AIR - Air NZ.

[couta1]

Wish I had a parcel to SELL now Couta but I timed it wrong and got out at $2.30

Your not alone my friend. Fancy these Guru Analysts stealing my target price which I've had for over a year, what a cheek.

[Snow Leopard]

...Using an input of $575m for AIR ...

Why $575M?

The pressy says "are likely to exceed $525 million"

likely = not guaranteed.

Much better that you take a conservative $526M, remove the $22M one-off Virgin bonus and end up with $0.323 eps.

As things are still going reasonably well for AIR, assume that they are not going to get any better going forward and definitely you do not want to paying anywhere near $3 a pop for this.

Mind you, neither do you want to be paying $5 for Qantas.

Best Wishes
Paper Tiger

[Xerof]

Jared Dillian (the 10th man) like airlines, and points out that Buffet does now too!!

gee...calls it 'the golden age of flying, here and now'

[Arbroath]

Last N.Z. have consistently done their clients no favors with AIR. They have consistently had the lowest valuation on AIR for several years now.
Clients who believed their valuation model were told as recently as yesterday that a fair price for AIR in 12 months time was $2.10. Obviously that's a complete joke. The guesswork, (yes that is a deliberate choice of term), underpinning their valuation model is systemically flawed in my opinion.
N.Z. analysts generally have consistently been behind the curve with AIR...investors are far far better to listen to management and follow the monthly stat's and work their own numbers and that's what I'll continue to do. Some of their analysts are very good and have won awards, their analyst covering AIR is without any merit, in my opinion.

I second that Roger. Why would anyone care what the local analysts think. UBS upgraded from 2.25 to 2.85 and left them as a neutral. What that means is most of their clients probably haven't owned AIR as its gone from $2 to $3 and paid a 10c dividend along the way. So FNZ & UBS dead wrong the past 12 months. Why put any weight in analyst views that are consistently wrong?

Morningstar have been the most bullish as far as I'm aware and have had them at $2.60 for quite a while. they are looking for c $575m NPBT.

[Joshuatree]

I care about what analysts think. Some of them are pretty damn good and i know they are good at what they have specialised in. Its great to get amateur sleuthing values and ideas off here too; throw them in the mix, gather as much info as poss; try all the tools out; i respect trained valuers who put their name to it; it all helps especially when they are looking ahead up to a year. Just had a look at my brokers valn, similar to others. And at an estimated 6.65% D/Y now not so attractive at this pricing .

[Beagle]

Why $575M?

The pressy says "are likely to exceed $525 million"

likely = not guaranteed.

Much better that you take a conservative $526M, remove the $22M one-off Virgin bonus and end up with $0.323 eps.

As things are still going reasonably well for AIR, assume that they are not going to get any better going forward and definitely you do not want to paying anywhere near $3 a pop for this.

Mind you, neither do you want to be paying $5 for Qantas.

Best Wishes
Paper Tiger

My preliminary estimate PT. I'll have another look next week. I am holding for dividend yield.
Even at 20 cps per annum fully imputed that's a gross yield of 9.6% at the current price of $2.90 and I believe that's sustainable across the cycle.
Factor in a couple of juicy specials in FY20 - FY22 when the capex program has a massive hole in it and the five year dividend outlook starts to look extremely attractive.
With the $170m revised capex reduction next year I am wondering if they might pay more than a final divvy of 10 cps this year...

[Baa_Baa]

The exhuberant calls put the hoo doo on the voodoo, like a beckoning call to the nimble profit takers, AIR SP above all analysts except those who reckon they have better insights here, and sure enough boom. Who knows where it's going from here but at the current parabolic rate it's fair to assume there's reason for tighter stops for the capital sensitive. But who uses stops anyway, almost never mentioned on ST, like naked trading, feels good until the cool breeze of a correction blows on ones nether regions.

[Beagle]

I second that Roger. Why would anyone care what the local analysts think. UBS upgraded from 2.25 to 2.85 and left them as a neutral. What that means is most of their clients probably haven't owned AIR as its gone from $2 to $3 and paid a 10c dividend along the way. So FNZ & UBS dead wrong the past 12 months. Why put any weight in analyst views that are consistently wrong?

Morningstar have been the most bullish as far as I'm aware and have had them at $2.60 for quite a while. they are looking for c $575m NPBT.

Well said mate. They've almost been as wrong as all those (who you can easily go back on this thread and see who they are), who thought AIR was a sell in late 2016 at ~ $1.80.

[Beagle]

The exhuberant calls put the hoo doo on the voodoo, like a beckoning call to the nimble profit takers, AIR SP above all analysts except those who reckon they have better insights here, and sure enough boom. Who knows where it's going from here but at the current parabolic rate it's fair to assume there's reason for tighter stops for the capital sensitive. But who uses stops anyway, almost never mentioned on ST, like naked trading, feels good until the cool breeze of a correction blows on ones nether regions.

Actually very few people called for $3 this time around and it was only very late afternoon trading when Asian and Chinese markets were open that pushed it over $3 yesterday.

[Baa_Baa]

Actually very few people called for $3 this time around and it was only very late afternoon trading when Asian and Chinese markets were open that pushed it over $3 yesterday.

Don't underestimate the influence of the vocal few on the passive masses, even the 4% can move the SP and there's 5x more lurkers here than members online. That said, I would wonder about why a yield and returns stalwart would engage in SP discussion as that's irrelevant to their strategy and objectives.