This paper presents a comparative financial analysis of Qantas Airways and Virgin Blue based on their 2008 annual reports. It examines both airlines across four key dimensions: profitability, operational efficiency, short-term liquidity, and long-term financial stability. Qantas, Australia's legacy national carrier, demonstrated improved operating margins and reduced long-term debt despite an industry-wide downturn. Virgin Blue, a younger low-cost competitor, experienced sharper profit declines driven by overcapacity and rising costs. The paper concludes with observations on each airline's competitive positioning and offers strategic recommendations, while acknowledging the limitations of ratio-based analysis in a rapidly changing economic environment.
Qantas is the national airline of Australia. The company has been in operation since 1920, when it began with a pair of WWI surplus biplanes and soon added a scheduled mail service. Qantas expanded during the post-war period and established itself as the dominant airline in Australia (Qantas 2008 Annual Report). Today, with one of the airline industry's most recognizable brand names, Qantas is considered a "legacy" carrier — one of the older companies operating under a traditional airline business model. The company operates 224 aircraft, servicing 146 destinations in 36 countries. It flies 6,720 flights per week, carries 38.6 million passengers (Ibid), and employs 33,670 staff (MSN Moneycentral, 2009). In 2008, Qantas recorded a $969 million profit on revenues of $16.191 billion. The company operates several different divisions, including Qantas Holidays, Jetstar, and a number of ancillary businesses.
Virgin Blue is part of the Virgin Group and was founded in 2000 as a low-cost competitor to Qantas. The company's service offering proved popular, and the fleet grew to 69 aircraft. Virgin Blue ranked second in Australia by fleet size and number of passengers flown. The airline competed primarily in the domestic and vacation markets, but had recently moved to challenge Qantas on the key U.S. route through its V Australia subsidiary (Creedy, 2009). The routes from Australia to the west coast of North America had long been a cash cow for Qantas, insulating it from downturns elsewhere (Smith, 2007).
In light of the intense competition between these two airlines, this financial analysis attempts to glean insight into the respective financial situations of both firms, with the aim of determining which has been more successful of late.
Both airlines saw reduced profitability in 2008. Qantas saw its net margin reduced from 5.18% to 4.71%; Virgin Blue saw its margin reduced from 9.98% to 4.21%. It is difficult to ascertain the full cause of the Qantas numbers. The income statement (2008 Annual Report, p. 74) shows that net profit divided by net revenue equalled 5.98% for 2008 and 4.46% for 2007. The improvement in the net margin for Qantas is attributable to expenditure reductions. These were incremental — there were no single significant undertakings — but the operating margin improved from 6.83% in 2007 to 8.48% in 2008. In real terms, this improvement accounted for over 100% of the bottom-line improvement.
The numbers provided for Virgin Blue are consistent with these trends. Most of the decrease in profitability can be attributed to cost increases that were not matched by revenue growth. Operating expenditures increased 18.3% while revenues only increased 8.4% (2008 Virgin Blue Preliminary Statement). Virgin Blue had been building out capacity for essentially its entire existence, and for the most part revenues had followed this capacity growth quickly — particularly through the middle part of the last decade. In their public statement, Virgin Blue cited high fuel prices (Oliver, 2008), which did increase significantly. However, labour costs also rose, indicating a general increase in capacity that was unmatched by a corresponding increase in revenue.
Qantas was able to record efficiency gains in 2008. This is in part a function of the company's ability to reduce costs and thereby improve profitability. Asset and liability gains were incremental relative to revenue gains, so the improved efficiency stemmed mainly from the increase in profit. The steep reduction in profitability at Virgin Blue resulted in a corresponding decline in their efficiency ratios. Given that the company continued to expand in size while experiencing only minor revenue growth, operational efficiency suffered. There is evidence of overcapacity, an issue that Virgin Blue addressed in the interim through service cuts (Associated Press, 2009).
Both companies remained liquid. Qantas, however, experienced the more significant decrease in liquidity between 2007 and 2008. The company's cash holdings declined substantially, while its "other" liabilities almost tripled. There were also working capital issues at Qantas, with the firm recording an increase in its receivables turnover in days. Virgin Blue likewise saw a reduction in liquidity and an increase in receivables turnover in days. For Virgin Blue, cash declined over the past year while interest-bearing liabilities increased — a situation most likely attributable to a combination of capacity expansion and revenue reduction.
"Short- and long-term liquidity and leverage"
"Caveats on ratio analysis and changing conditions"
"Strategic outlook and advice for each carrier"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.