft for its market value of US$8 million. What is the book profit
realised, and what is the cash flow after repayment of the outstanding loan balance?
Annual Depreciation
($10,000,000 -$1,000,000) -;- 15 = $600,000
Depreciated value at year end:

Year
Value ($000)
9,400
8,800
2
8,200
3
7,600
4
7,000
5
Book profit
Cash flow
111
c) Effect ofPrepayments to Manufacturers
In US$ thousands
b)
Sources ofFinance
Sale price less depreciated value

$8,000,000 --$7,000,000 = $1,000,000
Sale Price less loan outstanding
$8,000,000 --$6,169,370 = $1,830,630
5 per cent at contract signature, 30 months before aircraft delivery.

5 per cent at quarterly intervals between 12 and 24 months before delivery.
3 per cent 9 months before delivery.
What is the effect of these prepayments on aircraft price if the prevailing interest
rate is 10 per cent?
The aircraft price quoted is US$10 million, estimated at date of delivery
(including manufacturer's escalation). If the airline had no prepayment obligation,
these payments could have been invested at 10 per cent a year which would have
amounted to $3.867 million, rather than the 33 per cent of aircraft price or $3.3
million. Thus, the effect of the prepayment schedule is to raise the cost of the aircraft
by $0.567 million, or by 5.7 per cent.
Chapter 6
Equity Finance
Equity finance is one of the two main forms of long-term borrowing discussed in
the previous chapter. It will be addressed in more detail here. It consists of various
classes of shares which are issued by the airline in return for a consideration ~r price.
They may be subsequently bought and sold, usually through a stock exchange.
A new issue of shares can either be offered to the public or placed with financial
institutions. A prospectus will be issued, showing past financial performance and
short-term prospects. The issue will need to be underwritten to ensure success, and
this is done by obtaining commitments from several financial institutions to take a
given number of shares at a substantial discount in return for a fee. For a more risky
start-up airline, a venture capital firm might be invited to take an initial stake. This
will be explored more below.
6.1
Share Issues
Various classes ofshare may be issued by a company to raise money for the business.
The holder of the share has various rights, the main usually being:
the right to a dividend, if one has been declared;
the right to vote at various meetings and by post;
the right to a share of the assets if and when a liquidation takes place (although
they would only be paid after all the other classes with claims on the assets
had first been paid).
The rights of shareholders are normally described in the Articles of Association

reflected in the company laws of the country in which it is based. In some countries
(such as China and Russia), company law is less well developed and shareholders
need to rely on government agencies to enforce their rights, rather than the law
courts.
The airline's balance sheet will show the nominal value of the shares issued,
together with any premiums paid on subscription. BA's nominal value for each
ordinary share is 25p, but this has little practical significance. Both these will appear
under shareholders' or stockholders' equity, which will also include any revaluation
surpluses or deficits, other reserves and retained profits and losses from previous
years.
The different classes ofordinary share will be shown separately under shareholders'
equity. For example, China Southern Airlines has three classes: domestic shares held
by the Chinese Government (2.2 billion), 'H' shares listed overseas and held by
114
Equity Finance
Airline Finance
foreign nationals (1.17 billion) and 'A' shares which were issued in 2003 to private
Chinese shareholders (1 billion).
Companies may issue special classes of shares either to thwart a hostile take
over or restrict the ownership to nationals of its country. Air transport is especially
dependent on the latter, and foreign ownership restrictions will be discussed below.
Singapore Airlines had two classes of ordinary shares SIA200 and Foreign
each with a separate stock market listing. In 1999, it decided to merge the two and
issue one non-tradable special share to the Ministry of Finance. The vote attached
to this share was required to approve certain resolutions, allowing the Singapore
government effectively to block certain strategic changes to the airline, such as
acquisition by foreign interests. In addition the airline created 3,000 million non
tradable redeemable preference shares with full voting rights: these would be issued
to Singapore nationals in the event of any threat to their Air Services Agreements
from foreign ownership.
There are a large number of conditions and requirements for listing shares or
securities on a stock market. These are more onerous for the major ones such as the
London Stock Exchange (LSE) or the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).
Many non-US companies prefer to obtain a listing in the US by issuing American
Depositary Shares (ADSs), which give the holder a claim on a given number of
ordinary shares held outside the US. An American Depositary Receipt (ADR) is
a certificate of ownership of such shares, and the ADR is often used to describe
both the certificate and the shares themselves. The advantages of issuing an ADS
include:
Access to the world's largest capital market;
Ease of trading and settlement;
The ability to denominate the shares in local currency and at appropriate price
level for US investors (the Depositary Receipt ratio);
Easier stock/option allocation to US employees.
SEC reporting requirements are less onerous for ADSs than for US companies: annual
results are filed on Form 20-F up to six months after the close of the financial year,
compared to US companies need to file the 10-K form up to 90 days from their close.
No quarterly reports need to be filed. More importantly, the 20-F can be produced
using the accounting standards of the home country, with only a reconciliation to
US GAAP.' The 10-K report needs to be prepared in accordance with US GAAP.
However, Some foreign firms are unhappy with the more onerous regulatory burdens
placed on foreign companies using ADRs resulting from the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002. While not all the requirements of the Act apply, some such as the personal
liability of the CEO and Finance Director may deter some foreign firms from listing
in the US. It should be added that the ADR allows listing on all US stock exchanges,
and the Over-the-Counter market. No 20-F reporting is needed for the latter, but the
ADS gets less exposure to US investors.
Depositary receipts Information Guide, Citigroup website, July 2006.
115
BA is one example of an airline that has issued ADSs that have been traded on the
NYSE for many years. Each of its ADSs is equivalent to 10 ordinary shares, while
China Southern's more recently issued ADS can be converted into 50 of their 'H'
class of shares. Arbitrage keeps the prices ofADRs (quoted in US$) and underlying
foreign shares (quoted in non-US currencies), converted at current market exchange
rates, essentially equal.
Capital can be raised from existing shareholders through a rights issue, where the
owner of each share has the right to subscribe to a given number of new shares in
proportion to their existing holdings, by a given ratio, say, one new share for every
three shares held. A rights issue will need to be priced at a discount to the current
share price of up to 15 per cent, which is why the rights have a value in themselves
even before they are fully paid up. New shares can also be issued in the form of a free
distribution ofthe company's reserves (accumulated from previous years' profits) by
a scrip or bonus issue, but this will not raise any new capital.
An example of a rights issue was Lufthansa's issue of one new share for five
existing ones in June 2005. The issue was 99.82 per cent subscribed at the offer price
of 9 .85, raising 752 million for the airline. TheAMR Corporation also raised $223
million in November 2005 through the issue of 13 million new shares at around $17
per share, capitalising on the doubling of their share price over the year.
6.2
Equity Finance for Start-up Airline
Smaller or start-up airlines with no access to more conventional sources of capital

often turn to venture capital companies. These firms are looking for a large potential
capital gain commensurate with the high risk. Most start-up airline business plans
are now based on the low cost model, although there are also some business class
only, regional and charter start-ups. A typical scenario might be the venture capital
firm taking an equity stake at the outset or after an initial proving period. If the
airline were successful, the firm would seek to sell its shares a few years after launch,
either through acquisition by a larger airline, or by way ofa public share issue (Initial
Public Offering or IPO). This would give the venture capitalist an exit route to realise
their capital gain.
Examples of earlier venture capital firms are the US west coast specialists,
Hambrecht and Quist (which has financed People Express in the US, the short-lived
Scottish airline, Highland Express, and more recently Vanguard Airlines and Ryanair),
and New Court Securities, an offshoot ofRoths childs, which lent to Federal Express.
The large banks now also have their venture capital arms, notably Citicorp Venture
Capital, which lent $600,000 to People Express,2 and NatWest Venture Capital, who
have financed British World Airlines. There are many more such firms in the US,
with a few specialising solely in airline ventures. George Soros and Chase Capital
were the original backers of JetBlue, the former the venture capital arm of a retail
2 Wells, A. and Wensvecn, 1. (2004), Air Transportation: a Management Perspective,

fifth edn, Wadsworth.
117
Airline Finance
Equity Finance
bank. In Europe, banks are becoming more active in this area, but are still reluctant
to subscribe equity to the airline industry.
One of the few exceptions is 3i, the venture capital company jointly owned by
UK clearing (retail) banks. They had an equity stake in British Caledonian some
years ago, and more recently in the UK airlines Gill Airways and City Flyer Express.
Both of the last two have been sold, Gill to its management and CityFlyerto British
Airways. In 2001, 3i took a majority stake in the British Airways low cost airline
'Go', together with 20 per cent from Barclays Bank, 4 per cent from its chief
executive and IS.5 per cent from staff. Another venture capital firm, Elektra Partners
was originally one of the bidders, as was the Carlyle Group. BA received $112.7
million in cash and $2S.1 million in loan notes, and would receive a further $14
million if 3i decided to sell the airline within the next five years years. The intention
was to float the airline with an IPO by 2003 but the airline was sold to easyJet and
BA collected its bonus. According to KPMG,3 venture capitalists generally require:
One publicly owned bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development (EBRD) has taken small equity stakes in airlines in Eastern Europe
and the CIS countries. These have been designed to encourage other private sources
of capital to invest in airlines after the collapse of the Soviet bloc. Their stake in
SkyEurope (Table 6.1) was sold at the subsequent IPO discussed below, while the
EBRD still retains a 9.93 per cent stake in majority government-owned Ukraine
International Airlines, together with 22.5 per cent held by Austrian Airlines (see
Table 6.7).
Other LCCs have had a large part oftheir equity funding provided by individuals
or families: the Ryan family founded Ryanair and the Haji-Ioannou family easyJet.
The latter still control the airline, whereas the Ryan family have only retained a
minority interest in Ryanair.
The Brazilian LCC 'Gol' divides its shares into ordinary and preferred; the
preferred began trading on the Sao Paulo Stock Exchange in June 2004. They are
also traded on the New York Stock Exchange as ADRs, originally with one ADR
equivalent to one preferred share, changing to one ADR to two preferred shares
in December 2005. The average daily trading volume in these shares in December
2005 was R$1,783 million (US$783 million) in Sao Paulo and US$55,168 million
in New York. Only 26.4 per cent of the voting share capital was publicly held (and
could thus be foreign owned) at end December 2005. This example shows how it
is possible to tap the large US market by combining a listing there with one on a
relatively small exchange in the home country.
116
A return of around 30 per cent a year over three years.

An exit route for their investment in around three years' time, through an IPO
or placing.
Confidence in management and business plan.
65-80 per cent of the equity, preferably with management having the rest.
The very high rate of return required is to compensate for the investments made
by venture capitalists that fail. Management are left to run the business, in spite
of having a minority of shares. The level of profits required to satisfy the high rate
of return demanded can be reduced if a significant amount of debt capital can be
raised.
Table 6.1
Venture capital interests in LCC/start-up airlines, early 2000s
Gol (Brazil)
SkyEurope (Slovak)
Spirit Airlines (US)
Tiger Air (Singapore)
Wizz Air (Hungary)
72
51
24
nla
40
* formed by the European Bank (EBRD), EU/EBRD SME Finance and ABN AMRO
Spirit Airlines, based in Fort Lauderdale, is said to be the largest privately owned
airline in the US, with 4.7 million passengers in 2005. Its backer, Oaktree Capital
Management is the fund managcment arm of Indigo Partners.
3 Meldrun, A., (2001), Financing start-up airlines: private equity, presentation to
Airline Finance course at Cranfield University, 1 March.
6.3
Foreign Ownership Limits
Air Services Agreements (ASAs) usually have a clause that requires designated
airlines to be effectively controlled by nationals of that country. If that clause is
contravened, the other country has the right to refuse designation and thus remove
the airline's air traffic rights. This could be a problem at the time of privatisation,
since the airline's shares will change from government (nationally owned) to private
hands, the latter potentially being foreign owned. This will be addressed in the next
chapter, but the problem may also arise in connection with airlines that are in private
(non-government) ownership.
Given the very large US capital market, it is easy to sec foreign ownership rise
substantially, either through an IPO or subsequent issues or market purchases. The
question is what constitutes substantially owned and effectively controlled by a
country's nationals?
The US limits foreign control to 25 per cent ofthe voting equity in contrast to the
EU's 49 per cent. The EU were pressing for a relaxation in the US limit as part of
their 2005/2006 Air Services Agreement (ASA) negotiations, and the US Department
of Transportation were awaiting comments on a draft proposal in 2006 which would
introduce minor changes to the definition of control. Limits for a selection of other
countries ranged from only 20 pt.'!' cent for Brazil to 49 per cent for Australia (which
allowed 100 per cent foreign ownership of its domestic airlines) and 50 per cent for
,I'
r~~
Airline Finance
Equity Finance
Korea. Some countries had relaxed the limits between 1998 and 2000, although still
keeping them below 50 per cent.
Some airlines, such as Thai, Air New Zealand and AeroMexico, have'A' and 'B'
shares, with the'B' or foreign shares only purchasable by foreign nationals. This is
one way to avoid exceeding the share ownership limits for ASA purposes.
In December 2005,38 per cent ofBNs issued share capital was held outside the UK,
with just under half of these held in the US (see more on this in the next chapterV
Ryanair took steps in June 2001 to limit the share of its stock held by non-EU
investors. The airline instructed its ADS depositary bank to suspend the issue ofnew
ADSs until further notice. 6 At end June 2005, non-EU nationals held 46.2 per cent of
Ryanair voting stock, and this suspension was still in force in September 2006.
4
;:-
Ii!
N
150.0
.i!
1000
""
bk "'~Ut ,I "'aV\naAf1
1.1
A:_ ~
0.0
1;
Figure 6.1
'" '" 8
:g ~ :g i'l
~ ~ ~ ~ e; i
E :; 0 bO.O: ;:;
Ryanair (Dublin) vs Nasdaq (ADR) share price
(Indexed on 1 June 2001)
Figure 6.1 shows the effect of the ADS restriction, the two prices drifting apart
bctween 2002 and 2004. It also shows how the sudden release of bad news can
affect the share price: in this caSe a profit warning combined with the indication of
an adverse EU ruling to come. The EU ruling would mean repaying some support
that it had received from airports, and a generally less favourable airport charges
environment in the future.
4 Chang, Y-C et al. (2004)" The evolution of airline ownership and control provisions,
Journal ofAir Transport Management 10, 161-72.
5 British Airways Fact Book, (2006), www.basharcs.com under 'Financial
Infomlation' .
6 Ryanair 20F Annual Report, 2004/2005, p. 18.
119
6.4 Share Trading and Stock Market Listings

Airlines have a large choice ofworld stock markets on which to list their shares, though
they are first likely to choose their home market where they are best known. By far the
largest in terms of domestic market capitalisation is the New York Stock Exchange
(NYSE) at almost US$14,000 billion at May 2006. Next was Tokyo with over $4
billion, Nasdaq with $3,559 billion, and then London, Euronext (Amsterdam, Paris,
Brussels and Lisbon) and Osaka each with just over $3,000 billion. 7 Nasdaq ranks
second in terms of value traded, and the Deutsche Borse replaces Osaka in fifth place.
Amongst the' emerging economies, 'the South Korean stock market turnover was
around $650 billion, with Russia, India, Brazil, China and Hong Kong all totalling
around $600 billion. China includes the Shanghai and Shenzhen exchanges. 8
Some of the larger exchanges have their main market and a somewhat less
regulated one for smaller companies and start-ups. For example, the London Stock
Exchange (LSE) launched its Alternative Investment Market (AIM) in 1995 and by
2006 it had attracted around 1,500 companies. Lighter regulation means that it is
slightly more risky than LSE's main market.
The NYSE had 449 foreign firms listed in May 2006 compared to 1,732 domestic
companies. Nasdaq had a total of 3,151 firms of which 328 were foreign. London
had 333 foreign and 2,856 domestic. In Asia, Singapore had the highest share of
foreign firms (224 out of a total of 689).
Turnover of shares varies considerably between exchanges. This is measured as
daily turnover divided by market capitalisation, or 'share turnover velocity'. Nasdaq
was highest with 261 per cent in May 2006, followed by Shenzhen in China with
186 per cent. London, Euronext and NYSE were both between 110 and 120 percent.
Tokyo's 132 per cent contrasts with Osaka's 9 per cent, while Hong Kong (58 per
cent) was much lower than Shanghai (120 per cent).
The above exchanges now accommodate electronic trading, for example through
Deutsche Borse's XETRA. A growing volume of dealing is also taking place outside
the exchanges: large brokers and investment banks can deal directly using alternative
trading systems; 'over the counter' or OTC trades can take place using only brokers
as intermediaries; and new institutions have recently emerged in the US such as
Liquidnet, handling large blocks of shares.
Trading is becoming dominated by hedge funds, estimated to account of around
40 per cent of volume in the US. The US pre-eminence described above can no
longer be taken for granted, with a large number of IPOs moving from America to
Europe and Asia, mainly due to the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. 9
Any issue of equity capital will be more attractive if the shares offered are or
subsequently quoted on one or more stock exchanges. Having a quotation in more
than one market increases the ease oftrading by potential investors, but also adds to
the legal and accounting requirements, which may become expensive. Stock markets
such as Nasdaq in the US and Europe, and easdaq in Europe were introduced as a
cheaper way to obtain a market quote, without such onerous requirements, although
the US Sarbanes-Oxley law afiects all US based trading.
7
8
From World Federation of Exchanges. Available at: www.world-exchanges.org.
The Economist, (July 2006), p. 17.
The Economist, (May 2006) p. 25.
120
Table 6.2
Airline Finance
Equity Finance
International passenger airlines with stock market listings

(Only those in top 50 by total revenues in 2005)
Share Price '
AeroBot
Air France-KLM
Alitalia
Austrian Airlines
British Airways
easyJet
Finnair
Iberia
Lufthansa
Ryanair
SAS
Turkish
Alaska Air
American (AMR)
Continental 'B'
Delta Air Lines
letBlue
North-west
Skywest
Southwest
United Airlines
US Airways Group
ACE Aviation
Concorcio
AeroMexico
LAN Airlines
121
Table 6.2 gives the majority of airlines which have quotations, as well as some
trading. For the ones listed, the amount of daily trading will vary considerably from,
say, BA with an average of 10.6 million shares traded per day over 2005/2006 (or
1 per cent of the shares issued), compared to majority government owned Finnair,
which had only 116,000 shares traded on average, or 0.1 per cent of shares issued.
For the US carrier, Southwest, the figures were 2.7 million/day, and 0.3 per cent
respectively.
In Table 6.2, only those airlines in the top 50 by total revenues have been
considered. The only three airlines in the top 30 that did not have a listing were
Emirates, Saudi Arabian and Virgin Atlantic. to The first two were 100 per cent
government owned. In terms of market capitalisation, Southwest Airlines is by far
the largest US airline, while Singapore Airlines is also well ahead ofthe next largest
AsialPacific carrier.
In Europe, Lufthansa, BA, Air France-KLM and Ryanair are the leaders, their
ranking sensitive to small share price movements. The important point, however,
is that there are no global giants partly because of the restrictions on trans-national
ownership. Thus, the largest airline's capitalisation ($14 billion) is dwarfed by banks
such as Citigroup (around $200 billion) or oil company Exxon's $360 billion.
Stock price indices are constructed by selecting stocks and weighting their
price movements by capitalisation. These are to give a general idea how stocks in
a particular country or sector are moving, but it is also possible to buy a derivative
security that is based on these index changes to get a diversified portfolio. The major
world indices are shown in the table below.
Table 6.3
Major world stock indices
Index
Air
Air New Zealand
All Nippon Air
Cathay Pacific
0.39
0.71
3.73
1.79
China Airlines
China Eastern A
China Southern HlA
EVA Air
Japan Airlines
Korean Air
Malaysia Airways
Qantas Airways
Singapore Airlines
Thai
0.44
0.15
0.23
0.39
Dow Jones Indu..<;trial Average

Nasdaq Composite
S&P500
FTSE 100
Dax
CAC40
Nikkei average
'" And a number of US commuter airlines such as Skywcst and Mesa.
1.85
32.50
0.76
2.37
8.36
1.04
I. At 28 July 2006; quote based on first exchange listed

2. Frankfort. Stuttgart. Munich, Hanover. Dusseldorf; Berlin/Bremen and Hamburg
The FTSE 100 is the top 100 shares traded on the London exchange in terms of
market capitalisation. BA is the only airline included, although there are others listed
10 Virgin Atlantic is 49 per cent owned by Singapore Airlines and 51 per cent by the
Virgin Group, which used to be listed on the London Stock Exchange, but Sir Richard Branson
bought out the public shareholders and de-listed the group.
I,
Airline Finance
122
Equity Finance
on the exchange. In 2005, easyJet set its managers the target of becoming part of
the FTSE 100 for at least six months before the end of September 2008. If this is
achieved they will qualiJY for a bonus in shares equivalent to their annual salary, as
as they stay with the airline for another 3 Yz years. Some of the smaller country
indices also include airlines, such as Iberia in the Madrid index. Ryanair is the only
foreign airline included in a major US index.
Various composite airline indices have'been developed and are quoted by such
firms as Reuters, Bloomberg and Yahoo Finance. The American Stock Exchange
has an airline index that is now entirely made up of US airlines (although it used to
include one foreign airline, KLM). Many of the US majors were not in this index in
2006 due to being in, or recently out of, Chapter II.
Table 6.4
AM EX Airline Index (XAL), July 2006
JetBlue Airways
Continental Airlines 'B'
Expressjet Holdings
Southwest Airlines
AMRCorp.
Alaska Air
Skywest Inc.
Frontier Airlines
Mesa Air Group
Airtran
11.73
ILl4
10.37
10.10
9.01
8.97
8.91
8.69
8.62
Source: American Stock Exchange
The London Exchange includes airlines in their 'travel and tourism' index, but
in the US, Dow Jones publishes the DJ US Airline index that includes eight US
airlines. Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI) publishes a large number of
stock indices based on regions, countries and industries, including a number of ones
dedicated to airlines. The MSCI Europe Airlines Index has been published since
1995 and includes Lufthansa, British Airways, Air France (now Air France-KLM),
SAS and Iberia. Their World Airline Index included 28 international airlines in 2006,
with only Southwest Airlines from the US.
Some airlines link executive remuneration to their share price performance,
in terms of total shareholder return (including both share price movements and
dividends paid) relative to a market index. Qantas granted share options to senior
executives subject to its share price outperforming both the ASX 200 index and a
basket of global airlines which then included Air Canada, Air New Zealand, the
AMR Corp., BA, Cathay Pacific, Delta Airlines, Japan Airlines, KLM, Lufthansa,
Northwest, Singapore Airlines and VAL. The plan was suspended in 2002, although
their 2005 Annual Report included a graph of the MSCI World Airline Index.
Table 6.S
123
Constituent airlines of the MSCI world airline index (July 2006)
ACE Aviation
Air China
Air France-KLM
Air Asia
All Nippon
Asiana (Korea)
British Airways
Cathay Pacific
China Airlines
China Eastern 'H'
Malaysia Airlines
Qantas
Ryanair
SAS
Singapore
Southwest
TAM (Brazil)
Thai Airways
Turkish
From 1996, BA had a similar long-term incentive arrangement for senior executives,
which was discontinued in 2004. Half of the incentive was linked to an operating
margin target and half to a total shareholder return target of BA shares against the
FTSE 100 index. In 2005, the scheme was changed, keeping the two independent
benchmarks: operating margin and total shareholder returns. The index target was
changed from the FTSE 100 index to a basket of 20 airlines against which BA
competed. The award of 25 per cent of the shares would only be triggered if BA's
total shareholder returns reached the median of the 20 airline group performance. A
sliding scale then applied until the full award is made when BA's returns are at or
above the upper quintile (or top 20 per cent) of the airline group. The scheme was to
run over a three-year period.
Table 6.6
easyJet
British Airways@ Performance Share Plan comparator airlines'
US Airways
* used in 200512006 award (Source: BAAnnual Report 2005/2006)

A variation of the above was applied by Austrian Airlines in 2005, with awards made
if the Austrian A kline shareholder returns outperformed the MSCI Europe Airline
Index (deSCribed above) by at least 3 per cent over a three-year period.
124
6.5
EqUity Finance
Airline Finance
Initial Public Offering (IPO)
An Initial Public Offering is the sale of shares to the public for the first time,
before a stock exchange listing. The shares could then be traded in the secondary
market. The process is often a means for the controlling and possibly founding
shareholders, which may be those who launched the business together with any
venture capital firms, selling all or part of their stakes. New shares may also be
issued by the airline at the same time to raise fresh capital for investment in aircraft.
For example, 82.5 per cent of the Indian airline, Jet Airways, IPO consisted of new
shares, the remainder coming from Tail Winds, a company owned by their founder,
Naresh Goyal. The IPO will involve the preparation of a prospectus containing
detailed information on the company, including its latest audited accounts and
perhaps a profit forecast. It will be publicised through the press (if it is to be offered
to the general public) and brokers, and applications sought for a certain number of
shares at a fixed price (or a narrow price range).
The IPO will normally be priced at a level that ensures that all the shares will
be subscribed. If not, one or more investment bank will underwrite the issue: agree
to take the shares that are not taken up at a preferential price or for a commission.
Sometimes, the price is adjusted downwards following feedback from the market
via the lead manager ofthe issue (investment bank). This may be because of events
that negatively affect the market in general, or factors specific to the industry and
company. An example of this was the IPO of the fast expanding Indian airline, Air
Deccan, in 2006. An initial price range for the shares ofRs300-325 was suggested by
the airline, but their advisers eventually persuaded them that Rs150-175 was more
realistic. The shares were finally offered at Rs148, but the shares dropped to Rs98
on the opening day of trading on the Mumbai Stock Exchange, largely because of
factors affecting the Indian market in general. They drifted lower to Rs85 over the
next month. '2 This is an example of both over-optimistic pricing (the airline was
trading at a loss), and a severe change of market sentiment too late to withdraw the
issue.
IPOs are often marketed to the general public and financial institutions separately,
each being allocated a given number ofshares. The price per share may be determined
in advance and bids sought at that fixed price. However, the prospectus may indicate
a price range with bids sought above the bottom of that range. The public are then
asked to submit their bids in a monetary amount, the number of shares they receive
then depending on the final price. The final price is decided following the results
of a 'book building' phase, involving the lead investment bank adviser consulting
financial institutions about demand for the shares and bid price intentions. Once
the book is closed, the price will be decided (there could be two prices: one for the
institutions and one for the public). In cases where the issue is oversubscribed, bids
will be scaled down pro rata, with public and institutional allocations often dealt
with separately. Over-SUbscription may also trigger a 'greenshoe' option whereby

additional shares may be sold for a short period after trading in the shares starts.
Where a small number of founder shareholders retain a large stake after the IPO,
they may sign an agreement not to sell any of their holding for a specified 'lock up'
period, usually between six months to one year.
Table 6.7 shows the mixed fortunes ofsome ofthe airline IPOs between 2000 and
2005. One significant IPO not included in the table was by Ryanair: this occurred in
1997 at a price equivalent to 2.48, allowing the Ryan family to reduce significantly
their holding and for a listing to be obtained in Ireland and New York. New shares
were also issued to raise finance for the airline. This was a fixed price offer but with
an over-allotment option to increase the shares sold by 10 per cent (which was in
fact exercised).
Table 6.7
Airline IPOs taking place between 2000 and 2006*
Airline
easyJet
JetBlue
Virgin Blue
Norwegian
Gol
Air Asia
Jet Airways
TAM
SkyEurope
Eurofly
Air Berlin
Silverjet
II Underwriting discounts and commissions totalled US$I.89 per share for the jetBJue
IPO, or 7 per cent of the issue price (from JelBlue Prospectus, II April 2002).
12 Air Deccan: IPO Struggle Reflects Indian Overcapacity Worries, Aviation Strategy,
(June 2006).
125
Deccan
Aviation
* IPOs that were part of airline privatisations are discussed in the next chapter
127
Airline Finance
Equity Finance
The issue priccs shown above may have followed the publication of a price range:
for example, Jet Airways issued a price range of Rs950 to Rs 1,125 before deciding
on Rs I, 100. The share prices of the two Brazilian airlines in the above table, TAM
and Gol, have donc extremely well since the IPO, partly due to the collapse of the
country's national flag carrier, Varig. The Indian carriers, Jet Airways and Deccan,
suffered from the general decline in the Indian stock market, although the former
was operating at a loss at the time of floatation. Similarly, Air Berlin, Eurofly and
SkyJet were loss making at thc time ofthe offer, and did not provide a profit forecast,
rather promises of profits to come. JetBlue were offered at US$27 (or US$8 to take
into account the later stock split) in April 2002 ending their first day's trading (when
48 million shares changed hands) at $45 (adjusted to $13.33), falling to a low of
$8.93 in October 2002 and then climbing to a high of $31.23 exactly one year later.
They subsequently declined as a result of worsening financial results and a more
competitive operating enviromnent.
The IPOs shown above varied in their marketing strategy: Jet Airways offered 60
per cent of its issue to financial institutions in contrast to Norwegian offering only 20
per cent. One start-up, Silverjct, managed to raise over 30 million in equity before
it had even applied for Air Operator's Certificate (AOC) from the UK Civil Aviation
Authority. By August 2006, easyJet's highest share price reached 57 per cent above
the issue price and Air Asia 67 per cent; on the other hand, Virgin Blue only climbed
16 per cent above its issuc price and SkyEurope 6 per cent higher. Air Berlin had not
risen above its initial offer price, neither had Eurofly.
Table 6.8 shows the more significant investments in other airlines. Most of these
are connected with a privatisation or strategic alliance. Virgin Atlantic's investment
in Nigeria followed the failurc of the country's national airline. Both the Air
France-KLM investment and that of AMRiBA were relatively small but intended to
cement a strategic alliance. The former maintained its 2 per cent share in Alitalia by
subscribing to the Deccmber 2005 rights issue.
Icelandair's parent, FL Group, had also invested in a sizeable stake of easyJet
(16.9 per cent) that it had gradually acquired in the open market since October 2004.
This was sold in April 2006 for 325 million, giving them a profit of 140 million.14
FL Group also acquired 100 per cent of Sterling Airways of Demnark (recently
merged with another Danish airline, Maersk Air) for US$242 million in early 2006,
followed by a 10 per cent stake in Finnair.
126
6.6 Mergers and Cross-Investment

Airlines are normally prevented from acquiring a majority of airlines in other
countries because of Air Services Agreement (ASA) restrictions on foreign
ownership. However, it is possible, as will be explained in the next section. An
airline taking a majority stake in another airline in its own country is much easier,
and has usually taken the form of a financial link with a commuter or feeder airline
(e.g., Northwest 27.8 per cent in Mesaba Air, or Air France's 100 per cent stake in
Regional Airlines). An airline might also sct up a subsidiary airline to operate as a
low cost or chartcr carrier.
Taking a minority stake is possible, and has mostly been to cement a strategic
alliance (e.g., British Airways and American Airlines in Iberia), or as a strategic
partner in an airline privatisation (British Airways in Qantas). The Ryan family
discussed selling 25 per cent of Ryan air to BA in 1995 to raise money for expansion,
but BA wanted 49 pcr cent and an option to take full controL The deal fell through,
and the following year the 25 per cent was sold to David Bonderman's Texas Pacific
Group, after he decided to withdraw from Richard Branson's low cost airline venture
in Belgium (later to become Virgin Express)."
13 Creaton, S. (2004) Ryanair: How a Small Irish Airline Conquered Europe, Aurum
Press.
Major airline cross-border investments in other airlines

(June 2006)
Table 6.8
ACE Aviation
American Airlines
Air France-KLM
Austrian Airlines
Austrian Airlines
British Airways
Lufthansa
SAS
Atlantic
Air China
Cathay Pacific
Emiratcs
Qantas
Singapore Airlines
South African
1.00
6.00
62.00
22.50
10.00
30.00
20.00
49.00
10.16
20.00
43.63
46.30
49.00
49.00
* An additional 7.34 pcr ccnt of Cathay Pacific held via its 100 per cent holding in CNAC
A number of investments havc recently been reversed: BA sold the 18 per cent
of shares it had remaining in Qantas after taking 25 per cent before the latter's
privatisation. Singapore Airlines took a loss ofS$45.7 million from its 25 percent of
Air New Zealand after its collapse. Continental Airlines sold its 43.5 per cent stake
in the Panamanian national airline, copa, through an IPO that was offered at US$15
17; in spite of its legacy flag carrier origins, the offer was oversubscribed and trading
started at $24.
14 FL Group Sells Entire easyJet Holding, Victoria Moores in Air Transport Intelligence
News, (April 2006) 5.
128
Airline Finance
Two cross-border airline mergers have occurred in Europe between 2004

and 2005: Air France and KLM, and Lufthansa and Swiss. With moves towards
substituting EU for national controls in EU ASAs, mergers between EU carriers
should become easier than in other world regions. However, there were still major
obstacles in both cases.
Chapter 7
Airline Privatisation
Air France-KLM
The acquisition ofKLM by Air France was announced in September 2003, and was
completed around the middle of 2004. The deal involved compensating the KLM
shareholders with Air France stock, and resulted in the French Government share
of Air France dropping below 50 per cent. It is thus the last phase of Air France's
privatisation and will be discussed in the next chapter.
Lujlhansa-Swiss
The acquisition of Swiss by Lufthansa announced in March 2005 did not involve
government majority ownership, with only 20.2 per cent of Swiss shares held
by the Swiss Federal government. The deal was approved by both the European
Commission and the US anti-trust authorities in early June 2005. A Swiss-domiciled
company, AirTrust, gradually acquired all the shares of Swiss, offering CHF8.96 per
share for the remaining minorities. In addition to a total of 4 7 million, former Swiss
shareholders also received a 'debtor warrant' or 'out-performance option' that would
give them up to a further total ofup to CHF390 million subject to the Lufthansa share
price outperforming an index of competitor airline share prices by 50 per cent in
steps over a three-year period to 2008. The pay-out doubles for every 10 per cent that
Lufthansa out-performed the competitor index, up to the maximum over the period
21 March 2005-20 March 2008. Thus, depending on the future exchange rate, the
acquisition will cost Lufthansa between 4 5 million and around 3 00 million. The
competitor airline index consisted of BA (40 per cent), Air France-KLM (40 per
cent) and Iberia (20 per cent).
The trend towards the privatisation of government owned assets gathered pace
during the 1980s, as part of overall economic programmes introduced by more
capitalist governments. This was encouraged by aid agencies such as The World
Bank, the Asian Development Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and
Development. Policies pursued by the latter became increasingly influenced by the
USA, their major donor country.
The justification for privatisation was both strategic and financial. Strategic
reasons encompassed:
Reducing the involvement of the state in the provision of goods and services.
The promotion of economic efficiency.
The generation of benefits for consumers.
The promotion of an enterprise culture.
The achievement of wider share ownership.
Of equal, or even greater, importance were often the financial reasons: governments
welcomed these sources of cash with which to reduce their budget deficits, allow
room for reducing taxes, or shift the financial burden to the private sector. However,
it is not entirely obvious that an airline would be a financial burden, once it had
been prepared for privatisation. Furthermore, while these policies may have looked
attractive in the short-term, they might, in some cases, have resulted in fire sales of
quality assets at low prices which effectively transferred wealth from the population
as a whole to those who were lucky enough to be allocated shares in the newly
privati sed company.
This chapter focuses on the financial aspects of airline privatisation. Equally
important, but beyond the scope of this book, are the economic aspects and the
preparation before privatisation. This is discussed in some depth by Doganis, with
particular reference to Olympic Airways, an airline which he chaired during its
preparation period. I
The average government stake in the largest 25 international airlines was 28 per
cent in 1996, 19 per cent in 2001 and 16 per cent in 2005 (ranked and weighted by
international RTKs in each year). This reduction was caused by the governments of
Germany, France, Italy. Spain and the Netherlands all reducing significantly their
shareholdings, offset to a small extent by the Malaysian Government re-nationalising
Doganis, R. (2001), The Airline Business In The 21st Century, Routledge, see
Chapter 8.
130
Airline Finance
Airline Privafisation
Malaysia Airlines. This compares with an average of 59 per cent for the next 25
largest international airlines in 200 I (up from 51 per cent in 1996).
The trend towards airline privatisation began over the period before 1996, but
was mainly in these top 25 airlines: this is evident from the reduction in average
government stake for these airlines from 48 per cent in the early 1980s, with the
privatisation of British Airways, JAL, KLM, Qantas, Malaysian and Air Canada.
British Airways is one of the early examples of a total privatisation. Before the
airline could be privati sed, it had to go through a radical shake-up, resulting in drastic
staff cuts, axing unprofitablc routes and disposing ofloss-making subsidiaries.
Privatisation can involve the sale of a minority government stake to the private
sector (as in the case of Finnair), the sale of a majority in a number of stages (e.g,
Lufthansa) or in one stage (e.g., Kenya Airways), or an outright sale ofa 100 per cent
government shareholding (e.g., British Airways). Examples of each of these paths
are discussed in more detail below.
Methods of privatisation are one or a combination of the following:
Table 7.1
Government shareholdings (per cent) in top 20 international

airlines, 2005
Lufthansa
Singapore Airlines
Air France'
British Airways
Korean Air
Cathay Pacific
KLM'
Japan Airlines
Emirates
American Airlines
United Airlines
China Airlines
Qantas
EVA Air
NortwestNorth-west Airlines
Malaysian Airline System
Thai Airways
Federal Express
Air Canada
Delta Air Lines
% government
owned
0.0
56.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
100.0
0.0
0.0
70.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
69.3
54.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
* full merger agreed

Source: lATA WATS 2006 for 2005 RTK weights and airline annual reports
Since 1996, the privatisation process has been completed for some of the top 25,
with others such as Iberia and Air France added to the list. However, little progress
has taken place amongst the next 25 largest, with the average government share in
fact increasing. This was because ofthe entry into the top 50 of state owned airlines
such as China Eastern, and the disappearance of part privately owned Finnair.
Boeing estimated that, among the top 25 airlines, the share of total capacity offered
by govenunent controlled airlines has fallen in the past 20 years from 38 per cent to
10 per cent. 2
2 Boeing, (2001), Current market outlook 200 1.
131
Flotation (public subscription).

Private placement (a number of different private investors).
Trade sale (one large investor which also operates in the same or related
industry).
Employee or management buy-out.
A flotation is only possible where there is a strong domestic equity market (with
good volume trading in a number of different companies and industry sectors), and
the local stock market regulations can be complied with by the airline. Success will
depend on the airline having a good track record (at least two or three years' of
profitable trading), and an appropriate capital and issue structure. Iberia's privatisation
was repeatedly postponed in the early 19908 because it had not been profitable and
needed more time to restructure.
7.1
Full PrivatisatioD through Flotation - British Airways
The conservative government of Margaret Thatcher was elected in 1979 with

a programme which included the privatisation of many of the state owned firms.
British Airways was one of the first candidates for this process, and John King
was appointed as its chairman in 1980 with the task of preparing the airline for
privatisation.
Most airlines had suffered badly as a result ofthe economic recession ofthe early
1980s. In 198111 982, British Airways were technically insolvent,3 with long-term
debts of over 1 billion and negative equity of almost 200 million. The privately
owned Laker Airways was in a similar position in that year. A snapshot of the two
British airlines at end March 1981 and 1982 is shown in Table 7.2.
Apart from their contrasting ownership, a major factor in BA's subsequent
recovery, and Laker Airways' 1982 bankruptcy was the sterlingfUS$ exchange
rate: the strengthening of sterling before 198 I had an adverse effect on the national
flag carrier, but had the opposite effect on Laker, which had low foreign exchange
revenues relative to its foreign exchange costs. The dramatic weakening of sterling
3 Gordon Dunlop, BA's Finance Director stated in 1982 that had the airline been in
the private sector it would have gone through the bankruptcy courts, Reed, Arthur, (1990),
Airline: the inside story ofBritish Airways, p. 47.
against the dollar after 1982 helped BA's recovery, while sealing the fate of Laker
Airways.
Table 7.2
British Airways' and Laker Airways' liabilities
Current liabilities
Long-tenn debt
The exchange rate, however, was only one factor in BA's recovery. The new
management team introduced a radical restructuring of the airline, which involved
the reduction in staff numbers from just under 54,000 in 198011981 to 36,000 in
198311984. The measures taken to prepare the airline for privatisation are well
documented,4 the overall outcome being the reduction in long-tenn debt to 626
million by the end of March 1985, and a return to a positive figure for shareholders'
funds of 287 million. Helped by further growth in the world economies, the balance
sheet was in even better shape by the time the privatisation prospectus was issued in
January 1987 (long-tenn debt down to 316 million and shareholders' funds standing
at 620 million at end September 1986).
The method of valuation for a share issue such as this was described in the
previous chapter. Early on in the UK privatisation progranune, the government set
a higher priority on making the issue a success with small investors, and were thus
erring on the low side in detennining the price at which the shares were to be sold.
They later faced a substantial amount of criticism in selling state assets too cheaply,
so that other mechanisms for flotation were used for subsequent privatisation issues
which did not command such high premiums in early trading.
The prospectus was issued in January 1987, and contained much infonnation
on the airline, the industry environment and outlook, as well as the procedures for
application for shares, and arrangements for employees and airline pensioners. 5
Table 7.3 summarises the key ratios predicted in the prospectus for the financial
year 1986/1987, and compares these with the actual outcome which was published
in May of the same year. The prospective PIE ratio was considerably below the UK
market average of 14, and the prospective dividend yield compared favourably with
the equity market average of 4.2 per cent.
4 Ashworth, M. and Forsythe, P., (1984), Civil aviation policy and the privatisation of
British Ainvays, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
5 British Airways. (1987), Offerfor sale on behalfofthe Secretary ofStatefor Transport,
Hill Samuel & Co. Ltd., January.
133
Airline Finance
132
Table 7.3
British Airways privatisation factsheet (1987)
Issue price per share
Market capitalisation
Forecast profits for 1986/1987
Prospective PIE
(Based on 1986/1987 pre-tax profit)
Historic PIE
(Based on 1985/1986 pre-tax profit)
Net dividend yield
Dividend cover
Net t~m,.ihle a<;;sets oer share
1.21-1.28 billion!
162
5.3 3
2.3%3
x 4.9
0.84
1. Price range on first day's trading

2. Actual pre-tax profit for the financial year 1986/1987
3. Based on the market price per ordinary share of 181p on 31 March 1987
A further inducement to subscribe to the offer was given in the fonn of a loyalty
bonus. Individuals obtaining shares under the offer would be eligible to receive one
additional free share for every 10 shares held continuously until the end of February
1990, or for three years. This was to dissuade individuals from taking their profit
early on, and thus to support the government's policy of a shareholding society.
To provide some incentive for BA staff, a number of arrangements were made for
the distribution of both free and paid shares:
The free offer of 76 shares for each BA employee.

The matching offer of two free shares for each share employees purchased at
the offer price (for up to 120 paid shares).
The priority offer, whereby BA employees would receive priority for any
further applications, subject to any scaling down that might occur.
The discount offer under which 1,600 shares applied for by BA staffunder the
above priority offer could be purchased at a 10 per cent discount.
The share otTer was II times oversubscribed, reflecting both the attractive offer price
and the considerable advertising effort undertaken by the government. This meant
that applications had to be scaled down, and the employee scheme had the effect of
making a substantial bonus payment to them of just under 30 million (62 million
shares multiplied by a first day average premium of 48 pence).
Only around 4 per cent of shares were held by employees by 1996, with two-thirds
of the airline's staff holding shares. A profit sharing scheme was first introduced
in 1983/1984 whereby, if profits exceeded a certain target, all eligible (UK based)
employees would receive a given number of weeks' additional salary as a bonus.
This could be taken in cash or used by trustees to buy shares in the airline on behalf
of the employees (an incentive to take shares was introduced in 1996 in the fonn of
a 20 per cent increase in value of the bonus taken as shares). The bonus amounted to
134
Airline Finance
94 million in 1995/J 996, or one week's basic pay for every eligible staff member
for every 100 million in pre-tax profits earned Over a target of 269 million. 6
Table 7.4
Initial post-privatisation British Airways share distribution
135
However, since 1997, the airline has faced considerable problems, and its performance
declined in relation to the UK market and other airlines.
3&).Orr------------------------------l
300.0+------------------------
Employees
UK public (individuals)
UK institutions
Overseas
bonus retention
ArolU1d 20 per cent of the total offer of 720 million BA shares was made lU1der a
separate overseas offer in the USA, Canada, Japan and Switzerland. An application
was made to list the shares on the New York Stock Exchange, in addition to the
London exchange, and it was intended to obtain a listing on the Toronto exchange
at a later date. These listings would clearly increase the attraction of the shares to
foreign investors, but, on the other hand there would be problems if too large a
proportion of shares were held by foreign nationals.
This is because air services agreements, which give the airline its right to operate
international routes, require that the airlines designated by the UK Government are
substantially owned and effectively controlled by UK nationals. The implication of
this clause for the exact percentage of foreign owned shares allowed is subject to
interpretation. Substantial ownership implies foreign ownership of perhaps 50 per
cent and over, but effective control might be exercised if one foreign corporation or
individual held, say 25-30 per cent of the issued share capital, and the remainder
of shares were widely distributed among a large number of entities. No maximum
percentage was stated in the prospectus, but in the event of BA's traffic rights
being removed or reduced a..<; a result of this clause in the air services agreement,
a mechanism was introduced to refuse to register the shares which caused such a
situation (a nationality declaration is required for shares to be registered in any new
owner's name).
In practice, BA's foreign ownership has reached 41 per cent in 1992 without any
problems for traffic rights, and without the need to refuse registration. The level
subsequently fell to 26 per cent in March 1993, was 35 per cent at year ends 1994
and 1995,27 per cent at the end of March 1996, rising to 43 per cent in early 2001
(of which around three-quarters are held in the US) and back to 38 per cent at end
December 2005, with only half of these held in the US. This compares with the
initial US allocation ofjust over 17 per cent.
BA has outperfonned its home market following privatisation (see Figure 7.1),
especially in the period after the effects of the Gulf War had been fully digested.
6
British Ai/ways News, (24 May 1996).
'_BriIioh AirwaYs'
1nQ9l('J
- -FT100
250.0
200~!_--------------"~--------------------------------------------------_:~
,,1
150.0
1-1-------------
100.0
1""
......
~~~~"~~~~T~=-~~~~~;:~~~~
__
' ~ 7"."
SO.O 1 - 1 - - - - - - - - -
0.0
I ,, ,,,, , , ,,
r/#.I/
, I "
, I I I , , , , , , , I , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , I I , "
cI./'/ 1"/./'/ 1"//'ti'#.f>df~/'''i'\:J'd!'''/'Ii"r df</}i"'./')~<P/'/ /
Figure 7.1
7.2
i , i i ' , , I , i , ii, i I I I '"
, ,
.1
British Airways share price trend vs UK market
Full Privatisation through Trade Sale and Flotation - Qantas
The privatisation of Qantas Airways Ltd was achieved by taking a number of steps.
First, the airline was merged with one of the two major domestic airlines, Australian
Airlines, in September 1992. This was to give it control over domestic feeder services,
as well as to improve crew, aircraft and overall productivity. Next, in March 1993,
a trade sale was made of 25 per cent of the share capital to an international airline
that could give the airline a stronger presence in international markets. This was
done by tender, and BNs bid ofA$666 million was successful against the only other
contender that could realistically be considered, Singapore Airlines.
At the same time, BA also entered into a 10-year commercial agreement with
Qantas, thus cementing a strategic alliance between the two airlines. The final step
was the sale of the remaining 75 per cent of the shares in Qantas, which were held
by the Commonwealth (government) of Australia. This was done through an offer
of750 million shares to both the public and institutions. The price of the issue was
determined by tenders from the institutions, with the final price being set at A$2.00.
The price of public offer was then set at 10 per cent below the institutional price, or
A$I.90. Thus, the total issue was valued at A$1.45 billion.7 The issue was 2.5 times
oversubscribed at the bottom end of the price range and 2.2 times oversubscribed at
the institutional final price ofA$2 (individual subscriptions were allocated in full).
Qantas Airways Limited (1995), Offering Memorandum, 22nd June.
136
Airline Finance
Table 7.5
Qantas Airways~ post-offer share distribution
Australian individuals and employees
Australian institutions
Foreign institutions
British Airways pIc
bonus retention
137
Eaeh employee was given free shares with a total value ofA$500 at the then market
price. During the financial year 1996/1997, a similar free distribution would be made
to employees, subject to a performance target for the year ending 30 June 1995 being
met.
The shares opened at A$2.15, giving individual investors a 13 per cent day one
premium. The shares moved ahead to almost A$2.30 over the next few months. After
a good start, Qantas has underperformed compared to its home market in the two
years years following privatisation (see Figure 7.2).
Source: SBe Warburg

115.0
The 20 per cent foreign institutional demand was principally from the US and UK!
Europe, with 47 per cent and 43 per cent respectively, leaving only 10 per cent from
Asian investors.
As with the BA issue, it was necessary to limit foreign ownership in the airline.
The government passed the Qantas Sale Act to ensure that Qantas remained an
Australian airline. In the act, the total amount of foreign ownership was limited to
49 per cent of the shares. To enforce this restriction, the directors of the airline have
powers to remove the voting rights of a share, to require the disposal of shares and
to transfer shares whieh exeeed the limit.
In the days following the issue, foreign investors pushed their share up from
the 45 per cent at allocation (see table above) to the maximum 49 per cent allowed.
To satisfy foreign demand, which was running at a higher level than the shares
available, finance houses issued derivatives which shadowed the Qantas share price
and dividend distribution, but which did not give the holder any claims on Qantas
assets or any votes. Air New Zealand's privatisation contained similar foreign
ownership limits: 49 per cent overall, 25 per cent from anyone airline, and 35 per
cent from any group of airlines.
Table 7.6
Qantas Airways privatisation factsheet (1995)
Issue price per share

Market capitalisation
Forecast profit after tax:
1995/1996 (to end June)
Prospective PIE (1994/1995)
(Based on A$2 issue price)
Prospective PIE (19951996)
(Based on A$2 issue price)
Historic PIE (1993/1994)
Dividend yield (1995/1996)
Net tangible assets per share
1.
price on first day's trading
105.0
100.0
i.Ii
95.0
"
___ I
110.0
"
.. .
,
.,
e
90.0
660+1... ~::~::~~:~:II:: Imm- __

#' #,,,# ,..#.,..#.,..# ' '#,.rY.I'.;p.I'..t-#~,#
#..<> 11"" <~.." .,j"-V ,p"-V ,#" <>
Figure 7.2
~- $' ~-
.Uhmmmuuuuuuummum',
,,# ,.1'#'#"#'.1,#.,,#
,,# ,,#.,.1'
".i ".i
l,.t.S.,s6
~ ............"
l\.y~" 'f,)"
'11"
<!;p'
.... #~ ..~~.p.
Qantas Airways share price trend vs Australian market
Subsequently BA's 25 per cent stake was diluted to 18.25 per cent as a result of not
taking up their allotment in a rights issue. They finally sold their remaining shares
by placing them with institutions in 2004. By then this was no longer seen as a
necessary strategic investment and BA's major concern was to reduce its longterm
debt. The sale raised A$l.l billion (around 430 million),B This gave them a book
profit of 165 per cent, aside from the dividends received each year and the benefits
from the alliance.
A$ 247 million
7.3 Gradual Privatisation - Lufthansa

Lufthansa has had private shareholders and its shares have been traded on the
Frankfurt market for many years. The Federal government's stake fluctuated
between 72 per cent and 85 per cent over the years 1953-1987, when it dee lined
to 65 per cent. In 1989, however, the German Government took the first step in
8
British Airways Press Release, (9 September 2004).
pursuit oftheir policy of eventual privatisation ofthc airline. In the autumn of 1989,
Lufthansa issued DM304 million worth of shares (nominal value), and the Federal
Government and other state entities (the Federal Railways and the Krcditanstallt filr
Wiederaufbau) did not subscribe to the issue. This resulted in the government share
falling from around 60 to 52 per cent.
Further progress towards privatisation was halted first by the serious financial
consequences of the Gulf War recession, and second by the staff pensions problem.
Lufthansa employees were covered by the government backed supplemental pension
fund (VBL), and the fund's constitution would have resulted in the loss of pension
rights if the government's share in the airline were to drop below 50 per cent.
Lufthansa did not have the financial resources to fund these benefits themselves.
The issue was finally resolved in 1994, when the Federal government agreed to
provide DM 1.567 billion to maintain the pension benefits of existing staff, following
Lufthansa's withdrawal from VBL. The airline would fund a separate pension plan
for new staff themselves. The withdrawal took place at the end of December 1994.
Once the pensions problem had been resolved, the way was clear for the
government to reduce their take to below 50 per cent. This occurred in October 1994,
with a share issue ofDM 1.2 billion not taken up by the government, and a placement
of2 million shares held by the Federal government with institutions.
~.0r------------------------------------------------------------------~---'
300.0
250.0
M
!...
200.0
.,......... ......."...
"","
l!
'n"~"
l ,.
, .......... !.
".;'.
."
"
".,\..:
..... ~,., t%
'
:11
100.0
so.a
oo~--------------------------------------------------------------~
Figure 7.3
Lufthansa share price trend vs the German market
During the 1995 financial year, Lufthansa bought 105,531 of its own shares in the
market, representing 0.28 per cent of its nominal share capital. The shares were
offered to employees of the various companies in the group between August and
December 1995 as part share in the profits earned in 1995. 9
9
Table 7.7
Lufthansa shareholding -1996 and 1997
Shareholder
Federal Republic of Germany
Kreditanstallt flir Wiedcraufbau'
Deutsche Postbank and Deutsche Bahn
State of North Rhinc-Westfalia
Munich Air Transport Securities Company (MGL)
Total above known German shareholders
Other shareholders
January
1997%
37.50
1.38
1.77
10.05
Deutsche Lufthansa (1995), Annual Report.
'" 100 per cent owned by the Federal Republic of Gennany
.. ..
150.0
,!.
One final problem relating to Lufthansa's privatisation was solved in 1999. Most
shares in German companies are 'bearer,' rather than registered in the shareholder's
name. Bearer shares are similar to banknotes in that their owners are not known and
cannot be traced, Dividends have thus to be claimed by holders, since payments
cannot be sent to known holders. It is thus impossible to know who is holding
the shares. This becomes a problem once the government only holds a minority
of the shares, since many of Germany's air services abrreements with other non
EU countries require their designated airline to be wholly owned and controlled by
German nationals.
.....
'I.,"....
139
Airline Finance
138
The group of state companies and institutions that, following full privatisation, had
agreed to retain their holdings to ensure majority German ownership (see Table 7.7),
no longer needed to do so. In 2001, 62 per cent of the airline's shares were held by
German nationals, with a further 14 per cent held by UK nationals, and another 4
per cent and 3 per cent held in Luxembourg and Belgium respectively, By the end of
2005, 79 per cent of their shares were owned by German nationals, and only 5 per
cent US nationals.
However, Lufthansa reported that in August 2006 the share offoreign investors
in their share capital had reached 40.29 per cent, or above the threshold level when it
is authorised to buy back its own shares. It added that it did not need to do so because
lO
it did not see a threat of excessive foreign control.
7.4
Partial Privatisation - Kenya Airways
As with Qantas, the Kenya Airways privatisation involved both a trade sale and a
public offering of shares. The trade sale took place in December 1995, with KLM
acquiring 26 per cent of the shares of the airline for US$26 million in cash and the
provision of various services to the value of US$3 million. This followed a period
10 Deutsche L~fthansa, Corporate Communications, Press Release, (3 August 2006).
140
Airline Finance
of restructuring and rationalisation under a management contract with Speedwing

Consulting, which is owned by British Airways, following an unsatisfactory
relationship with Swissair.
The public offering took place in March 1996, with a flotation of 34 per cent of
the company's shares on the Nairobi stock exchange, as well as an international sale
ofa further 14 per cent ofshares, with 3 per cent allocated to employees. This left the
Kenyan Government with a minority stake of23 per cent ofthe issued share capital,
and limited foreign ownership to a maximum of 40 per cent. I I
The shares were offered at KShs 11.25 (or around 20 US cents) per share to
international investors. This compared with the cash price KLM paid of about 22
cents per share.
It should be noted that the net financial charge disappeared in 199511996, and
was replaced by net financial income. This was partly because of a US$7 million
foreign exchange gain, but also resulted from the government having previously
swapped US$33.1 million of long-term debt into equity. At the same time, the
airline had built up cash and bank balances to US$52.5 million by the end of
September 1995.
Table 7.8
Kenya Airways' pre-privatisation financial data

199411995
(12 months)
Total revenues (US$ million)
Total costs (US$ million)
172.7
141.4
Operating profit (US$ million)
31.3
(14.4)
Net financial income (US$ million)

After-tax profit (US$ million)
Passenger yield (US cents per RPK)
load factor
29.3
7.4
68.9
Source: Kenya Airways Initial Public Offer Document, Citibank, March 1996
No profit forecast was included in the prospectus. On the pessimistic assumption

that the audited results for the six-month period in 1995/1996 (which covered the
more profitable summer season) could only be maintained, then earnings per share
would have been KShs 1.56, and the price-earnings ratio of 7.2 at the issue price
of KShs 11.25 a share. This compared with the average PIE ratio of 12.4 for the
Kenyan market as a whole in 1995. Net assets per share amounted to just over
KShs 5 at the end of September 1995, compared to the issue price of KShs 11.25
per share.
II Kenya Airways. Initial Public Offer Document, Citibank (March, 1996).
Table 7.9
141
Kenya Airways' post-privatisation results'
Total revenues (US$ million)

Total costs (US$ million)
Operating profit (US$ million)
Net profit (US$ million)
Passengers (000)
Passenger-kms (million)
Passenger yield(US centslRPK)
Passenger load factor
No. of 4>""nl..""""
>I<
Financial year ended 31 March (released after public offering)
Source: Air Transport World, December 1996, from Kenya Airways Annual Report
The March 1996 prospectus warned potential investors that the Nairobi stock
exchange is smaller and more volatile than most US or European exchanges. I2 The
exchange's index of 52 listed shares (the NSE Index) had increased by 115 per cent
in 1993 and by 81 per cent in 1994, followed by a fall of 24 per cent in 1995 (to
which foreign investors would need to add an allowance for currency movements).
It had also experienced some delays in settlement, so holders ofshares that wished to
sell them on this exchange would have to wait some time before receiving payment.
Investors were also warned of differences in Kenyan accounting standards and
principles compared to those in the UK and US, although these did not appear very
significant.
The historical figures for the financial year 199411995 in Table 7.9 are not
identical to those in Table 7.8, which may be due to the exchange rate used for the
translation into US dollars. However, the net profit for the year was almost double the
position after six months, giving a historical PIE ratio of only 3.8 at the issue price.
Even though demand was reported to be twice the number of shares available, J3 the
share price fell immediately once trading started, and by October 1996 the shares
were quoted at KShs 9.5, or a PIE ratio of 4.5. By the end of 1996, the price had
fallen to KShs 8.4.
The airline's results for the remainder of the decade were positive, with the net
result reaching US$40 million in 1999/2000 before falling back to US$17.5 million
in 200012001.
The KLM co-operation agreement envisaged Nairobi being the hub for KLM's
services to Sub-Saharan Africa. From March 1997, KLM would stop flying to all
points below Kenya, except for South Africa which is regarded as a key KLM
market. Kenya Airways would connect to KLM's Nairobi-Amsterdam flights from
II African points. The agreement also covered a comprehensive alliance which
12 The exchange'S 1996 turnover was only $60 million, compared to almost $100 billion
for the Johannesburg exchange.
13 KLM (1995/1996), Annual Report and Accounts.
142
Airline Finance
would include code-sharing, route and systems integration, fare coordination, shared
sales and ground resources and joint purchasing.
The KLM shareholders agreement contained a provision to protect KLM's
interest at 26 per cent of the issued share capital. KLM would appoint two board
directors and nominate candidates for the positions of managing director and finance
director for approval by the 11 member board. They agreed not to dispose of any
of their shares for at least five years, but Kenya Airways would require the prior
approval from KLM if it wished to make any major strategic decisions or changes.
In 2006, Air France-KLM still retained 26 per cent in the airline, with the kenya
government holding 23 per cent.
fixed at 14 and the public otTer was 10 times oversubscribed. None of the net
proceeds of the sale went to the Air France Group.
At the offer price, Air France was floated on a P/Eratio of35.5 based on earnings
to the end of March J999, and 14.2 on forecast earnings to end March 2000.
OMlership at the end of March 1999 was: the state 73.4 per cent, employees
0.8 per cent, and the public: 25.8 per cent. Employees were offered shares on terms
preferential to those offered to the public, and by end March 2000 they had increased
their share in the airline to 10.9 per cent, with the public/free float at 31.7 per cent
and the state dmvn to 56.8 per cent. Two schemes were available, the Aeromixt and
the Aerodispo options. Under the former, employees could purchase shares at a 20
per cent discount from the French public offer price, but they would be prohibited
from selling or transferring them for two years years. After that time they would be
entitled to one free share for one purchased share up to a limit of609 .80, and one for
four above that limit. Under the latter scheme, there was no discount on the price, but
holders would be entitled to one free share for every three held after only one year.
The share price ranged from 14-18 on the opening day and by the 22 February
2000 was 15.30, following a high of 2 1.52. Figure 7.4 shows this trend in index
form against the French index of major shares. It also shows the pre-privatisation
trend, including the big jump in the second quarter of 1997, following the
announcement ofthe airline's first profit since 1989.
7.5
Fun Privatisation and Trade Sale
Iberia
The privatisation ofthe Spanish national carrier, Iberia, was originally contemplated
in the mid-1990s, but only in November 1999 did it look like becoming reality.
However, it was postponed until the following year owing to global equity turbulence
and continuing problems with Aerolineas Argentinas, and yet again to 2001 because
of the impending national elections.
The market value was fixed at US$2.73 billion, down 22 per cent from the
November 1999 valuation. A trade sale was completed with British Airways, who
took 9 per cent of the total equity, and American Airlines who took I per cent. BA's
share entitled them to two members of the board. Private institutions then took 30
per cent of the shares with the employees taking a further 6 per cent. All the private
institutions were Spanish Caja Madrid, BBV Bank, EI Corte Ingles, Logistica and
Ahorro Corp. so the likelihood of foreign control was minimised.
A public offer was made for the other 53.9 per cent of the shares in March 2001:
492 million shares were offered at 1.19, with a price range of 1 .l2-1.20 on the
first day of trading. Up to the beginning of September 200 I it traded between 1.15
and 1 .l9 .
The Spanish Government retains a 'Golden Share~ for at least five years years
from the date of the sale, with an option to extend this for a further two years years.
This gave them a veto over any major change of objectives, merger or voluntary
liquidation.
To prevent more than 25 per cent of the voting control ofIberia falling into non
Spanish hands, the law allows for the board of directors to purchase foreign oMled
shares to rectify the situation. The directors may also suspend the voting rights of
such shares until such time as the re-purchase has taken place.
------------------------------j
400.0 'I
3500
+---------
300,0
--1lr--'1'.-------
250.0
III
~ 200.0
15M
100.0
~ AIr
50.0
00
~
00
m m
1996 1996 1996 1996 191f1
Gradual Privatisation and Acquisition - Air "France
Air France was partially privatised in February 1999, with a track record of only
18 months ofprofitable trading. A public offer was carried out (flotation) in February
1999: around half to the French public and remainder to institutions in France and
abroad. The French public offer totalled approximately 13.5 million shares. and the
international offer to institutions around 2 1.2 million shares. The offer price was
France
"-j
-SBF 120 Index ..
"-""-"'---""'
7.6
143
Figure 7.4
1m
00
m m
00
00
m m
00
1997 1997 , _ 19\11l 1998 1998 1999 1999 1999 1999 2000 2000 2000 2000 2001 2001
"--
---
Air France share price trend vs the French market
The exercise of employee allocation, warrants and conversions decreased the State's
stake to 56.8 per cent at end March 2000, and to 54.9 per cent at end March 2003.
The next stage in the privatisation which reduced the French Government stake from
to below 50 per cent was the acquisition of KLM. Air France purchased KLM shares
Airline Finance
144
by issuing new Air France shares (11 Air France shares and 10 warrants l4 for 10
KLM shares), which resulted in the dilution of the French Government stake to 44.7
per cent.
Figure 7.5 shows the way the acquisition was structured in order to have time to
protect the KLM operations from Air Services Agreement restrictions. Although Air
France-KLM only holds 49 per cent ofthe voting rights in KLM, it owns 100 per cent
ofthe economic rights in the operating airline. It was assumed that by 2007 the KLM
operations at Amsterdam would enjoy full traffic rights and the merger could be
consummated. At that point, the separate identities would still be maintained under
assurances given to KLM and the Dutch State by Air France-KLM, applicable until
May 2012. These included the continuation ofthe hub operation at SchipholAirport.
This specifically guarantees the services from Schiphol to 42 key intercontinental
destinations up to 2008 and the balanced development of the Schiphol and Paris hubs
for a further three years. This would be monitored by the Dutch Government. IS
[
Starting September 2004 for three years
Current AF
shareholders
CurrentKLM
shareholders
100%
I AJ~~~nce'J
Operating company
-',
Listed company
Percentage holdings shown are voting rights
'
..
[IlutchStatel
option
145
7.7 The Results so Far

Privatisation has been most marked amongst the largest 25 international airlines
although a number of the next tier have either already moved to the private sector
(Turkish) or are planned to do so (AeroMexico and LOT Polish Airlines). The major
changes so far will be discussed below by region.
North America
There are no airlines in the US either federally owned or state owned. Following
9111, the Federal government took steps to assist airlines in the form of compensation
payments, loans and loan guarantees through the Air Transportation Stabilization
Board (see also Chapter 12). In conjunction with the loan guarantees it also received
warrants, or options to acquire shares. These were received from Frontier Airlines
16
and World Airways, the former being sold by auction in May 2006.
Air Canada was privati sed through an IPO and subsequent share sales over
1988-1989. It filed for bankruptcy in April 2004 and exited later that year under a
reorganised holding company, ACE. As part of the reorganisation, Deutsche Bank
underwrote a rights issue to unsecured creditors, and it was agreed to repay the
US$84 million loan guaranteed by Lufthansa that was outstanding immediately
before bankruptcy over the five years years to 2009. This had been provided jointly
by Star Alliance partners Lufthansa and United Airlines in support of a buy-back
of shares by Air Canada in 1999 to foil a hostile take-over. United's share (US$92
million) was unlikely to have been settled in full. '7
The Mexican Government had re-nationalised the countries two major airlines
_ AeroMexico and Mexicana by transferring their shares in 1995 into a state
owned holding company, Cintra to avoid their bankruptcy. They had originally been
privatised back in 1988/1989. Mexicana was sold in 2005 to a privately owned
Mexican hotel group (although legal proceedings were initiated the following year
over the sale price), and it was planned to sell AeroMexico to the public by auction
18
towards the end of 2006 but this was postponed to 2007.
Caribbean
I<'igure 7.5
Air France-KLM post merger interim structure
In 2004, the French Government placed with institutions 18.4 per cent of the airline
for 720 million in January 2005 with an additional 7.6 per cent going to employees
(giving them a total of 17.4 per cent), leaving it with 18.7 per cent, a level that it
stated it wished to maintain. Since 1999, the Air France share price has ranged from
a low of7.12 to a high of26.60.
14 Each warrant entitled holders to acquire two Air France-KLM shares at a price of20,
with an expiry date in November 2007.
15 De Wit, Jaap and Burghouwt, Guillaume (2005) Strategies of multi-hub airlines and
the implications for national aviation policies, AirNeth Workshop Report, The Hague.
Air Jamaica was sold to a private Jamaican corporation involved in the hotel and
tourism industry in 1994, but it was re-nationalised in 2004 following financial
difficulties. A similar fate befell the Trinidad based airline, BWIA. It was sold to US
and Caribbean investors in 1995 (with the government retaining 33.5 per cent of the
shares), but the government ofTrinidad and Tobago increased its stake to 75 per cent
16 Air Transportation Stabilization Board, US, Treasury, Press Release (31 May 2006).
17 Air Canada Management Discussion (JfFinancial Results 2003.
18 It was originally plarmed to sell AeroMexico at the same time as Mexicana, but bids
did not reach the minimum price required by the government (Kerry Ezard, Air Transport
Intelligence News, (22 August 2006).
Airline Finance
in 2004, following the failure of a rights issue. BWIA was closed down at the end of
2006, and replaced by a new entity, Caribbean Airlines.
state-owned assets led to the government selling a 23 per cent stake on the Istanbul
exchange in December 2004 at a price of just under seven lira. A further 28.75 per
cent was sold in May 2006 leaving the government controlling 46.43 per cent of the
airline and a Golden Share.21 Since 2002 the airline's share price has ranged from a
low of five lira to a high of nine lira, and has performed poorly compared to the ISE
National 100 index of stocks on the Istanbul exchange. Finnair was still majority
government owned at the end of2005.
In Eastern Europe, LOT Polish Airlines was part-privatised by selling 37.6 per
cent to Swissair in 1999. This was later diluted to 25 per cent and, with the bankruptcy
of Swissair, remained in the hands of the Swissair administrator until 2005, when
it was agreed to offer it for sale in an IPO of the airline. Hungarian national airline,
Malev, had also sold a stake to strategic investor, Alitalia, but that was subsequently
re-purchased by the Hungarian government. An attempt to sell 99.95 per cent of the
airline in 2004 resulted in only one bid that (rumoured to be linked to Aeroflot) was
rejected as not meeting the terms of the tenderY Bulgaria Air, the national airline
of Bulgaria was in 2006 being prepared for privatisation by public tender, with the
government retaining a Golden Share. 23
146
Central and South America
South America initially took the lead in airline privatisations, and while there have
been some success stories (notably LAN-Chile), there have also been some major
problems. Aerolineas Argentinas was 'privatised' through a sale to the former Iberia
holding company (SEPI),19 although this merely changed its control from one
government to another. Later, in June 2000 Aerolineas' majority shareholder, the
Spanish state holding company SEPI, announced a 'final' restructuring plan to try and
return Aerolineas to profitability by 2003. In June 2001, flights to seven international
destinations were suspended and the airline went into administration. SEPI agreed
the sale of its 92 per cent stake to the private Spanish company, Marsans Group,
in November 200 I who in tum committed to inject $50 million in fresh capital. In
a Buenos Aires judge
December 2002 the airline came out of administration
accepted its debt restructuring agreement with creditors
Another South American carrier, Viasa, was privati sed in the early 1990s, but
subsequently went bankrupt in 1998. The largest airline in South America, Varig,
was owned by a private foundation, but effectively controlled by the government.
Following its bankruptcy in 2006, its cargo division was acquired by private investors
(Variglog) who later also took over the operating division of the passenger airline.
The government-owned airline of Chile, LAN-Chile, was privatised in 1989,
later becoming LAN Airlines, controlled by Chilean family and industrial interests.
The Panama national airline, COPA, had for many years been partly owned by
Continental Airlines of the US. In December 2005, this stake was sold to the public
through an IPO and listing on the New York Stock Exchange. 2o
Europe
Significant progress has been made in Europe and by 2006 most of the larger airlines
had been privati sed, the most recent being Alitalia whose government holding had
gradually been eroded by the government not taking up their rights. After a number
of attempts at privati sing the whole airline, Olympic Airways was split into an
operating company (Olympic Airlines) and a ground services company (Olympic
Air
At the end of 2004, the Greek Government launched another attempt
to sell both companies with no success by 2006. Another airline that remains 100 per
cent government-owned is Aer Lingus. The unions had opposed previous attempts
to privatise it, but in 2006 a sale of up to three-quarters of the government stake
was offered through an (PO in September 2006. The other airline that remained in
government hands was TAP Air Portugal.
Turkish Airlines had a small holding in private hands (1.83 per cent) since
1990, and tried to sell further shares in 2001 without success. IMF pressure to sell
19 American Airlines also took an 8.5 per cent stake via the Spanish holding company.
20 Aviation Strategy, March 2006, p. 6.
147
Africa/Middle East
In Africa, Kenya Airways was an excellent example for others to follow (described
above), but this has not yet happened, and South African Airways, a prime candidate,
is still 100 per cent state owned. The Nigerian flag carrier, Nigeria Airways, went
bankrupt in 2004, and a privately owned Virgin Nigeria Airways was formed to fill
the void. 24 The collapse of other state-owned airlines included the multi-nationally
owned, Air Afrique, liquidated in 2001, and Ghana Airways in 2004.
Air Madagascar was planned to be privatised in 1999 but the bidders (a consortium
that included Air France) suspended their offer when the central bank defaulted on
payments to the Ex-1m Bank relating to its B747 aircraft. 25 More recently, in mid
2006 the government of Botswana was considering bids for their national carrier.
Asia/Pacific
Progress in Asia has been mixed. The Thai Airways position in September 200 I
was that the government intended to reduce its stake from 93 per cent to 70 per cent
later in the year, with the possibility of more than 10 per cent available to a foreign
investor. This reversed their previous position, which ruled out foreign investment
in the airline. However, the Thai Government gradually reduced their holding to
54 per cent in 2006. Singapore Airlines also remains under majority state
21 Ibid., (June 20(6).
November), 23.
22 DUnn, Graham
23 Airline ~",cinacc
24
per cent owned by Nigerian institutional investors and 49 per cent by Virgin
Atlantic
25 McMillan, Ben (2000) Air Transport Intelligence, (30 March).
Airline Finance
and the Malaysian Government re-purchased its majority in its national flag carrier.
The Malaysian private investor received RM8 per share from the government, the
same price that he originally paid when he bought his 29 per cent controlling stake.
However, RM8 was more than double the market price ofthe shares (RM3.68) at the
time they were bought back. 26 The Asian financial crisis of 1991 and its aftermath
clearly upset some plans, and also made it hard for already privati sed airlines,
Malaysian and Philippine Airlines,27 to make profits. The Indian Government's
progress towards privatising Air India has also been slow, and their plans to allow
substantial foreign stakes were later reversed. 28 In Australasia, one ofthe first airlines
to be privatised, Air New Zealand ran into trouble at the end of summer 200 I, with
the bankruptcy of its subsidiary Ansett. Its bankruptcy in January 2002 resulted in
Singapore Airlines' stake being reduced to 6.41 per cent (with a write-down of their
investment by S$380.6 million) and the government re-taking control with 80.4 per
cent of the airline.
The national carrier of Sri Lanka was privati sed in March ] 998 by means of a
trade sale to Emirates Airlines. The Middle East airline took 40 per cent ofAir Lanka,
increasing this to 43.63 per cent by 2006, by which time its name had changed to
Sri Lankan Airlines. The government retains 51 per cent and employees hold 5.3 per
cent of the shares.
All the three largest Chinese airlines have been part-privati sed by IPOs and
secondary offerings. Air China's IPO took place in December 2004, with the
government selling of a 24 per cent stake through a Hong Kong listing. Cathay later
acquired 20 per cent though a share swap. The carrier's secondary offer of a further
16 per cent of the total shares issued or 1,639 million shares (reduced from an initial
allocation of 2,100 million due to poor demand) to Chinese investors took place
in August 2006, with a Shanghai listing. 29 China Southern had previously taken
a similar approach, first selling 35 per cent on the Hong Kong stock exchange in
February 1991, and a further one billion shares through a Shanghai listing in July
2003. The State retained 50.3 per cent of the shares of the airlines. China Eastern's
!PO occurred soon after in July 1991, with their domestic debut following later.
There have been no studies to date which have suceessfully separated the impact
ofprivatisation per se on efficiency, employment or profitability. Some ofthese gains
have clearly been evident in the lead-up to privatisation, and thus one difficulty is the
period over which to examine the data. One study suggested that semi-private and
privately owned airlines improved their productivity (in revenue per employee) by
5 per cent more than government owned airlines between 1992 and 1991.30 Another
study found that air fares in both the British Airways' and Air Canada's markets
fell significantly when the control passed from government to private ownership,
reflecting expected improvements in economic efficiency and keener competition. At
the same time, the stock prices of competitors fell following the announcement. J1
Privatisation has usually resulted in more liquid market for share trading, but a
better working of the marking could only be possible once majority share ownership
by foreign nationals is allowed, and restrictive clauses in Air Services Agreements
are removed.
148
26 Financial1imes, (22 December 2000).

27 Sixty-two per cent of I'hilippine Airlines was sold to the private PR Holdings in 1992,
and by 2006 the government only retained a nominal 4 per cent stake in the airline.
28 Singapore Airlines had planned to join the large industrial conglomerate, the Tata
Group, in investing in Air-India, but subsequently withdrew altogether.
29 Philip Tozer in Aviation Industry News, 8 August 2006.
30 Baur, U. and Kistner, D. (1999), Airline Privatisation Principles and Lessons Learned,
in Handbook ofAirline Finance, eds Butler and Keller, pp. 71-90.
149
31 Privatization and Competition: industry Effects ofthe Sale ofBritish Airways and Air
Canada, Social Science Research Network, Working Paper, (31 July 1994).
Chapter 8
Airline Financial Planning and Appraisal
Financial planning is the process whereby an airline's corporate goals, and the
strategies designed to meet those goals, are translated into numbers. These numbers
cover forecasts of market growth and airline market share, and estimates of
resources required to achieve this share. Financial planning ranges from the short
term preparation of budgets to long-term planning, the latter often in conjunction
with fleet planning. Its main longer term financial aims are:
The evaluation of the expected future financial condition of the company.
The estimation of likely future requirements for finance.
The first requires the estimation of items in an airline's future profit and loss
statement. The second focuses on cash flow, which might also include assumptions
on long-term finance, as well as working capital or short-term financial needs. Both
of these will also need to be tested for the impact of alternative strategic options.
Short to medium-term financial planning is generally described as budget
planning and control. It is concerned with the achievement of the firm's objectives,
but it is also the principal way in which a company controls costs and improves the
utilisation of assets. The control process involves four aspects:
The development of plans.
The communication ofthe information contained in the plans.
The motivation of employees to achieve the plan goals.
The evaluation and monitoring of performance.
The difference between longer term financial planning and shorter term budgets lies
in the latter's greater detail and ability to provide the basis for the improvement in
resource utilisation. The remainder ofthis chapter will be divided into an examination
ofairlines' approach first to shorter term budgets, and second to longer term financial
planning.
8.1
Budget Preparation and Control
The budget is a formal quantification of management's short-term plans. It forces

managers to think ahead, and to anticipate and prepare for changing conditions. It is
generally prepared for the financial year ahead, by month and often also by quarter.
The greater the likely problems ofcontrol, the shorter the reporting period should be.
More frequent reporting and analysis takes time and resources. For airlines, costs are
Airline Finance
reported monthly, while the less controllable traffic and revenue side is examined on
a daily basis (passenger and cargo reservations, and traffic levels), and as frequently
as accounting systems allow for yields.
Continuous budgets are sometimes produced, with an additional month added at
the end of the period as soon as one month passes, so as always to give a complete
12-month projection. Cash budgets are also useful to avoid situations of idle cash
surpluses or worrying cash shortages. Aflexible budget can be prepared for a range
of outputs based, for example, on alternative traffic forecasts and varying levels of
aircraft utilisation.
The format of the budget may be broadly similar to that of the longer term
corporate or fleet plan. Indeed, the first year of the longer term plan may be the
starting point in the preparation of the budget. The integration of the two is clearly
important, and longer term goals should not be abandoned for inconsistent short
tenn measures. Budgets are generally coordinated by the finance department, but
their preparation involves a high degree of co-operation between departments:
one route. Similarly the ownership costs of one aircraft would need to be spread
across a number of routes. The removal of one loss-making route may appear to
improve overall profitability, but this may not be the case: once the revenues have
been deducted from other routes that were fed from the route that was removed, the
profit may actually decline. Similarly, the aircraft fixed costs saved by not operating
one route may have to be reallocated across the network, resulting in lower profits
on these routes.
Budgetary control consists of comparing the estimates of revcnues and costs
contained in the monthly budgets with the actual revenues earned and costs incurred.
Control will also be exercised through the cash and working capital budgets. The
variation between forecasts/estimates and actuals will be calculated, and any
si!,'11ificant differences highlighted. The likely causes of such differences should be
identified, and any necessary action taken.
52
Table 8.1
Passenger and market share forecasts (Marketing).
Cargo forecasts (Cargo).
Yield and revenue projections (MarketinglFinance).
Schedules planning (Marketing, Operations, Engineering).
Resource and manpower planning (all departments).
Cost estimates (all departments).
Budget finalisation (Finance).
Budgets therefore help the coordination between the various parts of the airline.
For example, flight operationS/scheduling need to liaise closely with engineering on
maintenance planning and scheduling.
For an existing firm, budgets are often prepared with reference to the previous
year's experience. Zero-based budgets, on the other hand, take nothing as given, and
consider the most effective way of achieving output targets. For an airline, capacity
plans are converted into a schedule, usually for the coming summer or winter
season. This is determined by, and is checked against, passenger and cargo traffic
forecasts. Resources are then estimated in order to be able to operate the schedule
most effectively, but at a desired level of service. A chart ofthe daily rotation of each
aircraft in the fleet is determined by the requirements of the market, and optimised
to take into account airport curfews, maintenance and crew schedules and estimates
for turnaround times at airports. Slot constraints are also becoming more important
for some airlines. Allowance will be made for contingencies such as flight diversions
and delays. Budgets can be built up in various ways and with various levels of detail.
They can be for the airline as a whole, by department or by route. A route analysis
usually includes the items shown in Table 8.1 .
Costs are allocated as far as possible down to the route level to allow a comparison
of each route's contribution to overheads. Table 8.1 is one way that this can be done,
but airlines might group costs in different ways. This serves as a starting point for
an evaluation of the impact of removing, combining or adding routes. It should be
stressed, however, that a system-wide or network approach should be adopted. This
is because the revenues from one passenger may have to be shared with more than
153
Route profitability analysis
Block hours
Return flights
Passengers
Cargo tonnes
Revenues ($000):
- Passenger
- Cargo
Duty-free
- Total
Operating costs ($000):
Direct operating costs I
Contribution
Aircraft related costs
Ground operations
Commercial costs
Commissions
) ...."'",,+i.,n- result
1. These usually include fuel, engineering. airport, ATe, crew allowances, catering, security,
handling, delay/diversion and sub-chartering costs
Table 8.2 shows a typical airline management accounts' comparison of monthly

budget with the actual monthly result. It gives the summary overall position of the
airline, although more detail would be available by route, activity, or cost/profit
centre. Changes in actual traffic, operating and financial data can easily be seen
both in relation to the budget (the variance) and in relation to the same month of the
previous year. The financial year-to-date position would normally also be shown for
the current and previous years.
154
Table 8.2
Airline Finance
Airline Financial Planning andAppraisal
Typical airline management accounts - Budget 2006
Passengers carried
Passenger-km (000)
Seat-kms (000)
Passenger load factor (%)
Average stage kms
Aircraft hours/day
Passenger yield (cents)
Cost per seat-km (cents)
Breakeven load factor
Operating ratio (%)
Expenditure by department ($m)
Marketing
Operations
Engineering
Personnel
Other
Total
Expenditure by type ($m)
Staffcosts
Depreciation
Aircraft rentals
Agent commissions
Fuel costs
Other materials/services
Total
21,547
3,306
5,654
58.5
345
7.3
55
33
60
97.5
Performance indicators should also be shown to give an idea of underlying changes

in productivity or service quality. These could include:
423
412
113
6
5
1
5
3
0
1O.0pts
9.1
13.5
4
6.5
3.3
36.4
0.2
1.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
1.9
23.2
4.7
0.5
3.9
3.5
0.6
3.2
0.5
0.2
-0.7
0.9
1.9
1hA
The variance in total expenditure can be broken down into the principal explanatory
factors. These might distinguish between capacity (costs would rise if more seat-kms
were operated compared to the plan), or price (fuel prices were above those assumed
for the budget). They might also include any exchange rate changes that had not
been allowed for. A further analysis might reveal:
Staff costs:
$3.2 million, or 16 per cent over budget;

Number of employees up by 5 per cent
Average wage/salary levels up by 10.5 per cent
Fuel costs:
$0.7 million, or down by 17 per cent compared to budget;
Block hours down by 5 per cent; average price down by 12 per cent
155
Regularity, or flights operated vs. planned.

Punctuality, or on-time performance.
ATK capacity per employee.
Fuel cost per block hour or ATK.
Landing fees per aircraft departure.
Average payroll cost per employee.

Average flying hours per pilot.
Average flying hours per cabin crew member.
Reservations cost per passenger.
For example, SAS introduced a productivity target for cockpit and cabin crew in
2004: they planned to increase the number offlying hours per pilot from 550 in 2004
to 700, and flying hours per cabin crew member from 570 in 2004 to 750. More
detailed performance data might include fuel burn by aircraft type, or even for each
aircraft, number of transactions per payroll clerk, etc.
Some of the differences between actual and budget figures will be due to factors
beyond the control of management. For example, bad weather at the home base
airport or an unexpected increase in fuel price. A distinction should therefore be
drawn between controllable and non-controllable costs.
Budgets are the basis for expenditure limits within a particular department or
division for a particular period, usually the financial year. Most budgets lapse at the
end of the period, so that funds that were allowed, but not spent, cannot be carried
forward to the next period. This has obvious advantages in cost control, but can
result in the budget holder finding ways to spend the remaining funds before they
are withdrawn.
Table 8.3
Example of airline cash budget
Total revenues
Direct costs
Payroll costs
Aircraft rentals
Other costs
Net cash from operations
Net capital movements
Net cash surplus/(shortfall)
Opening balance
Monthly movement
balance
Airline Finance
The budget can be in account or accrual fonnat, or in tenns 0 f cash. The latter is vital
in detennining future working capital needs, which are described in the next section
of this chapter. For the cash budget, asswnptions will be made on the delay between
the date on which the passenger is carried (the accounts) and the date ofreceipt of the
funds. For airlines, this would be around one month for sales through travel agents, and
around the same period for expenditure on credit. Cash sales and revenues would be
received and incurred in the same month as shown in the accounts.
Table 8.3 highlights the variation ofa leisure traffic airline's cash flow by season.
For example, a European charter airline would have a cash shortfall in the low winter
months and a surplus in the summer season. The table includes the net inflow or
outflow of capital which is obtained from the capital budget, the area covered later
in this chapter. This budget would also show capital movements, such as debt and
equity financing.
for cash. Airlines, and other service industries such as hotels, carry low stocks
(mostly materials or consumables), little work-in-progress (repairs on aircraft) and
no finished goods. They sell almost entirely on credit.
An airline's product or service is delivered by aircraft and associated equipment,
and stocks are required to keep aircraft serviceable. The word stocks in the aircraft
maintenance context could include spare engines, spare parts, rotables (repairable
items) and consumables (short-life items). These are important in maintaining an
aircraft in service, and any missing critical items might result in delayed or cancelled
flights and substantial costs:
156
8.2 Working Capital Management

The management of an airline's capital can be divided into short-term working
capital management (up to one year) and longer tenn capital budgeting.
The appropriate level ofworking capital is detennined by the levels ofcurrent assets
(cash, marketable securities, receivables and stocks) and current liabilities (overdrafts,
short-tenn borrowings, accounts payable, and sales in advance of carriage).
The way in which an airline's assets are financed involves a trade-off between
risk and profitability. In general, short-tenn borrowings cost less than long-term
borrowings, and short-tenn investments earn less than long-tenn ones; thus on the
basis ofprofitability, the aim should be for a low proportion ofcurrent to total assets,
and a high proportion of current to total liabilities. However, this would result in a
very low or negative level ofworking capital, and a high risk oftechnical insolvency
(an airline unable to meet its cash obligations).
Ideally, each ofthe airline's assets would be matched with a liability or financing
instrwnent of approximately the same maturity. This would ensure that cyclical and
longer tenn cash needs were met (i.e., zero risk) at minimum cost. In practice, a
cushion would be required because of the difficulty in forecasting cash flows with a
high degree of accuracy. This would imply a level ofcurrent assets somewhat higher
than current liabilities. In fact, many airlines operate with the two broadly equal, or
with current liabilities less sales in advance of carriage equal to current assets. This
is because many advance sales are not reimbursable with a cash payment, and a
cushion is provided by an overdraft facility, which can be used at any time.
Each of the elements of working capital will now be examined in more detail.
This expands on the definitions given in Chapter 2 (Section 2.3), and the discussion
of current and quick ratios in Chapter 3 (Section 3.3).
8.2.1
Current Assets - Stach
Manufacturers tend to hold high levels of stocks or inventories, which include

materials, work-in-progress and finished goods. The finished goods tend to be sold
on credit. Retailers, on the other hand, carry only finished goods, which are sold
157
Overnight and meal costs for delayed passengers.

Cost of purchasing alternative flights on other airlines.
Loss of subsequent bookings from dissatisfied customers.
The balance sheet definition of stocks normally covers only consumables or
expendables (after an allowance for obsolescence), spare parts and rombles being
considered as fixed assets and depreciated in the same way as aircraft. This means
that only such items as maintenance consumables, office and catering supplies, fuel
and oil are included in the amount shown for stocks.
The nonnal stock turnover ratio (cost of sales divided by stocks) would be under
10 times for a manufacturer, but is not relevant to services industries such as airlines.
The average stock turnover period is another measure that gives an idea ofthe length
oftime for which the stocks are held. This is calculated by relating the average stocks
held over the period to the cost of stocks of materials consumed during the period:
stocks held
Average stock turnover period
Cost ofsales -;. 365
For airlines, the cost of sales should only include goods or stockable items conswned,
and not services such as airport charges. This figure is not always easily obtainable
from published accounts. For BA, the average stocks held can be obtained from current
assets in the balance sheet (averaging the beginning and end year positions), and was
72 million in 2000/2001. Cost of sales would include principally fuel and engineering
costs, which amounted to ju.<;t over 1.7 billion in 200012001. Assuming, additional
relevant costs of in-flight meals, ticket stocks and other items increased this amount to
around 2 billion, BA's average stock turnover period for 20001200 I would have been
only 13 days. This stood at 14 days for BA's year ended 31 March 2006.
8.2.2
Current Assets - Debtors or Receivables
Almost all airline sales are on credit, whether through accounts with travel agents or
through credit card companies. This involves a cost to the airline of administration,
the opportunity cost of the funds not yet received, and the possibility of bad debts
agents or corporate customers). These will be outweighed by the benefits of
increased sales.
Airline Finance
Airlines that panicipate in Bank Settlement Plan arrangements with travel agents
do not have to decide the period of credit to extend to their distributors. This is
fixed automatically, with funds transferred to net recipients on the 17th day after the
month of sale. Agents would also extend credit to their corporate customers, so that
reducing the 1 month or so that airlines give to agents would only result in agents
having to find extra working capital at high cost.
The average settlement period is calculated by expressing the trade debtors
amount on the balance sheet date in terms of the numbers of days' sales.
An airline might build up cash and marketable securities, either because it plans
major investments in aircraft in the near future, or to fund acquisitions or investments
in other companies. British Airways' liquid assets increased to 2.44 billion
(US$4.2 billion) at the end of March 2006, from just over 1 billion at the end of
March 2002. Removing depreciation, amortisation and currency adjustments from
operating expenditure gives a rough figure for cash spend: this was 7, III million
for the 12 months to 31 March 2006, or an average of 19.5 million/day. Thus,
BA's end 2006 cash and cash equivalents of 2,440 million would cover 125 days
of expenditure. For AMR, their cash and short-term investments of $3,814 million
would have covered only 71 days at their average cash spend in 2005 of$53.8 per
day, contrasting with Southwest's 147 days.
158
Trade debtors
Average collection period =
Credit sales
365
8.2.4
Ideally, it should be in terms ofthe number of days' credit sales, but this information
is rarely available from the financial statements, and so 'total traffic sales' is used. For
British Airways, the average collection period using figures for total sales declined
36 days in 1999/2000 to 34 days in 2005/2006. The Lufthansa Group recorded
49 days in 2005 and Air France Group 42 days, but both of these include other
businesses such as aircraft and engine overhaul and catering. US carriers do not
normally separate trade debtors from current debtors or receivables, but using total
receivables would result in an American Airlines' period of only 19 days in 2005.
Other US carriers have a similar period, with the notable exception of Southwest
with only 13 days (because of the low percentage of passengers buying tickets
though travel agents). Asian carriers such as Thai and Singapore Airlines had similar
periods to BA in 200512006, but Cathay Pacific achieved a shorter period of29 days,
well down from its 1997 level of 47 days through different financial arrangements
with their travel agents.
8.2.3
Current Assets - Cash and Marketable Securities
Cash holdings would usually cover only money that is immediately available, i.e.,
petty cash and current account balances. However, funds might be placed on short
term deposit with banks for a term of anything between overnight to one year. These
funds will earn interest, and the very near term deposits could be considered as quasi
cash.
There will be an opportunity cost of holding cash in the interest or higher interest
income foregone. At times of high inflation, cash holdings will lose their purchasing
power. The major reason for holding cash is the unpredictability of cash flows,
and the need to have funds available to meet wlexpected demands. Many airlines
accumulate cash during the peak season, and retain this (or place it on short-term
deposit with banks or in government securities) to meet demands in the low season.
An overdraft facility gives airlines the possibility to reduce cash holdings, but
this is an expensive form of borrowing, and should be used to cover events such
as aircraft grounding or sharp downturns in traffic and revenue which cannot be
predicted.
159
Current Liabilities
The two key items ofworking capital in current liabilities are trade creditors and sales
in advance of carriage. Overdrafts were discussed in cash above, and there will also
be other short term creditors such as the government (taxes due) and shareholders
(dividends payable). A new and growing item is accrued frequent flyer programme
liabilities.
Trade creditors are a source of short-term finance which depends on suppliers'
terms. A free period of credit will generally be extended to customers, after which
interest may be charged on late payment. Delaying payments too long might put
critical supplies at risk.
That part of current liabilities described as sales in advance of carriage (or
advance sales) has the advantage of being short-term borrowing, but of low risk
since most of the money will not have to be re-paid (as long as the airline continues
trading). While interest does not have to be paid on this money, there is an implicit
cost in the difference between the air fare charged and the fare that would otherwise
have been offered without the advance payment and non-reimbursable features.
The average settlement period can be calculated in the same way as the average
collection period. There is, however, a similar problem in obtaining data from
published accounts on credit purchases.
Average settlement period
Trade creditors
Credit purcha~es + 365
Asswning that credit purchases approximate to operating expenses less staff costs
and depreciation, then British Airways' average settlement period was 58 days in
2005/2006 (well down from 76 days in 20001200 I), and the Lufthansa Group 66
days for its year to end December 2005. The settlement period for financial year
2005 for American Airlines (AMR) was 31 days and South-West 53 days. Cathay
Pacific reported 37 days for 2005.
8.3
8.3.1
Airline Finance
160
Financial Planning
Cash Flow Forecasts
Financial planning deals with the longer term financial condition of the airline, and
in particular the generation of investment proposals, and the process of the analysis
and selection of projects from these proposals (capital budgeting). The term capital
refers to fixed assets, which for the airline is likely to be one or more aircraft, but
could also be a major computer or maintenance hangar project. These have a useful
life of anything between five and 25 years, and to evaluate whether such investments
should be made it is necessary to prepare cash flow forecasts over a similar period.
The starting point for the cash flow forecasts are projections of traffic, yield and
revenues. Similarly, operating costs will be estimated from capacity planned to meet
the traffic forecasts, as well as input price projections.
Forecasts of cash disbursements should include capital expenditure, progress
payments on aircraft acquisitions, future dividend and tax payments, and the proceeds
ofasset sales. Net cash receipts (receipts less disbursements) are then subtracted from
the initial cash balance to give the subsequent cash surplus or cash requirements in
each period. If there is a cash shortfall, then the methods of financing should be
considered, and the schedule of capital and interest payments incorporated in the
cash flow forecasts.
The pro forma (projected) profit and loss and balance sheet can be derived from
the cash flow forecast. For the profit and loss, the capital expenditures will need to
be removed and replaced by a depreciation charge. Profit or loss from asset sales will
be substituted for the ca..'lh proceeds from such sales.
The pro forma balance sheet will be estimated for the end of each forecasting
period. The initial balances of fixed assets, current liabilities, etc. will be updated
using information from the profit and loss and cash flow statements for each period.
Thus, the future financial position of the airline will be estimated, and its ability to
raise further long-term capital.
In summary, the following financial statements. are likely to be prepared in
conjunction with any major fleet planning study or other corporate planning
exercise:
For investment appraisal
Investment schedule.
Cash flow statement.
F or financial evaluation
Loan disbursement schedule.
Summary of finance charges.
Debt service schedule.
Debt repayment schedule.
Cash flow statement.
Net income statement.
Balance sheet.
161
For the investment appraisal, it is not necessary to know likely future sources of
finance for the investment being evaluated. For a fuller financial evaluation, however,
sources of finance can be evaluated, and their impact on the cash flow, net income or
profit and loss statement and balance sheet determined.
The next part of this chapter will deal with the investment appraisal. For this
it has been assumed that the investment options have been narrowed down to two
alternative aircraft types: the acquisition of a new A330-300 for US$1l5 million
versus a new Boeing 777-200 tor US$138 million (both including the necessary
spares). The aircraft have similar passenger capacity and each will perform the
required services between specified or likely future city pairs. Where there is a
difference in payload or cargo capacity, this will be reflected in the revenue forecasts.
Cost differences will also be reflected in the cost projections. A higher residual value
(65 per cent of cost) has been assumed for the B777-200 in the base case, compared
to 60 per cent for the A330-300. It should be stressed, however, that this is not
necessarily a widely accepted view, and this initial assumption and the figures in
Table 8.4 are not based on a real case.
Table 8.4
Aircraft investment appraisal cash How forecasts (USS million)
Capital cost (incl.spares)

Residual value
Cash operating revenues
Cash operating costs
Cash operating result
Net cash flow
PV cash flows @ 8%
NPV@8%
IRR-%
Capital cost (inc!. spares)
Residual value
Cash operating revenues
Cash operating costs
Cash operating result
Net cash flow
PV cash flows
8%
NPV@8%
IRR-%
69
35
10.9
24.1
93.1
89.7
42
12.2
29.8
The projections for both aircraft have only been made over five years years, to make
it easier to understand the calculations in the absence of a PC spreadsheet. This has
necessitated the estimation of a residual value of each aircraft at the end of the five
years, and the assumption on this would clearly be critical to the outcome. With
162
Airline Finance
forecasts over a longer period. of say 15-20 years, this problem would be less significant.
The residual value should ideally be the market value of the aircraft at that time; this is in
practice difficult to forecast and the depreciated book value is sometimes used instead.
Taxation should also be incorporated into the financial projections, since they
could have a large impact on cash flow. In the UK, unusually high 100 per cent first
year capital allowances were allowed against corporation tax for a period ending in
1978. These would have favoured capital intensive fleet replacement decisions.
Expected profitability, or net cash flow, is an essential element in the selection of
investment projects, and the following techniques reduce the net revenue streams of
different projects (or fleet planning options) to a common measure. This provides a
quantitative basis for comparison, although the final selection of aircraft or capital
investment may include other non-quantifiable elements. Net cash flows for financial
appraisal are nonnally stated in constant or base year prices. This avoids the problems
of forecasting inflation rates for the various cost and revenue items. Above average
rates of inflation for particular items will then be reflected in higher real or constant
price increases in the item (e.g., fuel costs). Alternatively, all revenues and costs
could be forecast in current prices.
profits (pre-tax?) and whether to take the average investment over the life of the
project, this technique does not differentiate between profits earned at the end of
the first year and profits earned, say, after 20 years. The particular example has been
chosen to produce identical rates of return and no preference for anyone project;
however, even ifone project had produced the highest rate of return, selection on this
basis might have been misleading due to the different timing of profits.
This ratio cannot be calculated from the data in Table 8.4, since accounting items
such as depreciation would have to be deducted from cash profit to get accounting net
profit. The ratio is useful in that returns can be compared with the overall return on assets
or investments for the finn as a whole, but it is not widely used in investmt.'11t appraisal.
8.3.2
Table 8.6
Decision Criteria
Various measures are used to combine the project cash flows (or profits) for
comparison with the initial investment required. These are used to decide whether to
go ahead with a particular project (comparison with the without project case), or to
compare a number of different projects.
Accounting rate of return The average rate of return technique measures the
average profit per year and expresses this as a rate of return on the capital invested.
Table 8.5
Example of accounting rate of return
Investment
Annual profits:
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Total profits
Average annual profit
Return on investment %
The example in Table 8.5 shows three projects of similar initial investment but
varying profits and project duration. Apart from difficulties about how to measure
163
Pay-back period This technique measures the length of time that a project takes
to re-coup the initial investment. Here, cash flows (profits before depreciation) are
measured rather than accounting profits. The timing ofprofits is more important than
in the first technique, but no consideration is given to cash flows received after the
pay-back period.
Example of payback period
Investment
Net cash flows:
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
1,000
2,000
1,000
1,000
3,000
3,000
5.7
Project A is selected by this method, although it is possible that the rate of return
over its whole life is zero or negative. This illustrates the problem of using this
technique, which should only be used as an initial screening device in certain cases.
For the airline example shown in Table 8.4, the pay-back period for the used A330
300 is 4.4 years and the Boeing 777-200 is 4.5 years. They are thus very close on this
measure, but ideally a longer forecast period would make the results less dependent
on the aircraft's residual value which is a large part of the cash return in year five for
both aircraft. The assumption on residual value is therefore crucial to the outcome.
Discounted cash flow Discounted cash flow (DCF) techniques take into account
the differing timings of cash flows and the variation in project lives. The only
mathematical manipulation required is the reciprocal of compound interest.
The essential objective of DCF is to value each year's cash flow on a common
time basis. This is usually taken to be the present, although it could equally well be
164
Airline Finance
at the end of the period. Profits earned in year I could be re-invested in each of the
three subsequent years on a compound interest basis; conversely, profits earned in
future years can be discounted back to the present, the mathematics ofwhich is given
in the following general formula:
Profitability Index This is the ratio of the project's benefits to the project's costs,
both discounted to present values at the appropriate discount rate. It is similar to the
net present value approach, but has the possible advantage of being independent of
the relative size of the projects. For the example in Table 8.4, the A330-300 has an
index of 1.064, while the B777-200 has an index of 1.061. This ratio may be useful
where there are a number of investments that might be made, but limited capital
available for investment (i.e., capital rationing). Here, projects could be ranked by
profitability index, and selected from the top ofthe ranking until the available capital
was used up.
Net Present Value
to
where
eF,
(l+i)'
Net cash flow in period t

Discount rate or cost of capital
Project life (years)
The Internal Rate 0/ Return (lRR) The discount rate (i) required to equate the
discounted value of future cash flows with the initial investment, or to reduce net
present value to zero. This can be calculated by trial and error; for a project requiring
an initial investment of$l 0,000, followed by cash benefits of$6,500, $5,500, $4,500
and $3,500 at the end of the first, second, third and fourth years, this amounts to
solving the following equation:
o -
+ 6,500
10,000
(I
i) + (I
5,500
4,500
3,500
+ i)2 + (1 + i)3 + (1 + i)4
The internal rate of return (sometimes referred to as the DCF rate of return of the
investment) in this example is 40 per cent. Projects can be ranked according to rate
and a project selected if its Internal Rate of Return (IRR) is greater than
a specified cut-off value. The major drawback of this technique is the possibility of
finding two solutions to the above equation, or two internal rates of return for the
same investment. (This occurs when there is a change -of sign to negative for future
cash flows, as in the case of the need to decommission a nuclear power station at the
end of its useful life. ) For the airline example shown in the Table 6.4, the IRR for the
A330-300 is 10.4 per cent and the Boeing 777-200 is 10.2 per cent.
Net Present Value Instead of calculating the discount rate required to equate the
Net Present Value (NPV) to zero, the rate of return is specified and the NPV is
calculated. Projects may be selected with a positive NPY, the discount rate chosen
as a minimum target rate of return, ideally based on the weighted average cost of
capital to the firm (WACC). Projects may also be ranked according to NPVs. This
is the preferred technique in investment appraisal, although it does require the prior
selection ofthe discount rate. One answer to this is to compute NPVs with more than
one discount rate to see how sensitive the outcome ofproject ranking is to changes in
this parameter. For thc airline example shown in Table 8.4, the Net Present Value for
the A330-300 is US$9.9 million and the Boeing 777-200 is US$11.1 million, both
using an 8 per cent discount rate.
8.3.3
165
Discount Rate Calculation/or NPV
The discount rate is selected to represent the cost of capital to the airline, although
it should also be appropriate to the particular project that is being evaluated. Since
investors do not usually have the opportunity to signal their needs in relation to a
particular project, in practice past returns to investors in the airline are taken as a proxy
for future returns to the airline and project. This is calculated for both equity and debt
finance, or a weighted average based on a past or target future debt/equity ratio.
The cost of debt can be obtained by taking a weighted average rate of interest of
existing balance sheet debt. Another approach would be to take the current LillOR
plus the premium suggested by the airline's current credit rating, although that might
be affected by shorter-term factors which may not persist over the entire project life.
The cost of equity is computed using the Capital Asset Pricing Model. This
assumes that equity markets are 'efficient' in the sense of current stock prices
reflecting all relevant available information. Finance theory asserts that shareholders
will be compensated for assuming higher risks by receiving higher expected returns.
However, the distinction should be made between systematic risk, which is market risk
attributable to factors common to all companies (e.g., impact of II September 2001
on all airlines), and unsystematic risk, which is unique risk specific to the company
or a small group of companies (e.g., US Airways' bankruptcy announcement or the
impact ofthe European Commission's decision on airport charges on Ryanair). CAPM
models the expected return related to the systematic risk. According to portfolio
theory, unsystematic risk can be diversified away through portfolio selection, and
thus no reward is received for assuming this risk.
The covariance between the company's return and the market's return is the
company's ~ value, and is a measure of the systematic risk of the company (see also
3.5). From the ~ value, CAPM can be used to calculate the equilibrium expected
return ofa company. The equilibrium expected return of a company, R is the sum of
the prevailing risk-free rate, R{' and a 'risk premium' dependent on the ~ value and
the market risk premium (Rm - Rf ). This can be expressed as follows:
Re = Rf
+ f3( Rm R f )
166
Airline Finance
In order to estimate p, the following regression equation is used:
Re - Rr
= a +be(Rm - Rf
Where
Re
RJ
a
Rm
be
the return on equity e,

the risk-free return,
constant,
the return on the overall stock market,
the equity p.
Although the calculation of p involves a covariance relationship between company

return and market return, the exact methodology of estimating P is not explicitly
indicated for published values, nor is it apparently unique. I The risk-free return is
needed for the above formula, and the yield on government bonds is taken as a proxy
for this, adjusting for the expected future rate of inflation. Index-linked government
bonds can be used for this, or the inflation rate subtracted from the bond yield.
Estimates for this have ranged from 2.5 per cent to 3.5 per cent. AMR used 2.93 per
cent as the risk-free rate in their 2005 calculation of stock option values using the
Black-Scholes model.
An estimate of the equity risk premium is also required. The UK CAA have used
a range of 4-5 per cent in past regulation of airport charges, which they later revised
down to 3.5 to 4.5 per cent. The UK CANs discussion paper on the cost of capital
also includes US estimates of3-4 per cent and even lower.2
The formula for WACC uses the p values obtained from the above CAPM
methodology:
WACC = g(rf + p).(l-T) + (l-g)(rf + ERP.
Where:
g is the gearing for the airline expressed as ratio of debt to (debt + equity)
rf is the risk-free rate
p is the debt premium
T is the airline's rate of corporate or profits tax
ERP is the equity risk premium
Pis the beta value estimated from the CAPM regression
This is discussed further in Morrell, P. and Turner, S. (2003) 'An evaluation of airline
beta values and their application in calculating the cost of equity capital,' in Journal ofAir
Transport Management, 9(4), 201-209.
2 Heathrow. Gatwick and Stansted Airports' price caps, 2003-2008: CAA
recommendations to the Competition Commission, February 2002, Annex: Cost of capita for
Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted. UK Civil Aviation Authority website.
167
Gearing (g) can be the airlines existing ratio, or more usually a target future ratio.
The first (debt) part of the equation can be replaced by the airline's average existing
debt interest rate.
8.3.4
Which Criterion to Choose?
The B777-200 is marginally the preferred alternative using the pay-back period and
the NPV criteria, but the Airbus A330-300 comes out better on IRR and profitability
index.
The first two criteria do not take into accountthe time value ofmoney, and can thus
be rejected. Both NPV and IRR are valid methods of comparison used in industry,
but a different conclusion is drawn depending on which is used. IRR is however
widely used, and it is easy to see why this is so, especially in large organisations:
the spreadsheet calculations will be done at lower level of management than those
making the decision (which for larger projects will be at board level). There might
also be a time lag between evaluation and decision. It is thus easier for the board
to be given the preferred project IRR and then decide on their target or cut-off rate,
taking into account the project's risk, rather than specity the discount rate to be used
for each NPV calculation.
Table 8.7
Financial evaluation of alternatives
Pay-back period (yrs)

Net present value
(NPV @ 8% in US$ lIl1111UII.
Internal rate of return
index
ILl
10.2
1.061
For independent projects, the NPV and IRR criteria always lead to the same accept!
reject decision. This is illustrated in Figure 8.1, where it can be seen if the IRR is
greater than the project cost ofcapital or discount rate, then the NPV using that cost
of capital as the discount rate will always be greater than zero.
If the projects are mutually exclusive, as in the case of the A330-300 vs. the
Boeing 777-200, then if the cost of capital is greater than the rate at which the two
lines cross the two methods lead to the selection of the same project. In other words,
if the cost of capital is greater than 9.3 per cent then the A330-300's NPV is always
greater than the Boeing 777-200's NPV, and the A330-300 also has the higher IRR.
If the cost ofcapital is less than the cross-over rate, then a conflict exists between
NPV and IRR; in such a case, it is preferable to take the pr~ject with the higher NPV,
since this would add most to shareholder wealth, assuming that the airline can obtain
the necessary funds to invest in the project.
169
Airline Finance
It should be noted that projects which have relatively high up-front capital costs will
have a curve that is steeper sloping (Figure 1.8) . A sensitivity test that assesses the effect
of higher than expected capital costs will result in a rotation of each curve to the right.
Second, a long-term project will have a steeper slope than a short-term one.
Changing the profile of the project by moving costs from the near term to the longer
term will have the effect of rotating the curve in a clockwise direction.
revenues and costs. A series of rate of return calculations is then produced in the
form of probability distributions for the rate of return for each aircraft option. The
project with the highest probability of exceeding a given rate of return is chosen.
168
80.0
80.0
r~ A330~OO I
. _ _ B777~
40.0
C
,i
EO
!II
20.0
2.
~
0.0
Sensitivity analysis Sensitivity analysis tests the effects on the financial outcome
or ranking ofprojects of changes in some of the key assumptions used in making the
projections, assuming other factors remain unchanged. These tests should be applied
in areas of greatest uncertainty such as traffic forecasts, market shares, fuel prices or
rates of exchange. Judgement would be required to determine which parameters to
change and the range of values to be explored. Sensitivity analysis does not involve
the assignment of probabilities to changed assumptions: for example if the central
plan assumed fuel prices to be constant in real terms over the forecast period, the
alternative might be tested of an increase of 3 per cent per annum in real terms.
Sensitivity analysis would determine the resultant change in NPY, but would not
consider the likelihood of the alternative assumptions. In the example in Table 8.4,
the outcome would change if identical assumptions had been taken on residual
values (i.e., 60 per cent of first cost in both cases). This would have reduced the
B777-200 NPY from $11.1 million to $6.4 million, and its IRR from to.2 per cent
to 9.3 per cent.
20.0
40.0
10
11
Ol""",nl_(%)
Figure 8.1
NPV vs discount rate: A330-300 vs. B777-200
The best decision criterion to use is NPY, assuming that the airline can borrow
sufficient funds at the discount rate or cost of capital to finance the investment. In
the above example, the B777-200 would be preferred on this basis, but the outcome
is very close. In such cases, first a rigorous series of sensitivity tests should be
carried out (see below). If the B777-200 choice was'more sensitive to changes in
key assumptions, and might be affected more by, say, external economic shocks,
then it may be better to decide on the more robust solution, the A330. Unquantifiable
factors, such as the longer term security of spares and other support, may also be
taken into account in the final decision.
A survey of airline CFOs in 2005 indicated a strong preference for NPY and pay
back approaches, with accounting rate ofretum and lRR also widely used. 3
8.3.5
Risk and uncertainty
Probability (risk) analysis This relatively complex task involves the estimation
of ranges of values and probabilities of the financial inputs to each project. Thus,
for each aircraft purchase option, these must be estimated for forecasts of traffic,
3 Gibson, W. and Morrell, P. (2005) Airline finance and aircrafi evaluation: evidence
from thefield. PapertoATRS World Conference, Rio de Janeiro, July 2005.
Scenario analysis This technique considers the sensitivity of the NPV or IRR to
changes in the key variables and also the range of likely variable values. Thus, a
pessimistic set of variables might be chosen to determine the NPY, or an optimistic
set, to give a range ofoutcomes. The optimistic set might include fuel prices declining
or remaining constant in real terms, a high GDP forecast, and high market share or
low yield dilution. The pessimistic scenario might take a high fuel price increase,
low GDP growth, and low market share. It is important that the assumptions for
the key variables are consistent with one another for each scenario, e.g., low fuel
price escalation is consistent with high GDP growth. The analysis may involve much
work on generating alternative assumptions, as well as workshops where these are
challenged and honed into a short-list of scenarios to be evaluated.
In conclusion, it needs to emphasised that investment decisions based on the
framework and criteria recommended above are only as good as the assumptions used
in the evaluation. As many of the relevant factors as possible should be quantified
and included in the appraisal, some sort of risk analysis undertaken, and, where
appropriate, other unquantifiable factors also addressed.
Monte Carlo simulation is a procedure whereby random numbers are generated
using a normal probability distribution of the expected values of the assumptions
that were used for the cash flow forecasts. This is similar to Probability analysis
described above, but where the probabilities are not known.
The survey of airline CFOs referred to above found that, of the airline managers
using the NPV technique, almost two-thirds raised or lowered the discount rate to
allow for risk, rather than changing the cash flow forecasts using the techniques
171
described above. 4 This is clearly easier, but does not provide the discipline of re
visiting the major assumptions upon which the evaluation is based.
8.4 Start-up Airline Business Plan

~
' 0-
~...:
8 ;q
""
.
~~'T~.
:!
t"'
~~~~:q~~
=:
0
~
"
'IT
<J;
-6
"'1'
~ ~
~
d
"7
~
....:
g ~ g ~
~"':N~
~ ~
'"
:::f
00
:= g
.,."
r-: ci
..::
o
o
I(",
or.
'
oe
'"""
:i ~
-~
Vl
('\l
N <:r
"'"
'Ot
'"
V)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
r: t.:'
I"'
<:>
v; !:;
..,;
'QC
" 00
'"
Q
..,.
M~
f-l
Q
10
....
'o::t
!Xl
II"l
'"'"I
on
N
II"l
N
tr;
t'.I
"..
N
OQ
$ :5
M M
M N
<nt
"'*'
1"":;
~
M
tr;
M N
'-:t"
.....
t;
~,....~
'"
" 8 '" - ..,.
~ ~ . . N 10 ~
I()
00
00
'7
':r
~ ~ ~ ~
MM'
=:
"
"'" --I'"...
M QQ ,.:
~~
N ~I~
..: -'
::!
"
M
N
is ~1~ld
RI i'<l
...,
N
,.:
o
o~
'"
'"
o~
("'I
g ::::
...,
..,. ~Id
,.:
:! ~
:3:
~
;!
-:i
'"
re
...:
on ..;
'"
'"'
'"l
v)
'"
"T
'"';" ;;
o
~
1""1
...,
00
~ :$
f"-
...:
..-:r~
..c
~ ~
r"'"
,..:
~
N
is
...o
:::r
"o ""'1_!'i.-.
<;
M~
"T
"T
,.;
"'I"
'" =
;:
g g
-
~ ~1i;ld
" '7
'"
i;O
vi
~ ~
"
'"
V)
~~ ~~
8 g
..,.
"'"
('4"
;;;
'" ...,
10
'" '"
8,.;
~ ~1~1;3
"
/!III
C.
""""
f.{
"9
;(j
~ ~
~~
f--i
::;
~
"t
fi:
0>
8'If'
,..{
~
'
"
!? ~
..0
"J;;"
17;
V)
<U
......
=
ii ~
..c
<U
=:
::I
088
~
~ M ~
""
=
";c.
t!!=
-::
~:;:
S; ~ ~
N
~
'":::: ...,"7 f'1"
~ ~
8 17;
"~ '"00
0&
07
g 17;15\1"1
~ 0
<rt ("'1
I"'-
,.
Q\
(J'.j
oq
QC
<U
:c
~
~
~ ~
~ ~ ~
.o!
'"
11
, ~
1""" ~
1!:
11
VI
2 !f. "
.: .~
~ !l ~ ~ ~
~
"' e
a~
i ~
iif .~'"
o G
1l0:
till3
o
~w
i2
~ .l5
i g
!j
'"
~ .~
i 11
~ !
Many of the essentials of preparing the financial part of a start-up airline business
plan have been discussed in the preceding sections of this chapter. The fleet plan
will be crucial, in that it brings together decisions on many aspects of marketing,
operations and engineering. For a start-up airline, however, the investment appraisal
might point to a particular solution, but the realities of the marketplace might dictate
something else. There might, for example, be an attractive offer of the right number
of aircraft at the right time at a low operating lease rate. ValuJet in the US started
with used ex Delta Air Lines DC-9s purchased with cash,s and Debonair in the UK
with a fleet of used BAe 146s on 16-month operating lease. 6 Other European low
cost carriers such as Ryanair, easyJet and Go all started with used B737-200s and
-300s, but later ordered new aircraft. JetBlue in the US started with new A320s, but
was well financed and presumably had a very attractive offer from Airbus.
Aircraft operating economics in these circumstances take second place to
savings, at least in the difficult start-up period, in capital investment. This is because
the airline may never take-off at all without the necessary finance; and the last part of
this chapter will show that, even when almost all assets are leased rather than owned,
the financial requirements to start an airline are still quite substantial.
The three key financial statements in any start-up airline business plan are
presented in Table 8.8 for a hypothetical airline. The figures suggest an initial level
oftraffic of around 500,000 passengers per year, operated perhaps with a fleet of7-8
short to medium haul aircraft. The investment appraisal has indicated that used, low
capital cost, aircraft would produce higher net present values, given the airline's high
cost of capital and discount rate. The financial evaluation (see Chapter 10) indicating
that an operating lease would be preferable to owning the aircraft, or taking them on
finance lease. But considerable working capital will still be needed, and some of the
sources of such capital described in Chapter 8 will have been considered.
The scenario described in Table 8.8 is one of an airline starting scheduled
operations, say on intra-European routes, at the beginning ofOctober, after spending
the previous three months in planning, obtaining licenses, approvals and slots,
training, marketing and promotion. In this period no revenues are eamed, but
considerable expenses would have been incurred. The particular example shows a
winter start-up, which might have been dictated by aircraft availability, and gives the
airline a chance to become better known before the peak summer season. But it may
mean a greater working capital requirement.
The discussion ofworking capital in 8.2 above suggested that perhaps a short-term
capital requirement could be financed on a short-term basis with, say, an overdraft.
This would not be appropriate here: first, the airline would not have the security to
.~
.~
4
5
6
Gibson and Morrell. Supra .

The Avmark Aviation Economisl, 19 (ApriUMay 1996).
Air/inance Journal, 13 (Julyl August 1996).
Airline Finance
get past the loss-making earlier months or even years, and would need to spend a
considerable amount oftime on refinancing their working capital; second, the banks
would only offer such finance in conjunction with more permanent finance, and even
then only on a self-liquidating basis; and finally the regulatory authorities would be
unlikely to license a start-up airline on this basis.
Regulatory authorities in most countries have various financial fitness criteria for
licensing start-up airlines. Countries that have more liberal air transport policies and
a more competitive environment are likely to have both stricter and less secretive
financial requirements. The European Commission published in 1992 common
criteria to be used by member states in granting operating licenses for start-up
airlines. They required that such airlines should provide a business plan for at least
the first two years years of the applicant's operation. 7 In an annex to the regulation,
the following information was required from first time applicants:
Article 5 paragraph 1 of the EU regulation gives two hurdles that need to be

overcome before a license can be granted. lo First, the airline needs to demonstrate
that 'it can meet at any time its actual and potential obligations, established under
realistic assumptions, for a period of 24 months from the start of operations'. From
Table 8.8, it would appear from the projected balance sheet that the airline could at
least meet the requirement for the first year. Second, the airline would be able to 'meet
its fixed and operational costs incurred from operations according to its business
plan and established under realistic assumptions, for a period of three months from
the start of operations, without taking into account any income from operations'. II
This can be tested by looking at the cash flow statement for the imaginary start-up
airline in Table 8.8. If all revenues are removed from the first three months, then the
cash balance at the end of December would be $6.4 million lower, or a -$493,000.
The airline would not therefore pass this hurdle.
However, if some of the future income were already contracted for, it might be
possible to include that in the calculations. For example, if the airline had a legal
contract to provide charter services for a tour operator in November and December,
and that the combined revenues under this contract of$500,000 were included in the
planned cash revenues in those months, then this revenue could be included and the
airline would pass the test. This modification was not written into the regulation, but
it would seem to be a sensible approach to take where significant charter operations
are concerned.
In the USA a similar approach is taken by the Department ofTransportation before
granting an operating certificate. The Air Carrier Fitness Division of DOT states in
its !,'1lidelines that applicants must provide 'independent third-party verification that
it has available to it resources
cash, lines-of-credit or bank loans) sufficient to
cover all of its pre-operating costs ... plus the operating expenses that are reasonably
projected to be incurred ... during three months of "normal" operations'.12 No
revenues can be assumed for these first three months, and expenses should be based
on projected traffic and revenues, and not reduced because of reduced or no traffic.
They prescribe the estimation of the first three months' operating expenses by
dividing expenses for the first 12 months by four.
The EU regulations could, in certain cases, be somewhat less strict than those of
the US DOT. The interpretation of the EU Regulation by the UK CAA states that
'in considering the extent to which all of the operational costs should be included
the CAA may take into account the proportion of flying which could be cancelled
without impact on the core business ... ' .13 This is in the context of licensing charter
carriers that operate ad hoc flights outside their core business of series charters for
tour operators. Such airlines are less common in the US.
172
1. The most recent internal management accounts, and, if available audited

accounts for the previous financial year.
2. A projected balance sheet, including (sic) profit and loss account, for the
following two years. 8
3. The basis for projected expenditure and income figures on such items as fuel,
fares and rates, salaries, maintenance, depreciation, exchange rate fluctuations,
airport charges, insurance, etc. Traffic/revenue forecasts.
4. Details of the start-up costs incurred in the period from submission of
application to commencement of operations and an explanation of how it is
(sic) proposes to finance these costs.
5. Details of existing and projected sources of finance.
6. Details of shareholders, including nationality and type ofshares to be held, and
the Articlcs ofAssociation. If parts of a group of undertakings, information on
the relationship between them.
7. Projected cash-flow statements and liquidity plans for the first two years years
of operation.
8. Details of the financing of aircraft purchase/leasing including, in the case of
leasing, the terms and conditions of contract. 9
Other provisions were also included for the continuing assessment ofexisting license
holders. rt can be seen that Table 8.8 provides some of the information required,
but a second year of operation would have to be added, as well as more details on
operating revenues and expenses, sources of finance and shareholdings.
7 This was increased to three years in Article 5 ofa Proposal for a regulation on common
rules for the operation of air transport services in the Community, European Commission,
COM(2006) 396 final, 18 July 2006.
8 This was increased to three years in ArticIe 5 of a Proposal for a regulation on common
rules for the operation of air transport services in the Community, European Commission,
COM(2006) 396 final, 18 July 2006.
9 Official Journal ofthe European Communities, No L240, (24 August 1992) p.7.
173
10 Official Journal a/the European Communities, supra, p. 4.

II This is considerably less strict that the rule applied by Microsoft, where enough cash
must be available to operate the company for at least one year, even ifno one paid them; see
Gates, W. (1996), The Road Ahead, revised edn, p. 45.
12 Air Carrier Fitness Division (2002) How to Become a CertificatedAir Carrier, Office
of the Secrctary, US Department of Transportation, 202-366-9721.
13 Financial framework for the grant of a Type A operating license, UK CAA, www.caa.
co.uk, Section 4.2.
Chapter 9
Risk Management:
Foreign Currency and Fuel Price
9.1
Excbange Rate Volatility
International airlines sell tickets in many different countries and currencies, even
in places where they do not have their own operations. They also incur operating
expenses in the currencies of the countries they serve, and buy capital equipment
from the major aerospace exporting countries such as the US, Canada, UK, France,
Brazil and Germany.
It would be impossible for there to be a perfect match in both amounts and timing
of foreign currency receipts and expenses. An airline may achieve some sort of
balance over the year as a whole in receipts and expenses in a certain currency, but
there will be weeks and months ofsurpluses followed by periods ofshortfall. This can
be managed by borrowing and lending in this one currency, and thus not involving
conversion into another currency or any exchange risk. But net surpluses in a foreign
currency would have to be exchanged into the local currency, which is the currency
in which most costs are incurred and ultimately any profits would be retained or
distributed. Here, there will be a time lag between income and expenditure which
involves a risk of a movement in the exchange rate, and therefore a foreign exchange
loss or gain. An airline's treasury has the task of managing revenues, expenditures,
assets and liabilities in both local and foreign currencies, and thus minimising the
risks of exposure to large currency movements.
Since the late 1960s, exchange rates of currencies have floated with respect to
other major currencies, subject to central bank intervention, in pursuit of economic
and monetary goals. Some currencies are pegged to major currencies, such as the US
dollar, or a basket ofthe currencies oftheir major trading partners. Some countries do
not manage their exchange rates as a policy objective, leaving them to float freely.
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) estimates the importance of the
various currencies in global foreign exchange market trading: the US dollar accounted
for 45 per cent of daily turnover in April 1989, falling only slightly to 44.5 per cent
in April 2004. The second most important currency is the Euro with just under 19 per
cent, followed by the Japanese Yen with around 10 per cent and the UK pound with
8.5 per cent. The UK pound has increased somewhat in importance (up from 7.5 per
cent in 1989) while the Yen has fallen from 14.5 per cent.
The European exchange rate mechanism attempted to limit the fluctuations
between European currencies, but market pressures and a lack of coordination of
176
Risk Management: Foreign Currency and Fuel Price
Airline Finance
EU monetary policies had placed the future of this system in doubt. However, 12
EU countries introduced a common currency (the 'euro' or ) in 2000, with the
complete phasing out of national currencies by March 2002. Only the UK, Denmark
and Sweden remained outside the euro area, such that their monetary policy was not
applied by the European Central Bank, as was the case with the others. This change
made life easier for Europe's major airlines (not only the ones whose countries have
signed up), in terms of reduced currency risks and transaction costs, but there are
also costs involved in the change-over.
Fluctuations occur because of changes in the supply of and demand for the
currency. For example, if the UK was running a balance of trade deficit, then more
traders would be selling pounds to pay for imports than exporters are buying pounds
with the foreign currency proceeds from their foreign sales. This would weaken the
pound, or the pound would depreciate against the currencies it traded with. Exporters
might delay invoicing in a currency that they expect to depreciate, in the hope of
gain, while importers might do the opposite. These 'leads and lags' would further
increase downward pressure on the currency.
Here exporters and importers are taking a position on future currency movements
which is no different from money traders, often called speculators. I The latter execute
orders for others, as well as trying to profit on their own account from movements
in currencies and interest rates. This can also add considerable buying or selling
pressures to a currency that cannot be counteracted by buying or selling by that
country's central bank, even if it wished to. However, the argument that governments
and central bankers are now increasingly powerless in the mce of global market
dealers has been rebutted by the strength of the dollar, following statements and
actions by central bankers from the 07 countries in April 1995.
In the past few years, exporters of capital have also become more important in
exchange rate determination. Foreign direct investment has been high from countries
like Japan which have a high domestic savings rate and visible trade surplus. This
has taken the form of Japanese investors buying foreign assets (see Chapter 10,
Japanese leveraged leases) or foreign stocks and shares, or of Japanese companies
establishing offshore manufacturing plant in countrieS' such as China and Federation
of Malaysia. This has the effect of weakening the yen against other currencies.
Market economics suggests that currency depreciation resulting from a trade
deficit would automatically make exports more competitive and lead to a reduction
in the trade deficit and thus an appreciation of the currency. One of the problems of
this equilibrium theory is that depreciation leads to higher import prices and increases
domestic inflation, which in turn reduces the move towards greater international
competitiveness. Thus, a country is trapped in a downwards spiral of inflation and
depreciation. Extreme examples of this have occurred at various times in the past,
notable in Brazil and other Latin American countries, many African countries, and
more recently Russia and some CIS countries.
The now well-known fund manager and investor, George Soros, was reported to have
made a eonsiderable sum from speculating on sterling's depreciation in 1992; see Ka1etsky,
A. The Times, 26 Oetober 1992.
177
140
AY8rago of dally bid rate..
1211
l00~.
i
p
80
Iie
80
JUs;"]..............................
48~""'~
.
I i
'OM&IUS$
I-Y!"ll~
..
211
Sout:o:OECD
ll1f63 1984 1985 , _ ,.7 18811 111M 1Il10 1191 11102 1m 1984 1119!5 , _ 1197 , . 1118G _
Figure 9.1
2G01 2002 _ _ _
Key currency exchange rates vs US dollar, 1983-2005
It can be seen from Figure 9.1 that even the world's major currencies are subject to
quite sharp fluctuations in the space of only one or two years years. A fall of the US
dollar against the yen and Deutschemark (DM) between 1985 and 1988 of above
40 per cent, and the pound by just under 30 per cent, illustrates this point. The Euro
() joined the list of major world currencies in 1999, and completely replaced the
Deutschemark and other EU currencies in 2002. Since, its introduction, however, it
has weakened against the US dollar, falling 15 per cent between 1999 and 2000.
Purchasing power parity (PPP) theory states that under liberalised international
trade a basket of goods in one country should cost the same as a basket of goods
in another country. If domestic prices rise in one country, then the exchange rate
between that country and another should change to restore the price equality
between the two baskets of goods. Exchange rates should, according to this theory,
be determined purely by relative price movements. It is doubtful ifthis would happen
even in the long term because of the increasing element of goods and services that
are not traded internationally in the basket of typical domestic purchases; in the
short or even medium-term many exchange rates persist in being significantly out
ofline with the rates that equate the price levels in each country. For this reason, the
use of market exchange rates causes distortions in international comparisons, for
example of airline costs or yields. These can bc removed by the use of PPP rates of
exchange which are published on a regular basis by the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD) for most major currencies. 2
Currency changes can have a significant effect on the pattem, and in some cases
the size, of air travel demand. An improvement in the pound against the US dollar
2 These are based on the consumer prices of a basket of goods, and are published in the
DEeD's Main Economic Indicators.
178
Airline Finance
between 1986 and 1989 encouraged some UK sun-seekers to switch from European
destinations such as Spain to Florida. On the other hand, the greater depreciation
of the pound against the French franc compared to the Spanish peseta and Italian
lira between 1992 and 1994/1995 led to the latter countries becoming relatively
more attractive to UK tourists. In 1997, Thailand, Federation ofMalaysia, Indonesia
and other Asian countries also became much more attractive to foreign tourists,
following their currency depreciation, but it also seriously inhibited foreign travel
by residents.
Few tourists buy the foreign currency needed for a foreign holiday in advance,
although there was some evidence that Germans did this when the US dollar was
particularly weak against the mark in spring 1995. 3 However, many still plan and
book their holidays well in advance of travel, even though some leave booking until
the last minute to try to take advantage of special offers. This means that currency
depreciation would result in less spending on discretionary items while on holiday,
rather than cancellation, and perhaps only affect demand in the following season.
9.2 Airline Trading Exposure to Currency Movements

Currency changes can also have a serious impact on an airline's reported profitability.
This might stem from its trading activities, which are examined here, or it may come
from the restatement of foreign currency denominated assets or liabilities, which
are discussed in the next section. For example, Singapore Airlines announced in
October 1996 that its results for the first half of the financial year had been hit by
both higher fuel prices and the strong Singapore dollar.4 The depreciation of key
revenue earning currencies such as the yen and DM contributed to a declinc in yields
expressed in Singapore dollars of6.7 per cent.
Airlines often report the adverse effect offoreign exchange movements on profits,
but rarely the converse. In order to explore the possible trading impact of marked
exchange rate movements, a simplified example has been constructed. This assumes
trading only in the local currency ( sterling) and one foreign currency (US$), and
treats airlines either as exporters or importers, depending on the currencies in which
its operating revenues and expenses are incurred.
For an international airline to be an exporter, the following is likely to hold
true:
Its costs will be primarily in the local currency.
The majority of its revenues will be in foreign currency.
The example in Table 9.1 assumes 60 per cent of revenues will be in foreign
currencies and 60 per cent ofexpenses will be in the local currency, which is a fairly
good approximation of many major international scheduled airlines (e.g., KLM in
1995/1996).
3 Financial Times Foreign Exchange Supplement, (6 June \995), p. vi.
4 Financial Times, (29 October \996), p. 27.
Table 9.1
179
Effect of exchange rate depreciation on profits of exporter airline
Local Currency ()
Foreign Currency in $
Foreign Currency in
(At exchange rate of$2.00 per )
TOTAL
The initial position is one of zero local currency trading profit at the rate of exchange
of $2 to the . The impact on profits of a depreciation of sterling of 25 per cent to
$L50 to the (which actually occurred between 1990 and 1993) is then evaluated,
assuming other factors remaining constant.
This example has shown how the depreciation ofa currency helps exporter airlines
by increasing the local value of their foreign earnings by a greater amount (20)
than the increase in the local value of foreign expenses (13), resulting in a profit
improvement (7). However, it would also allow them to reduce foreign selling priees
or fares and stimulate traffic without risk of reducing their sterling revenues.
International charter airlines whose revenues are almost entirely from their own
country's residents will be net importers (they will need to import aircraft and fuel,
both incurred in foreign currency). Foreign currency revenues for these carriers
are unlikely to exceed 20 per cent. Finnair, a scheduled airline with a large charter
operation, also provides an example of an airline which has relatively low foreign
exchange revenues (35 per cent in 1995/1996) and high local currency costs (65 per
cent). The impact of a similar sterling depreciation is shown in Table 9.2.
For the importer airline, the depreciation of a currency increases the local value
oftheir foreign earnings by a smaller amount (7) than the increase in the local value
of foreign expenses (13), resulting in a profit deterioration (6). There would also
be very little scope for them to increase revenues or stimulate traffic by reducing
foreign selling prices or fares.
Thus, the depreciation of the UK pound sterling will have a beneficial impact
on British Airways, but will hurt a charter carrier such as Britannia Airways (and
contributed to the bankruptcy of Laker Airways). But it should be noted that a
currency depreciation also has an initially adverse effect on the net exporter by
making its costs incurred in foreign currency immediately morc expensive. The effect
on revenues will generally take longer because of the advance nature of ticket sales.
It will also depend on whether the airline uses the depreciation as an opportunity
to lower local currency fares, or offer more attractive discount farcs, and the price
elasticity of its potcntial markets. This last effect is clcarly very difficult to quantify,
but often neglected in airline profit amlouncemcnts and related commentaries.
Airline Finance
180
Table 9.2
Effect of exchange rate depreciation on profits of importer airline
Local Currency ()
Foreign Currency in $
Foreign Currency in
(At exchange rate of $2.00 per )
TOTAL
Furthermore, in the longer term the rate of inflation of prices in general in the local
currency will increase, increasing the exporter's local currency costs and eroding the
profit increase. There might also be an effect on the exporter airline's local market,
which will find foreign holidays more expensive as a result of the depreciation of
their currency. But in reality airlines operate to many different countries, some of
whose currencies are bound to fare worse than the local one, and switching between
countries is the more likely response.
It is the major currencies in which an airline trades that will provide the greatest
exposure to large foreign exchange movements. One example of an international
airline that has regularly published details of the importance of this is SAS, which
does not fit easily into the above example, since it has three domestic currencies.
With quite large domestic markets, it tends to be long in two of its home currencies.
However, its long-haul hub is in Denmark resulting in quite high costs there, but
revenues are smaller partly due to the smaller domestic market. It is short in US
dollars, a common position for many airlines stemming from the fact that capital
costs/ fuel, some airport charges and US station and sales costs are all in dollars.
Table 9.3
SAS revenue and cost currency breakdown in 2005 (per cent)
Norwegian krona
Danish krona
Euro ()
US$
Pound sterling ()
Other
181
The data in Table 9.3 meant that, ofSAS's 2005 EBITDA of SEK3,000 million, the
airline had surpluses ofSEK5,900 million of Norwegian Krona, SEK3,900 million
ofeuros, SEK2,200 million ofSwedish Krona and SEKl,300 million of UK sterling.
It had a deficit ofSEKll ,000 million in US dollars, and SEKl ,600 million of Danish
Krona. In contrast to SAS which earns a large part of revenues in its home currency,
Turkish Airlines derived only 16 per cent of operating revenues from Turkish New
Lira in 2004, 45 per cent coming from euros and as much as 16 per cent from US
dollars. This is because of its strong sales to incoming European tourists and those
of Turkish origin living in Germany. The airline's expenditure was split between its
home currency (48 per cent), US dollars (32 per cent), euros (13 per cent) and other
currencies (7 per cent).
British Airways earns just under 60 per cent of its revenues in around 140
different foreign currencies (30 per cent in US$), and incurs about 50 per cent of
its costs abroad (30 per cent in US$). US carriers like Delta Air Lines have 75-80
per cent of their revenues and an even higher percentage of expenses in US dollars,
and are thus affected little by changes in exchange rates. A 1992 study ofAmerican
Airlines did, however, find that a weaker US dollar boosted short-run cash flows, but
that this might also in the longer run weaken the US economy and reduce American
trave1. 6
Qantas estimated the sensitivity of their profit forecasts with respect to the key
currencies in which it trades, namely the US dollar, the Japanese yen and the UK
pound. 1 They examined the eflect of a 5 per cent movement in the exchange rates of
these currencies, and estimated the following impacts:
Table 9.4
Impact of currency chauges on Qantas after-tax profit for

1995/19%
Uniform movement of 5 per cent in

A$ against all currencies
Movement of 5 per cent in A$ against US$
Movement of 5 per cent in A$ against Japanese Yen
Movement of 5 per eent in A$ against UK
-10%
20%
-3%
-3%
The after-tax profit forecast for Qantas stated in the prospectus of A$237 million
for the financial year 1995/1996 assumed an A$IUS$ exchange rate to average 0.76
over the year, A$Nen to average 72.2, and A$IUK to average 0.47. Profits actually
turned out to be higher than expected atA$247 million, not helped by an appreciation
of the Australian dollar, which averaged 76.6, or 6 per cent higher then predicted.
The A$I rate was 0.49, or a 4 per cent appreciation ofAustralian dollar, which again
Source: SAS Group Annual Report, 2005

5
rare.
Airbus now prices its aircraft in both US dollars and Euros (), although deals are
6 Bilson, J. (1992), Managing Economic Exposure to Foreign Exchange Risk: A Case

Study ofAmerican Airlines, The Economist, 6 June.
7 Qantas Airways Limited, Offering Memorandum, (22 June 1995).
Airline Finance
would havc tcnded to reduce profits. (The forecast ofA$ 0.76 to the US dollar turned
out to be right.)
Table 9.5 gives an idea of how sensitive various Asian airlines were to the
depreciation of their local currencies. s Unfortunately, the source did not give data
for Garuda, but it is likely that its situation was not dissimilar to Malaysian, both
having large domestic markets generating negligible foreign currency revenues. The
net impact on operating ratios is shown for a 5 per cent depreciation. In the case
of Thai Airways the local currency fell by around 50 per cent, which would have
shaved 4 per cent points offtheir operating ratio. This is without considering any net
economic effects of a reduction in travel by nationals, offset by the boost to tourism
from the more attractive rates. The most extreme example, Asiana was faced with
a 30 per cent drop in its local currency between 1997 and 1998, which would have
reduced its operating ratio by almost 10 per cent points .
The analysis in Table 9.5 ignores the possible benefits from revenues generated
in relative strong currencies other than the US dollar. Philippine Airlines carries a
large number of nationals living and working abroad who buy their tickets in foreign
currency. The table also misses the important impact of foreign debt repayments,
which are addressed in the next section.
182
lIDT.-------------------------------------------------------------------.
lOOt-
I::;
r 7
......
~:.
~80
toc
eo
'10
-Rupiah
'RM
. . . Baht
ID
--HK$
01
J.Ml1 F404l7 _97 Alz4r May

97
Figure 9.2
....4r 1liJg-97 _
'""~
Selected Asian exchange rates vs US dollar, 1997/1998
Asian airline US dollar mismatch
Airline
Air New Zealand
Cathay Pacific
Japan Airlines
Korean Air
Asiana
Malaysian Airlines
Singapore Airlines
Qantas Airways
Philippine Airlines
Thai Airwavs
9.3 Airline Balance Sheet Exposure to Currency Movements
0d4r _"97 Do<>ll7 JilI>OO Fob-lie Mor4e Alz""" ..... Jun-Q6 JM6 A_ _ '
H
The Asian financial crisis of 1997 and 1998 resulted in the very rapid depreciation of
many Asian currencies. Those airlines that were short ofUS dollars found themselves
having to buy them at significantly higher prices post-1997 compared to before.
Tahle 9.5
183
US$ costs as
% total
23
20
15
25
52
28
23
15
33
24
... Net impact on operating margin of a 5 per cent average local currency depreciation against
the US$
Source.' US-Asean Business Council (1999)
Airlines can also experience large reported foreign exchange profits or losses as a
result of borrowing money or acquiring aircraft in foreign currencies. SAS provides
an example of this, with large exchange losses being charged against 1992 profits
as a result of a revaluation of long-term debt, following the November 1992 float of
the Swedish krona, and its subsequent decline of 20 per cent against the DM and 15
per cent against the ECU. 9 This was somewhat offset by exchange gains from liquid
funds placed in foreign currencies.
An example of two transactions involving foreign currencies and an airline's
balance sheet is given below.
Example 1
An airline sells tickets to the value of US$100,000 on 1 December, but has not
received the funds by the end of the financial year at end December. The sale is
translated into at the rate ruling at the date of the transaction (or the rate for the
month through the lATA clearing house), say US$2.001. The passengers travelled
before the end ofthe year, so that revenue amounting to 50,000 will be included in
the Profit and Loss statement for the year. However, since the invoice had not been
paid by year end, debtors (accounts receivable) will have to include the $100,000
outstanding, but this will be converted into sterling at the year end rate of exchange,
which is perhaps only US$I.5/L Thus, debtors will include 66,667, the difference
between this and the revenue amount of 50,000 being credited to the profit and loss
8 US-ASEAN Business Council Inc. (1999), ASEA andAsia Pacific: Civil aviation and
airport development.
9 SAS Annual Report (1992), p. 27.
A irline Finance
statement as an exchange gain, such that retained earnings will ultimately offset the
change in debtors or current assets.
Once the money is received in the following January, the dollars are converted to
pounds at the new spot rate (US$I.60/), and the 62,500 is added to cash balances
in current assets. The exchange gain is thus 12,500, rather less than the 16,667
allowed for in the previous financial year, so an adjustment is made in the current
financial year for the difference of 4,167.
arrangement for funding the local embassy in return for payments to the airline in
the home country.
Where surpluses are eamed, and natural hedges impossible, they can either
be sold on the spot market (for immediate delivery into the local currency), or
they can be sold on the forward market (and vice versa). The forward market is a
realistic alternative for delivery of the local (or foreign) currency equivalent in up
to 12 months into the future, but beyond that period would tend to be too expensive,
or there would be no market available. Forward market prices are quoted for major
currencies for three, six, nine and 12 months ahead. A forward market contract will
commit the airline to buy a fixed amount of a given currency at a future date at a
given exchange rate.
An alternative to dealing on the forward market is to buy or sell an option which
gives the holder the right, but not obligation to exchange a given amount ofcurrency
at a certain rate, at a future date. A premium will have to be paid for buying the
option to purchase currency (a put option), or sell currency (a call option). This
money is lost, but the holder can then either exercise the option if the subsequent
trend in the spot rate is unfavourable, or throwaway the option if the spot market is
favourable. A European option remains with the buyer until the exercise date, but an
American option can be traded in the intervening period, and there will be a market
price for buying and selling options.
A major investment paid for in a foreign currency is a good example of whether
to hedge, and which method an airline should choose. Once a firm order has been
signed for an aircraft, an airline will be committed to delivering the cost of the
aircraft in one or two years years' time. The example below is based on a UK based
airline contracting to buy a B747-400 for delivery in one years' time at a cost of
US$140 million. It is assumed that down-payments and natural hedges result in
US$lOO being required at delivery date. There are three possible strategies:
184
Example 2
An airline buys an aircraft for US$1 million on I March, and this is entered in the
balance sheet under fixed assets at the rate of exchange ruling at the date of the
transaction. It will then be depreciated in the normal way based on this sterling
amount, say 500,000 (US$2.00/). At the end of the financial year, this amount
is not adjusted to reflect any change in the $/ rate since the date of acquisition.
The aircraft is, however, a foreign asset and any foreign exchange gain or loss will
eventually be realised, but only once the asset is sold. Alternatively, the aircraft value
can be adjusted at the end of each reporting period, using the new rate of exchange.
Long-term debt associated with the acquisition of such aircraft, however, is usually
adjusted periodically for exchange rate changes.
British Airways (and many other airlines) generally translate foreign currency
balances into sterling (or their reporting currencies) at the rates of exchange ruling
at the balance sheet date. Changes in the sterling value of outstanding foreign
currency loans and finance leases used for the acquisition of aircraft and investments
are reflected in the cost of those assets. Profits and losses arising on translation are
normally dealt with through the profit and loss account, although some airlines make
adjustments solely on the balance sheet.
9.4 Airline Foreign Exchange Risk Management

Airlines will try to rcduce foreign exchange exposure, or the risk of loss, by matching
revenues and payments, as well as assets and liabilities, in each currency. This is
called a natural hedge. It may be possible to achieve this is some currencies, and,
where there is an imbalance, increase expenditure in the countries where excess
revenues are earned.
For example, British Airways earns a surplus in French francs, and reduces
this by buying wine and food in France for its in-flight catering. In some countries,
revenues cannot be remitted to the home currency and are effectively blocked in a
rapidly depreciating local currency. The advantages of adopting a similar strategy
here are clearly much more sizeable, but there is generally less scope for making
such purchases in these countries. The possibility of running sales conferences
there might not achieve the desired result if the local hotels insist on charging in
US dollars or another hard currency (as the airline would probably now be doing
for its own local sales). Sometimes, however, state owned airlines come to some
185
a) Do nothing; wait until delivery date and then buy the US$IOO million in the
spot market, at the then rate of exchange;
b) Hedge the risk ofan adverse movement in the $/ exchange rate by buying the
$100 million forward;
c) Hedge the risk of an adverse movement in the $/ exchange rate by buying
a call option to buy the US$100 million in one year's time at the current
forward rate;
or a combination ofthe above.
Do nothing (Strategy A)
The spot rate is the exchange rate at which dollars can be purchased with pounds
for immediate delivery. It changes continuously as a result of supply and demand.
Assume that it was $1.5205 to the at the time the contract was signed. In 12 months'
time, however, it could be lower, hence the exchange risk. On the other hand, if it
rose, then the aircraft's price would effectively be reduced.
186
Airline Finance
Hedge with forward Purchase (Strategy B)

The forward exchange rate is the rate at which pounds can be purchased with dollars
at a future date. Assume the 12 months' forward rate was $1.4905 at the time the
contract was signed. The airline could therefore purchase US dollars forward with
the local currency it would have available in 12 months' time. It would then do
nothing until the forward contraet due date (i.e., in 12 months) when it would buy
the $100 million with 67 million oflocal currency (i.e., the pounds converted at the
contract rate of $1.4905).
187
less than they ended up paying. Alternatively, a forward hedge for the full $500
million would have resulted in a total cost of DM1.6 billion, or DM225 million
more. It is, of course, easy to be wise after the event, and the subsequent summoning
of Lufthansa's chief executive to the Transport Minister lO was probably more of a
gesture to calm the political storm that had arisen than a reprimand.
110.0
100.0
Hedge with Call Option (Strategy C)
Hedge with forward

-Nol1edge
90.0
A call option is the right to buy a currency at some future date at an agreed rate of
exchange. This right must be purchased at a price which varies according to supply
and demand. Assume that a call option to buy US dollars in one year's time at the
current forward rate of 1 = $1.4905 costs 5.1 per cent of the US$ amount. This
option can either be exercised in one year's time, with the dollars purchased at the
forward rate ($1.4905) costing 67 million, plus the 5.1 per cent cost of the option.
Depending on how the spot rate actually moves over the year ahead, the option
might not be exercised, with the dollars instead bought at the spot rate ruling at the
time, plus 5.1 per cent, which is the cost of the option.
Figure 9.3 shows how the local currency cost of the remaining payment for
the aircraft will vary with the eventual spot rate in one year's time. It can be seen
that if the spot rate had turned out to be below 1.4905 (the original forward rate),
then alternative (b) of assuring in the cost of 67 million with a forward contract
would have been best. If the spot rate had turned out to be above 1.4905, then the
'do nothing' strategy (a) would have been best (i.e., dealing on the spot market at
the time of delivery). In retrospect, the option strategy is never the best strategy,
regardless of how the spot market actually moves over the year. The option is the
worst strategy if the spot rate moves very little, and better than the worst strategy if
rates move significantly up or down. The forward purchase is the least risky strategy,
locking in the cost of the aircraft in sterling at 67 million, but the aircraft might
have cost less if the rate had hardened.
An actual example of a hedging strategy which involved a combination of(a) and
above was provided by Lufthansa. In early 1985, the airline bought 20 Boeing
737-300 aircraft at a cost of$500 million to be paid in on delivery in a year's time.
The spot $IDM rate at the time was around DM3.20. The airline decided that a
decline in the dollar was imminent, but that they should hedge 50 per cent of the
cost with a forward contract, just in case the markets once again confounded the
forecasters. The forward exchange rate was DM3.20, thus locking in half the cost of
$250 million at DM800 million.
The dollar in fact rallied to about DM 3.45 before falling to DM 2.30 over the
next 12 months. The total cost of the aircraft in local currency was then the DM 800
million from the forward deal plus a further DM 575 million at the spot price of
DM 2.30, giving a total of DM 1.375 billion. In retrospect, the 'do nothing' strategy
on the full $500 million would have cost only DM1.l5 billion, or DM 225 million
0_" ~J:i~~~ ";th "l'tlon
,g"
60.0
e
<tI
70.0
60.0
-I , ,_. _ ~
50.0
.o.o+-----~--------------+_------------~------+_----~---1.6
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
u
1.1
Figure 9.3
__~------+_----~
1.8
1.9
2.0
Cost of bedging vs eventual spot rate
Perhaps a better way of looking at Lufthansa's dilemma would be to go back to

the fleet planning and NPV analysis that the airline would have undertaken before
confirming the order for the aircraft (see Section 8.3). This would have included
assumptions on the DM/$ exchange rate, and ought to have been tested against various
possible exchange rate outcomes. Because ofthe impact of any subsequent exchange
rate movements on both costs and revenues, it may not have been necessary to hedge
the purchase cost at all. However, the effect on the project NPV of alternative foreign
exchange strategies could have been tested against actual spot rate outcomes. These
strategies should also have included options, particularly in view of the volatility of
the exchange rate in question.
It should be concluded that dealing in the forward or options markets (also called
'derivatives') is a way of managing risk, but it does not remove it altogether. It is
rather the exchange of an unacceptable risk (i.e., that the aircraft end up costing
significantly more than planned for) for an acceptable risk (e.g., that other airlines
might acquire aircraft more cheaply). It could also be seen as the payment of a
premiUm to insure against the risk of a serious financial loss in the future.
10 Financial Times, 24 February 1986.
Airline Finance
In a 1992 survey of 23 major international airlines,1l it was found that 21 used

natural foreign currency hedges (matching foreign currency revenues with expenses),
while 17 airlines hedged with forward contracts. Eight airlines used options for
hedging, with only two of those trading in options. Only seven airlines borrowed in
currencies with operating revenue surpluses, the majority either borrowing in local
currencies or borrowing in US$ to finance US$ assets.
amounts, while only one US airline had introduced surcharges on international

flights by August 2004.
Airlines are exposed to unexpected movements in fuel prices in the same way as
they are for the price of foreign currencies. This is not strictly a financial risk, since
fuel is a commodity, similar to others used by airlines such food or maintenance
materials. The difference is the amount of fuel they require, and the fact that they
use the same type ofrefined crude oil product, jet Al kerosene, throughout the world
for their jet and turbo-prop operations. The fact that it is a commodity means that
airlines can avail themselves of similar derivative contracts that they do in the foreign
exchange markets, and it is for this reason that it has been included here.
188
9.5 Fuel Price Exposure

9.5.1
The Need and Means to Hedge Fuel
Airlines use three approaches in dealing with fuel prices. First, they try to increase
the fuel efficiency of their operations. Second, they try to pass cost increase on to
their customers as price increases or surcharges. And third, they hedge fuel costs
using physical or derivative markets.
Increasing fuel efficiency in the short-term relies on changing operating procedures
(e.g., cruise speed) or tankering policies. 12 Most of these are already exhausted, and
there are limits to how much can be achieved, given safety requirements. Replacing
existing aircraft with more fuel efficient ones can take place gradually. This has the
same effect as a permanent policy of hedging fuel, as it reduces profit volatility from
fuel price changes.
Airlines have passed fuel increases on to customers on the cargo side of the
business for many years. Lufthansa and others published an index offuel prices, the
trigger points, and the resulting surcharge amounts. FedEx does not hedge fuel at all
since it can rely largely on these surcharges.
On the passenger side, surcharges were rarer, but recently most of the major EU
and Asian airlines have done this with some success. On the other hand, US airlines
operating within the US seldom make such increases stick (ATA, 2004).13 Low
cost airlines there now account for near one-third of capacity, and the competitive
situation is more intense than in other parts of the world.
It is also the norm in many other industries to pass on increases in input prices
in the short term, while investing in more fuel-efficient systems in the longer term.
Table 9.6 shows that many European airlines differentiated their surcharges between
short and long-haul trips. Interestingly, KLM's approach was very different from
that of their new owner, Air France. In Asia, there was a larger variation in surcharge
Table 9.6
189
Fuel surcharges announced by major airlines in 2004
Air France
British Airways
BMI
KLM
Air New Zealand

All Nippon
Cathay Pacific
China Eastern
China Southern
Dragonair
Qantas
Singapore
Blue
5%
nla
7.00
7.00
5.38-6.92
7.11
4-7
7.11
'" converted at average exchange rates in August 2004

KPMG/IATA (1992), Accounting Policies, Disclosure and Financial Trends in the
International Airline Industry, KPMG, August. p. 24
2 Modern jet aircraft minimum cost speeds can be slightly higher than minimum fuel
burn speeds, because labour, maintenance, and ownership costs accrue with time. However,
the differences are small. Tankering fuel from low-cost to higher-cost airports costs fuel
bum, and can be reduced when costs are high everywhere. Again, tankering involves a small
fraction of most airline operations.
13 Air Transport Association of America (2004), ATA:~ Response in Unisys, R2A
Scorecard, 2, No. 11, September p. 5.
Airlines buy fuel at the major airports around the world from the major multinational
fuel companies or their subsidiaries. 14 These companies are responsible for fuel
storage and its delivery to the aircraft on the apron at the airport.
14 Very occasionally, airlines have jointly purchased and stored their own fuel at certain
airports to assure supply at a reasonable price.
Airline Finance
For short/medium haul flights, airlines do not always need to pick up fuel at the
destination airport, and at smaller airports it is sometimes not available. However,
if the fuel is cheaper at the destination, they may top up their tanks, and engage in
tankering fuel to reduce fuel costs.
The contracts with the major oil companies all include a clause which allows
them to adjust price in line with world market price movements. They also add a
handling charge to recover their costs of storage, tankering or hydrant installations,
and sometimes an airport concession fee. Thus, if world markets increase sharply,
as they did in 1999/2000 and again in 2005/2006, then airlines experience marked
upward pressures on costs, with little time lag after significant crude oil price
increases.
To hedge the risk ofthese strong upward pressures on fuel costs, which can easily
result in an operating profit becoming a loss, airlines have a number of derivatives
which they can buy, involving one of the following. Fuel price risk can be managed
in a three ways: forward contracts, futures contracts, and derivatives such as options,
collars, and swaps
Forward contracts are 'over the counter' agreements between two parties
whereby one purchases a fixed amount of fuel from the other at a fixed price at some
future date. Airlinc fuel suppliers such as Air BP enter into such agreements, but their
tailor-made nature is not a convenient instrument for third parties or speculators.
Parties also have full counter-party risk that is risk that the airline or the supplier
goes bankrupt before the deal is closed.
Futures contracts are better suited to both hedging and trading, since they are
usually set up through exchanges that set standard contracts and protcct against
counter-party risk. One party to the contract agrees to deliver to another a standardised
quantity of oil at an agreed price (the 'strike' price) on an agreed date in the future.
These are conventionally reversed on the due date, so no physical delivery takes
place. In fact, according to NYMEX, less than I per cent of trades result in the
delivery of the underlying commodity, in this case crude oil and related products.
The main exchanges offering oil futures contracts are the International Petroleum
Exchange (IPE) in London and NYMEX in New York. The former's futures are
in Brent crude oil, one eontraet being for 1,000 barrels. The quality of the oil is
assured, and contracts can be fixed for each month up to two years ahead, and then
half-yearly to three years out. The liquidity for contracts beyond one year forward
declines significantly and there is a Clearing House that guarantees the financial
performance of contracts with the help of margin requirements.
Derivatives consist of an option or a right to buy (or sell) a given amount of
fuel at a specific date at a stated 'strike' price. Strike prices are available spaced
both above and below current futures prices. The cost of an option is based on the
underlying futures, and if exercised (there no obligation to do so) will result in a
corresponding futures position. A call option (right to purchase) offers flexibility
over a future, because it gives the holder the possibility to protect against a price rise,
while at the same time giving the opportunity to participate in a decline. Options
(and swaps) can also be taken out with other parties (e.g., approved counter-parties
such as banks) in aviation fuel, in addition to crude oil. Jet fuel is rarely traded on
any exchanges and thus must be 'over the counter'. These involve counter-party risk
for both sides, and thus financially weak airlines find it hard to find others willing to
take this risk. IS Options are available in both Brent gas oil and crude at IPE.
More recently, airlines have moved toward using combinations of a call and a
put option called a 'collar'. The call protects the holder from price increases above a
strike price above the current future, at a cost of the option premium that must be paid
at the outset. The holder of this call also sells a put option that limits the advantage
it can take of price reductions below another strike price, below the current future.
The total cost of taking the two options is the call option premium paid less the put
option premium received. This is popular with airlines since it locks in the price that
will be paid for fuel between two known values. A collar limits the speculative risk
to a small range of price moves.
Swaps are tailor-made futures contracts whereby an airline locks in payments
at future dates based on current fuel or oil price. These could be arranged with a
supplier such as Air BP. The airline would buy a swap for a period of, say, one year
at a certain strike price for a specified amount ofjet fuel per month. The actual prices
for each month is then compared with the swap price, and if the price is higher the
counter-party would pay the airline the price difference times the amount of fuel.
However, if the prices were lower, then the airline would pay the difference. They
lock in a given price, as with forward contracts.
In summary, aviation fuel itself can only be hedged through over-the-counter
arrangements witi'!. the additional counter-party risk. Hedging oil on exchanges such
as NYMEX or SIMEX (that regulate standardised contraets) eliminates counter
party risk. These markets also are more liquid, and allow an airline to sell before
due date. For longer periods into the future only crude oil instruments have good
liquidity. Jet fuel contracts only have liquidity for shorter periods.
Hedging using jet kerosene clearly fully reflects price movements in the
commodity that the airline actually needs to operate its aircraft. I6Apart from a little
traded Japanese market, there are no exchange-traded futures available in aviation
although over-the-counter contracts can be arranged.
The most liquid market available for the most closely related product is crude
oil, with contracts available in both Brent and US WTI crude. No markets exist for
OPEC produced oil products, although the market prices for these track very closely
the above two supplies.
Aviation fuel prices have in the past tracked crude prices fairly closely, apart
from period of very steep increases in crude prices, for example at the beginning
of the 1970s, 1980s and 2000sY Thus, crude oil derivatives are seen by some as a
good proxy for fuel price movements. On the other hand, it is at times of instability
when crude is a less good hedge that airlines need hedging most.
190
191
15 Jet Fuel Intelligence (2005), New Asian Carriers View Hedging as two-Edged Sword,
Energy Intelligence, XV, No.6, February.
16 Leaving aside the aviation gasoline that airlines operating small piston-engined
aircraft require.
17 At these times, a sharp increase in the demand for jet aviation fuel by the military
tends to increase its price relative to crude.
Airline Finance
192
9.5.2 Airline Fuel Hedging Practice

Most major passenger airlines in the US, Europe, and Asia now hedge at least part
of their future fuel needs. State-owned airlines hedge when they are allowed to,
and they have a uniquely valid reason for doing so. Most newer carriers do not
hedge at first, because they are using their credit to finance high growth rates. The
oldest low-cost carrier, Southwest, has excellent credit and does hedge, although
Southwest also has ties to the Texas oil industry and local relationships may have
influenced this decision. A survey of treasurers from 25 of the world's largest airlines
in 1991 revealed that 13 engaged in fuel futures transactions, managing exposures
six months to two years years into the future (KPMGIIATA, 1992),18
Three ofthe eight largest US majors were not hedged for 2004, and one (American
Airlines) was only hedged for six months of that year.
Table 9.7
Percentage of 2004 fuel needs hedged at 31 December 2003:

US majors
Southwest
Delta
US Airways
American'
America West
Continental
Northwest
United
* Approximate average for whole year; 21 per cent hedged for first quarter
Source: Airline 10K reports for 2003
All the major European network airlines had hedged a significant part of their
2005/2006 fuel needs at the date of publication of their 2004 annual report. British
Airways were somewhat under-covered, but subsequently increased their hedging
activity (Table 9.8).
Less information was available from the annual reports ofAsian airlines. However,
in general, less hedging seems to have been undertaken by the still predominately
state owned airlines. Both Thai Airways and Malaysian reported an upper limit of 50
18 KPMG/lATA (1992) Accounting Policies, Disclosure and Financial Trendv in the
International Airline industry, KPMG, August,
193
per cent on the volume of expected fuel uplift that could be hedged, with All Nippon
also reporting an unspecified limit.
State-owned Air India gained permission to hedge in 2003. Since the state is not
a portfolio investor, reducing profit swings may be more justified for such owners.
Table 9.8
FY2004/2005 fuel needs bedged at YE2003/2004:
Largest non-US carriers
British Airways
(200312004)
KLM
(200312004)
Air France
(2003/2004)
Iberia
(2003)
Lufthansa
(2003)
Air New Zealand
(2003/2004 )
Cathay Pacific
(2003)
Singapore Airlines
(2003/2004)
Thai Airways
(2003/2004)
* average price locked into to hedge contracts (for Lufthansa on only 35 per cent of annual
needs); ** market value offuel hedge derivatives at financial year end
Source: Airline annual reports and websites.
Korean Airlines reported a gain of Won 282 million from a forward fuel contract
in FY2003, reducing their average fuel price paid by 34 per cent. Qantas offset 73
per cent of their 200312004 increased fuel price paid through various unspecified
hedging activities. Singapore Airlines were able to offset almost all the price element
of their 2002/2003 increase in fuel costs by hedging, and in the following financial
year a S$135 million fuel cost increase from higher prices was made S$I million
worse by hedging losses.
The major Chinese airlines (e.g., China Southern, China Eastern and Air China)
were (as of end 2004) obliged to purchase their domestic fuel needs from the state
194
Airline Finance
oil company at Chinese (PRe) spot prices. They were not permitted to hedge fuel (or
foreign exchange) price risks.
As discussed above, futures are used by some airlines, but the growing forms
of fuel price hedging are options, swaps and collars, with collars seen as being less
speculative. Crude and heating oil contracts are more widely used than jet kerosene,
since they can be traded on an exchange. Airlines rarely cover more than 18 months
to two years into the future, with most treasurers looking to cover a part of their
requirements over the next budget or financial year.
Many airlines are finding it increasingly difficult and expensive to access credit
for fuel hedging purposes. To alleviate this problem and to reduce the costs associated
with risk premiums, lATA is working with leading banks worldwide to use the lATA
Clearing House for the settlement of hedging transactions.
Chapter 10
Aircraft Leasing
A lease is a contract whereby the owner of an asset (the lessor) grants to another party
(the lessee) the exclusive right to the use of the asset for an agreed period, in return
for the periodic payment of rent. Leases may be for houses, offices, telephones, cars
trucks or computers. In this chapter, the focus will be on aircraft, although there is no
difference in principle with the arrangements for aircraft and any other asset.
Leasing should not be confused with hire purchase, which also features periodic
payments from the user to the owner of the asset. The key difference between the
two is that hire purchase agreements are essentially a deferred payment mechanism
for the user eventually to own the asset. This could be over a five-year period for a
fax or photocopy machine. Since the intention is to own the asset after a few years,
the tax benefits of ownership can be used by the asset operator from the outset. It is
this ownership feature that distinguishes hire purchase from leasing.
An aircraft lease is a contract between a lessor and a lessee such that the lessee:
Selects the aircraft specifications.
Makes specified payments to the lessor for an obligatory period.
Is granted exclusive use of the aircraft for that period.
Does not own the aircraft at any time during the lease term.
The lessor could be a bank or specialist leasing company, or it could be a company
set up by high tax-paying investors seeking capital allowances to offset against their
income, thereby reducing their tax payments. The lessee will normally be an airline.
The airline mayor may not have an option to acquire the leased aircraft, or share
in the proceeds from the sale of the aircraft at the end of the lease term. Certain
characteristics of a lease follow from these broad definitions:
The lessor cannot terminate the lease provided the lessee meets the conditions
specified.
The lessor is not responsible for the suitability of the aircraft to the lessee's
business.
The lease may be extended at the end of the obligatory period for a further
period.
The advantages of leasing to the airline are:

Volume discounts for aircraft purchase can be passed on to airline (particularly
attractive to smaller airlines).
The conservation of an airline's working capital and credit capacity.
The provision of up to 100 per cent of finance, with no deposits or pre
payments (up to 33 per cent of the cost of the aircraft paid in advance to
manufacturers, or 15 per cent of the cost required by banks to be paid by the
airline as a condition of loan finance).
Shifting the obsolescence risk of aircraft to lessor (shorter term leases).
No aircraft trading experience needed.

The possibility of excluding lease finance from the balance sheet (see
Appendix 2.2 at the end of Chapter 2 for more on this).
Possible disadvantages could be:
A higher cost than, say, debt finance for purchase.
The profit from eventual sale of the aircraft going to the lessor (as title holder).
Higher gearing than, say, purchase with equity finance.
Aircraft specification not tailor-made for lessee airline (short-term leases).
Table 10.1 gives the share of the total fleet acquired through finance or operating
leases for some of the largest world airlines. Data were not available for some of
the larger Asian airlines, and others did not break down finance leased aircraft.
Operating leases accounted for 35.3 per cent of the fleet for all regions combined,
with a slightly higher share for the North American airlines. Finance leases have
been popular in the US, but the European airlines find this an attrdCtive form of
finance, especially BA (mainly through Japanese Leveraged Leases) and Iberia.
Ofthe LCCs included in Table 10.1, easy Jet and Air Asia both make considerable
use of operating leases, and to a lesser extent JetBlue in the US. Of the network
carriers, Iberia also has a high share of its fleet on operating lease, as does Continental
in the US and Air New Zealand in the AsialPacific region.
Table 10.1
Leasing is clearly advantageous to manufacturers and lessors, since it increases
opportunities for business. The documentation for leasing is usually simpler than
debt or equity financing. The greatest disadvantage is the risk that insufficient care
will be taken of the equipment.
The fastest growth in leasing was during the 1980s, especially the second half.
In 1980, the share of commercial jets owned or managed by operating lessors was
around 4 per cent, climbing to almost 18 per cent in 1990, and to 28 per cent by
2004. 1 The number of airlines either leasing all or some oftheir fleet rose from 59 per
cent in 1986 to 85 per cent in 1999, and those with an all leased fleet fTom 46 airlines
(15 per cent) in 1986 to 278 airlines (40 per cent) in 1999 (Figure 10.1).
00,-----------------------------------------------------------------,
45+!--------------------------------------
40
35
fh
:!l30
1:'
-OJ
'025
E<D
l20
15
10
o
All owned
Soome:
G~
All leased
197
Aircraft Leasing
Airline Finance
196
Mixed ownership
Leased aircraft sbares by region for selected airlines
AMR (end 12/2005)

Delta (end 12/2005)
Continental (end 12/2005)
Northwest (end 12/2005)
United (end 12/2005)
Southwest (end 12/2005)
letBlue (end 12/2005)
Totallaverage US
Lufthansa (end 12/2005)
Air France-KLM (end 3/2006)
British Airways (end 3/2006)
Alitalia (end 12/2005)
Tberia (end 12/2005)
Easy.Tet (end 9/2005)
Ryanair (end 3/2005)
TotaVaverage Europe
Qantas (end 6/2005)
Air China (end 6/2004)
SIA Group (end 3/2006)
Cathay Pacific (end 12/2005)
Air New Zealand (end 612005)
Air Asia (end 2005)
AsialPacific
9.4
6.6
0.5
1.0
12.4
2.0
0.0
5.5
5.1
16.9
0.0
6.9
9.4
0.0
0.0
12.2
nla
36.8
4.2
56.3
nla
0.0
nla
Source: Airline annual reports
rtom Af(cla!ll1!j
Figure 10.1 Number of airlines owning and leasing aircraft

Source: GECAS, from Airclaims
Ashcroft, Robert (2005) A Powelful Force in Commercial Aviation, UBS Investment
Research Q-Series.
10.1
Finance Lease
Finance leases accounted for around 30 per cent of newer jet aircraft financing in
1997 for the world, and around one-half offinancing for North American airlines, but
has declined significantly since then due to the withdrawal of Japanese Leveraged
Airline Finance
Aircraft Leasing
Leases and the decline of US tax leases. A finance lease can be for between 10 and
26 years but more likely for a period of at least 10-12 years. It is non-cancellable,
or cancellable only with a major penalty. The lessor expects to gain a normal profit
on the asset from one airline through a combination of rentals, tax benefits and
conservative residual value assumptions, without being involved in, or necessarily
having an understanding of, the lessee's business. The lessee is likely to have a
purchase option at the end of the lease term, at fair market value, for a percentage of
the cost, or for a nominal (very low) price.
The normal risks and benefits of ownership are the responsibility of the lessee,
although they are not the legal owner of the aircraft at any time during the lease
period (title mayor may not be eventually transferred to the lessee). Because the
lease period is for the major part of the aircraft's life, finance leases are often called
full pay-out leases. It follows that the lessee is responsible for repairs, maintenance
and insurance of the aircraft, and that the risk of obsolescence lies with the lessee.
The lessor does not consider the residual value of the aircraft at the end of the lease
period important, and does not need to be technically knowledgeable about the
aircraft or airline business.
The lessor may demand that the lessee pay a specified number of rentals on the
first day of the lease payment, with a corresponding rental holiday at the end of the
lease term.
Four other conditions must be fulfilled: the aircraft must be new, the rental
payments must not vary over the lease term, the lease must not exceed 120 per cent
of the depreciation life, and the final payment from the lessee must not be greater
than 45 per cent of the original value of the aircraft.
In 1990, approximately US$9 billion, or about 20 per cent of the value of all
aircraft deliveries, was financed by JLLs. By 1992, this had halved to around
$4.5 billion. 3 In 1994, $4.9 billion was arranged, followed by $3.7 billion in 1995.
The largest equity providers and arrangers in 199511996 were Orix Aviation (I5.7
per cent of the total), NBB (10.8 per cent) and Fuji (10.3 per cent).4 The leading
JLL borrowers in 1995/1996 were All Nippon Airways ($652 million), BA ($411
million) and United ($403 million).
The attractiveness of this form of financing can be seen in the cost of borrowing:
the margin over LIBOR has ranged from a low ofjust under 30 basis points (0.3 per
cent) for British Airways in 1995 to 120 basis points for China Southern in 1993. s To
put this in perspective, the inter-bank rates for lending between major international
banks are around 22-23 basis points over LIBOR.
However, JLLs were not available to any airline. Japanese equity investors prefer
well-known airlines, preferably those with government guarantees or high credit
ratings such as British Airways, KLM or Lufthansa.
Unfortunately, at the end of the 1990s, JLLs were withdrawn, and an attractive
source of finance that was made considerable use of by airlines such as BA
disappeared. Japanese Operating Leases were then offered with similar, albeit not
so large, advantages, but these did not fill the gap le~ by JLLs. JLLs were originally
encouraged as a way of exporting the foreign currency generated by Japan's large
trade surpluses; these surpluses have recently disappeared, and so there was less
need to encourage these and other ways of capital exports.
198
10.1.1
Japanese Leveraged Leases
A leveraged lease is one where the aircraft is acquired using a large amount of debt
finance and a small amount of equity finance. Equity is normally between 20 and 40
per cent of the total value of the aircraft, resulting in high gearing and thus high risk
and potential reward for the equity investors. Equity investors are prepared to accept
this risk, often because they are able to capture significant tax benefits from having
title to the asset.
One form of leveraged lease is the Japanese Leveraged Lease (JLL). This
involves the establishment of a special purpose company to acquire the aircraft, with
between 20 per cent and 30 pcr cent of the finance coming from equity provided by
Japanese investors, and the remainder from a bank or group of banks. The equity
share must exceed 20 per cent to satisfY the Japanese tax authorities. 2 The aircraft
is acquired by an airline, immediately sold to the special purpose company, and
leased back under normal finance lease terms for 10 years (narrow bodied aircraft)
or 12 years (wide bodies). This approach permits the airline to claim tax allowances
from the tax authorities in its own country, and the Japanese investors also to claim
full tax allowances on the same asset. This is known as 'double dipping'. It clearly
gives substantial benefits to both lessee and lessor, and results in the airline having a
very attractive cost of finance. The discounted present value of the allowances could
amount to between 6-11 per cent of the cost of the aircraft.
2 One group of Japanese investors, who have in the past supplied such equity, has been
Petinko (Pinball) game operators, having few capital investments which can be used to reduce
their taxable profits.
10.1.2
199
US Leveraged Leases
Financial leases at favourable rates have also been available in other countries,
such as the US and in recent years Germany. US based leveraged leases provide
the maximum benefits for deals relating to aircraft based and registered in that
country. However, foreign airlines had been able to make use of the US Forei!:,'11
Sales Corporation (FSC) provisions, which were designed to foster exports of US
manufactured aircraft. Tax exemptions were available on foreign generated lease
income for FSCs, as long as the aircraft has at least a 50 per cent US content, and
at least 50 per cent of the flight miles operated by the aircraft are outside the USA.
FSCs were, however, quite costly in terms of documentation and administration,
and only high value aircraft, such as JAL's B747-400s, could support these costs.
Lease terms ranged between 10 and 20 years, with typical terms for aircraft leased
to non-US airlines of between 12 and 15 years. FSC's were subsequently outlawed,
following EU country claims to the World Trade Organization that they provided
3 Airfinance Journal (J 994), No. 160, p. 22.
4 AirjinanceJournal (1996). Where on Earth Is the Slump?, May.
5 AirfinanceJournal (1994), No. 160, pp. 26-27.
Airline Finance
200
unfair subsidies. However, they were soon replaced by a similar cross-border lease
structure, the Extra Territorial Income (ETI).
Before the development ofFSCs, US leases required a lessee to be placed between
the US lessor and the non-US lessee. This was necessary to avoid the provisions of
the 1984 Pickle Bill (named after its sponsor, a Texas congressman named Pickle),
which disallowed investment tax credits for property leased to non-US taxpayers.
These leases were called 'Pickle leases', but were not economically very attractive.
10.1.3
European Leveraged Leases
The German aircraft lease market increased rapidly over the three years to 1996 to
reach more than $1.5 billion. These leases have been similar in structure to JLLs,
and their growth has been dependent on the high marginal tax rates that also apply
in Japan. Air France, Cathay Pacific and Lufthansa were the three leading lessees in
1995/1996, and a high percentage ofleases involved Airbus aircraft (65 per cent).6
Of the other European aircraft finance lease markets, the next largest was the UK
with only around $0.5 million of aircraft financed a year.
10.1.4 Extendible Operating Leases

Finance leases, with walk-away options at various break-points, appear to be more
like operating leases (see below), but the intention of both lessor and lessee is
generally to payoff the full cost of the aircraft. An example of this was British
Airways' extendible operating leases on their Boeing 767s, where the airline could
walk away at no cost after 5, 7, 9, 11, and 13-year breakpoints. Manufacturer's
guarantees were used to underwrite the aircraft values at each breakpoint.
A slightly different example was United Airlines' lease of 29 A320-200 aircraft
from Airbus. These are on 22- to 24-year operating leases, which are cancellable on
II months' notice during the initial! 0 years of the lease period. As operating leases,
these are not placed on United's balance sheet. United also benefits from the early
termination option in the assessment of the airline by the ratings agencies (e.g., S&P
and Moody).
10.2 Operating Lease

Although the dividing line between finance and operating leases has recently become
more blurred, but the key features of an operating lease are:
It allows airlines to respond rapidly to changes in market conditions.
It is of shorter term, usually between one and seven years, or an average of
five years, and ean be returned to the lessor at relatively short notice and
without major penalty.
The lessee cannot choose the aircraft specification (except for good customer
first user of aircraft).
Airftnance Journal, (May 1996), pp. 31-32.
Aircraft Leasing
201
An airline gains the use of an aircraft without the obligation to payoff its full
cost.
The lessor expects to profit from either selling or re-Ieasing the aircraft.
The lessee is usually responsible for the maintenance of the aircraft but often
has to pay to the lessor a maintenance reserve.
The aircraft's residual value is important to the lessor, and is a key factor in
determining the lease rentals that can be offered. The cost ofre-marketing or placing
the aircraft with another lessor also needs to be considered in rate negotiations, given
that aircraft may be placed with at least three different operators over their lifetime.
Operating lease rentals vary quite significantly over the economic cycle, with lessors
often accepting a short-term drop in monthly rentals to avoid re-marketing or even
parking aircraft.
Operating leases may have a purchase option for the lessee to buy the aircraft at
the end of the lease tenn, sometimes at a fair market value and sometimes at a stated
price. There will almost definitely be an option for the lessee to extend the lease for
a further two to four period.
The lessor assumes the risks of aircraft obsolescence and needs to know the
aircraft and airline business (and ensure that maintenance and overhaul is carried
out to high standards). There are specialist asset management firms that take care
of the technical management of operating leases for the aircraft owners. They can
also deal with the commercial side of the business (rent collection, contracts, etc.)
as well as re-marketing, repossession, placing and sales. Examples of such firms are
Airstream International, ALM, Fortis, Babcock and Brown and Pembroke Capital.
The last two jointly manage the ALPs securitisation portfolio of aircraft described
in the next chapter.? With the increasing trend towards the separation of ownership
and operation of aircraft, firms like these have an assured future. The lease rental in
the example in Table 10.2 was largely fixed. An alternative might assume an initial
monthly rental of $300,000 based on the six-month US dollar LIBOR of, say, 6 per
cent. This rental would be adjusted up or down every six months, depending on
LIBOR on the revision date.
The return condition of the aircraft is very important to an operating lessor,
since they will wish to place it with another operator with the minimum of delay.
For example, if an aircraft had been delivered to an airline fresh from its 'c'
check (an intennediate maintenance check on an airframe that is required every
3,500-4,500 hours of operation), the lessee would be expected to return it in a
similar condition at the end of the lease tenn. A fund, or maintenance reserve, is
usually established for the major overhauls (or 'D' checks), which the lessee will
contribute to, and out of which any such work that needs to be performed will be
paid. For better risk airlines, this would be dealt with at the end of the lease term.
Aircraft Economics, No. 28, NovemberfDecember 1996.
Airline Finance
202
Table 10.2
Typical operating lease terms
Aircraft type:
2 used Airbus A320-200 aircraft, each with IAE V2500-Al

engines
Delivery date:
April 1996
Lease tenn:
Three years from delivery date
Lease rental:
Payable monthly in advance to a bank account nominated

by the Lessor, in accordance with the following schedule:
Months }-9
US$300,000; fixed
Months 10-12
US$I,OOO per block hour
Months 13-24
US$350,000; fixed
Months 25-36
US$400,000; fixed
Security deposit:
US$900,000 per aircraft
Maintenance reserves: On the 10th day of each month, the Lessee shall pay a
Maintenance reserve in respect of the hours operated
during the previous month.
Airframe:
US$125.00 per block hour
Engines:
US$150.00 per engine, per block hour
APU:
US$30.00 per block hour
Landing gear:
US$1O.00 per block hour
Delivery condition:
On delivery, the aircraft shall confonn to the following

conditions:
Configuration: 180Y Galleys: Oland 05
Toilets:
LA,LEandLD
Engines:
Approx. 6,500 hours and 3,250 cycles
Airframe:
Approx. 6,500 hours and 3,250 cycles
IFE:
Lessor shall install at its own expense a
Sony Transcom IFE system. Lessee shall
pay lessor additional monthly rental
equivalent to 1.5 per cent of the total
installed cost of such system.
The lessee will have to comp ly with any airworthiness directives and service bulletins
that are issued by the regulatory authorities or manufacturers. These will usually
require a hangar inspection and sometimes modification of airframe or components.
Since such work adds value to the aircraft, the cost is often shared between the two
parties, sometimes once a certain threshold has been reached.
Other contract conditions required by the lessor will be a security deposit, which
will depend on the creditworthiness ofthe lessee, and could amount to 1-2 months'
worth of rentals. If the lease tenns are complied with, then this money will be
returned in full. Interest on the deposit (and the maintenance reserve) is subject to
negotiation, and may be applied as part of the rental payment. Approval would be
required for sub-leasing the aircraft, and the use and installation of other equipment
Aircraft Leasing
203
on the aircraft. s The tenns of the aircraft hull insurance would also be reviewed by
the lessor
Operating lessors have usually signcd contracts for most of the aircraft that they
will take delivery of over the next two years, but after that the orders are more
speculative. For example, in March 2000, ILFC had contracts for the lease of all
of its 67 aircraft to be delivered in 200 I, 62 out of the 66 aircraft arriving in 2002,
25 out of the 68 aircraft expected in 2003, 5 out of 67 in 2004, and four out of the
remaining 220 deliveries. 9
Many airlines in Russia and the CIS countries have had to rely on operating
leases to obtain western aircraft, due to the problems with export credits and debt
finance. Few of these countries have the aircraft registers, legal and accounting
systems which satisfy western lenders. Even operating leases run into problems:
ILFC leased a B757-200 to Baikal Airlines in June 1994 for a five-year tenn, but
the aircraft was returned to the lessor in summer 1996 because of the government's
insistence that $16 million were paid in backdated import tax. 10
Start-up airlines in both the US and Europe also tend to take aircraft on operating
lease: the Colorado based airline, Western Pacific Airlines, obtained its first 12 B737
300s on five- to ten-year operating lease, while the UK start-up Debonair leased their
seven BAe l46s from US Air Leasing for a short initial16-month period, with power
by the hour maintenance on airframe and engines. II More recently, both easyJet and
Air Asia both expanded rapidly using operating leases.
10.3 Japanese Operating Lease (JOL)

Japanese Operating Leases (JOL) elIective took over from the Japanese Leveraged
Leases (JLL) that were discontinued at the end of the 1990s (see 10.1 above). The
starting point for both is the demand from Japanese investors for tax benefits from
capital investments, the aircraft providing a convenient vehicle. The first crucial
difference between the two is that the aircraft is placed with the airline on an
operating and not a finance lease, with a maximum tenn of 10 years for narrow
bodied and 12 years for wide bodied aircraft. The second that stems from the first
is that tax benefits are only available in Japan and not to the aircraft operator (apart
from the rentals). However, the Japanese investors obtain generous tax write-offs
such that an attractive lease rental is possible (although not as attractive as for the
JLL). JOLs took off in 2001, and were running at around US$2-3 billion a year for
the next five years, with a range of operators benefiting from them (both network
carriers and smaller LCCs).
As with the JLLs, it seemed possible by the end of 2005 that the Japanese
pennissive treatment of JOLs might be tenninated, as occurred with JLLs in 1999.
8 Margo. R. (1996) Aircraft leasing: the airline's objectives, Air and Space Law, Vol.
XXI. No. 4/5.
9 International Lease Finance Corporation, SEC, Form lO-Kfilingfi}r fiscal year ended
December 31, 2000.
10 Aiifinance Journal, November (1996).
11 Aiifinance Journal, November (1996).
Airline Finance
204
10.4 Wet Lease

A wet lease is the leasing of an aircraft complete with cockpit and cabin crew, and
other technical support. The lessor is usually responsible for maintenance and hull
insurance. This type of lease is generally for a very short period, say for operations
over a number of months or summer season. Haj pilgrimage flights are often operated
on this basis. The aircraft retains the paint scheme and logo of the lessor, although
a temporary sticker can be used to show the lessee's name on the fuselage. A wet
lease is often described as an ACMI lease (i.e., an aircraft, crew, maintenance and
insurance lease), although in this case the aircraft is generally considered to be an
integral part of the lessee's fleet.
Quite often the lessor will provide only the aircraft and some of the operational
support services. For example, the lessee may wish to use their own cabin crew
because of language requirements. This can be described as a 'damp lease,' the name
given to a lease that falls between a dry lease and a wet lease.
A wet lease has many similarities with the chartering of an aircraft, the key
difference being the fact that the lessee would have the necessary operating licenses
and permits, and operate flights with the wet leased aircraft under its own flight
designator. '2 A chartered aircraft would operate under the designator of the owner/
operator or the aircraft.
Since 1990 a number of wet leasing specialists have established themselves,
notably Atlas Air (which spent six months in Chapter 11 in 2004 following the post
9/11 downturn) and Gemini in the US and Air Atlanta Icelandic. These generally
operate freighter aircraft and try to negotiate two- to three-year contracts, although
two to 12 months is the norm, possibly because of opposition from regulatory
authorities to longer wet lease contracts with foreign registered aircraft. 13 The longer
term contract is likely to include painting the aircraft in the lessee's livery (e.g., Atlas
Air's lease to British Airways World Cargo), and the agreement is based on a price
per block hour operated with a minimum number of hours charged. 14
10.5 Sale and Leaseback

Sales and leaseback occurs when airlines which own aircraft often decide to realise
the capital value of the aircraft, but at the same time continue to operate them. This
may be because they have cash flow problems, but it may also be for the following
reasons:
To meet capital requirements for new aircraft or investments.
To realise the current value of an aircraft that is likely to be retired in a few
years' time, especially when the market price of the aircraft will probably
decline significantly over that period.
12 This is important for the lessor, since the owner of the flight code (lessee) is invoiced
for charges such as airport and en-route.
13 The UK eAA required Atlas Air to lease their B747 freighter aircraft to BA through a
majority UK owned company, Global Supply Systems.
14 Endres, G. (2006) Surrogate supply, Airline Business. July.
Aircraft LeaSing
205
The typical duration for such deals is three to five years. The other party involved
(the lessor) is likely to be a bank, which will structure the lease to gain tax benefits.
The risk to the bank is relatively low, first because the term is short and second
because the lessee will probably be a good credit risk airline, perhaps one that is
already well known to the bank.
In 1990, British Airways sold 20 B737-200s at what in retrospect was a very
advantageous price ($6-7 million more per aircraft than the market value six years
later) and leased them back. Ten of the same aircraft type were sold and leased back
for six years by Varig, and 11 by Canadian International for five and a half years.
206
Airline Finance
Appendix 10.1
Aircraft Leasing
Lease Rental Calculations
Appendix 10.2
The formula for calculating lease rentals varies according to whether the payment is
in advance or arrears, although the structure is similar to the one for term loans:
Periodic rental payment = PV ..;- a
where: PV
the present value, or equipment cost

the rental factor, which for payments in arrears is:
l-(l+i)
-n
And for payments in advance:
a =
where: x
n
l-(l+i) -(n-x)
number of rentals payable in advance

number of payments in lease term
interest rate per period
207
Lease vs Buy Decision
Major considerations in the choice of financing for the acquisition of an aircraft are
the cost, taxation issues, and flexibility. Ifthe purchase option is selected, then a term
loan is generally the instrument used by the majority of airlines outside the US. The
Eurobond market can be cheaper than a term loan, but is only available to household
names of high credit rating. US public bond markets are accessed by US carriers,
with high risk, low credit rating airlines issuing high interest bonds to investors (also
called junk bonds).
For term loans, in addition to the interest charges, the airline must also pay the
bank for the preparation of the loan documents and commitment fees. Underwriting
fees are also payable for bond issues.
Equity finance may be considered, either to expand the capital base of an airline
in line with increased turnover, or when other avenues are not available, for example
when the level of gearing is already too high to obtain loan finance at reasonable
cost. Equity finance may be raised through a private transaction, i.e., when a 100 per
cent government owner subscribes more capital. This may be less expensive than a
public offer of shares which may subsequently be quoted on a stock market.
Leasing, whether for short or longer periods is becoming increasingly popular,
not always where an airline has no other sources of finance available.
Whether an airline leases or purchases outright an aircraft an evaluation will be
made of the expected return from the investment, from projections of revenues and
costs. Ifthe results are positive, then alternative methods offinance will be considered
by calculating the net present value of the financing costs for each option:
Assuming the Equipment Cost (PV) is $10 million

Calculate the NPV of the lease alternative.
Calculate the NPV of the buy alternative.
Choose the alternative with the lowest NPV cost.
Lease term = 10 years, or n = 120

Lease or interest rate = 12.5 per cent, or i = 12.5
(12 x 100)
Simplified example:
The rental factor (a) for payment in arrears is:
1-(1+0.010417)
0.010417
120
Thus, the Monthly Rental Amount = $10,000,000
68.317
$68.317 = $146,376
Using the formula for payments in advance (x = I) gives a monthly rental of

$144,867.
Aircraft cost:
Acquisition date:
Remaining asset life:
Lease terms:
Airline bank borrowing rate:
Airline financial year end:
Airline Pays no Corporation Tax
'Buy alternative' financing:
US$ I 0,000,000
31 December 2000
5 years
US$ 2.8 million per annum in arrears
13 per cent per annum
31 December
100 per cent from retained earnings
From the table below it can be seen that the airline would be marginally better
off by leasing than buying. The actual calculation would be much more complex,
and would include taxation issues, purchase progress payments, commitment fees,
residual values, etc.
Aircraft Leasing
Airline Finance
208
Date
3]112/200]
3111212002
31112/2003
31113/2004
31112/2005
Aggregate present value of rentals
31Jl212001
31112/2002
3111212003
31/12/2004
Aircraft purchase price

Difference
Tax paying lessee
An evaluation for a tax paying lessee must take into account the delay between the
payment ofinterest or rental and the cash benefit oftax relief. The following formula
derives an acceptable approximation (for small values of n) for thc after tax discount
rate from the pre-tax rate:
R2
where:
Rl"'T_
R]- (l +R]*T)"
Lessee's pre-tax borrowing rate (13 per cent)
R2
Lessee's after tax rate
T
n
Rate of corporation tax (35 per cent)
Delay oftax payment in years
Assuming the average tax delay is 18 months from the mid-point of the year, R2
is calculated from the above formula to be 8.74 per cent. The tax credit has been
determined by assuming that the asset could be written off over four years, with
the airline paying corporation tax at 35 per cent. The discount factor in the NPV
calculation is shown on the opposite page.
Thus, the difference in the present values of the buy and lease alternative in thc
table below show the former to be more costly by $289,265. With accelerated tax
allowances, purchasing the aircraft would become the cheaper option.
These examples have shown how increasing complexity can be introduced into
the evaluation. On the purchase side, advance payments to manufacturers would also
need to be introduced, as well as alternative financing options (see Appendix 5.1 for
term loan calculations). This would require a breakdown of the annual periods into
quarters or even months, and the use of computerised spreadsheets.
3 III 2/2001
31112/2002
31112/2003
31112/2005
209
Chapter] ]
Aircraft Securitisation
Securitisation, which started in the US in the mid-1970s, is the conversion of

identifiable and predictable cash flows into securities. The advantages of this to
lenders are:
Risk is spread over a number oflenders.

Risk may be spread over a number of world regions.
Greater size reduces costs of administration.
The loan or asset is removed from the balance sheet.
For the borrower, the cost of finance would be significantly lower than would
otherwise be the case.
Securitisation involves the re-packaging of cash flows or receivables into
securities which are then sold to investors. This is often done in different tranches,
each tranche having different rights and risks attached. Higher credit ratings,
and thus lower borrowing costs, can be achieved than would be possible for the
separate parties involved in each lease or mortgage. Ratings are given to each of
the securities by agencies such as Standard & Poor's or Moody, thereby making
them more saleable to institutions. The cash flows could be short-term, for example
with the sale of accounts receivables from travel agents, or on credit cards. They
could be medium-term, with the sale of five- to ten-year aircraft operating lease or
vehicle loan receivables. Or they could be long-term, with the sale ofhome mortgage
receivables of loan principal and interest.
In the case ofhouse mortgages, the loan portfolio is sold to a third party company
by the bank that originally provided the finance. This bank would continue to earn
fees from the management ofthe portfolio, and the loans would be removed from the
balance sheet to allow it to expand its business.
There has, however, been some debate about whether securitised assets should
be removed from the balance sheet, even though substantially all of the risks and
rewards of owning the assets has been transferred (sold) to another company. A
London law finn, Freshfields, described sccuritisation as:
The packaging of assets, backed by appropriate credit enbancement and liquidity support,
into a tradable form through an issue of highly rated securities, which are secured on the
assets and serviced from the cash flows which they yield.
Vercbere, I. (1994) The Air Transport Industry in Crisis, EIU, p. 119.
Airline Finance
Aircraft finance ranges from the traditional structures which rely on airline
credit to those which rely on aircraft value. As one goes from left to right along the
spectrum shown in Figure 11.1, the financing is less related to the airline's corporate
credit rating and more to the aircraft asset risk. On the far right, the securitisations
are not linked at all to an airline's credit rating. 2
The EETC was developed in the US in the 1990s as a means tor non-investment
grade airlines to source funds using investment gradc ratings, with the added
advantage of giving more protection to the owner of the aircraft in the event of
Chapter II bankruptcy.
An example of an EETC was the refinancing of 13 A320s operated by Northwest
Airlines, and originally financed by Airbus. This involved the sale by a trustee
of $352m of notes of four classes, with the highest class rated A by Standard &
Poor's. The notes are secured by the 13 aircraft, which are leased back from the
trust/partnership by Northwest. 3
More recently, American Airlines refinanced its acquisition of TWA with a
.3 billion EETC. This offered five classes of securities or notes, with the A class
rated AAA and A2 by S&P and Moody respectively. The initial loan to value ratio for
the top class was 41 per cent, giving a large cushion in case the underlying aircraft
needed to be sold in a weak market. The lowest class, the D notes, were rated BBB!
Baa2, and had a loan to value ratio of 66.5 per cent. Maturities of the notes ranged
from seven to 20 years, and the coupons (interest rates) ranged from 142 basis points
(1.42 per cent) over prime rate to 270 basis points. The collateral was 32 MD-lls, 10
B737-800s and four B777s, all belonging to TWA.4
Outside the US, EETCs are still rare, with only Qantas and Iberia using them
by the middle of 200 I, the latter denominated in euros. Iberia later issued Iberbond,
2004, a complex deal that combined an EETC structure with Japanese Operating
Leases. It was secured against 20 A319!A320!A321 aircraft valued at US$933
million, and the debt was denominated in a mixture of US dollars and Euros.
212
Reliance onl
airline credit
Traditional aircraft
financings
Single model
enhanced ETC
Diversified model
enhanced ETC
Small portfolio
SecuritisaUons
IReliance
on
aircraft value
ALPS
Airplanes
Figure 11.1 Aircraft financing spectrum

Source: Standard and Poor's
The remainder of this chapter will describe the securitisation of aircraft and similar
financing structures, which has important implications for the long-tenn financing of
the industry. They also provided one of the means for Guinness Peat Aviation (GPA)
to recover from near bankruptcy (see 5.3.3).
11.1
Equipment Trust Certificates
The Equipment Trust Certificate (ETC) is often described as a securitisation.

However, the ETC is created more for tax reasons than for the spreading of risk and
lowering borrowing costs. It would typically include only one or two aircraft.
A trustee issues equipment trust certificates to investors, and uses the funds raised
to buy the aircraft, which is then leased to the airline which ordered it. It is, however,
a fonn of securcd debt financing, and not a true leasc since the aircraft is ultimately
owned by the airline. It would provide protection from airline bankruptcy in the
same way as securitisation, but so would secured debt finance.
The certificates can generally be sold to institutions at a slightly higher rating
than that of the airline. They often have the added attraction of being tradable.
A modified version of the, ETC is the Enhanced Equipment Trust Certificate
(EETC), which looks more like the aircraft securitisations described below, and is
further to the right in tenns of relying more on asset risk in Figure ILL Rather
than selling one type of certificate or bond, the EETC divides these into different
categories, each of which has a different risk/reward profile in terms of security and
access to lease rental cash flows. A structure of this type will give the senior (lower
risk) certificates a much higher credit rating than under the, ETC. But the essential
difference of aircraft ownership between EETC and securitisation still remains, the
latter spreading the risk over more than one airline.
2 Standard & Poor's, (2001), Aircraft Securitization Criteria, www.standardandpoors.

com/ratings, pp. 3-4.
213

The first international securitisation ofaircraft was offered by Guinness Peat Aviation
(GPA) in mid-l 992, with the help ofCiticorp Investment Bank and Lehman Brothers
International. A total of 14 aircraft valued at US$380 million were leased to the
the various airlines at the time of launch of ALPS 92-1, with their share of aircraft
appraisal value indicated in brackets as seen in Table 11.1. 5
The North and Central America regional share of aircraft value was 28.5 per
cent, the European share 42.2 per cent and the Asian share 29,4 per cent. All except
Malev and China Southern are now majority o'Mled by private interests, although
BWIA, Air Jamaica and Philippine Airlines were government controlled at the time
of the issue.
The portfolio of aircraft consisted of six B737s (various series), one B757, one
B767ER, one B747, 2 MD-82!83, one A300, one A320 and one Fokker 100. This
gave a spread of manufacturers and sizes, but not of range capability (only two long
haul aircraft).
3 Transport Finance (13 January 1995).
4 Aj,:finance Journal (June 2001), 18.
5 Radley, A.B. (l994), Future Strategies in Aircraft Leasing, MSc Thesis, Cranfield
University, September.
Airline Finance
214
The assets were sold to a Jersey-based special purpose company, which was
financed by equity and $380 million worth ofbonds (the senior debt portion ofwhich
was rated AA by Standard and Poor) to be repaid from the cash flows generated
from the lease payments, plus the proceeds of any subsequent sales of aircraft in the
portfolio. Equity investors would get 10-12 per cent semi-annual dividends, plus
a share in any residual value of the aircraft at maturity. Investors in the company
were various European financial institutions, principally banks (39 per cent), fund
managers (32 per cent) and insurance companies (16 per cent).
Table 11.1
ALPS 92-1 aircraft portfolio
215
B.3 ALPS 94-1 Securitisation

OPA's second aircraft securitisation in 1994 packaged 18 aircraft valued at US$980
million. Aircraft included in the portfolio had a low average age, and the success of
the sale was helped by the upturn in aircraft values and lease rates, although some
concern was expressed by potential investors that any forced sale of a number of
aircraft at the next downturn might result in low values and losses.
The special purpose company was given more flexibility than under the terms of
ALPS 92-1 in selling aircraft to pay down the debt. Aircraft were also required to
be sold, once their lease term had expired. If any lessee defaulted, then a new lease
and aircraft should be substituted in the portfolio from a designated back-up pool of
aircraft.
North America:
11.4 Airplanes 96 Securitisation
Caribbean:
Latin America:
Europe:
Asia:
Table 11.2
ALPS 92-1 bond amounts and interest rates
Subclass A-I Certificates

Subclass A-2 Certificates
6 million
The main purpose of the Airplanes securitisation in early 1996 was to further
downsize GPA and remove just over $4 billion in debt off its balance sheet. The
number of aircraft remaining under GPA ownership was reduced by 229 aircraft to
129 (down from its high of380 in 1993). This left GPA with around $1 billion in
debt, secured on individual aircraft in their fleet.
This securitisation dwarfed previous ones in sheer size. The portfolio of 229
aircraft were placed with 83 lessees. The $4 billion in bonds were successfully
placed on the market by emphasising the growing attraction of operating leases to
both large and small airlines, the spread of risk across regions (see Table 11.3), and
the involvement of GE in the management of the leases. Investors would also be
totally insulated from any further problems that might be faced by GPA. Morgan
Stanley was the bank responsible for selling the bonds, in return for which they
earned $20 million in fees (or 0.5 per cent of the total value).
LTBOR + 0.8%
3 million
LlBOR + 0.7%
Class M Certificates
Table 11.3
Airplanes securitisation - Aircraft numbers and values
6 million
% of total value
LIBOR + 6.1%
Class B Certificates
12.00%
Total
Source: ALPS 92-1 Offering Circular
OPA was appointed to provide administrative and management services to the

company for a fee of 0.15 per cent of the initial purchase price of the aircraft.
They would also provide support in the form of re-marketing and re-leasing the
aircraft.
Africa
Asia
Australia
0.7
15.0
0.3
Europe
34.4
North America
17.3
Latin America
28.4
Other
1.1
Off-lease
2.8
Source: Airfinance Journal, July!August 1996
Airline Finance
One concern of potential investors in the bonds was the numbers of aircraft involved
and the possible affect on aircraft prices, at for example the bottom of the next
recession, if even 10 per cent of the total portfolio were offered for sale as a result
of a lessee bankruptcy. This was addressed by a greater emphasis of the cash flows
from the lease rentals as opposed to the security from aircraft residual values.
As with previous securitisations, efforts were made to give a spread of both
regions of operation and of aircraft types. As with ALPS 92-1, the senior bonds
were rated AA by Standard & Poor's, ensuring their acceptance by institutional
investors.
The new appraised value of the 14 aircraft was $455 million, compared to the
$522 million value under ALPS 92-1. Aircraft like the Airbus A300B4 had seen their
value fall from $31 million in 1992 to only $13 million in 1996. The B767-300ER
leased to Spanair, however, only declined from $78 million in 1992 to $68 million
in 1996.
216
Table 11.4
Airplanes securitisation - Bond amounts and interest rates

Interest Rate
Subclass A-I Certificates

Class B Certificates
Class C Certificates
Class D Certificates
LIBOR +0.25%
LIBOR +0.32%
LIBOR +0.47%
LIBOR +0.62%
LIBOR +0.35%
LIBOR+l.l%
8.15%
10.88%
Source: Airfinance Journal, July/August 1996

ALPS 96-1 was the refinancing of the original ALPS 92-1 securitisation which
resulted in the withdrawal of GPA and GECAS. GPA was repaid its share of the
class M bonds. Babcock and Brown took over as the managers of the portfolio from
GPA.6
Only one of the original 14 aircraft was replaced:? the B737-300 originally
leased to the Turkish carrier, Sun Express, was sold for US$25 million at a book loss
0[$1.6 million. This aircraft was replaced by a B767 -300ER belonging to Whirlpool
Financial Corporation, which had recently come off lease. Otherwise all the original
lessees were unchanged with the exception of an MD 82 which was now leased
to TWA (replacing Korean Air) and a B757-200 now with Transwede (replacing
TAESA).
6 Airfinance Journal, (July/August 1996), pp. 20--21.
7 OPA did have problems with a number ofother leases, for example in connection with
eight DC9s to a Mexican carrier and a number ofleases with the Brazilian airline, VASP, but
these were not in the portfolio.
217
11.6 More Recent Securitisations (2005/2006)

The first securitisation since 2003 was offered by AerCap (previously debisdebis
Airfinance) in September 2005 for US$942 million. This was followed at the end
of 2006 by Aviation Capital Group which securitised leases on 74 aircraft to finance
its purchase of operating lessor, Boullioun. The ACG Trust III deal raised US$1.86
billion, by issuing a triple A rated G-l tranche ($1.62 billion), an A-rated E-l tranche
($117.5 million) and a tranche ($122.5 million) rated at BBB (non investment
grade). Most of the aircraft portfolio consisted of newer narrow bodied aircraft, with
over 50 per cent B737-800s and A320-200s, and an overall average age of only
4.8 years. s
Aircastle, a fast growing operating lessor, securitised leases valued at US$560
million in June 2006, in addition to their IPO which raised $194 million to repay
debt.
11.7 Conclusions
Securitisation has not been widely used since its establishment at the beginning
of the 1990s. If were solely a device for GPA to avoid bankruptcy, then the next
major economic downturn may see another impetus to its use. Its future will also
clearly depend on future trends in operating leases: will they continue to increase
in importance, particularly in areas like Asia, where they have not to date been
so popular? This is part of the larger question of the separation of ownership
and operation of assets. Next is the question of accounting practice, and whether
securitised assets will be removed from balance sheets.
The advantages are persuasive, and centre on the reduced cost of borrowing for
airlines: before the ALPS 92-192-1 securitisation, banks had lent GPA 75 per cent
of the value of its leases at LIBOR plus 2 per cent. When the leases were securitised,
the special purpose company could borrow 87 per cent oftheir value at LIB OR plus
1.4 per cent. 9
Possible disadvantages of securitisation are a weakening of the relationship
between the lessee and the lessor, as well as the additional workload imposed on the
airline as a result of the increased number of parties involved. Second, it might be
argued that the contracting out of the monitoring and technical administration tasks
to specialist finns might prove to be less thorough than when they were perfonned
by the operating lessors themselves.
8 Aiifinance Journal, February (2006).
9 Financial TImes, Supplement on International Capital Markets, (10 June 1996).
218
Airline Finance
Chapter 12
EETCs, as an alternative fonn of securitisation not involving operating lessors,

look Iikcly to become popular outside the US, and ifthey took off in other parts ofthe
world they could provide a replacement to JLLs and other taxed based financing.
Airline Bankruptcy
The tenn 'bankruptcy' is often limited to personal insolvency, but has become widely
used in relation to business failures. Insolvency is the inability of a company to meet
its debts as they become due. Creditors may give the company more time to pay,
but eventually they may force the company to liquidate what assets it can to meet
its debts. This process of liquidation is normally also referred to as bankruptcy. It
may be forced by outside creditors, or it may be a voluntary liquidation suggested by
directors and agreed by shareholders. The company may cease trading or operating
at this point, or it may continue trading while it is re-structured and measures
introduced to return at least part of the company to profitability.
Airline bankruptcy, or the risk of bankruptcy, has become more likely with
increasing airline privatisation. While government-owned airlines do not generally
go bankrupt, cven larger privately owned ones do, as was the case with Sabena once
it had moved to the private sector. Terrorist and health scares add further instability to
an industry that is in any case very cyclical. The airline industry is also characterised
by high operational and financial gearing (see Chapter 3). This leads to severe cash
shortfalls during periods of unanticipated, sometimes prolonged downturns.
Bankruptcy or the liquidation of an airline clearly involves laying off staff and
the stranding of passengers who have completed only one leg of a multi-sector trip.
Thus, many countries have legislation to try to re-organise the company, and to
continue its operation while this process is undertaken.
It is important to note that most of an airline's assets will probably already be
mortgaged or used for security for loans at the time it is close to bankruptcy. This
will reduce the possibility of selling assets to raise cash to keep going. Pan American
managed to defcr bankruptcy by selling off assets such as its New York City tower
block offices and route rights, but this was an exception.
The second point is that most of an airline's assets are aircraft, and the owners
of these aircraft (lessors) or secured creditors probably prefer to keep those aircraft
flying and earning some revenue, rather than to have to re-possess them and try to
sell them in a very weak market (a 'fire' or 'distress sale').
The number of privately owned airlines that are susceptible to bankruptcy varies
widely throughout the world, with the majority experienced in North America,
Bankruptcy laws also differ by country. The next sections examine these by major
world region, taking the most prominent airline failures as examples.
12.1
North America
The US Bankruptcy code is designed to avoid the adverse effects of liquidation by

giving a company time to reorganise and some protection from creditors during this
A Mine Finance
Airline Bankruptq
period. Liquidation (,Chapter 7' of the code) would mean the grounding of aircraft,
stranding passengers, cutting off air service to some cities and unemployment.
The code gives a company the chance to file for this protection, known as 'Chapter
11'. In doing so, it is often referred to as Debtor-in-Possession (DIP). When a finn
gets to this point, it has generally (but not always) almost depleted its cash reserves,
so that finance is needed to continue operations in Chapter 11. Loans are thus sought
that are described as DIP financing, and which are accorded higher security than
would be available outside Chapter 11. The arguments as to whether the availability
of this finance prolongs the reorganisation period and leads to over-investment are
summarised in Dahiya et al. (2003). They concluded that there was no evidence that
this was the case.
The debtors are given more time to come up with a credible business plan than in
many other countries. However, creditors need to approve this before the airline can
emerge from Chapter 11. Such agreement to the plan discharges the debtor from all
debts arising up to the efiective date ofthe plan.
The US bankruptcy code gives companies in Chapter 11 relief from creditors,
which includes the defennent of principal and interest payments on lending. This
would nonnally cover payments to operating lessors and those extending certain
types of lending secured on aircraft. However, the code's Section I,ll 0 forces the
airline to put right any arrears in rental or related payments and continue paying
them, or return the aircraft to the owners (after a grace period). The law was amended
in 1994 to strengthen further the rights of these creditors and broaden the scope of
transactions that qualifY.
The Air Transport Association of America (ATA) has listed all US airlines that
went bankrupt since deregulation in 1978. Before that time, bankruptcies were very
rare, since the Civil Aeronautics Board tended to prevent this happening by arranging
marriages between weak and stronger airlines.
Up to the end of2004, ATA listed 144 airlines that had filed for Chapter II (many
ofwhich later emerged), and only 14 for Chapter 7 liquidation. The only two sizeable
airlines that filed for Chapter 7 (Eastern Airlines and Midway Airlines) had previous
already filed for Chapter 11 but emerged. Pan Am had filed for Chapter 11 and not
emerged. Most recently, US Airways went into Chapter 11 in August 2002, emerged
in March 2003 only to return in September 2004.
The most popular month for declaring bankruptcy was January, followed by
March, September and December. These were all winter months when airline
cash flow is traditionally weaker. As expected, May, June and July had the fewest
declarations since both creditors and airline managements tended to persuade each
other that positive summer cash flows might prevent the eventual need for such a
drastic step.
The first major US airline to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy following deregulation
was Braniff Airlines. They remained under Chapter 11 protection from May 1982
until acquired by the Hyatt Corporation in April 1984. The name was retained and
the airline slimmed down and re-focused on the business market.
Continental Airlines was the next to go in September 1983, and did not emerge
until three years later.
A number of studies have investigated the role of Chapter II in allowing those
airlines with temporary relief from incurring some costs to unfairly lower their prices.
Barla and Koo (1999) concluded that Chapter II airlines did lower their prices after
declaring bankruptcy (by an average of 2.3 per cent). This was possible because of
cost reductions of around 4 per cent. However, their rivals that had not yet filed for
bankruptcy tended to lower prices by an average of 4.4 per cent. Much larger air fare
reductions were clearly evident in markets where they competed with the failing
carriers, with the intention of driving them permanently out of business.
Borenstein and Rose ( 1995) conc 1uded in an earlier study that airlines approaching
bankruptcy tend to reduce fares, but rivals' fares are largely unaffected and the price
discount disappears after filing for Chapter 11.
Another study (Morrison and Winston, 1995) examined all the examples of
Chapter II airlines (see table above) that entered bankruptcy between 1983 and 1994.
They concluded that the effect of bankrupt carriers on the revenues of other carriers
was smaiL They also found that seriously weakened airlines lose market through loss
of image, fear of loss of frequent flyer miles and difficulties in negotiating deals with
corporations and large travel agents. This allows the other carriers to raise prices.
Whether the subsequent price response fitted the first or second model depended on
how healthy the airline was when filing for Chapter II.
Continental first filed in 1983 when it was not in too bad shape, J and the industry
lost from having to respond to fare discounting by Continental. The converse was
true when Eastern filed in March 1989 and Continental for the second time in 1990.
The same study showed that, of the three largest airlines, Delta had tended to
gain revenue as a result of the bankruptcies, United lost the most and American lost
less.
220
Table 12.1
Key US airline Chapter 11 entry and exit
Braniff
Continental
Eastern
Braniff (2)
Continental (2)
Pan American
Midway
America West
TWA
US Airways
United
US
Source: The evolution of the airline industry, Morrison and Winston, Brookings, 1995 and
Author
221
1 It had apparently not defaulted on any loans and still had $60 million in cash
(Gudmundsson, 1998).
222
Airline Finance
Airline Bankruptcy
What previous studies have not addressed is the extent to which a bankrupt
airline's costs are lower that others, as a result of Chapter II protection. Any
concessions obtained fTOm labour stem either from a voluntary agreement (from fear
of shut-down) or by invoking Section 1113c of the code to force cuts from entirely
new contracts.2 Section 1110 limits protection from interest and rental payments on
many secured financings, leaving only some financing and capital charges. However,
pension contributions are sometimes suspended, giving some cost advantage.
Other criticisms of Chapter II have focused on the large professional fees that are
incurred.] For example, United Airlines' parent company has hired legal, aircraft,
lease and management consultants to help with its reorganisation. A fee committee
was established just to examine the detailed submissions for reimbursement of
fees from advisers representing the various interests (e.g., McKinsey, Babcock and
Brown, Deloittes, PriceWaterhouse and KPMG). Its report to the court was over 500
pages long.
A report to the US President and Congress in 1993 proposed that the time limit
on Chapter 11 carriers filing reorganisation plans be strictly enforced, and that time
limits should also be placed on such airlines accepting or rejecting scarce airport
gate leases. By 2004, nothing had changed in this respect, but another proposal on
lessor rights has been addressed. 4 This might have gone some way towards meeting
the criticism of Weiss and Wruck (1998), whose analysis of the Eastern Airlines
bankruptcy concluded that the Chapter 11 process allowed Eastern's value to drop
by over 50 per cent because of 'an over-protective court insulated Eastern from
market forces and allowed value-destroying operations to continue long after it was
clear that Eastern should have been shut down'.
The Act also gave the Board power to offer guarantees on loans of up
to $10 billion. By the middle of 2004, applications had been received for
$2.9 billion, with approvals for only $1.6 billion. Approvals were granted to
US Airways ($900 million), America West ($379.6 million), ATA Airlines
($148.5 million), Frontier ($63 million), Aloha ($40.5 million) and World
Airways ($27 million). Nine airlines had their requests turned down, by far
the largest being the $1.1 billion from United Airlines.
The loan guarantees usually came with onerous covenants, including
security on all unencumbered assets, satisfactory debt ratio, fixed charge
coverage ratio and adequate liquidity. The Board also receives warrants
entitling it to purchase common stock in the airline.
The US Airways loan guarantees allowed the carrier to obtain loans with a
term of six years, and at a much lower rate of interest than it would otherwise
have paid (close to that paid by large banks). There was an annual charge set
initially at 4 per cent of the guaranteed amount ($900 million). The Board
received 7.635 million warrants that gave it the option to purchase common
stock at $7.42 per share (which would give it around 14 per cent of the voting
shares).
As at the beginning of 2005, no warrants had been exercised, and so the
US airlines were still free of government ownership.
US Airline Stabilization Board

The Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act was introduced
on 22 September 2001 to bring some stability to and restore confidence
in the US airline industry following the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The Act
established the Board to implement its programmes' of compensation and loan
guarantees. Its membership comprised representatives from the Department
ofTransportation, the Treasury and the General Accounting Office, as well as
the non-partisan Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve Board chairman (later
replaced by his nominee, Edward Gramlich).
Compensation was paid to air carriers that suffered losses as a direct
result of 9111, including increased insurance premiums. A total ofjust above
US$4.6 billion was paid to 427 carriers. For example, United Airlines received
$774 million, American Airlines $694 million and Southwest $283 million.
2 The bankruptcy code now makes it more difficult for airlines to terminate labour
contracts, following the experience of Continental Airlincs in thc 19805.
3 Change. Challenge and Competition. a Report to the President and Congress bv the
National Commission to Ensure a Strong Competitive Airline
(August \993).
4 Ibid
223
Canada has a close equivalent to the US's Chapter 11: The Companies' Creditors
Arrangement Act (CCAA). Air Canada filed for and received protection under CCAA
on 1 April 2003. The court appointed Ernst and Young as 'Monitors' whose role was
manage the process for the court. Air Canada had been struggling for some time, and
had been faced with many of the pressures that US carriers faced, post 9111, with the
added constraints that it had agreed to upon the acquisition of CP Air in 2000.
Air Canada published a reorganisation plan in July 2004, and emerged from
bankruptcy protection at the end of September 2004. The airline became a subsidiary
of ACE Aviation Holdings. Deutsche Bank and other creditors had 88 per cent of
the shares in this holding company, Cerberus Capital Management 9.2 per cent, and
the balance for management. To comply with foreign ownership restrictions, some
owners received a higher percentage of voting shares.
12.2
Latin America
At the end of 2004, there were six Latin American airlines close to bankruptcy:
Aerolineas Argentinas, VASP and Varig in Brazil, Avianca and Intercontinental in
Colombia, and Nuevo Continente in Peru. Avianca had been in US Chapter II since
March 2003, but emerged after the court approved a restructuring plan that involved
a Brazilian company investing US$63 million for a 75 per cent controlling interest.
The Brazilian Government is unlikely to let Varig go under, but the fate of the other
three is less assured. 5
5
Airline Business, December (2004).
Airline Finance
Airline Bankruptcy
The Argentinian national carrier had filed for bankruptcy protection in mid
2001, and was later acquired by a Spanish consortium that included a Spanish tour
company and Spanair. Its restructuring plan was approved in December 2002. By the
end of2004, it was expected to emerge from bankruptcy protection, with the Spanish
owners planning to sell 45 per cent of the equity to the public through an IPO.
(AOM), to try to give it a better chance of survival. The then still solvent SAir had a
49.5 per cent stake in the new airline group, and had agreed to inject a further
million. easy Jet had been interested in buying the airline and its slots at Paris Orly
Airport, but was deterred by the level of the company's debts. It was
going by a French Government loan.
SAir Group filed for protection from creditors in October 200 I after two of its
largest lenders, UBS and Swiss Bank decided not to extend further loans to the group.
By the beginning of December, all main airline leasing and operating companies
were granted further protection to allow Crossair to take over a substantial part
of Swissair's airline operations. This deal was made possible by financial support
from the Swiss Government, which in tum had persuaded some of the largest Swiss
corporations to lend to the new national carrier.
The collapse of SAir Group also caused the bankruptcy of the Belgian national
carrier, Sabena, in which the Swiss airline had a 49 per cent, and effective control.
This occurred at the beginning ofNovember 200 I, and resulted in the saving of only
a small part of Sabena's operations. These were limited to regional and some intra
EU trunk routes that were sold to a new airline, SN Brussels that acquired Sabena's
regional subsidiary, DAT.
Alitalia, a major state-owned EU carrier, has been close to bankruptcy on a
number ofoccasions between 1997 and 2004. The Italian Government has continued
to inject new capital into the airline to keep it going, while at the same time trying to
prevent the EU competition authorities in Brussels from imposing restrictions on it.
In this respect, the European Commission decided to approve in 1995 the
capital injection of Lira 2,750 billion subject to 10 conditions. One of those was:
224
12.3
Europe
In Europe, a Chapter II equivalent does not exist. The closest to this is the UK's
'administration' where a court appoints an administrator to run the business, usually
a firm of accountants. It thus differs significantly from Chapter II in the US where
the existing management may stay in place. Assets may be sold, but the aim is to
save at least part as a going concern.
An example of a UK airline going into administration was Air Europe, or its
parent tour operator, International Leisure Group (ILG). This occurred in March
1991, after considerable effort had been expended in trying to get new investors.
ILG's bankruptcy was precipitated by the bankruptcy in Switzerland of one ofILG's
major shareholders (Omni Group), and Citigroup's (one of the major creditors')
desire to repossess and sell the aircraft on which it had secured its lending. Once in
'administration' ILG's tour operator bond of 63 million was called in to repatriate
stranded abroad, and at that stage continued operations were not
possible. Because of this, it was suggested that there was an overwhelming case for
Chapter II type of protection to enable a more rational outcome to be obtained. 6
In Germany, many equity shareholders are the major commercial banks. These
try to avoid bankruptcies of their associates or subsidiaries by appointing new
management. This gives it a chance to survive, by rationalisation or selling poorly
performing assets, with bankruptcy as the last resort.
An example of this was the demise of German charter carrier, Aero Lloyd in
October 2003. Bayerischer Landesbank owned 66 per cent of the airline, and had
been trying sell it to a strategic investor. Once it deci~ed to stop funding the ailing
carrier, an insolvency administrator was appointed by a German court. At that
the re-emergence of a much slimmed-down airline, operating only 12 aircraft with
half the number of employees, was possible. However, in spite of some additional
funding from the Bavarian bank, nothing came of this olan. and the airline was
broken up.
In France, a company that stops paying creditors must declare bankruptcy, and
a court appoints officials to help management (usually the existing team) draw up a
rationalisation plan. This procedure is similar to Chapter II, but has a time limit of
18 months for the process to be completed. If not, liquidation takes place.
One of the larger French airline bankruptcies was Air Liberte, which finally
stopped operations for good in January 2003. It had filed for bankruptcy in June
2001, about a year after British Airways had sold the airline to Taitbout Antibes,
and it had lx-en combined with SAir Group owned Air Littoral and Air Outre-Mer
6
AvmarkAviation Economist. (MaTch/ApriI1991), p. 9.
225
Until 31 December 2000 Alitalia shall refrain from offering fares lower than those offered
by its competitors for equivalent services supplied on the routes which it operates.
(OJ L322144. Article 1, paragraph 7, European Commission, 25 November 1997)
In approving a further tranche of state aid to Alitalia (Lira 500 billion), the
Commission noted in June 1998 that two conditions imposed in the 1997 decision
had not been met. One was the requirement that Alitalia did not engage in price
leadership. The Commission did not see this as an obstacle to the further subsidy
being paid, given the Italian Government promise that 'AlitaIia had discontinued its
promotional campaigns (involving low-price tickets) within the European Economic
Area and reverted to the basic fare structure. '
However, the Italian authorities presented yet another restructuring plan for
Alitalia to the Commission in October 2004. This was soon followed by a complaint
from eight European airlines to the Commission on Alitalia's current plan to cut
fares while expanding capacity.
The privately owned Italian airline, Volare, went bankrupt in December 2004,
after the Italian Government had appointed an administrator to try to rescue the
airline. A plan was submitted to the aviation authority, but lack of financing resulted
in the withdrawal of their license. 7
Aviation Strategy, (November 2004).
226
Airline Banknmlrl)
Airline Finance
12.4 Australasia
Most ofthe flag carriers inAsia are still majority owned by theirnational governments,
and thus not likely to be allowed to go bankrupt. Some smaller, privately owncd
airlines have over the years gone into liquidation: a number of Thai airlines, notably
Air Siam, and many small carriers in Indonesia have gone out of business over the
years.
In Japan, equity holders and employees tend to have priority, and informal
rescues rather than court-administered bankruptcies tend to be most common. All
of the three new entrants have been bankrupt or close to it, but all have continued
operating as a result of various rescue packages: Skymark received a large capital
injection, Air Do was supported by All Nippon Airways and Skynet Asia went into
a type of 'Chapter 11 '.
Few Asian countries have the procedures for restructuring ailing airlines that
North America and Europe do, and creditors tend to have limited rights. Creditors
with liens over aircraft have a better chance of re-possession if their aircraft are
operated internationally, rather than solely on domestic flights. Steps can more
be taken to seize aircraft when parked at foreign airports, where legal enforcement
of rights is easier.
The most prominent airline bankruptcy in Asia was that of Philippine Airlines
whose finances deteriorated fast after the 1997 Asian financial crisis. By mid
1998, PAL had debts of over US$2 billion, around half involving US and EU export
credit agencies. The airline went into receivership following a pilots' strike in June
1998. A rehabilitation plan was only approved by the country's Securities Exchange
Commission in May 1999. This involved a two-year management contract with
Lufthansa Consulting, and the dilution of majority owner Lucio Tan's stake from
70 per cent to 54 per cent. Before this approval, the US Exim bank had threatened to
re-possess the four B747-400s that were the security for its loans, because the
did not have the required approval of more than two-thirds of creditors.
In Australia, the long-established airline, Ansett was placed in voluntary
administration by its owners (Air New Zealand) on U September 2001 (one day
after 9/11), and finally ceased operating in March 2002. Some regional subsidiary
airlines continued to operate for a while, but assets were gradually sold off over that
year (including their Sydney Airport terminal to the airport owners). The proceeds
of the sale of assets went to the secured creditors. Creditors had previously voted
against liquidation, give the state of the industry at that time. Any such 'fire-sales'
would have been at very low prices.
Australia deregulated its domestic market in 1990, which was followed by the
entry of Compass Airlines. After about one year's operation they failed to find
new equity and a receiver was called in. Regional airline, Impulse, started trunk
operations in 2000, but also went out of business in May 2001 after institutional
investors withdrew support. Qantas then took over the airline.
The background to Ansett is interesting in that it explains one of the factors
behind the bankruptcy of the New Zealand national carrier, which owned 100 per
227
cent of Ansett at the time of its demise. Air New Zealand had purchased 50 per
cent of Ansett from TNT Corporation which jointly owned the Australian domestic
carrier alongside News Ltd. Singapore Airlines later tried to buy the 50 per cent
stake held by News Ltd, but Air New Zealand exercised its pre-emption right and
took 100 per cent control. Singapore Airlines subsequently bought 25 per cent ofAir
New Zealand.
Following the bankruptcy of Ansett, Air New Zealand came under financial
pressure, and trading in its shares was suspended on a number of occasions over
the following two months. Its future was assured, however, when the New Zealand
government injected NZ$885 million (about US$370 million) into the airline in new
equity and convertible stock. This was carried out on 18 January 2002, giving the
government 74 per cent of the ordinary stock and 82 per cent of the voting rights.
Singapore Airlines' stake was reduced from 24.99 per cent on 31 August 2001 to
6.47 per cent in August 2003. The OECD's report on the New Zealand economy in
20028 urged the government to sell its shares in the national airline to focus funds
on 'higher social priorities'. The government has announced its commitment to do
this, but had not done so by August 2004.
12.5
Summary
Airlines that are close to liquidation do not often lack suitors to acquire part or all
of its assets, or take control to implement a survival plan. This often occurs without
the necessity to file for Chapter 11 or receivership. In the US, a Chapter 11 filing,
or even a threat of this often acts as a catalyst to new agreements by employees and
suppliers. Chapter 11 in North America favours existing management, and has been
criticised for allowing airlines that have no hope of longer term survival to compete,
possibly unfairly, with existing carriers, although there is scant evidence of this.
In Europe, 'administration' hands over the day-to-day management to an
independent individual or firm that is appointed by the court. Their remit is to get
the best deal for creditors and shareholders: this may be achieved by continued
operation of the airline, but this is probably more difficult than in Chapter 11. The
administrator is often faced by loss of confidence by one or more major secured
creditor, in addition to loss of potential customers and continued cash flow crises.
In some cases, the aviation authority withdraws the airline's operating license to
prevent further market disru
All bankruptcies lead to the significant dilution of the interests of the existing
holders. Usually, a sizeable part of the outside creditors will be banks and
lessors with security over one or more aircraft. This may suggest a lower likelihood
of reorganisation and continued operations. In fact, airline financial problems also
tend to coincide with a very depressed market for used aircraft sales. This means
that secured debtors would prefer that the aircraft is kept in service with the ailing
airline and generating some revenue, rather than them incurring the risks and costs
ofre-possession and sale or re-lease.
8
Economic
(J(New Zealand 2002, OECD, May 2002.
228
Airline Finance
Unsecured creditors will be suppliers ofairport, ATC and fuel services, passengers
and shippers with paid-for tickets and others. Airports often force settlement of
outstanding debts by blocking an aircraft of the airline in question if it has landed
at its airport. ATC authorities also have similar powers to prevent an aircraft from
taking off until its debts have been paid. Other unsecured creditors are not so lucky,
although they may be able to vote on a proposed re-organisation plan. With the
growing popularity offrequent flyer membership, there may be millions ofunsecured
creditors who have earned miles but not yet redeemed them. It would be impossible
to include all of these in any re-organisation process.
Chapter 13
Industry Financial Prospects
Just as the industry experiences cycles in past financial performance, so does the
optimism of forecasters and commentators oscillate even more widely. This depends
on where in the cycle the predictions are made. In the midst of the early 1980s
downturn dire predictions were being made on the ability of the industry to finance
expected growth. A similar prognosis was being offered in the early 1990s, but
before the forecasters have decided to make downward adjustments in their demand
forecasts, traffic had picked up and profitability had returned to the industry. IATA
were then in a better position to issue dire warnings of impending constraints from
the lack of airport and ATe capacity. I As Chapter I has shown signs started to
appear in 2000 and 2001 that another industry downturn was beginning, although
opinions varied as to the depth and length of the impending recession. The terrorist
attacks of 9111 converted the downturn into a major slump, the consequences of
which were obviously very severe in the US, but also spread to other world regions.
The recovery took place over the period 2002-2006, against a background ofbuoyant
demand. By 2006, some regions had only just regained traffic levels experienced in
the 1999/2000 peak, but by then airlines had to contend with an era of persistently
high fuel prices.
This chapter will take as a starting point the latest forecasts ofair traffic, revenues
and costs, as well as investment (principally aircraft) needs. A forecasting horizon of
10 years is considered as long enough into the future to include any future downturn,
even though some industry forecasts extend to 20 years or more.
13.1 World Airline Traffic and Financial Forecasts

Most of the recent longer term forecasts of world air traffic are assuming average
growth rates of around 5 per cent a year, with significant regional variations. These
tend to be based on simple econometric models which relate traffic growth to growth
in world GDP. In this respect, they can only be as good as the GDP forecasts which
are produced by firms such as Global Insight, Standard & Poor's, or international
organisations like The World Bank. Some forecasting models also try to incorporate
a fare or yield variable, given the price elastic nature of a large part of the market.
Short-term forecasts of up to five years years ahead are provided by lATA. These
are generally built up from individual airline forecasts. Care needs to be taken in
identifying whether the forecasts arc measured in passenger-kms or in passengers
(or include air cargo). The Avitas forecasts referred to in Table 13.1 are for air
traffic, without specifying units of measurement. Generally, passenger-kms would
Janes's Airport Review, (1996), p. 9.
230
Financial Prospects
A irline Finance
231
be expected to grow faster than passengers. There has been a gradual shift for
both business and leisure travellers going further afield, and trip length has been
increasing at between 0.5 and J.O per cent a year. This is evident in the differences
between ICAQ's two forecasts in Table 13.1.
Both airports and Air Traffic Control organisations also produce long-term forecasts,
some of which are published. For example, EURQCQNTRQL forecast IFR flights
20 years into the future, their December 2004 release giving a range of between
2.3 per cent and 3.4 per cent a year between 2004 and 2025.
Table 13.1
Table 13.3
World air traffic and GDP forecasts
lATA short/medium-term forecasts
% pa2005
Airbus (2004-24)
Boeing (2005-25)
Rolls Royce (2004-24)
ICAQ (2002-15)
ICAQ (2002-15f
Avitas
nla
2.5
2.5
3.1
in tenns of passengers
Table 13.2 looks at the projections from the two major aircraft manufacturers in
more detail. These are from forecasts published in 2005, and both are in passenger
kms for the more heavily travelled groups of routes. It can be seen that they are
largely in agreement on the trans-Pacific, Europe-Asia and domestic China and
USA, but Airbus are more bullish overall and especially for intra-European routes.
Boeing is somewhat more optimistic on domestic USA, which has a high weight in
the total world forecast. Some researchers examine domestic USA markets for signs
of maturity. US traffic bounced back with 8 per cent growth domestically in 2004,
slowing to 3 per cent growth the following year, and the two major manufacturers
expect it to continue to grow at this rate, not much above the GDP forecast growth.
Based on past trends, a rough and ready guide to air traffic growth is to assume twice
the growth in GDP, with this multiplier declining to one as maturity is approached.
Table 13.2
Air traffic forecasts by region: Airbus vs Boeing
Intra-Europe
Europe-North America
Asia-North America
Europe-Asia
Domestic USA
Domestic China
World
includes domestic Canada, and Canada US
Average annual growth rates

2004/2005 to 2024/2025
Boeing
3.4
4.6
6.0
5.4
3S
8.8
4.8
North Atlantic
Trans-Pacific
Europe-Asia/Pacific
Europe-Middle East
Within Asia/Pacific
Within Europe
Total international
to 2009
5.3
5.8
5.9
6.6
6.8
5.1
5.6Sec
The lATA forecasts in Table 13.3 were published in late 2005, and indicate strong
traffic growth for all regions in 2005, especially within AsialPacific and between
Europe and the Middle East. These two regions are also forecast to grow fastest
over 2005-2009, the former due to the high growth in China and India and the latter
fuelled by a number of start-up airlines based in the re!:,rion.
13.2 World Airline Capital Expenditure Projections

An average of almost 90 per cent of capital expenditure by the world's airlines
has historically gone towards aircraft. Future aircraft needs are derived from the
above traffic forecasts by making further key assumptions on load factors, flight
frequencies, aircraft utilisation, and aircraft retirements. The latter are hard to predict,
given uncertainties in future fuel and maintenance costs, and whether aircraft will
be modified to meet new noise and emission rules. For example, most or all aircraft
such as B727-200s and B737-200s were phased out by 2002, the year in which
these aircraft did not meet the noise standards without expensive hushkitting or re
engining. Assumptions on the future degree of hubbing and passenger transfers are
also required, with point-to-point services recently boosting traffic in many world
regions. Boeing see a relative decline in hubbing with more hub by-pass flights,
while Airbus are more optimistic on hubs. The Boeing argument rests on passenger
preference for non-stop flights and increasing hub congestion; the Airbus view is
supported by the economics of hubs and concentration of population in Asia with
few secondary airports.
Table 13.4 focuses on aircraft deliveries and retirements and reflects the differing
philosophies of the major manufacturers. The retirement figures may vary insofar
as they include or exclude aircraft that are in storage and never expected to return
233
Airline Finance
Industry Financial Prospects
to airline service. Boeing's view is of a higher rate of deliveries and also a greater
number of retirements a year, the lower average price per delivery indicating higher
turnover and demand ofsmaller capacity aircraft. Rolls-Royce is closer to the Boeing
forecast and is probably more optimistic at the regional jet end of the spectrum.
Boeing give a detailed breakdown of forecast aircraft demand by region over

the 20 years to 2024 (Table 13.5). This shows the continued dominance of North
America, Europe and Asia, but with demand in Asia for larger more expensive
aircraft.
Table 13.4
Table 13.5
232
Commercial jet aircraft delivery/retirement forecasts
Rolls-Royce (2004-2024)
Boeing (2005-2024)
Airbus (?004-7074
Retirements
per year
637
467
215
Embraer forecasts jet deliveries for aircraft of seating capacity between 30 and 120
seats: they expect deliveries ofthese aircraft to average just under 400 a year between
2005 and 2025, at an average value ofU8$45 million per aircraft.
The volume of retirements started to increase again at the end of the 1990s,
reaching over 300 aircraft in 1998, although some of these were to be converted
into freighters. Both Rolls-Royce and Boeing expect retirements to increase in the
future.
Deliveries of jet aircraft hit a low of 486 in 1995 and climbed back to 1,200 in
200 I, with investment banks forecasting a continuation of this trend to 1,400 in
2003, before turning down again. The delivery forecasts in Table 13.4 obviously
include two complete cycles, but there is still a marked difference in manufacturer
predictions.
One ofthe key ditferences in the last downturn is the increased dependence of the
manufacturers on the operating lessors. Thus, for the firm orders outstanding in the
first quarter 200 1,38.8 per cent ofAirbus's 1,016 aircraft backlog was accounted for
by operating lessors (and 31 per cent at that time unplaced with airlines). For Boeing
the position was slightly better with 30.6 per cent of its 1,084 aircraft backlog, with
22 per cent unplaced. 2
13.3 World Airline Financial Requirement Forecasts

If the major aircraft manufacturer forecasts discussed above turn out to be accurate,
there will be a need for between U8$1.9 trillion (Airbus) and U8$2.1 trillion (Boeing)
to finance the cost of the aircraft over the next 20 years, both at 2004 prices. This
amounts to around $100 billion a year, and looks large in comparison with 2004 cash
generated by the world's airlines from internal sources of only $16 billion (see the
beginning of Chapter 5). However, 2004 was not a good year for the airlines, with
many North American airlines struggling to be cash positive.
2 European Aviation Review 3, J P Morgan Securities Ltd, Equity Research (12 June
2001).
Boeing airplane demand by region (2004-2023)
Asia Pacific
Latin America
Middle East
Source: Boeing Current Market Outlook, 2005
Included in Boeing's pr~jection of 7,163 aircraft for the AsialPacific region is a

demand for 2,612 aircraft from China, valued at $213 billion in 2,004 dollars. This
gives an average of $82 million per aircraft, lower than the AsialPacific average due
to the need to build up regional and feeder routes with smaller aircraft.
Airbus gives the top 10 end-user nations in their overall forecast of $1.9
trillion passenger and cargo aircraft demand over 2004-2023. The US is top with
$412.7 billion worth of passenger aircraft, followed by China with $241.7 billion
and the UK with $119.2 billion. Single aisle and small jets account for 40 per cent
of total delivered value, 25 per cent for intermediate and long-range twins, large
aircraft 22 per cent and small twin aisle and regional aircraft 13 per cent. 3
Boeing's prediction in 1993 of a large decline in Japanese involvement in future
aircraft financing now seems to have been somewhat of an overreaction to the early
1990s Japanese withdrawal. However, the withdrawal of the ILL in the late 1990s
left a gap the Japanese Operating Lease (JOL) has not completely filled. JLL had
financed up to $12 billion of aircraft a year, whereas the JOL so far only accounts
for $2-3 billion a year (see Section 10.3). Equity issues have probably played a
more important role than anticipated, as airlines have been privatised and free to
raise this type of capital which their owners had been unable to provide in the past.
New entrants have also raised equity, both in North America and in Europe, with
an increasing number of venture capital firms looking for business. This might be
an even greater source of funds in the future, following the collapse of the dot.com
bubble, although continued regulatory and ownership restrictions limit the number
of such possibilities.
Airbus (2005), Global Market Forecast 2004-2023.
234
Airline Finance
Public debt has certainly been more important in aircraft financing in the US,
principally through the EETCs. For the rest of the world, public debt has been
channelled into aircraft finance via the operating lessors. The Boeing forecast was
probably wrong on the negligible role of US banks, and certainly on the Japanese
Banks.
credits still playa large part, in conjunction with bank lending, providing
at least $10-15 billion in finance a year. In the longer term, there could well be the
exit from the industry of some of the household name airlines, as financiers and
investors become more selective, and variations in the cost of capital between good
and bad risk airlines becomes greater. It will also be interesting to see whether foreign
ownership restrictions will be removed, and international mergers and acquisitions
allowed. The further growth of the operating lessor sector is also expected by some
observers, although aircraft manufacturers view such a trend with some concern.
In the longer term, aircraft orders will adjust to a level that can attract the
necessary finance at a price that allows a reasonable return to be made to aircraft
owners. Such adjustment may be painful both to existing airlines and lessors that
have over-ordered aircraft, but it will also mean many start-up airlines will not attract
the necessary finance to satisfY licensing authorities.
Bibliography
AAE (1990), Pan Am: What Will it Sell Next?, The Avmark Aviation Economist,
7(3), April, Avmark International, London, pp. 2-4.
Allegis Corporation (1988), Addressing Airline Issues, 1987 Annual Report,
Chicago.
Airbus (2005), Global Market Forecast 2004-2023, Airbus S.A.S., Toulouse.
Air Carrier Fitness Division (2002), How to Become a Certificated Air Carrier,
Office of the Secretary, US Department of Transportation, 202-366-9721.
Air Transport Association of America (2004), ATA Response in Unisys, R2A
Scorecard, 2(11), September, p. 5.
Ashcroft, Robert (2005) A Powerful Force in Commercial Aviation, UBS Investment
Research Q-Series, UBS, New York.
Ashworth, M. and Forsythe, P. (1984), Civil Aviation Policy and the Privatisation of
British Airways, Institute for Fiscal Studies, London.
Atrill, P. and McLaney, E. (1995), Accounting and Finance for Non-Specialists,
Prentice-Hall, London.
Barker, A, Ross, T. and Wood, S. (1996), Airline Valuation Guide, September, SBC
Warburg, London.
Barla, P. and Koo, B. (1999), Bankruptcy Protection and Pricing Strategies in the US
Airline Industry, Transportation Research, E 35, pp. 101-120.
Baur, U. and Kistner, D. (1999), Airline Privatisation Principles and Lessons Learned,
in Handbook ofAirline Finance, eds Butler and Keller, pp. 71-90.
Bilson, J. (1992), Managing Economic Exposure to Foreign Exchange Risk: A Case
Study of American Airlines, in Stocks and currencies, The Economist, 6 June,
p.l13.
Boeing Commercial Airplane, Co., (1996), Current Market Outlook, Boeing,
Seattle.
Borenstein, A. and Rose, N. (1995), Bankruptcy and Pricing in US Airline Markets,
American Economic Review, 85, No.3, pp. 415-435.
British Airways (1987), Offer for Sale on Behalf of the Secretary of State for
Transport, Hill Samuel & Co. Ltd, January.
British Airways (2003), Memorandum and Articles ofASSOCiation, website as at 15
July, www.bashares.com.
Butler, G.F. and Keller, M.R., eds, (1999), Handbook ofAirline Finance, Aviation
Week (McGraw-Hill), New York.
CAA (1984), Airline Competition Policy, CAP500, Civil Aviation Authority,
London.
Chang, Y-C et al. (2004), The evolution of airline ownership and control provisions,
Journal ofAir Transport Management 10, pp. 161-172.
Clark, P. (2001), Buying the Big Jets: Fleet Planningfor Airlines, Aldershot: Ashgate
Publishing.
236
Airline Finance
Bibliography
Commission of the European Communities (2001), Proposal for a Regulation ofthe

European Parliament and of the Council amending. Council Regulation (EEC)
No. 95193 of 18 January 1993 on common rules for the allocation of slots at
Community airports. COM(2001)335, Brussels, 20 June.
Cranfield University (1996), Single Market, Review 1996 - A ir Transport, Department
ofAir Transport, European Commission.
Creaton, S. (2004), Ryanair: How a Small Irish Airline Conquered Europe, Aurum
Press, London.
Cunningham, L.F., Siovin, M.B., Wood, W.R. and Zaima, J.K. (1988), Systematic
Risk in the Deregulated Airline Industry, Journal of Transport Economics and
Policy, 22(3), pp. 345-353.
Dahiya, S., John, K., Puri, M. and Ramirez, G. (2003), Debtor-in-possession
Financing and Bankruptcy Resolution: Empirical Evidcnce, Journal ofFinancial
Economics, 69, pp. 259-280.
Darryl, A., ed. (2002), Handbook of Airline Economics, 2nd edn, Aviation Week,
McGraw-Hill, New York.
de Wit, 1. and Burghouwt, G. (2005), Strategies of Multi-Hub Airlines and the
Implications for National Aviation Policies, AirNeth Workshop Report, The
Hague.
Dixon, R. (1994), Investment Appraisal: A Guide for Managers, revised edn, The
Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, Kogan Page, London.
Doganis, R. (2001), The Airline Business in the 21st Century, Routledge, London.
Doganis, R. (2002), Flying offCourse: The Economics ofInternational Airlines, 3rd
edn, Routledge, London.
Endres, G. (2006), Surrogate supply, Airline Business, 22(7), July, pp. 56-58.
Expanding Horizons, A Report by the Comite des Sages for Air Transport to the
European Commission, (1994), pp. 29-31.
European Investment Bank (2004), Evaluation of ElB Financing of Airlines: A
Synthesis Report, European Investment Bank, Luxembourg.
Feldman, 1. (1993), The Eagle Has Landed, Air Transport World, December, p. 44.
Fisher, F.M. (1987), Pan-American to United: the Pacific Division Transfer Case,
RandJournalofEconomics, 18(4), pp. 492-508. .
Foley, M.A. (1989), Impact of Operating Lessors on Aircraft Demand, Paper
delivered at 1989 Geneva Forum, 17 February 1989.
Gates, W. (1996), The Road Ahead, revised edn, Penguin, London.
Gibson, W. and Morrell, P. (2005), Airline Finance andAircraft Evaluation: Evidence
from the Field, Paper to ATRS World Conference, Rio de Janeiro, July 2005.
Haanappel, P.P.c. (1994), Airport Slots and Market Access: Some Basic Notions and
Solutions, Air and Space Law, XIX, No. 4/5, pp. 198-199.
Hai, N. (1994), An Evaluation of Scheduled Airline Traffic Rights, MSc thesis:
Cranfield University, England.
Hall, S., ed. (1989), Aircraft Financing, Euromoney Publications, London.
Holloway, S. (1992), Aircraft Acquisition Finance, Pitman, London.
Holmes, G. and Sugden, A. (2004), Interpreting Company Reports and Accounts,
Woodhead-Faulkner, Hemel Hempstead, UK, ninth edn.
Howard, B. (1982), The Iron Lady at DOT, Forbes, 7 June.
HSBC James Capel (1996), British Airways: Selling Slot(s), November, pp. 31-33.
lATA (1982), Airline Needs and Sources ofCapital, lATA Financial and Economic
Studies Sub-Committee, Geneva.
lATA (1994), Airline Accounting Guideline No.1: Explanatory foreword and
translation of long-term foreign currency borrOWings, Exposure Draft, in
association with KPMG Peat Marwick, August.
lATA (2006), WorldAir Transport Statistics, International Air Transport Association,
Geneva.
ICAO (1996), The World ofCivil Aviation, 1995-1998, Circular 265, Montreal.
ICAO (2004), Outlook for Air Transport to the Year 2015, Circular 304 AT1l27,
Montreal.
ICAO (2005), The World of Civil Aviation, 2003-2006, Circular307-ATI129,
Montreal.
ILO (1991), How to Read a Balance Sheet, Geneva: International Labour Office,
2nd (Revised Edition).
International Lease Finance Corporation, SEC, Form 10-K Filing for Fiscal Year
Ended December 31,2000.
Jct Finance S.A. (1995), Analysis ofthe comparative ability ofthe European airline
industry to finance investments, a report prepared for the Commission of the
European Communities, June.
Jet Fuel Intelligence (2005), New Asian Carriers View Hedging as two-Edged
Sword, Energy Intelligence, XV, No.6, February, 1-3.
Key, S.L., ed. (1989), The Ernst and Ylmng Guide to Mergers and Acquisitions,
John Wiley & Sons, New York.
KPMG/lAAIA (1994), Airline Internal Audit, KPMG in association with the
International Association ofAirline Internal Auditors, Novembcr, London.
KPMG/IATA (1992), Accounting Policies. Disclosure and Financial Trends in the
International Airline Industry, International Air Transport Association, August,
Geneva.
KPMG/IATA (1995), Strategic Issues and Current Trends in the International Airline
Industry, KPMG, London.
Littlejohns, A. and McGairl, S. (1998), Aircraft Financing, third edn, Euromoney
Publications, London.
Mandall, R. (1979), Financing Capital Requirements ofthe US Airline Industry in the
1980s, Lexington Books, D.C. Heath & Co, Lexington, Massachusetts, USA.
Margo, R. (1996) Aircraft Leasing: The Airline's Objectives, Air and Space Law,
XXI, No. 4/5, pp. 166-174.
McKenzie, W. (1998), The Financial Times Guide to Using and Interpreting
Company Accounts, Second Edition, FT Prentice Hall, London.
McMillan, B. (2000), Air Madagascar Sale Back on Track after Bank Default, Air
Transport Intelligence, accessed 30 March, www.ratLcom.
Meldrun, A. (2001), Financing Start-up Airlines: Private Equity, presentation to
Airline Finance course at Cranfield University, 1 March, England.
Miller, K. (1993), Air Finance for Eastern Europe, MSc thesis: Cranfield University,
England.
Milne, I.R. (2005), Debt burden, from Bridging the GAAP, Airline Business,
February, pp. 54-56.
Morrell, P. and Turner, S. (2003), An Evaluation of Airline Beta Values and their
237
238
Airline Finance
Application in Calculating the Cost of Equity Capital', in Journal ofAir Transport

Management, 9(4), pp. 201-209.
Morrison, S. and Winston, C. (1995), The Evolution of the Airline Industry, The
Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, USA.
NatWest Securities (1996), Strategic Assessment of British Airways, January,
NatWest Securities Ltd. London.
Official Journal ofthe European Communities, No. L.240, 24 August 1992.
Peters, TJ. and Watennan, R.H., Jr (1982), In Search ofExcellence: Lessons from
Americas Best-run Companies, Harper & Row, New York.
QantasAirways Ltd (1995), Offering Memorandumfor 750 million Ordinary Shares,
22 June.
Radley, AB. (1994), Future Strategies in Aircraft Leasing, MSc thesis: Cranfield
University, September, England.
Reed, Arthur, (1990), Airline: The Inside Story of British Airways, BBC Books,
London, pp. 47-48.
Reid, W. and Myddelton, D.R. (2005), The Meaning ofCompany Accounts, 8th edn,
Aldershot: Gower Publishing.
Rosenberg, B. and Guy, J. (1976), Prediction offJs from Investment Fundamentals,
Financial Analysts Journal, 32(4), pp. 62-70.
Symonds, J.P. (1991), Aircraft Finance: A Study ofFuture Supply and Demand, MSc
thesis: Cranfield University, England.
Taneja, N.K. (1982), Airline Planning: Corporate, Financial and Marketing,
Lexington Books, D.C. Heath & Co, Lexington, Massachusetts, USA
Transportation Research Board (1991), Winds of Change: Domestic Air Transport
Since Deregulation, National Research Council, Washington, DC, USA
TravelTechnics Ltd (1992),A Failed Partnership: Factors Contributing to Failures in
the US Airline Industry, for International Institute for Tourism Studies, October.
Vercbere, I. (1994), The Air Transport Industry in Crisis, Chapter 8, pp. 105-121,
EIU Publishing, London.
Walsh, C. (1997), Key Management Ratios: How to Analyze, Compare and Control
the Figures that Drive Company Value, FT Prentice Hall, London.
Weiss, L.A and Wruck, K.H. (1998), Infonnation Problems, Conflicts of Interest,
and Asset Stripping, Chapter II's Failure in the Case of Eastern Airlines, Journal
ofFinancial Economics, 45, pp. 55-97.
Wells, AT. (2003), Air Transportation: A Management Perspective, Brooks/Cole,
Belmont, fifth edn, California, USA.
Glossary of Terms
Accelerated depreciation
A rate of depreciation higher than the nonnal

rate, generally for tax purposes.
Accounting concepts
The basic assumptions underlying the preparation
of accounts, including 'going concern',
'accruals', 'consistency' and 'prudence'.
Accounting policies
The specific accounting bases judged by

the business to be most appropriate to its
circumstances and therefore adopted in the
preparation of its accounts, e.g., of the various
methods of accounting for depreciation, the
policy adopted may be to depreciate plant over
a five-year period.
Accounting records
The 'books' in which a business records the

transactions it has entered into. For companies,
minimum standards of accounting records are
required by law.
Accrual
An expense or a proportion thereof not invoiced

before the balance sheet date but included in the
accounts - sometimes on an estimated basis.
Accruals concept
Income and expenses are recognised in the

period in which they are earned or incurred,
rather than the period in which they happen to
be received or paid.
Advance corporation tax
The tax a company is required to pay (at the basic

income tax) rate when it makes a distribution.
The amount paid can be subsequently set off
against the company's corporation tax liability
for that year.
American Depositary Receipt

(ADR) or Share (ADS)
Certificates issued by a US depository bank,

representing foreign shares held by the bank,
usually by a branch or correspondent in the
country of issue. One ADS may represent
a portion of a foreign share, one share or a
bundle of shares of a foreign corporation. ADS
are subject to the same currency, political,
and economic risks as the underlying foreign
share.
240
Amortisation
Airline Finance
An estimate of the proportion of the cost

of an intangible fixed asset which has
been consumed. Also the reduction in loan
outstandings in accordance with an agreed
repayment schedule.
Asset
Any property or rights owned by the company

that have a monetary value.
Asset-based financing
A form of financing in which the risk is related

to the value of the equipment, rather than the
company.
Associated company
See Related company.
Balance sheet
A statement describing the financial position of

a business at a particular date.
Balloon payment
A payment which follows a series of lower

periodic rentals paid over the term of the lease.
Although normally paid at the end of the lease
period, balloon payments may also occur
during the lease term.
Bank settlement plan (BSP)
Agreement between airlines and travel agents,

whereby all air ticket issue and settlements
within a particular country are handled by a
'clearing bank'. Although BSPs are established
through the lATA mechanism, they are not to
be confused with the lATA clearing house
for settling inter-airline accounts in different
currencies.
Basis point
One basis point is one-hundredth of 1 per

cent.
Bond
Documentary promise to repay long-term

borrowed money with interest at a definite or
determinable future date (usually issued by
larger firms with a public listing).
Call option
An option to purchase an asset at a set price at

a particular future date.
Cape Town Treaty
The Cape Town Convention on international

interests in mobile equipment; signed in Cape
TowninNovember2001. This is an international
registry for security rights in aircraft, aircraft
engines and helicopters that will reduce the
risks of lending for aircraft financiers, and thus
reduce the cost of credit.
Glossary of Terms
241
Capital allowance
An allowance against profits given for tax

purposes in respect of expenditure on fixed
assets during the period.
Capital assets
Assets acquired with the expectation that
they will remain in service for a number of
accounting periods.
Capital costs
Depreciation
investment.
Capital employed
The aggregate amount of long-term funds
invested in or lent to the business and used by
it in carrying out its operations.
Capital lease
A lease which transfers substantially all the
risks and benefits of ownership of the leased
equipment to the lessee.
Capitalisation
The treatment of costs as assets to be included
in the balance sheet rather than as expenses to
be written off in the profit and loss account.
Cash flow
In company accounts, a statement of cash
balances based on estimated cash inflows and
outflows over a given period. In cost-benefit
analysis or investment appraisal, the anticipated
net benefit or cash stream for a project.
Cash Value Added (CVA)
An economic measure of profit which takes
into account the economic cost of capital;
provides a better measure of shareholder value
than accounting profits.
Consistency concept
The requirements that once an accounting
policy for a particular item in the accounts has
been adopted the same policy should be used
from one period to the next. Any change in
policy must be fully disclosed.
Consolidation
Method of combining the accounts of a group
of companies into one balance sheet and profit
and loss account for the group as a whole.
Contingent liability
A liability dependent upon the outcome of a
future event.
Costs of goods sold
Those costs (usually raw materials, labour
and production overheads) directly attributed
to goods that have been sold. The difference
between sales and cost of goods sold gives a
measure of gross profit.
and
interest
on
capital
242
Airline Finance
An estimate of a tax liability payable at some

estimated future date, resulting from timing
differences in the taxation and accounting
treatment of certain items of income and
expenditure.
Depreciation
An estimate of the proportion of the cost of a

tangible fixed asset which has been consumed
(whether through use, obsolescence or the
passage of time) during the accounting period.
Discounted cash flow
Technique for assessing the present value of

future income and payments (cash flow) which
takes into account the time value of money.
Distribution
An amount owed which will have to be paid

within 12 months of the balance sheet date or
money received in advance of carriage.
The amount distributed to shareholders out of

the profits of the company, usually in the form
of a cash dividend.
Dividend yield
The comparison between current assets and

current liabilities in a balance sheet, providing
a measure of business liquidity.
The relationship between the amount of

dividend per share and the market share price
of listed companies.
Dole-Pickle bill
United States legislation by which cross

border leasing was effectively abolished for
that country.
Amounts due to those who have supplied goods

or services to the business.
Cross-border lease
A lease in which the lessor and lessee are in
different countries or different legal systems.
Current asset
An asset which, if not already in cash form,

is expected to be converted into cash within
12 months ofthe balance sheet date.
Current liability
Current ratio
243
Deferred taxation
Creditors
Current cost convention
Glossary a/Terms
A basis of accounting under which revenue

is compared with the current (rather than the
historic) cost of resources used up in earning
it in and assets are stated in the balance sheet
at their current value to the business (usually
equivalent to net current replacement cost).
Debentures
Long-term loans, usually secured on the

company's assets.
Debt
A form of financing where the borrower pays

interest at an agreed rate and is liable to repay
the principal by an agreed date.
Double-dip lease
A lease that takes advantage of tax and funding

incentives from two sources, usually situated
in two different countries.
Debt/equity ratio
A measure of the financial structure of a firm

which is used in assessment of financial risk.
Double entry
Debtors
Amounts due from customers to whom goods

or services have been sold but for which they
have not yet paid.
A system of bookkeeping whereby the amount

of each transaction the business enters into is
recorded in two places according to the manner
in which the transaction increases or decreases
anyone or more of the business's assets,
liabilities, capital, revenue, or expenses.
Default
An event defined in a lease agreement, such as

failure to pay rent or perform some obligation
required under the terms of a lease.
Dry lease
The lease of an aircraft without the crew.
Earnings per share
The amount of profit (after tax, but before any

extraordinary items) attributable to shareholders
divided by the number of Ordinary shares in
issue.
Return over and above a company's average
cost of capital (WACC) multiplied by market
adjusted capital employed (Equity Value Added
considers only equity capital).
Defeasance
Deferred asset/liability
A situation where the lessee borrows at one rate

and deposits at a higher rate, with the deposit
used to fulfil the rental obligations in the lease.
Since the deposit is at a higher rate, the sum
deposited is less than the total borrowed
financed amount and the lessee obtains an up
front cash benefit which can be used to increase
the net present value benefit 'of the transaction.
An amount receivable or payable more than
12 months after the balance sheet date.
Economic Value Added
244
Enterprise Value (EV)
Equity
Equity participation
Airline Finance
The market value ofboth the equity and quoted

debt securities, plus any other debt (both long
and short-term) less cash, deposits and short
term loans to others, plus the present value of
operating lease contracts.
A form of financing which provides a share
in the ownership of an entity and on which
dividends are paid out of the profits earned by
the entity concerned.
Where the lessor or one of the group oflessors
participates in a leveraged lease. Equity
participants hold trust certificates to provide
evidence of their beneficial interest as owners
under the owner trust.
Exceptional item
Income or expenditure that, although arising

from the ordinary course ofbusiness, is ofsuch
unusual size or incidence that it needs to be
disclosed separately.
Expense
A cost incurred, or a proportion of a cost, the

benefit ofwhich is wholly used up in the earning
of the revenue for a particular accounting
period.
Export credit
Extraordinary item
Finance lease
A long-term sales financing with a non-payment

guarantee and (optionally) interest rate support
from the government of the manufacturer's
country.
Any significant amount of income or
expenditure arising from events outside the
ordinary activities, of the business and which,
because of its unusual nature, needs to be
separately disclosed.
A lease where ownership and the associated
benefits and risks, are transferred to the lessee
at the end of the lease period. Rentals are net
to the lessor. Taxes, insurance, maintenance are
the responsibility ofthe lessor. Rentals over the
life of the lease are sufficient to cover the cost
of the equipment plus a return on investment.
First loss deficiency guarantee
A guarantee given by the manufacturer on the

continued value of the product.
Fixed asset
Assets held for use by the business rather than

for sale.
Glossary a/Terms
245
Fixed cost
A cost that does not necessarily vary with

changes in the scale of operations, e.g., rent.
Forward contract
An agreement between two parties to exchange

a certain underlying asset for a specified price,
called the forward or exercise price, at a
specified future date.
Futures contract
Similar to a forward contract, but can be traded
on an exchange, which regulates the market in
terms of contract specification, policing margin
payments and providing a clearing house.
Gearing (Debt/Equity Ratio)
The ratio of debt to equity, usually expressed
as the proportion which long-term borrowings
bear to shareholders' funds.
Going concern concept
The assumption that the business will continue
in operation for the foreseeable future, i.e., that
there is no intention to curtail or significantly
reduce the scale of operations.
Goodwill
Any surplus consideration paid over and above
the value of net tangible assets acquired.
Gross profit
The difference between sales and the cost of
goods sold.
Group
A number of companies operating under the
same controlling ownership.
Historic cost convention
The convention by which assets are valued on
the basis of the original cost of acquiring or
producing them.
Holding company
A company that controls another company as
a result of owning more than 50 per cent of its
equity share capital.
Institutional investors
Investors such as banks, insumnce companies,
trust funds, pension funds, foundations,
educational institutions, etc.
Interest cover
The relationship between the amount ofinterest
payable during a period and the amount of
profit (before interest and before tax).
Internal rate of return (lRR)
The discount rate that equates a project's future
net cash flows with the initial investment (or,
alternatively, results in a zero net present
value).
246
Japanese leveraged lease
LASU
Lease
Lease term
Glossary a/Terms
Airline Finance
247
A type of lease originated in Japan in 1986

by which cross-border leasing of commercial
aircraft is financed through Japanese funds
(equity is provided by blind pool of investors
and non-recourse debt is provided by Japanese
financial institutions).
Long-term liability
An amount payable more than 12 months after

the balance sheet date.
Materiality
A subjective judgement of the extent to which

any amount is significant in the context of the
financial position of a business as described in
the balance sheet or its reported profit or loss.
Large Aircraft Sector Understanding: An

agreement negotiated through OECD by the
countries of the European Community and
the USA in 1985, covering export sales of
aircraft and helicopters, and ruling cash down
payments, credit terms and fixation of interest
rates.
Minimum lease payments
The payments over the lease term that the

lessee is or can be required to make, together
with any amounts guaranteed by the lessee (or
related party), to the extent that it is likely that
these payments will be made.
Minority interest
That part of a group's net assets owned by

shareholders other than the holding company.
Net assets
The net amount of total assets less total

liabilities.
Net book value
Amount at which an asset could be sold in its

existing condition at the balance sheet date,
after deducting any costs to be incurred in
disposing of it.
Net present value (NPV)
The discounted value of future net revenues,

benefits, cash flows or rental streams, allowing
for the time value of money.
A contract between a lessor and lessee for the

right to use an asset. The ownership ofthe asset
is retained by the lessor, but the right to use it
is given to the lessee for an agreed period of
time in return for a series of rentals paid by the
lessee to the lessor.
The non-cancellable period for which the lessee
has contracted to lease the asset.
Lessee
The user of the equipment which is being
leased.
Lessor
The owner of the equipment which is being

leased.
Nominal value
The face value of a share or other security.
Non
A lease in which at least three parties are

involved: a lessee, a lessor and a provider of
long-term debt. The debt is a significant part
of the transaction,. generally without recourse
to the lessor.
Lenders places a high degree of reliance on the

project, and their rights to the borrower's assets
are limited.
Over-the-Counter (OTC)
The OTC market is a network of securities

dealers or brokers and not an exchange. These
firms make the market by posting buy and sell
offers on a bulletin board. Issuers of securities
traded in the OTC market do not have to comply
with SEC or other exchange rules.
Operating lease
A lease where the lessor retains ownership, and

the associated risks and property advantages,
ofthe asset at the end ofthe lease period, which
may be quite short.
Option
The right, but not obligation, to buy a specified

quantity of an underlying asset at a specified
price, called the strike or exercise price.
Overhead
An expense that cannot be attributed to any

specific part of the company's operations.
Leveraged lease
Liability
An amount owed.
LlBOR
London Inter-bank Offered Rate; and is usually

the rate offered for either 3 month or 6 month
US dollars.
Liquidity
A term used to describe the cash resources of

a business and its ability to meet is short-term
obligations.
Listed investments
Investments the market price for which is

quoted on a recognised Stock Exchange.
Long lease
A lease with an unexpired term in excess of

50 years.
(or limited) recourse
248
Post balance sheet event
Prepayment
Airline Finance
Any event occurring after the balance sheet

date, but before the accounts are issued, which
is sufficiently significant to be either reflected
or noted in the accounts.
The part of a cost which is carried forward as
an asset in the balance sheet to be recognised
as an expense in the ensuing period(s) in which
the benefit will be derived from it.
Price/earnings ratio
The relationship between the latest reported

earnings per share and the market price per
share.
Profit
The difference between the revenues earned

in the period and the costs incurred in earning
them. A number of alternative definitions are
possible according to whether the figure is
struck before or after tax, extraordinary items,
distributions, etc.
Glossary C!f Terms
249
Repossession
The act of recovering the leased asset fTOm the
company and country where it is leased.
Repossession insurance
Insurance against the inability to recover
leased equipment in the event of a default (for
example, non-return of an aircraft by a foreign
government or inability of the lender to de
register the aircraft.)
Reserves
The accumulated amount of profit less losses,
and any other surpluses, generated by the
company since its incorporation and retained
in it.
Residual value of an asset
Cost ofan asset less any part ofthe cost that has
been depreciated or amortised or treated as an
expense or loss. (Also, the value of the leased
equipment at the conclusion of the lease term.)
Revenue
Money received from selling the product of the
business.
Profit and loss account
A statement summarising the revenues earned

and the costs incurred in earning them during
an accounting period.
Sale-leaseback
A transaction which involves the sale of
equipment by the owner and the subsequent
lease of the same equipment back to the seller.
Project finance
Financing where the lender looks to the

project's cash flow to repay the debt and pay
interest, and to the project's assets for security.
Samurai lease
Provision
The amount written off in the current year's

profit and loss account in respect of any known
or estimated loss or liability.
Japanese-sourced lease designed to fund
foreign assets in order to help to reduce the
Japanese balance of payments surplus.
Sensitivity analysis
Prudence concept
The philosophy which says that when

measuring profit provision should be made for
all known or expeqted losses and liabilities, but
that revenue should only be recognised if it is
realised in the form of cash or near-cash.
A part of financial or economic appraisal
that tests the effect of various forecasting
assumptions on the net present value or internal
rate of return.
Share capital
Stated in the balance sheet at its nominal value
and (if fully paid, and subject to any share
premium) representing the amount of money
introduced into the company by its shareholders
at the time the shares were issued.
Shareholders' 'fund'
A measure of the shareholders' total interest in
the company, represented by the total of share
capital plus reserves.
Share premium
The surplus over and above nominal value
received in consideration for the issue of
shares.
Sub-lease
A transaction in which the leased equipment is
re-Ieased by the original lessee to a third party,
while the lease agreement between the two
original parties remains in effect.
Purchase option
Option to purchase the asset; bargain purchase

option is an option to purchase the asset at
below market value.
Put option
An option to sell an asset to another party at a

set price at a particular future date.
Quick ratio
The relationship between those current assets

readily convertible into cash (usually current
assets less stock) and current liabilities.
A company in which the investing company
holds a substantial (generally not less than 20
per cent) and long-term interest and over which
it exercises significant influence.
Related company
250
Airline Finance
Subsidiary company
Any company in which the investing company

has an interest of more than 50 per cent in the
voting share capital, or otherwise is a member
of it and controls the composition of its board
of directors.
Syndicated loan
A loan made available by a group of banks in

predefined proportions under the same credit
facility.
Tax credit
The amount of tax deducted at source (at the

basic rate of income tax) by a company from
any dividend payment.
Timing difference
An adjustment to accounting profit in order to

arrive at taxable profit which arises from the
difference between the accounting and taxation
treatment of certain items of income and
expenditure.
Total Shareholder Return
Combination of share price performance and

dividends paid over a defined period (TSR)
Turnover
Revenue from sales.
Useful life
The period of time during which an asset will

have economic value and be usable. Useful life
is sometimes called the economic life of the
asset.
Variable cost
A cost that increases or decreases in line with

changes in the level of activity.
Walkaway lease
A lease which allows the possibility for the

lessee to return equipment to the manufacturer
providing a short notice is given without having
to make penalty payments.
Wet lease
The lease of an aircraft with crew and other

back-up.
Working capital
Current assets less current liabilities,

representing the amount a business needs to
invest - and which is continually circulating
in order to finance its stock, debtors and work
in-progress.
Work-in-progress
Goods (or services) in the course

of production (or provision) at
the balance sheet date.
Sources: How to Understand and Use Company Accounts by Roy Warren; Aircraft Financing
edited by Simon Hall; Guidelines for Infrastructure Development through Build-Operate
Transfer Projects; and the author
Index
accounting practice
standardisation 44-6
variations 25-6, 44, 72-3
accounting rate of return 162-3
acid test ratio 63-5, 72-3
acquisitions see mergers
ADR (American Depositary Receipt) 114,
115
definition 239
ADSs (American Depositary Shares) 114,
115
definition 239
Africa, privatisation 147
agents, commission 24
Air Canada
aircraft depreciation 86
bankruptcy 145,223
debt rating 88
government shareholding 130
operating ratio 70
privatisation 145
valuation ratio 87
Air France-KLM
Alitalia stake 127
merger 128, 144
privatisation 142-4
ROIC 58
share price 143, 144
see also KLM
air miles schemes 35,49, 50
Air New Zealand, re-nationalisation 3, 12
air traffic forecasts
and GDP 2, 229-30
region, Airbus vs Boeing 230-1
short/medium-term 231
air traffic rights 75-79
franchising 77-78
negotiation 75-6
ownership 76
purchase of 77
valuation 77, 78-9
see also airport slots
Airbus
air traffic forecasts 230
aircraft delivery/retirement forecasts 232,
233
Asset Management 105
export credit 103
leases 200
aircraft
deliveries 91
delivery/retirement forecasts 231-2
price 11, III
purchase finance 97-9
size 11
utilisation 11-12
aircraft leasing 195-205
airlines
and leasing 196-7
shares by region 197
dry lease 204, 243
European Leveraged Leases 200
Ex.tendible Operating Leases 200
features 195
finance lease 197-200
finance and operating accounting 51-3
financing 99
Japanese Leveraged Lease (JLL) 198-9
Japanese Operating Lease (JOL) 203
lease vs buy 207-9
NPV calculation 207
lease vs hire purchase 195
operating lease 200-3
pros and cons 195-6
rental calculations 206
sale and leaseback 204-5
tax. paying lessee 208-9
US Leveraged Leases 199-200
wet lease 204
aircraft securitisation 211-18
Airplanes 96 Securitisation 215-16
ALPS 92-1 Securitisation 213-14
ALPS 94-1 Securitisation 215
252
Airline Finance
Equipment Trust Certificates (ETC) 212

13
meaning 211
pros and cons 211-13, 217-18
recent securitisations 21 7
airline bankruptcy 219-28
Australasia 226-7
Canada 223
Chapter II action 9, 90, 220-3, 227
Europe 224-5
Latin America 223-4
North America 221-5
airline debt ratings 89-90
airline depreciation, example 30-6
airline finance
balance sheet 26-36
bank loans 100-1, 106-8
bonds 95-7
book profit calculation 110
break-even point 9-10
capital expenditure 91
depreciation 18, 29-32
dividends 92-3
EBRD 108
EIB 107
equipment trust certificates 97
export credit 91-2
agencies 10 1-4
factors affecting 8-10
governmental organisations 106-8
IBRD 106-7
ICAO 108
institutions 100-8
Japanese 91
key issues 12-13
leases 99
long-term 92, 93-100
see also equity finance
manufacturer's support 99-100
operating lessors 104-6
preference share capital 94-5
profit and loss account 17-26
shareholders' equity capital 93-4
short-term 93
sources
external 93-100
internal 92-3
spectrum 212
term loans 97-99
airline
_
acquisitions/mergers 13
alliances 13
AMEX Index 122
asset utilisation 10-12
business models, profitability 6-8
capital expenditure projections 231-2
cross-border investments 127-9
debt/equity ratio 1, 12
finance sources 91-111
financial ratios 55-73
financial requirements forecasts 232-4
financial statements 15-53
foreign ownership limits 117-18
and Gulf War 1,2,5,9,10,134

key financial issues 12-13
MSCI index 123
new entrants 12
operating costs 8-9
operating margins 4-5
overcapacity 10
productivity 11
and loss 1, 2-4
reports
European Commission 6
USA6
ROIC8
and September 11 (2001) events 1,5,6,
229
stock market listings 120-1
stock performance 13-14
subsidies 3
airline privatisation 128-49
Africa 147
Air France 142-4
and ASAs 117
AsiaJPacific 147-49
British Airways 13 1-5
Caribbean 145-6
Central & South America 146
Europe 146-8
flotation 131-7
government shareholdings 129-30
Iberia 142
justification 129
Kenya Airways 139-42
Lufthansa 137-39
methods 131
Middle East 147
Index
North America 145
Qantas 135-7
airline valuation 76-90
comparisons 85-7
DCF84
enterprise value 85
intangible assets 75-83
price/earnings ratio 85
ratings agencies 88-90
ratio method 85-88
tangible assets 83
as a whole 84-88
Airplanes 96 Securitisation 215-16
airport slots
allocation 79-80
DCF valuation 80-1
trade in 80
valuation 80-3
see also traffic rights
Alitalia
Air France-KLM stake 127
cross-border investment 127
debt to equity ratio 70
leased aircraft 197
operating ratio 70
privatisation 146
state aid 225
stock market listing 120
alliances 13, 135
ALPS 94-1 Securitisation 215
AMEX Airline Index 122
American Airlines see AMR
amortisation 18
definition 240
AMR (American Airlines) Corporation
accounts 15
acid test 64
air miles scheme 50
airport slots 79, 81
BA, accounts, comparison 21-3,26-30,
36-38,41,56,58,59,64
cash flow statement 41
consolidated statement of operation 22
cross-border investments 127
currcnt ratio 63
debt ratings 88
depreciation charge 22
EETC 213
253
financial ratios, key 70
FFPs 48
fuel hedging 192
government loans 222
interest cover 60
Ieased aircraft 197
market capitalisation 87
operating ratio 70
outsourcing 42
RoE 59
ROIC 58
self-financing ratio 68
share price 115
turnover to capital employed ratio 58
value added distribution 43
ASAs (Air Services Agreements) 117, 118,
126, 128
and privatisation 117
Asia/Pacific, privatisation 147-49
Asian financial crisis (1997/98) 2,5,148,
182,226
asset utilisation 10-12
per employee 11
assets 27-33, 36-7
definition 239
see also intangible assets; tangible assets
Association of Asia Pacific Airlines, profit

and loss 5-6
Australasia, airline bankruptcy 226-7
Austrian Airlines, ROIC 58
balance sheet 26-36
assets 2733, 36-7
BA vs AMR, comparison 36-38
cash flow statements 38-41
components 26
presentation 26
variations 27
bank loans 100-1
bankruptcy see airline bankruptcy
Beta Values 68-9
use 69
BIS (Bank for International Settlements)
91, 175
Boeing aircraft
747-400, cost )0
forecast demand 233
254
book profit, calculation 110
accounts 15
acid test 64
AMR Corporation, accounts, comparison
21-3,26-30,36-38,41,56,58,59,64
assets
current 32-3
non-current 29
balance sheet 28
Beta Value 69
capital and reserves 35-6
cash flow statement 38-41
cash value added statement 43-4
consolidated income account 20
convertible preference shares 95-6
current ratio 63
debt to equity ratio 60-1
depreciation 29
dividend 21
dividend cover 64-5
dividend yield 64-5
EPS 65-6
equity valuelEBITDAR 67-68
foreign ownership 134
fuel consumption 1
interest cover 60
Laker Airways, comparison 131-2
liabilities
current 33-5
non-current 34-5
market capitalisation 65, 87, 88
net asset value per share 67
net profit margin 57
operating account 18, 21
operating ratio/margin 56
Perfonnance Share Plan comparator 123
price/earnings ratio 66
privatisation 131-5
key ratios 132-3
share distribution 134
staff incentives 133-4
Qantas, alliance 135
RoE 59
ROIC 57-8
self-financing ratio 68
share price 19,65,66,67,84,86,97, 135
share value 113
turnover/profit 21
US Air, investment in 95-6
valuation criteria 87
value added statement 42-3
value per share 67
budgets 151-6
cash ISS, 156
fonnats 156
monthly 154
perfonnance indicators 155
route analysis 152-3
types 152
zero-based 152
business plan, start-up airline 171-3
Canada, airline bankruptcy 223
capital expenditure projections 231-2
Caribbean, privatisation 145-6
cash flow forecasts 160-2
cash flow statements 38-41
BA vs AMR, comparison 41
variations 40-1
Cathay Pacific
fuel hedging 193
fuel surcharges 189
interest cover 70
leased aircraft 197
MSCI index J23
operating l<itio 70, 71
RoE 70
stock market listing 120, 121
US dollar mismatch 182
Central & South America, privatisation 146
Chapter II bankruptcy 6, 90,220-3,227
Civil Aviation Authority (UK) 76
Continental Airlines
AMEX airline index 122
bankruptcy 221
borrowings 99
operating margin 56
corporation tax 24-5
cross-border investments 127-28
currency exchange rates, vs US dollar 177
currency movements
255
Index
Airline Finance
balance sheet exposure 183-4
trading exposure 178-83
see also exchange rates
current ratio 62-3
CVA (Cash Value Added) 43-4
definition 241
Datastream, Beta Value 69
DCF (Discounted Cash Flow)
airline valuation 84
airport slots val uation 80-1
definition 243
fonnula 163-4
debt to equity ratio I, 12, 60-1, 71
definition 242
examples 62, 70
definitions 239-50
Delta Air Lines
debt rating 88
fuel hedging 192
incremental costs 48
Ieased aircraft 197
operating margin 57
operating ratio 70
depreciation 18
definition 243
example 29-32
Deutsche Borse 119
dividends 92-3
double-entry system 16
definition 243
dry lease 204
definition 243
easy Jet
equity funding 117
IPO 125, 126
leased aircraft 197
RoE 59
share price 126
EBRD (European Bank for Reconstruction
and Development) 108, 117
ECGD (Export Credit Guarantee
Department) (UK) 103
EETC (Enhanced Equipment Trust
Certificate) 212-13, 218, 234
examples 213
see also ETC
EIB (European Investment Bank) 107
equity finance 113-28
foreign ownership 117-18
IPO 124-6
for start-up airline 115-17
ETC (Equipment Trust Certificate) 212
see also EETC
Europe
privatisation 146-7
European Commission, airline industry

report 6
European Leveraged Leases 200
EVA (Economic Value Added) 43
definition 243
exchange rates
Asian vs US dollar 182
volatility 175-78
see also currency movements
Eximbank 102
export credit agencies 101-4
credit volume 101-2
European 103
list 102
Extendible Operating Leases 200
extraordinary items
accounting 25
definition 244
FFPs (Frequent Flyer Programmes) 47-50
approaches 24, 47-8
deferred revenue technique 48
incremental cost method 48-9
and profitability 47
see also air miles schemes
finance see airline finance; equity finance

financial planning and appraisal 151-73
accounting rate of return 162-3
aims lSI
budgets 151-6
cash flow forecasts 160-2
control 151
working capital management 156-59
financial ratios 55-73
Beta Value 360-1
categories 55
inter-airline comparisons 69-72, 86-7
256
Index
Airline Finance
interpretation problems 72-3
key 70
liquidity ratios 62-4
performance/earnings ratios 56-9
risk/insolvency ratios 59-62
self-financing ratio 68, 92
stock market ratios 64-9
value of73
as window dressing 73
financial statements 15-53
availability 17
secrecy 16
stakeholder interest in 16
uniformity 17
financial year 17
Fitch agency 88
foreign currency 175-88
foreign exchange, risk management 184-8
foreign ownership
British Airways 134
limits to 117-18
Frequent Flyer Programmes see FFPs
FTSE 99 121-3
fuel
consumption I
efficiency I
surcharges 189
fuel prices 1-2
hedging 188-94
GDP, and air traffic forecasts 2, 229-30
gearing 8, 61-2
definition 245
GECAS (General Electric Capital Asset
Services) 104, 105
glossary 239-50
goodwill 76
accounting 24
definition 245
GPA (Guinness Peat Aviation) 104-5
Gulf War 1,2,5,9,10,134
Iberia Airlines 3
EETCs, use
privatisation 142
IBRD (International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development) 106-7
ICAO (International Civil Aviation
Organization) 108
ILFC (International Lease Finance
Corporation) 104, 105
income statement see profit and loss account
intangible assets 27, 75-83
goodwill 76
valuation 80-3
DCF 80-1
price/earnings method 81
see also airport slots; traffic rights
interest cover 59-60, 72
definition 245
examples 70
variations 60
investment, in other airlines 127-8
IPO (Initial Public Offering) 124-6
Iraq War (2003) 5
1RR (internal rate of return) 164
definition 245
NPV, comparison 167-8
JAL (Japan AirLines)
aircraft purchase 104
interest cover 70, 72
operating ratio 70
privatisation 130
RoE 70, 71
JetBlue
debt rating 90
IPO 125, 126
leased aircraft 197
stock mar!<et listing 120, 121
JLL (Japanese Leveraged Lease) 198-9, 233
definition 246
JOL (Japanese Operating Lease) 203, 233
Kenya Airways
financial data 140-1
KLM co-operation 141-2
privatisation 139-42
share price 136
KLM
Kenya Airways co-operation 141-2
see also Air France-KLM
Laker Airways, British Airways, comparison
131-2
Latin America, airline bankruptcy 223-4
LCCs (Low Cost Carriers)
equity funding 116-17
leased aircraft 197
venture capital 116
leasing see aircraft leasing
liquidity ratios 62-4
London Stock Exchange see LSE
loyalty programmes see frequent flyer
programmes
LSE (London Stock Exchange) 114, 119,
Lufthansa-Swiss
Beta Value 69
cash flow 41
consolidated income statement 23-4
merger 128
privatisation 137-39
ROIC 58-9
share price 97, 128, 138
shareholding 139
Malaysia Airlines 6
re-nationalisation 3, 12
mergers 13, 126, 128
Middle East, privatisation 147
Monte Carto simulation 169, 171
Moody agency 88, 89, 211
Nasdaq 118, 119,120,121
national flag carriers 6, 12, 107.226
net profit margin 57
new entrants 12, 19,80, 101,226,234
see also start-up airline
New York Stock Exchange see NYSE
NEXI (Japan) 103-4
North America
privatisation 145
see also Canada; USA
Northwest Airlines
Chapter II bankruptcy 71
cross-investment 126
debt rating 88
FFPs47
fuel hedging 192
leased aircraft 197
257
operating ratio 70
NPV (Net Present Value) 164-7
discount rate calculation 165-7
IRR, comparison 167-8
lease calculation 207
NYSE (New York Stock Exchange) 114,
115,119, 120, 121
oil prices 3
see also fuel prices
operating costs 4, 8-10
operating lessors 104-5
fleet size & value 106
operating margins 4-5
operating ratio 56-7, 70
ratios 70
outsourcing 9, 11,42, 68
overcapacity 10, 12
passenger load factor trends 7-8
payback period 163-4
performance indicators 155
privatisation see airline privatisation
probability (risk) analysis 168-9
profit and loss
airline industry 1, 2-4
Association ofAsia Pacific Airlines 5-6
AMR Corporation 21-2
British Airways 18-21
components 17-18
expenditure 17-18
revenue 17
profitability index 165
Qantas
airport slots 82
Beta Value 69
British Airways, alliance 135
cross-border investments 127
currency changes, impact 181
debt rating 88
EETCs, use 213
fuel surcharges 189
interest cover 70
leased aircraft 197
MSCI index 123
258
index
Airline Finance
operating ratio 70
privatisation 135-7
RoE 70
share distribution, post-offer 136
share price 136, 137
US dollar mismatch 182
quick ratio see acid test ratio

ratings agencies 88-90
ratios see financial ratios
risk management
foreign exchange 175-88
fuel prices 188-206
risk ratios 59-62
risks
exchange rates 175-88
fuel prices 188-94
RoE (return on equity) 59, 70, 71
examples 70
ROlC (Return on Invested Capital) 8, 57-9
Rolls-Royce, aircraft delivery/retirement
forecasts 232
route profitability analysis 152-3
route rights see traffic rights
Royal Brunei Airlines 6
Ryanair
share price 11 8
sale and leaseback 204-5
SARS health threat (2003) 2, 5
SAS Airlines
interest cover 60
revenue and cost currency breakdown
180
ROIC 58
scenario analysis 169
securitisation see aircraft securitisation
sensitivity analysis 169
September 11 (2001) events 1,5,6,229
share issues 113-15
share price
Air France 143, 144
AMR 115
British Airways 19, 65, 66, 67, 84, 86,
97, 135
ea~yJet 126
Kenya Airways 136
Lufthansa-S wiss 97, 128, I 38
Qantas 136, 137
Ryanair 118
Turkish Airlines 147
Singapore Airlines 4
Beta Value 69
solvency ratios 59-62
Southwest Airlines
aircraft, depreciation rate 31
debt rating 88, 89, 90
debt to equity ratio 61, 70
fuel hedging 192
leased aircraft 197
MSCI world airline index
operating margin 4
operating ratio 70
RoE 70, 71
stock market listing 120, 121
staff numbers 11
Standard & Poor's agency 88,89, 2ll
start-up airline
business plan 170-3
equity finance ll5 -17
regulations 172-3
see also new entrants
statement of financial position see balance

sheet
stock indices 121- 3
stock market
listings U 9-21
ratios 64-9
stock markets, world 121
stock performance 12, 13
subsidies 3, 102,200
tangible a~sets 27
valuation 83
taxation 96
term loans 97-9
repayment calculations 10910

Thai Airways
fuel hedging 193
interest cover 70
MSCI world airline index 123
RoE 70
operating ratio 70, 71
US dollar mismatch 182, 183
Tokyo Stock Exchange 119
traffic see air traffic
Turkish Airlines
government shareholding 146-7
share price 147
United Airlines (U AL)
9/11 compensation 222
aircraft leases 200
airport slots 76
fuel surcharges 189
government share holding 130
investment rating 89
manufacturer's support 99
operating ratio 70
US Air
aircraft leasing 203
British Airways investment 95-6
operating ratio 70
US Airways
airport slots 83
Chapter 11 entry/exit 220, 221
debt rating 88
fuel hedging 192
government loans 223
259
US Leveraged Leases 199-200
USA, airline industry report 6
valuation see airline valuation
value added statements 42-3
venture capital
firms 116
LCCs 116
Virgin Atlantic
brand franchising 77
operating ratio 70
RoE 70
WACC (Weighted Average Cost of Capital)

8,44,69,96,164
formula 166
wet lease 104, 204
working capital management 156-9
cash/securities 158-9
current liabilities 159
debtors 157-8
stocks 156-7

Airline Finance PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Airline Finance PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Airline Finance PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are some methods of financing for airlines discussed in the text?

What are some methods of financing for airlines discussed in the text?

What factors influence an airline's financial performance?

What factors influence an airline's financial performance?

Airline Finance

Appendix 5.1 Tenn Loan Repayment, Book Profit and Manufacturers'

8 Airline Financial Planning and Appraisal

9 Risk Management: Foreign Currency and Fuel Price

13 Industry Financial Prospects

ICAO scheduled airline traffic growth vs world GDP growth

Passenger load factor trends by major world region

Airline return on invested capital (ROIC)

World airline stock index vs top share indices, 1995-2006

Aircraft lease classification guidelines

Income statement valuation ratios for selected airlines by region

Ryanair (Dublin) vs Nasdaq (ADR) share price

British Airways' share price trend vs UK market

NPV vs discount rate: A330-300 vs B777-200

Key currency exchange rates vs US dollar, 1983-2005

Selected Asian exchange rates vs US dollar, 1997/1998

Cost of hedging vs eventual spot rate

Figure 10.1 Number of airlines owning and leasing aircraft

Figure 11.1 Aircraft financing spectrum

World airline productivity

British Airways' Group consolidated income account

British Airways' turnover/profit by area of sales

American Airlines' consolidated statement of operation

Lufthansa Group consolidated income statement

British Airways' Group balance sheet

British Airways' Group non-current assets

Depreciation rate comparison for 2005/2006:

British Airways' Group current assets

British Airways' Group current liabilities

British Airways Group Operating ratio/margin

Scheduled world airlines balance sheet long-term financing

Venture capital interests in LCC/start-up airlines, early 2000s

Government share holdings (per cent) in top 20 international

Route profitability analysis

Effect of exchange rate depreciation on profits of exporter airline 181

Effect of exchange rate depreciation on profits of importer airline 182

SAS revenue and cost currency breakdown in 2005 (per cent)

Impact of currency changes on Qantas after-tax profit for

Asian airline US dollar mismatch

Percentage of 2004 fuel needs hedged at 31 December 2003:

FY2004/2005 fuel needs hedged at YE2003/2004:

ALPS 92-1 aircraft portfolio

Key US airline Chapter 11 entry and exit

The purpose of the book is to provide, as far as possible, a broad understanding of

an evaluation of the financial prospects of the industry. Wherever possible, the

Industry Financial Performance

World Airline Financial Results

Industry Financial Performance

ICAO scbeduled airline traffic growth vs world GDP growth

ICAO scheduled airline financial results

Industry Financial Performance

III Asia/Pacific ---I

. III North America :

ICAO scheduled airline financial results as per cent revenues

;;=;~~;=-:=~=J_ __;":..'~.~.[""'I l '!--, . . . . ~-.t-~rI\\...w~