PIA Annual Loss Soared to 45 Billion Rupees in 2016

[Abbas Ali]

Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) posted a net loss of Rs 45 billion ($433 million) for 2016, a jump of 36 percent over the loss of Rs 33 biilion ($310 million) incurred in the previous year.

The airline's revenue was down by two percent to Rs. 89 billion from Rs 91 billion a year ago.

Source: DAWN (October 14, 2017)

[Abbas Ali]

Source: PIA

Abbas

[furqan_haider]

Good thing is PML-N can't blame this one on ouster of NS.

[Amaad Lone]

What the passenger and cargo load factor on PIA???

One way to overcome these losses is to improve the load factor for year round operations.

Off season if the planes are flying half empty try to increase load.

If 90 billion rupees equals to 65 percent load factor then 80 percent load will equal 110 billion or wiping out 30 billion in losses with no extra cost.

Something to think about.

[imiakhtar]

What the passenger and cargo load factor on PIA???

One way to overcome these losses is to improve the load factor for year round operations.

Off season if the planes are flying half empty try to increase load.

If 90 billion rupees equals to 65 percent load factor then 80 percent load will equal 110 billion or wiping out 30 billion in losses with no extra cost.

Something to think about.

LOL.

You really haven't got a clue.

Load factors are for all intent and purpose meaningless. It's yield, or the money you make per seat that matters. PIA could fill all their aircraft tomorrow by dropping prices, but that WOULD NOT cover the cost of flying the seat.

I've given this example a billion times over: British Airways couldn't make a profit on London-Dhaka despite having a seat load factor averaging over 90%.

[Amaad Lone]

LOL.

You really haven't got a clue.

Yes I do not because I am not an airline professional, but neither do the idiots running the airline for the past 13 years.

Load factors are for all intent and purpose meaningless.

Really then why is term used all over the world to determine if the airline is doing well or not.

It's yield, or the money you make per seat that matters. PIA could fill all their aircraft tomorrow by dropping prices, but that WOULD NOT cover the cost of flying the seat.

No one is suggesting PIA drop fares by 50 percent obviously I know that would do the opposite as revenue would decline, but there must be ways to improve traffic that would increase revenue.

For example PIA never promotes its frequent flyer program like other airlines, do I have tried to get a PIA frequent flyer plan but have not been able to.

What about stand by fares like lot of airlines offer, last minutes empty seats can be filled up with half the fare that will still bring in billions.

But the Sabre reservation system does not allow that.

The truth is with fares remaining at a static level and the load factor goes up PIA revenue will increase.

Just booking a seat for my son for London-Lahore-London for December and PIA is the most expensive ticket in the market.

[Abbas Ali]

Found this information about difference between Yield and Load Factor on airliners.net forum.

The load factor is the number of butts in the seat and amount of cargo in the hold -- relative to the number of available seats and available cargo space.

The yield is the amount of money the flight makes.

So ... if the flight costs the airline $250,000 to operate and they're flying 250 PAX in a 300-seat aircraft they have a (PAX) load-factor of 83%.

Now, assume for the purposes of this exercise that the airline has $15,000 worth of cargo in the belly, it means the PAX yield needs to be $235,000.

Which means that the average ticket price needs to be: $940 for break even.

If they've only managed to get an average price of $800 per pax, it means the yield is $215,000.

So the load factor is good on the flight, but the yield isn't.

Now, if they'd got an average price of $1,000 per pax, the yield works out at $265,000.

So: good load factor and good yield.

Of course this is very simplified, but it shows why a good load factor doesn't necessarily mean good yields (and also why low load factors can return good yields).

http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=767427

Abbas

[imiakhtar]

LOL.

You really haven't got a clue.

Yes I do not because I am not an airline professional, but neither do the idiots running the airline for the past 13 years.

Load factors are for all intent and purpose meaningless.

Really then why is term used all over the world to determine if the airline is doing well or not.

It's yield, or the money you make per seat that matters. PIA could fill all their aircraft tomorrow by dropping prices, but that WOULD NOT cover the cost of flying the seat.

No. Seat load factor is only used as a simple measure for seat occupancy.

Airlines and their yield management teams use rask or rasm and cask or casm. It's simple. Honestly. And no, you don't need airline experience to run one successfully (though I am a former BA network and ops manager).

[Abbas Ali]

Audited accounts for the year ended December 31, 2016, together with auditor's report and directors's report will be presented at Extra Ordinary General Meeting of the shareholders of Pakistan International Airlines Corporation Limited (PIACL) that will be held at 10:00 AM, on Saturday, November 25, 2017, at The Grand Ball Room, CAA Jogging Track Lawn, Opposite CAA Club, Near Star Gate, Main Shahrah-e-Faisal, Karachi.

Notice in October 29 newspaper:



Abbas

[Abbas Ali]

PIA suffered pre-tax loss of 45.27 billion rupees in year 2016, according to report available on airline's website:


Source: PIA

Abbas