Delta, other airlines lose a big bet on fuel prices

Delta faces losing up to $450 million as it pulls out of prior contracts to buy fuel at set rates, or "hedging" against spikes in price. As oil prices hover near historic lows, many airlines are reconsidering the practice. 

|
Jeff Haynes/Reuters/File
A Delta Airlines Charter is seen at the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

Delta’s bet on fuel hasn’t paid off, according to the airliner's latest earnings report.

Delta Air Lines is facing a $450 million loss from pulling out of pre-set contracts to buy fuel at certain prices, as the cost of fuel ended up being much lower than the company anticipated. Such contracts are meant to protect a company against spikes in fuel costs. The practice, known as "hedging," is common among airlines, but when the price of fuel falls or fails to jump as high as expected, trade losses on fuel hedges can cancel the benefits of cheaper fuel.

Hedging fuel prices became commonplace in the airline industry after Southwest Airlines found success with the strategy in 2008, making $1.3 billion on hedges as oil prices surged. Chris Monroe, vice president and treasurer of Southwest, recently told the Wall Street Journal that the company sees value in hedging even though it hasn’t seen direct gains from the practice in recent years.  

“It’s like having a teenage-boy driver living right in the middle of your income statement,” he said. “You need some insurance on him.”

Hedging is particularly common among Asian and European airlines because fuel is bought using US currency, but flights are sold in other, often weaker, currencies. However, after many European airlines sustained huge losses last year from hedging, companies are looking to cut back on the practice.

Oil prices are near historic lows. In 2008, oil peaked at $147 a barrel; in February of this year, it was $26 per barrel. In March, oil was $41 per barrel, almost 60 percent lower than prices seen in mid-2014.

Additionally, because of more fuel-efficient aircrafts, and recent mega-mergers within the industry, there may be less of a need for hedging fuel prices even as they fluctuate. 

“We don’t need to hedge that risk like we used to," Gerry Laderman, the acting chief financial officer of United Continental, told the Wall Street Journal.  "That doesn’t mean that hedging is off the table. We are looking at formulating…a different way of thinking about it.”

Delta isn’t the only airline to lose out on fuel hedging. Last year, United Continental lost $604 million from the practice. Southwest lost $254 million. The only airline that hasn't hedged on fuel in recent years is American Airlines, the US airline with the most traffic out of the big four airlines.

In 2016, United Continental shares have dipped 29 percent, and Delta has seen share prices drop 28 percent. For Delta, revenue per mile, or revenue for each seat flown one mile, dropped five percent in the second quarter of this year, more than the expected decline of 2.5-4.5 percent.

Airlines are facing other headwinds besides fuel costs. Fare prices have decreased in the past year due to the combination of low oil prices and a greater supply of flights than there is demand for flights. Fears of terrorism and uncertainty regarding Brexit have also hurt the airline industry in recent months.

Even with lower fare prices and a loss from hedging fuel prices, Delta will still save money from pulling out of fuel contracts. Though oil prices have increased since February 2016, they are still 20 percent lower than last year.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Delta, other airlines lose a big bet on fuel prices
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2016/0706/Delta-other-airlines-lose-a-big-bet-on-fuel-prices
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe