Lala81 Hypersonic October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 2 minutes ago, Wt_know said: 2+ years interval = chop chop curry pop liao 3-4 years = normal interval for normal people ... lol the challenge is family willing to have 3rd and 4th kid ... 1-2 kids still in "negative" replacement cycle ... hehe no leh. convention is duan tong bu ru chang tong. Almost everyone tell me quickly get 2 out first. haha its universal advice. Most of my friends/relatives are around 2+ to 3 years max age gap between kids. ↡ Advertisement 1 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chongster 6th Gear October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 Actually TFR issue not with the married couples but too many woman unmarried. Then very quickly no local market and can only become export sets 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethalstrike Turbocharged October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 5 hours ago, inlinesix said: Hedging is to remove any volatility in the P&L as well as provide certainty in cost. The hedging policy has to be approved by BoD prior to implementation. Yeah I can understand its to provide a degree of stability in P&L. But clearly somewhere is wrong in the execution of its hedging strategy. I still hold to my opinion that a 5 year horizon for fuel contracts is taking on too much unnecessarily. I'm not even sure if any professional oil trader trading Brent engages in a 5 year time horizon. For such losses to happen, then I can only conclude the whole lot of top management including the BoD are proven to be duds then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
inlinesix Supersonic October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 1 hour ago, Lethalstrike said: Yeah I can understand its to provide a degree of stability in P&L. But clearly somewhere is wrong in the execution of its hedging strategy. I still hold to my opinion that a 5 year horizon for fuel contracts is taking on too much unnecessarily. I'm not even sure if any professional oil trader trading Brent engages in a 5 year time horizon. For such losses to happen, then I can only conclude the whole lot of top management including the BoD are proven to be duds then. Can you fill me in on my question below. For FY/14/15, average per barrel fuel cost is $111.60. For FY15/16, average per barrel fuel cost is $86.10. How much is it higher than market average cost? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philipkee Twincharged October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 38 minutes ago, inlinesix said: Can you fill me in on my question below. For FY/14/15, average per barrel fuel cost is $111.60. For FY15/16, average per barrel fuel cost is $86.10. How much is it higher than market average cost? Not sure if this helps.... https://www.iata.org/en/publications/economics/fuel-monitor/ Maybe someone can do the calculations IF this jet fuel price is the price used by airlines who never hedged. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wind30 Turbocharged October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, inlinesix said: Is Can you fill me in on my question below. For FY/14/15, average per barrel fuel cost is $111.60. For FY15/16, average per barrel fuel cost is $86.10. How much is it higher than market average cost? Your question isn’t clear in the first place. Why don’t u just save us the trouble and write down what answer u think is correct... From the sia annual report, sia already admit to overpaying the fuel for those years by billion of dollars due to hedging. Yes we all understand hedging helps to reduce fuel cost fluctuations... telling that 20 times does not change the fact that sia has paid a huge cost for those hedging over the years. espcially the decision in 2017 to increase their hedging by more than 4x... did I read the numbers correct? Does the sensitive number implies sia increase their hedging 4x? Edited October 10, 2020 by Wind30 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
inlinesix Supersonic October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 36 minutes ago, Wind30 said: Your question isn’t clear in the first place. Why don’t u just save us the trouble and write down what answer u think is correct... From the sia annual report, sia already admit to overpaying the fuel for those years by billion of dollars due to hedging. Yes we all understand hedging helps to reduce fuel cost fluctuations... telling that 20 times does not change the fact that sia has paid a huge cost for those hedging over the years. espcially the decision in 2017 to increase their hedging by more than 4x... did I read the numbers correct? Does the sensitive number implies sia increase their hedging 4x? 1st of all, i don't have the answer. What you see and yak about is the overpayment. What i am interested why there is OVERPAYMENT? Can this overpayment be predicted at the point the contract was entered into? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wind30 Turbocharged October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, inlinesix said: 1st of all, i don't have the answer. What you see and yak about is the overpayment. What i am interested why there is OVERPAYMENT? Can this overpayment be predicted at the point the contract was entered into? Why isn’t there overpayment? It is simple right? This year fuel cost is $100. You pledge to buy a portion of next year fuel at this years price. If next year price is $50, you are buying some of next years fuel at a higher than market price, $100. it is so simple, everyone understand it, I think u do too. So I don’t understand why are you asking this... is my understanding wrong? I know there are more complicated contracts but the idea should be right. Nobody can predict the future 100% but Sia management obviously is trying to predict by increasing their fuel hedges a lot in 2017. It was reported widely in 2017 Sia is betting the oil prices will rise and only time will tell if they are prudent in their hedging... Edited October 10, 2020 by Wind30 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
inlinesix Supersonic October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Wind30 said: Why isn’t there overpayment? It is simple right? This year fuel cost is $100. You pledge to buy a portion of next year fuel at this years price. If next year price is $50, you are buying some of next years fuel at a higher than market price, $100. it is so simple, everyone understand it, I think u do too. So I don’t understand why are you asking this... At the point you pay $100, can reasonably predict that oil price will drop by $50? Quote Nobody can predict the future 100% but Sia management obviously is trying to predict by increasing their fuel hedges a lot in 2017. It was reported widely in 2017 Sia is betting the oil prices will rise and only time will tell if they are prudent in their hedging... For FY18/19 & 19/20, does it relate to 2017 fuel hedging? Edited October 10, 2020 by inlinesix 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wind30 Turbocharged October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 1 hour ago, inlinesix said: At the point you pay $100, can reasonably predict that oil price will drop by $50? For FY18/19 & 19/20, does it relate to 2017 fuel hedging? Err... what sort of question is that. Do u buy shares? Can u predict the shares you buy will not drop? everyone of us obviously cannot predict the future but each of us try our best and make decisions based on what we think the future might be. just because we cannot predict the future does not prevent many of us trying to pick winners among many stocks. the management were obviously so confident about rising fuel prices that they bet heavily on it by increasing the hedges a lot in 2017. They were pretty right in 2018/2019 so they made 0.5 billion. they did not take into account something that could halt air traffic for months. the mistake will really cost Sia many billions... I don’t think Sia has reported all the losses related to hedging yet... which is really sad because alll these billions have to be paid by someone, Temasek or shareholders... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
inlinesix Supersonic October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 9 minutes ago, Wind30 said: Err... what sort of question is that. Do u buy shares? Can u predict the shares you buy will not drop? everyone of us obviously cannot predict the future but each of us try our best and make decisions based on what we think the future might be. just because we cannot predict the future does not prevent many of us trying to pick winners among many stocks. the management were obviously so confident about rising fuel prices that they bet heavily on it by increasing the hedges a lot in 2017. They were pretty right in 2018/2019 so they made 0.5 billion. they did not take into account something that could halt air traffic for months. the mistake will really cost Sia many billions... I don’t think Sia has reported all the losses related to hedging yet... which is really sad because alll these billions have to be paid by someone, Temasek or shareholders... Can you predict a black swan event? I can’t 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sosaria Turbocharged October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 (edited) OYK very notty to use chinese saying to reply Jamus who is more ang moh in outlook and language Edited October 10, 2020 by Sosaria 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethalstrike Turbocharged October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 33 minutes ago, inlinesix said: Can you predict a black swan event? I can’t If SIA wants to play the game and hedge over a 5 year horizon, then they had to stomach all the risks associated with it, black-swan event or not. Without Covid-19, their strategy might just turn out well and everyone will be patting on each other's back in the boardroom. But alas, kanna once in a lifetime black swan event which no one could have predicted. What to do? Lan lan suck up the losses now and ensure in the future don't lock themselves in over a 5 yrs timeframe. I think Wind30 and a few other, including myself is not trying to argue against you on the technicalities about whether its an astute hedging strategy or not by going down to the details. We are saying that Covid-19 is a rude and abrupt wake up call for SIA's management in terms of how they approach losses accumulated due to their hedging strategy. If not for Covid-19, I think the public won't even know that SIA has been absorbing losses thanks to their "stellar" strategy repeated over the years. And the worst? The top management and Board sat by and approved it. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wind30 Turbocharged October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 (edited) 49 minutes ago, inlinesix said: Can you predict a black swan event? I can’t honestly, it will be much easier for everyone, if you just state your argument up front, instead of asking roundabout questions. This is not the first time this argument was brought up. Below image is from SIA 08/09 annual report. Notice how the chairman is keen to emphasis the below. "Second, we have always resisted the temptation to opportunistically gamble heavily on fuel and currency hedges, preferring a consistent approach through We are already aggressively pursuing business with more dynamic pricing, exceptional value-added packages and promotions designed to recognise our loyal customers. good times and bad. This means our hedging losses in the short term, while there, will be much less than those of some of our more adventurous competitors." You can't predict when black swan events occur BUT you are supposed to guard against one. The 2008 financial crisis is err the most commonly refered "black swan event". If the SIA in 2008 could guard against it by being prudent in her fuel hedges, why can't she do now. You are just ignoring that SIA has over the recent years "opportunistically gamble heavily on fuel hedges", relinquishing their "consistent approach" before 2009. Honestly, your argument will hold much more weight if all SIA did was just to maintain a consistent hedging strategy over the years. Also not all airlines hedges. Emirates for one do not fuel hedge since getting burned in 2009 and they have stuck to not hedging. That is what we pay CEOs for I guess. The current CEO unfortunately has driven SIA to its grave... " Edited October 10, 2020 by Wind30 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
inlinesix Supersonic October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Wind30 said: honestly, it will be much easier for everyone, if you just state your argument up front, instead of asking roundabout questions. This is not the first time this argument was brought up. Below image is from SIA 08/09 annual report. Notice how the chairman is keen to emphasis the below. "Second, we have always resisted the temptation to opportunistically gamble heavily on fuel and currency hedges, preferring a consistent approach through We are already aggressively pursuing business with more dynamic pricing, exceptional value-added packages and promotions designed to recognise our loyal customers. good times and bad. This means our hedging losses in the short term, while there, will be much less than those of some of our more adventurous competitors." You can't predict when black swan events occur BUT you are supposed to guard against one. If the SIA in 2008 could do it, why can't it do now. You are just ignoring that SIA has over the past years "opportunistically gamble heavily on fuel hedges", relinquishing their "consistent approach" before 2009. Honestly, your argument will hold much more weight if all SIA did was just to maintain a consistent hedging strategy over the years. Also not all airlines hedges. Emirates for one do not fuel hedge since getting burned in 2009 and they have stuck to not hedging. That is what we pay CEOs for I guess. The current CEO unfortunately has driven SIA to its grave... " I wonder who can predict a black swan event that resulted in almost ZERO revenue? Would you travel now if SQ offer you $100 ticket to LA? I will not. For FY07/08 & 08/09, the Group generates almost $16b revenue or $4b/quarter. From Apr - Jun 20, the Group generates $0.9bn. Edited October 10, 2020 by inlinesix 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
inlinesix Supersonic October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 Can specialist explain the above numbers y.o.y.? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atonchia Supersonic October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 On 10/9/2020 at 10:45 AM, Kklee said: IMHO, the environment people, rather than make noise, should come up with concrete plans on how to SOLVE the problem of our carbon footprint so that it will never be leveraged against us in world trade. There is a price to pay for being environment friendly. Now where got time to still promote, encourage or incentivize ? Talk is cheap, where got so easy to invent things ? You need a culture to be creative and inventive. I think the plain fact is that consumers are not willing to pay for inventions. Just remember, in SG, we brought it onto ourselves. Last time, marketing was done with basket and vege is wrapped with newspaper. Marketing for some, are done daily, because refrigeration was unaffordable. Hawkers use re-usable wares and utensils. Soft drinks comes in glass bottles and so does liquid sauces. Very little plastic used. When petrochemicals giants have lots of byproducts after refining.... What to do with them? Make these byproducts into usable products...... that doesnt disintegrate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atonchia Supersonic October 10, 2020 Share October 10, 2020 On 10/9/2020 at 7:26 AM, Wind30 said: I think they need to just fire the CEO for all the hedging losses.... those billions is enough to pay for any environmental tax. Or at the very least, claw back some money from that guy... This guy should take responsibility lah. Made such a huge blunder on hedging loss on fuel. Then make all aircrafts to take less fuel, which meant less take-off and cruising weight, hence require less fuel..and less running cost. Yes its good to save fuel and operational cost for both environment and company. But pushing to the operational limits can leave very little of margin of error..... If have bad weather and not enough holding fuel Then how? Just push for a landing? This type of top mgmt losses and no responsibility to answer seemed like a corporate culture reflected by the top honchos of the large wealth fund organisation. ↡ Advertisement 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In NowRelated Discussions
Related Discussions
File Your Tax Returns Bros!
File Your Tax Returns Bros!
Public transport business models
Public transport business models
Transport Minister S Iswaran assisting in CPIB investigation
Transport Minister S Iswaran assisting in CPIB investigation
Soft drinks also wanna tax?
Soft drinks also wanna tax?
Public Buses of Yesterday
Public Buses of Yesterday
S’pore Airshow - Worst transport experience’
S’pore Airshow - Worst transport experience’
Higher spending on healthcare does not mean a healthier population: Ong Ye Kung
Higher spending on healthcare does not mean a healthier population: Ong Ye Kung