Air Transat Posts Net Loss
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
Re: Air Transat Posts Net Loss
No hate, but what else is new. Transat couldn’t make money pre covid. They certainly aren’t going to turn a profit these days.
Re: Air Transat Posts Net Loss
I saw the writing on the wall and decided to leave in summer 2025.
-
Realitychex
- Rank 7
- Posts: 561
- Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 2:37 pm
Re: Air Transat Posts Net Loss
Transat is once again back at the tax payer trough, this time with a cheap $150m, tax payer subsidized, "loan" that I'd wager will never be repaid.
To give an indication of just how bad things are at Transat, they managed to get $125m of the $150m paid immediately in late July, even though the LASR Overview page states:
Size / Principal Amount – The maximum aggregate loan amount available to an eligible borrower is $150 million. The facility amount will be based on CEEFC’s assessment of the amount required to offset the impact of increased aviation fuel costs from May 1st to November 1st, 2026, relative to the same period in 2025. The loan may be advanced in monthly tranches during the availability period ending November 15, 2026.
https://ceefc-cfuec.ca/lasr-overview/
Assuming the Feds will cap the "Loan" at $150m, ( and I wouldn't assume anything), that means the last $25m will be distributed in 3 monthly tranches of roughly $8.3m on Aug 1, Sept 1 and Oct 1.
So Transat pockets $150,000,000 for 96 days of ops as of today, July 28th, or $1.562m a day taxpayer subsidy. On a peak day in the summer, (ie Sunday 26 July), Transat operated 19,862 seats.
I wonder if the $78.67 per seat cash subsidy would be better spent on things like health care or education?
How many life saving MRI's could occur with $150m?
And what happens to Transat come Nov 1st when the cash dries up and aviation fuel is still us$3.60+ a gallon?
And who's next at the trough?
Two guesses. It ain't rocket science.
To give an indication of just how bad things are at Transat, they managed to get $125m of the $150m paid immediately in late July, even though the LASR Overview page states:
Size / Principal Amount – The maximum aggregate loan amount available to an eligible borrower is $150 million. The facility amount will be based on CEEFC’s assessment of the amount required to offset the impact of increased aviation fuel costs from May 1st to November 1st, 2026, relative to the same period in 2025. The loan may be advanced in monthly tranches during the availability period ending November 15, 2026.
https://ceefc-cfuec.ca/lasr-overview/
Assuming the Feds will cap the "Loan" at $150m, ( and I wouldn't assume anything), that means the last $25m will be distributed in 3 monthly tranches of roughly $8.3m on Aug 1, Sept 1 and Oct 1.
So Transat pockets $150,000,000 for 96 days of ops as of today, July 28th, or $1.562m a day taxpayer subsidy. On a peak day in the summer, (ie Sunday 26 July), Transat operated 19,862 seats.
I wonder if the $78.67 per seat cash subsidy would be better spent on things like health care or education?
How many life saving MRI's could occur with $150m?
And what happens to Transat come Nov 1st when the cash dries up and aviation fuel is still us$3.60+ a gallon?
And who's next at the trough?
Two guesses. It ain't rocket science.
Re: Air Transat Posts Net Loss
Market cap $95M. Feds loan it money because nobody else will, at least not on reasonable terms.
Lots of excuses for financial performance included in the Q2 report. Some of the causes may mitigate with time. Others, possibly not. Yet there is still a commitment to growth in capacity.
TRZ seems to live in its own little world largely exempt from financial reality. The feds seems to be the greatest enabler.
The balance sheet needs to be recapitalized (debt forgiveness is not recapitalization) and there needs to be new ownership. Peladeau was rebuffed. AC withdrew.
Pretty all that is left is Porter or WJ. That means Deluce or ONEX. If I had to pick the devil to dance with it would be ONEX. Less risk. Greater access to capital. Stronger long term ownership.
Porter fits better commercially but it doesn’t fix the immediate and long term requirement for cash. Neither one addresses the ‘Quebec based solution’.
Perhaps a trip through CCAA. Trump has 2 1/2 more years so uncertainty will prevail.
Good luck to the TS staff. Great product. Great service. Great employee morale. But that doesn’t fix the underlying issues.
Lots of excuses for financial performance included in the Q2 report. Some of the causes may mitigate with time. Others, possibly not. Yet there is still a commitment to growth in capacity.
TRZ seems to live in its own little world largely exempt from financial reality. The feds seems to be the greatest enabler.
The balance sheet needs to be recapitalized (debt forgiveness is not recapitalization) and there needs to be new ownership. Peladeau was rebuffed. AC withdrew.
Pretty all that is left is Porter or WJ. That means Deluce or ONEX. If I had to pick the devil to dance with it would be ONEX. Less risk. Greater access to capital. Stronger long term ownership.
Porter fits better commercially but it doesn’t fix the immediate and long term requirement for cash. Neither one addresses the ‘Quebec based solution’.
Perhaps a trip through CCAA. Trump has 2 1/2 more years so uncertainty will prevail.
Good luck to the TS staff. Great product. Great service. Great employee morale. But that doesn’t fix the underlying issues.
-
TFTMB heavy
- Rank 7
- Posts: 704
- Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 9:58 am
Re: Air Transat Posts Net Loss
There's always some chatter about AC coming back around but the sources are never reliable. That being said they could still come around. TS is lobbying hard, apparently, to allow foreign ownership up to 49% by one single entity.rudder wrote: ↑Wed Jul 29, 2026 8:16 am Market cap $95M. Feds loan it money because nobody else will, at least not on reasonable terms.
Lots of excuses for financial performance included in the Q2 report. Some of the causes may mitigate with time. Others, possibly not. Yet there is still a commitment to growth in capacity.
TRZ seems to live in its own little world largely exempt from financial reality. The feds seems to be the greatest enabler.
The balance sheet needs to be recapitalized (debt forgiveness is not recapitalization) and there needs to be new ownership. Peladeau was rebuffed. AC withdrew.
Pretty all that is left is Porter or WJ. That means Deluce or ONEX. If I had to pick the devil to dance with it would be ONEX. Less risk. Greater access to capital. Stronger long term ownership.
Porter fits better commercially but it doesn’t fix the immediate and long term requirement for cash. Neither one addresses the ‘Quebec based solution’.
Perhaps a trip through CCAA. Trump has 2 1/2 more years so uncertainty will prevail.
Good luck to the TS staff. Great product. Great service. Great employee morale. But that doesn’t fix the underlying issues.
Indeed they were not making money like the other airlines pre-COVID but at least there was no debt back then.
It'll be 40 years next year for this Airline.
-
Realitychex
- Rank 7
- Posts: 561
- Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 2:37 pm
Re: Air Transat Posts Net Loss
AC's takeover attempt of Transat in May 2019 was predictably shot down in flames by EU regulators who, correctly, determined that an AC/TRZ link up would have very negative competitive implications in the marketplace.
Consider that on a recent peak day, 85% of Transat's capacity, (close to 66m ASM's), was to Europe, with just .78% of capacity, (yes, under 1%!), operating domestically. A single 737-800 YYZ-YYC r/t generates considerably more ASM's than Transat's entire daily domestic operations.
At just under 20,000 seats a day, they have a near identical footprint to Flair, another aviation afterthought.
Europe's concerns will not have moved an inch; they'll require all kinds of undertakings that would negate any benefits accruing from a takeover, (it wouldn't be a "merger").
Domestically, Transat isn't even in the game. If they stopped flying tomorrow, few outside Toronto and Montreal would even notice.
If Transat shut down late 3Q, all their capacity would be replaced by others with little more than some temporary minor inconveniences.
Fuel is currently averaging US$3.90 a gallon.
Only an eternal optimist would believe the middle east is going to settle down anytime soon.
Who will be Transat's next lender of last resort?
Consider that on a recent peak day, 85% of Transat's capacity, (close to 66m ASM's), was to Europe, with just .78% of capacity, (yes, under 1%!), operating domestically. A single 737-800 YYZ-YYC r/t generates considerably more ASM's than Transat's entire daily domestic operations.
At just under 20,000 seats a day, they have a near identical footprint to Flair, another aviation afterthought.
Europe's concerns will not have moved an inch; they'll require all kinds of undertakings that would negate any benefits accruing from a takeover, (it wouldn't be a "merger").
Domestically, Transat isn't even in the game. If they stopped flying tomorrow, few outside Toronto and Montreal would even notice.
If Transat shut down late 3Q, all their capacity would be replaced by others with little more than some temporary minor inconveniences.
Fuel is currently averaging US$3.90 a gallon.
Only an eternal optimist would believe the middle east is going to settle down anytime soon.
Who will be Transat's next lender of last resort?
