Member Info for YesIam

John, whatever I am writing 3 in the morning being drunk and having fever makes more sense than what you are saying. You sound like a mix of DavidKov and Robert Kyosaki.

Lucas, do you know by any chance what is happening with G-XLRA in PRG? Is it getting it's engines robbed for another NEO or it is just being repaired after the hard landing? Also do you know why G-WUKY was ferried to Prestwick? Any planned maintenance or it will be parked there for engine inspection? Thanks

B777Captain, yes I am in the industry as well but not affiliated with WIZZ by any means.

And John here you at least getting something. In the RYR forum it seems that some sort of Irish-British dispute going on but my English not even strong enough to understand what the f...k is going on there. So stay tuned, we feed you with real information and you can make your decision when to invest or whether to invest at all.

LOL, John. I said earlier you are here because you would like to see what a good entry into WIZZ would be. I knew it earlier than yourself. And you are not wrong. You are getting a lot of valuable info here for that decision and you have a good chance to catch the bottom. But don't blame those who started to invest at higher prices with the same speculation. Every investor searching for beaten down stocks that otherwise have strong fundamentals or have the chance to turn around the business. There are few great examples from botbot below. But catching the real bottom is a question of luck nothing more. I wish I would be in your position and start averaging from 1100p.

Admit John, you became a WIZZ fan. Because it is the only airline stock in Europe that has the potential to 2-3x from here in few years time with relatively low risk of going insolvent. RYR, very impressive figures , but reaching 50-75 EUR in few years time? Less likely in my view.

Johnbri4, I posted many arguments why I expect the SP to grow in the upcoming years. Actually I am one of the few who posted my investment strategy here. You don't have to agree which is fine but at least I am not contradicting with my own arguments. While you claiming that airline share prices have nothing to do with fundamentals you invested in several airlines. Guess what , if you are right the sentiment about WIZZ can be changed as well and SP could go up regardless of it's results. You call a 10% capacity growth YoY a stagnation. What is the ASK of EZY YoY? It is only one of the KPIs.

I posted on this before. Last time on the 17th. In the F25 report the delivery plan shows 424 AC by end of F30. This is already a revised plan compared to the Q3F25 report claiming that airbus can't deliver anyways. Wizz had 231 AC at the end of F25. So growing to 424 by end of F30 is a 12,9% fleet CAGR. As shown in their F25 presentation. In the Q1F26 call (when closing of Abu Dhabi became public) they said that the focus will be on yield improvement rather on growth which will be trimmed to 10-12% capacity growth YoY instead of fleet growth. This is the 2-3x of expected GDP growth in CEE if I understood well. They also mentioned that they are in talks with Airbus about a new delivery plan. So nothin new here.

At the end of F25 out of the 231 AC 186 was operating. So if they reduce deliveries by 100 AC to 324 by end of F30 and the grounded fleet is being back to operation by that it means 11,7% CAGR on operating aircraft basis. In terms of capacity (ASK) it will be even higher given that the seat density will grow from app 227 seats to 235 per aircraft.

What is happening now is exactly what they communicated in the previous earnings call.

Why WIZZ shares would stagnate for years? Can you elaborate on that?

Made another quick calc and if anyone has view on it correct me if I am wrong. I tried to compare WIZZ fuel CASK vs RYRs.

In Q1 WIZZ reported 1,35 Cents. RYR does not report CASK and ASK figures. But they had 1,457 bEUR fuel cost. They carried 57,9 mio pax with LF of 94%. So the available seats were around 61,6 mio. With RYR average stage length being appr 1260km, the ASK is around 77,62 bio km. That gives an appr 1,88 cents fuel CASK. 40% difference. Of course Ryan flying shorter routes so their flight hour/cycle ratio is lower and take off/climb stage has higher weight due to the higher fuel burn. Plus hedging policy and all, so not apple to apple. But I am pretty sure that on similar route structure WIZZ fuel CASK would be still lower as their operating fleet is 70% Next gen engines vs RYR being at 33% at the moment. So I think we will see further fuel cost advantage on WIZZ side in the coming years. Especially if fuel prices start to go up again.

B777Captain, I am not really an expert on this, but my view is that it is what it is. Airlines have to live with that. Emission targets been set and there won't be any new technology available for pax aircraft in 100+ seats segment in the next 20 years. In fact there won't be any new narrowbody aircraft in the next 10-15 years. I think ( and I am not a powerplant engineer) it is a great technology but as every new technology it has teething issues. GTF especially but if OEMs can get over the supply chain issues it will be great. And on fuel efficiency the technology is proven already. What I don't believe in, is SAF to be honest.

Stan36, many thanks, appreciate it. Crazy right, that less than 10 years old airframes are being scrapped for parts. Imagine this is being factored in when environmental impact is being calculated and it turns out that previous gen engines are much more environmental friendly than the current ones. On the other hand this is now the reality and in this reality Wizz orderbook looks impressive. The proportion of NEO engines in their fleet among the highest in the industry already and increasing and this will be seen in the fuel cost side. Just saw an interesting interview with Aercap CEO on this whole topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9qlPL6VawQ

B777Captain, Interesting read from Deutsche Bank. Actually I was calculating operating profit. It is then adjusted with the financial expenses. I have no too much visibility on that but have the assumption that the Fx gain can well offset the financing cost so the the net financial expense could be close to zero or be a low negative/positive figure ( can be wrong though). This then gives us the Profit before TAX. On TAX I have no idea at all. If it is really around 90-100 mEUR as DB assumes then yes, my H1 net profit figure would be also close to 300 mEUR. Interesting that they use quite similar assumptions: flat RASK. And ex-fuel CASK being -1% YoY. ( I have +1% YOY). Also wondering how they have calculated the ASK itself ( I am sure they have access to more sophisticated data than I do). All in all, H1 net result of 250-350 mEUR seems to be reasonable unless there is any hit on the cost/ P&W compensation/ SLB gain or one off accounting items that we can not see from outside.

What that means for H2 is yet to be seen. Hope we get any guidance. I am sure cost will be further under pressure in H2. Especially maintenance and maintenance related depreciation. Winter maintenance season just starts, I think more end of leases are coming and they still have 8 ex-abu Dhabi CEOs on ground in addition to the 34-35 GTF groundings, which capacity they won't need in H2 anyway but on cost it will put pressure for sure. On the other hand they plan 40 SLBs in F26 from which I don't know how many they had so far but the gain booked in Q1 was 28 m EUR. In F25 They had 16 SLBs and appr 7-8 spare engine SLBs and the total gain was 121 mEUR. So if they really have 40 SLBs this year and booked only 28 mEUR in Q1 there must be a significant SLB gain coming either in Q2 or in Q3-4, which will lower the ex-Fuel CASK.

One more delivery of new aircraft yesterday. 3 total this week. I see 5 additional aircraft that had a test flight already so expect several deliveries in the next one month.

Thanks Lucas. Was not aware of that.

Taut, yes H2 usually when profit drops. And there are some uncertainties that we can not predict without having insider info. But on the purely operational side it does not look that bad. Listened the Q1call again and my take from there is that WIZZ will announce a revised fleet delivery plan soon. They came out with a more conservative plan in early 2025 claiming that Airbus will not be able to deliver anyway and they would like to focus on yield rather on growth. That plan showing 12-13% fleet CAGR. I mentioned here before that I found that still too optimistic. In the Q1 call however they said that the current plan (after Abu Dhabi exit) is to have rather a 10-12% capacity CAGR not fleet CAGR. Part of it will come from the higher seat density and the deliveries will be further reduced and they will reach the 400 something AC by 2032 iso 2030. So I expect less new deliveries in F27 and higher focus on lease returns. In F26 the aircraft will come at high rate as usually 12 month needed before delivery to make any changes at OEMs. I also not completely disagree with those analysts who are cautious about revenue claiming that putting this extra capacity in CEE will put a pressure on yields in order to keep LF on a desired level. What analysts miss I think is that CEE travel market still has much more growth potential than Western Europe. And many analysts claims that CEE stock markets and companies are still undervalued compared to US and Western Europe. Some see WIZZ az an UK company as it is traded there and Luton being a big hub but to be honest it is far from being an UK airline. And the UK stock market sentiment should have much less impact on share price as it has now.

Stan36, thank you. There is not too much info publicly available. There are subscription websites providing such data but those are very expensive. Maybe someone has access and can share info here. Best would be the local CAAs as they have it and some of them makes it public, some does not. I don't know why. It is not very well regulated within EASA countries and remains a local competence.

B777Captain, Thank you. Appreciate it. But please do not, I could be totally wrong. :)

Anybody has H1 results estimate? I built my own model and based on that the results are better than what Bernstein estimates. I can be wrong of course but would be nice to see if anyone else is playing around with the figures and the already known data? Or any well paid analysts are hiding here? Drop me a PM :)

What supports H126 vs H125 in my view is:

- Fuel CASK. It was already down in Q1 by 14% and I don't see any reason why it would go up in Q2. Actually with the additional NEO deliveries the proportion of the more efficient aircraft is even higher. Parking 8 ex-Abu Dhabi CEOs in Sep. supports this further. Q1 fuel price was 715 USD vs 822 in 2024 and they hedged like 70% of the entire year already.

- Flight disruption cost: Europe ATC were much more stable in Q2 vs last summer.

- No wet lease cost this summer

So, with further increase in maintenance and depreciation CASK I came to a total CASK of 4,53 vs 4,54 in H125. Ex fuel 3,18 vs 3,00 and fuel 1,35 vs 1,54 Yoy. With RASK being flat at 5,57 (as communicated during the Q1 call) and estimated ASK of 35,08 (bn) i have operating profit of 418 mEUR. There are 3 major things that are hard to estimate and the model is sensitive to:

- Financing expense. This I don't know but I believe that FX gain with the weaker dollar will well balance interest expenses. If this is the case PBT should not be very different from Operating results.

- SLB gain. This is a grey area. It is booked on the cost lines as cost mitigating element. In Q1 it was 28 mEUR vs 71 mEUR in Q125. But the number of aircraft deliveries does not provide any information. SLB gain only realized on leased aircraft but some aircraft are financed via JOLCO, FTL or other financial leases where they don't realize any gain at delivery. In addition they took delivery of several spare engines as well last year with same SLB structure and the figures are not shown separately. In the Q1 call they said in F25 they had 16 SLB transactions while they took delivery of 26 AC in total. In F26 they plan to have 40 something SLB transactions. So either in Q2 or in H2 that will appear in the result which will have a positive effect on the CASK. I could better estimate the SLB impact if I had an access to a database where I can see the owner of each aircraft. For the HA registered aircraft I know because the Hungarian CAA discloses the owner in the registry. But the Maltese doesn't. So if anybody has access to such database feel free to share with us ;)

- P&W compensation: I expect this to be lower vs Q225 as less aircraft is grounded.

As said my model is using CASK and ASK as a basis and CASK is very sensitive on the above items so I could be totally wrong with my assumptions but the overall picture does no seem to be that bad especially as they also said that the closure of abu dhabi shall not have any PnL impact since the cost will be eliminated by the unrealized loss those flights were generating.

Any thoughts ?

Two new aircraft delivered today. 22 deliveries so far this FY25. 29 in CY25.

Lucas, do you know what is the fate of the ex-Abu Dhabi fleet that are in KTW and still in A6-reg?