Spirit Airlines Inc (SAVE) 2018 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Welcome to the Third Quarter 2018 Earnings Conference Call.

My name is Paulette, and I will be your operator for today's call.

(Operator Instructions) I will now turn the call over to DeAnne Gabel, Senior Director of Investor Relations.

You may begin.

Thank you, Paulette, and welcome, everyone, to Spirit Airlines' Third Quarter Earnings Call.

Bob Fornaro, our Chief Executive Officer, will give us a few brief opening comments; followed by Matt Klein, our Senior Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer, who will review our revenue performance and outlook; followed by Ted Christie, our President, who will discuss our cost performance.

We will have a Q&A session for sell-side analysts following our prepared remarks.

Also joining us in the room today are Scott Haralson, our Chief Financial Officer; Thomas Canfield, our General Counsel; John Bendoraitis, our Chief Operating Officer; and other members of our senior leadership team.

This call is being recorded and simultaneously webcast.

A replay of this call will be archived on our website for 60 days.

Today's discussion contains forward-looking statements that represent the company's current expectations or beliefs concerning future events and financial performance.

Forward-looking statements are not a guarantee of future performance or results and are based on information currently available and/or management's belief as of today, October 25, 2018.

There could be significant risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements, including the risk factors discussed in our annual report on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q.

We undertake no duty to update any forward-looking statements.

In comparing results today, we will be adjusting all periods to exclude special items.

Please refer to our third quarter 2018 earnings release, which is available on our website, for the reconciliation of our non-GAAP measures.

With that, I'll turn the call over to Bob.

Thanks, DeAnne, and thanks to everyone for joining us today.

Before we begin with comments, I wanted to take a moment to congratulate Scott Haralson.

We announced last week that Scott had been promoted to Chief Financial Officer.

Scott has over 18 years of industry experience.

This experience, together with the knowledge gained from serving as our Vice President of Financial Planning and Analysis for the past 6 years, made him an ideal choice to succeed Ted Christie as Chief Financial Officer.

Thanks, Bob.

This is Scott, by the way.

Excited about the new role.

We have a great management team, and I'm glad to be a part of it.

For all of the analysts and shareholders on the call, I look forward to meeting you in the coming months.

Thanks again, Bob.

So turning to our results.

Yesterday, we reported third quarter 2018 net income of $100.5 million or $1.47 per diluted share.

We are very pleased with our third quarter TRASM result of up 5.5% year-over-year, which significantly exceeded our expectations.

We are also pleased with our continued strong financial performance.

For the third quarter, we achieved a completion factor of 99% and a DOT on-time performance of 76.6%.

Year-to-date through last Sunday, we have a completion factor of 99% and a DOT on-time performance of over 80%, which ranks us #4 of 17 reporting carriers for on-time performance.

Excellent teamwork all around.

Our revenue trajectory is improving and so is our operational reliability.

Together with our continued focus on delivering excellent cost performance, we have a solid platform that positions us to deliver earnings growth in 2019.

With that, I'll turn it over to Matt and Ted to discuss our third quarter in more detail.

Thanks, Bob.

For the third quarter 2018, we reported total revenue of $904 million.

Total revenue per available seat mile increased 5.5% year-over-year, materially better than our initial expectation of up 2% to 3%.

We are seeing measurable benefit from the enhancements we've been making to drive passenger yields.

On the passenger revenue side, we've restructured our pricing and revenue management teams, added resources and have been developing processes and using enhanced data analytics to better optimize passenger yield.

We believe these internal improvements have sustainable future benefit and especially so in strong demand environments when they give us increased leverage to manage yields up as they did in the third quarter 2018.

In addition, post-Labor Day, we cut many underperforming long-haul routes.

Over the last 2 years, we have made a lot of network changes and now have 10 key cities with 20 or more daily departures.

This, together with the improved capabilities of our reservation system, has helped to drive more connect itinerary opportunities, resulting in higher load factors.

These actions as well as a strong demand environment contributed to our third quarter revenue result.

Turning to non-ticket.

On a per passenger segment basis, non-ticket revenue for the third quarter was up $1.86 year-over-year to $54.44, in part due to our dynamic pricing initiatives and our ancillary bundle offering.

We remain on track to achieve our goal of $55 in non-ticket revenue per segment by year end.

In the coming months, in addition to continued momentum from our current offerings, we expect we will begin to see additional benefit from enhanced merchandising opportunities.

And recently, we and our partner, Bank of America, made some changes to our co-branded credit card offer on board the aircraft.

These changes are designed to drive more applications, have higher attachment rates and promote additional use of the card itself.

These initiatives, along with others that we plan to implement over the next 2 to 3 quarters, give us confidence we can continue to drive increases in ancillary revenue per segment.

Turning to our network.

Since our last earnings call, we began service to both Greensboro and Asheville, North Carolina.

And we've also recently announced Cali, Colombia and Jacksonville, Florida as our newest destinations, which begin service later this quarter.

Also in early October, we've launched service from Orlando to 7 destinations in Latin America and the Caribbean, with 4 more to start in early November.

We are very excited to have the opportunity to expand our international footprint.

In addition to being a city with high demographic affinity to Latin America and the Caribbean, our Orlando service is a perfect complement to our existing Fort Lauderdale service as it provides greater schedule utility for our connecting passengers.

By year-end, our international capacity will account [for approximately] 15% of our total capacity.

Now turning to our outlook for the fourth quarter 2018.

As we announced last night, we expect [ASM] capacity to increase about 15% year-over-year.

Additionally, in terms of our revenue guide, based on our current booking trends and considering how well our internal initiatives benefited us in the third quarter, we estimate TRASM will increase approximately 6% year-over-year.

Before I hand it over to Ted to discuss our cost performance, I want to add that the improvements we're seeing on both ticket and non-ticket metrics are a direct result of a company-wide effort to improve our revenue performance.

We have a lot more work to do, but the results thus far are clearly encouraging.

And with that, I'll turn it over to Ted.

Thanks, Matt.

Thanks to all of you for joining us today.

Now turning to our third quarter 2018 performance.

Network optimization and improved yield management, combined with our team's continued focus to drive ex-fuel costs down, produced an operating margin of 16.1% for the third quarter 2018, nearly flat year-over-year despite a significant increase in the cost of fuel and higher pilot rates in connection with our new pilot agreement approved in the first quarter of 2018.

I thank all our team members for contributing to this strong performance.

CASM ex-fuel for the third quarter was $0.0522, a decrease of 3.7% year-over-year.

Better operational performance was a large driver of this improvement as well as improved labor productivity and efficiency, which helped to partially offset the impact of higher wage rates.

Aircraft rent per ASM was also lower year-over-year.

Regarding fleet, in the third quarter, we took delivery of 2 new A320ceo aircraft and ended the quarter with 121 aircraft in the fleet.

In the fourth quarter, we are scheduled to take delivery of 5 new A320ceo aircraft and 3 A320neo aircraft.

In 2019, we have 15 aircraft scheduled for delivery and estimate our capacity growth for 2019 will be about 14%.

We are evaluating debt financing as well as sale-leaseback options to finance these aircraft.

However, for cost guidance purposes, we are assuming we will debt finance them.

On a full year basis, we are solidly on track to achieve 2018 CASM ex-fuel of down 3.5% to 4% year-over-year.

Our fourth quarter 2018 CASM ex-fuel is estimated to be up 5% to 6% year-over-year.

As you may recall, our 4Q CASM ex-fuel last year was down 4.4%, which was partially due to favorable group health expense and timing of supplemental rent that creates a challenging comparison for this year.

In addition, we have yet to lap the pressure from higher pilot rates in connection with our new pilot deal ratified on March 1 of this year, and we have some headwinds related to the timing of heavy maintenance events.

Regarding fuel, based on the trends quarter-to-date and the forward curve, we estimate our average fuel price per gallon in the fourth quarter will be $2.46.

At these elevated fuel prices, it is more important than ever to drive continued fuel efficiency.

We already have one of the youngest, most fuel-efficient fleets in the industry, and over the next year, our fuel efficiency should get even better as we add more new aircraft, most of which are neos that consume between 15% to 20% less fuel.

We are also leveraging technology to help us drive more fuel-efficient routings and optimize cost indexing and aircraft speed.

In fact, on a per seat mile basis, we have a 30% advantage against the industry average in fuel burn, which actually helps expand our absolute cost advantage in times of rising oil prices.

Looking forward to 2019 nonfuel costs, we are still in the early stages of our 2019 budget planning process.

We were comfortable reiterating our 2019 CASM ex guide of flat to up 1%.

In closing, we are enthusiastic about both our revenue and cost trajectory as we look ahead to 2019.

We are addressing higher fuel prices by adjusting our network and pushing pricing where we can.

Our yield management initiatives are just beginning to bear fruit and should drive additional benefits as we further refine processes.

Our non-ticket initiatives remain robust and on target to produce higher non-ticket revenue.

Together with our continued cost discipline and improved operational performance, we are optimistic about the potential outcome for earnings growth in 2019.

With that, I'll turn it back to Bob.

Thanks, Ted.

We've made a lot of improvements at Spirit over the past few years, and all our hard work is starting to pay off.

We've improved our operational reliability and made great strides in improving our service metrics.

We have an industry-leading cost structure and a cost gap to our competitors that we believe will continue to widen.

Our key labor agreements are in place for the next several years.

We have refined and improved our revenue management processes.

We have made measurable improvement in non-ticket revenues and see further upside, and we have broadened and diversified our network.

And in the future, we see plenty of new route opportunities.

And of course, none of this would have been possible without our talented and dedicated team members.

For all these reasons and more, we are confident about our future success.

With that, back to DeAnne.

Thank you, gentlemen.

We are now ready to take questions from the analysts.

(Operator Instructions)

(Operator Instructions) And our first question comes from Kevin Crissey.

Can you talk about what it is about the international markets that is attractive from Orlando and how that cost structure advantage plays out in those international markets as compared to domestic markets?

Yes, sure, Kevin.

This is Matt.

In terms of Orlando, a lot of things that we've learned in Fort Lauderdale and how we serve the market tends to be unique.

We have a great ability to carry customers that wouldn't otherwise be able to go, and that's what our cost structure allows us to do.

What we've learned in Fort Lauderdale is that there's a lot of traffic back and forth that is visiting friends and relatives, and that kind of traffic or that kind of customer base are people that we serve very well.

And Orlando has similar affinity to Latin America and the Caribbean.

Not exactly the same as South Florida, but it has a lot of the same characteristics.

And as we continue to build out our network in Orlando, we're creating connect opportunities that allows us to flow traffic over Orlando as well.

So it actually creates really good opportunities for our guests out of the Northeast, specifically -- or any city really that can connect through either Fort Lauderdale or Orlando, gives them better ability to create an itinerary that meets their needs.

So what level of connectivity are we talking about?

Are we above 10% connectivity from either of those cities at this point?

Yes, sure.

So yes, to answer your question.

And in Fort Lauderdale, we've done some things from a scheduling perspective that promotes the flow of connect traffic.

And it's one of the few places in our network where we do have some banking that takes place there as well.

And we don't have the same exact structure getting set up in Orlando right now just because the size is smaller, but over time, we expect that we'll continue to build out Orlando to act similarly to Fort Lauderdale, not exactly the same, but similarly.

And I guess, why -- I understand why that -- how should we think about that for a low-cost carrier?

To what extent is that a traditional practice?

I know that Southwest connects more than people think.

How does that differ from the historical practices of an ultra-low-cost carrier?

Or maybe it doesn't?

Kevin, this is Bob.

I don't think it does.

Again, if we have to look at the nature of the operation, it's got a lot more -- we're not flying on the Transatlantic with twin-aisle airplanes.

This is the narrow-body operation and we're generally talking 2- or 3-hour flights.

There is -- so for the most part, the costs are not dissimilar.

There's some customs and things like that, but generally, you get compensated for it.

You're able to run relatively high utilization because many of these markets, you can serve with red-eyes and evening flights.

So it's actually, in many ways, it's highly complementary to the domestic operation because we're actually using airplanes at night that, quite frankly, have no other place to go.

So it really extends the network.

And it's just a matter of how you want to view the globe.

But the reality is, if there were more cities south of Fort Lauderdale, we would be flying there.

They just happen to be international.

But it's -- I think conceptually, it's the same.

And quite frankly, it helps us because of our geography and the large -- we're about -- almost 57%, 58% of our operation touches Florida, the Caribbean, Latin America.

It allows us to increase our utilizationn actually quite a bit.

So I think it's kind of a natural for us.

Our next question comes from Duane Pfennigwerth.

In terms of revenue management improvements you've made, pricing cleanup, can you expand on what new tools you have deployed, what exactly it is you're doing?

And how would you characterize what inning are we in, in terms of the recovery of those base fares?

This is Matt.

So we've -- I don't think I'm going to go into too many details of exactly tools that we're using.

We've done some things internally, and we're building out some new processes.

I think you've heard me say before how we have a tremendous amount of data just like every airline generates.

And one of the keys is not just the collection of the data but thinking about the right way to use that data, and that's exactly what we're doing now.

And in terms of fares and what inning we're in, I just like to think of it as every flight, every season, off-peak, peak, they're all going to act a little bit differently and they have a lot of reliance on just what's going on in terms of the economy and in the industry in general.

So sort of a continuation of what we saw throughout the summer and into the fall is not that different.

We're seeing pretty good strength around the holidays and the peak periods, and the off-peak periods have recovered pretty well.

We've done some things from a network perspective that have created more sort of peaking even within a week.

So we've eliminated bad flying on Tuesdays and Wednesdays that we don't think it is accretive to what we're trying to accomplish, and that, in general, helps overall pricing trends for us.

If we're not having to do a lot of extra discounting on Tuesdays and Wednesdays, then it just helps the overall week, in general.

So I can live with that.

So just to go a little further, I think we are in the early innings, and I think it -- and the revenue improvements will come.

Some will come from the industry environment, we can't escape that, and some of it will come from our own initiatives.

And fortunately, we're getting a lot more from our own initiatives.

It takes a while to get this stuff going.

And finally, like I said, it always takes a little -- to get these systems up and running, but we're finally seeing the benefits.

Again, we've got a whole new team in that area.

So like I said, I think generally, in the early innings, we're way down from the real peaks of 2014 and 2015.

That's kind of obvious.

And some will be tied to industry evolution, but we feel good that a lot of things now are more in our control than perhaps a year or 2 ago.

That's great.

And then maybe an industry question.

As you think about your fourth quarter outlook and seasonally stronger periods late in the quarter, could you contrast your visibility into 4Q revenue versus the visibility that you had into 3Q revenue?

Sure.

So at this point in the booking curve, we're pretty going with what's going on in October obviously.

And as we look forward, the holidays, we have pretty good visibility as to what's going on.

I think we're set up really well.

I think we've done a really good job in understanding demand patterns and what we're seeing out there from a pricing environment perspective.

And it's really no different than we talked about on the last call, which is we're continuing to drive loads as much as possible in the off-peak periods.

We've eliminated some bad routes and we've eliminated off-peak flying on Tuesdays and Wednesdays, which is helping in general.

And the trends are moving a relatively stable way, which is what we like to see.

So it's a little easier to predict what's going on right now, but you never know what will happen as we move through the quarter.

But as of right now, we think we're pretty good on what we're looking at.

I would have guessed that you'd say we're ending on a high note as opposed to September.

Our next question comes from Dan McKenzie.

A couple of questions here.

I'm going to try first on third quarter revenue sort of slash pricing.

I'm just wondering if you guys led or followed any of the industry actions in the third quarter.

So this is Matt again.

In terms of actions overall, we're making pricing changes and yield management changes on a daily basis.

We tend to not take really big, broad actions all the time because that doesn't necessarily benefit us.

We're much more surgical in how we look at our data and understand where do we see opportunity to increase fares, we will, and where we see the need to reduce fares or be a little more sale promotional, we'll do that.

And in fact, the same market may exhibit those 2 characteristics at the same time, depending on travel, season or any unique events that are occurring in certain cities.

Very good.

And then, Matt, I guess, while I have you here, the $55 target for non-ticket revenue per passenger, first, what is the next target, how are you thinking about that?

Is $60 reasonable next year, and what is the pathway there?

I believe there's a product refresh that's going on.

I'm just wondering if that's enough in and of itself to get you to the next rung?

Or what are the big drivers as we look ahead??

Yes.

So Dan, we haven't put a stake in the ground for sort of the next publicly stated goal that we want to get to.

We're looking at that now, we're assessing all of the different opportunities that we have.

I think we have mentioned before, and I have no problem mentioning again, that we know that we have opportunity to improve our co-branded credit card program, which we're working on with Bank of America now.

We know we have opportunity to improve our packaging business, which is -- we think of as selling hotels and cars in addition to air.

And we have some new technology coming in place later this quarter and into next year that should help us with better merchandising and continuing to sell what we're selling today but in better ways.

So we have not stated exactly a target beyond the $55 at the end of this year, but it is something that we are looking at as we think about 2019 and beyond.

Your next question comes from Jamie Baker.

You've had several months now to live with the new pilot contract, and at the same time, the growth rate based on ASMs is decelerating pretty meaningfully.

If I were hired as a first officer today, which would be a bad idea obviously, but what would your best estimate be in terms of how long it would take me to move to left seat?

And 2 years ago, at this time, what would your answer have been, roughly speaking?

This is John Bendoraitis.

So right now, we're running about -- it ranges from 2 years and 8 months to about 3 years, depending on when you want to make the move.

So we just kind of round to 3 years.

And it's been pretty consistent in my time here, and so it's been hovering right around that 3-year mark.

So give or take a few months on either side.

And going forward, that's true even with the slower growth rate?

But the block hours are -- again, look, we're getting bigger.

So the -- we're -- even though the rate's going down, we're adding...

Yes, and I would say the move -- Jamie, it's Ted.

The move off of this, there may be rounding a little bit, but it's not going to be material shifts.

We're still going to be an extremely attractive place to work for pilots while we continue to grow even at mid-teens rather than 21%.

It's still going to be one of the best in the industry.

Okay, got it.

That was the point of the question.

And second, have you run any of your own simulations?

Would you be willing to run any of your own simulations at the current seat pitch, just to be absolutely sure that you still hit the 90-second evac rule?

Yes.

I mean, look, all of the airplanes that fly today have already been certified safe for exit, be it because of the original certification or a mini-evac, as it relates to whatever the configuration is.

So we're comfortable that our airplanes meet those requirements.

And I think the FAA has already publicly opined on it, to be honest.

So I don't think there's an issue there, and I think we are comfortable to say that our airplanes meet those mandatory requirements.

Our next question comes from Hunter Keay.

When you get 2019 CASM ex last time, you said 0 to 1%, but you hope to do better.

This time, you just said 0 to 1%.

Kind of curious to know why you choose to drop those words?

And do you still hope to do better?

And if you do, what's going to make that happen?

No, I always hope to do better, Hunter, which is why we hired Scott.

So no, we're -- that's not an oversight.

Look, we go into the planning process always aggressively.

I don't think you should read anything into that.

Our objective is always to do better.

We're still in the midst of it, so I'm not prepared to update beyond where we've always been, which is flat to up 1% with the intent to always do better.

Right.

And the second part of that question was what's going to make that happen?

What are the -- is it the budget?

Is it the utilization?

I mean, yes?

Yes.

I mean, look, as we've said, the levers we pull around here are going to be how do we best optimize assets, that's always the case.

So peak utilization is a primary objective, and you and I have talked about that as we have publicly that over the last 3 years, our utilization has come off a little bit, and we see that as an opportunity to improve asset utilization.

We don't lap the pilot deal until the first quarter, but obviously, so there's a little bit of pressure there.

But we still have -- the aircraft purchases that we did in the middle of this year, we don't lap until midway through the year, so that helps us too.

And so there's always maintenance timing, there's always a bunch of other things that we work our way through, but this company has got a pretty unified objective to maintain our cost structure and expand the cost gap.

And we've done that for the last 7 years and it will continue.

And I think if anyone would have asked us at the beginning of this year as to whether or not we're going to deliver flat to down CASM in a pilot year, we would have been called liars, and we did it.

And so that's kind of the way we're approaching next year too.

Liar is a bit harsh, but I -- so this is a question for Matt.

So as you build the schedule depth, you mentioned obviously the benefit of more connecting itineraries and you even talked about banking Orlando a little bit, but are you finding it a little bit harder to raise local fares in those markets because of the additional frequencies that effectively mean you're competing against yourself because you also compete against ULCCs when you do that?

How are you finding that dynamic of pricing improvements locally where you're adding depth?

Yes.

Hunter, that's a good question.

We're actually finding the reverse to be true, that as we add more optionality to our customers, we actually have the ability to carry them in both directions on a much better schedule, which in fact, helps us on yields and helps us on pricing power in the marketplace.

So I know -- I understand your question.

But in fact, what happens is it's a benefit to pushing up yields largely because we don't have to necessarily do some things to help drive added traffic.

The traffic will just naturally flow over.

And then in terms of the local markets themselves, right now, we believe the environment is strong.

We know what happened last year.

Pricing is still out in the marketplace, but inventory control are things that we're practicing more and more of, and I think it's showing up.

And I think that the ability to drive traffic has never been an issue for us.

It's been more about, can we get that at the right yield.

And right now, we're not having any issues with it.

Let me just go a little further, Hunter.

If you just look at our route network, in about 1/4 of our routes, we have more than 1 flight a day.

But again, you've got to look at networks completely differently.

And you can look at a legacy carrier network.

So we're relatively small, but we've got a series of cities where we've got 20, 30, 40 flights.

So again, we've got 25 in about 10 cities and some substantially bigger.

And quite frankly, we can add more service because we're kind of gaining scale in key places.

And as Matt said, when you've got better time-of-day coverage, we got a great cost structure, the product's better.

The differences in coach compared to carriers is tiny, and we run a dramatically better airline before.

So we do pretty well in those routes.

And then we operate against a larger carrier, we can have a 50%, 60%, 70% cost advantage.

So I think it's kind of part of really what we do.

We -- about, I think, 50%, 60% of our routes we have once-a-day, and we have 15% where we're less than daily.

So we vary our strategy by the route and by how we perceive our own strength in the city.

And I think right now, I think we're at a pretty good spot.

Our next question comes from Savi Syth.

American is going to change their basic economy product offering a bit recently.

And I'm just wondering if you've noticed any difference -- just with when kind of your -- the legacy competitor now, in the future, you'll have some of the competitors with this basic offering.

Is there a difference in kind of the product where they include the carry-on or not and if you're seeing anything different with this change?

Let me start off.

Matt will finish.

I -- listen, everybody now has basic economy, so they say this is all tied to how people want to manage their revenues.

We really don't care what they're doing.

The industry competes in a lot of different formats and I guess, now it's -- maybe we got 4 or 5 carriers doing it.

This is just -- it's just the marketplace adjusting and adapting, and the key thing is, ultimately, is how many seats do you sell at a certain price.

That is, by far, the biggest driver.

And like I said, we're very comfortable with the direction of our earnings.

Some of it is tied to what the industry does, but well more than half is tied to things that we're doing, and obviously, as you know, we're pretty comfortable with our ancillary structure, which doesn't fluctuate with industry activities.

Matt?

Yes, sure.

That's right, Bob.

And I would just add, Savi, that the idea of customer segmentation by using base economy is one that makes sense.

I think anyone in -- the core principles of revenue management suggests that customer segmentation helps you price more effectively to the customer segments that you're putting together.

So I guess, from my perspective, allowing -- like American's change that you had mentioned, they're going to change their product to see how -- to what they think is best.

To the extent that it blurs the line on segmentation, to me, would mean like they have to sell less seats because they're blurring the segmentation.

So in fact, in that case, our overall statement in the past still holds, that we expect all these products to be neutral to slightly beneficial to us because anything that helps us segment is beneficial.

And then, at the end of the day, if there's a line that's getting blurred on that, then our competitors may have to sell even less of those price points in order to maintain what they see as important segmentation.

Okay.

Well, it's a very helpful answer.

And if I just might -- a quick follow-up to Ted.

You talked about fuel efficiency improvement.

This year, it kind of -- it looks like it improved about 3%.

Does that moderate as they go into the following years?

Or how should we think about that level of improvement?

It's a good question, Savi.

We're -- I don't know if I can say for sure exactly what's going to be the impact going forward.

I mean, neos will have a notable improvement.

They will drive considerable improvement going forward in just that fuel burn line.

So I don't think we're done improving on it.

I assume that percentage was on an ASM basis, and I don't think that improvement's necessarily done.

If the fleet gets bigger, it'll round over time, there's no doubt about it, but we're just not quite sure yet how much the neos will offset any other aging pressures that we have.

Our next question comes from Andrew Didora.

Ted, maybe a little bit of a follow-up to Savi's first question, but as you enter your new role when you look forward for Spirit, how do you view SAVE's competitive position in the market as the legacy airlines continue to strengthen their cabin segmentation initiatives?

And I guess, what do you think are the biggest network opportunities for Spirit over the -- say, the next 3 to 5 years?

Sure.

So I think Matt addressed our collective views very well on how we view the strengths of our product.

It's tied to our cost advantage.

It's tied to the design of the model and the attractiveness of à la carte pricing for our customer base.

We know that's what they want.

We survey them, and that's what they get.

So we feel very good about the way the product's designed.

I think what you hit upon is where my focus is for the next 3 to 5 years is on network and design of that network and the value of -- as we build out the opportunities that we see -- and we put them into buckets, right?

We've talked about big city opportunities, we've talked about large leisure destinations and we've talked about international.

And in fact, if you look at the past year and you just look at the routes that we added over the past year, in rough numbers, depending on categorization, it's about 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 is what we added last year, about -- some big city stuff, some large leisure destinations and plenty of international.

And as the network matures and evolves, those opportunities become clearer to us rather than foggier.

And so what we're excited about over the next 3 to 5 years is how are we going to optimize those opportunities.

And it ties into some of the commentary Matt made earlier about what we do with kind of intentional connect opportunities and how we time our aircraft in various markets, will have an impact on our ability to continue to drive yield improvement.

And with a quality product, a clearly improving product and a very high-quality product for us, we think we have a tremendous amount of advantage, good costs, high-quality product and an evolving network.

That's where my head's at, and the management team, for the next 3 years.

And then just a follow-up there.

Are there other markets outside of the South Florida that could be another source for connecting traffic?

So we do connect some in non-South Florida markets today.

It's not big, and so there are a handful of opportunities for us to continue to optimize that.

And we do see markets that will flesh out over time where that -- again, I don't want to overemphasize the concept of connect.

We're never going to be a true banking airline in large kind of metropolitan areas.

What we are going to do is optimize our fleet and the network opportunities so that we drive appropriate amount of yield opportunity.

And that's going to come some from connect and largely from local.

And so we do see opportunities beyond just South Florida, but that's going to have to flesh out over time.

Our next question comes from Helane Becker.

So I don't know if Bob or Ted want to answer this, or Matt even, but was -- as you think about all these improvements that you've made and you've seen really great improvement on the operations, 2 questions.

One, what's the cost associated with the getting to 99% completion factor?

Or should we be thinking of it more as a cost savings rather than a cost spent?

And two, how has that translated into your Net Promoter Score, if that's a number you look at?

So we'll break it into 2, and I'll let Matt talk about the Net Promoter, or at least comment on it.

But I think if we want to start with the operation, so philosophically, if you try to fix an operation in 6 months or 6 weeks, you could alter your cost structure very quickly.

So we've basically -- we said, "Well, we got a couple of years and we're going to be very diligent," because the goal was to make sure the cost gap for the industry was lower.

So we started -- a little bit of block, we made some adjustments on our routings, gone through all our turns.

We went in excruciating detail and we took some utilization down.

Really, what we found was we really wanted to get at the completion and the cost of disruption because that number, for us, the cost of disruption is higher than other carriers who have a lot of frequencies.

And so we've actually saved a substantial amount of money.

And we're now at a point where we think we can begin to flex up the utilization again.

But now we have control.

Again, so if you have an operation where we are, you don't fix 8 things at a time.

You create the stability.

We've created a stable platform.

And we think now we can start improving our utilization again.

Again, at the same time, I think our labor agreements are substantially better.

I think our pilot deal is a win-win for the pilots and for our customers because we have a lot more flexibility to manage our airline.

And again, we're -- the bulk of our operation is from the Midwest to the East Coast, so we have a lot of ATC issues.

We manage these things dramatically better today than we did a couple of years ago.

So we're at a pretty good spot.

I think we are around 80%.

I think we're running a good airline, and I think we can now actually begin to squeeze some additional cost improvements out of it without really having a negative impact on our operation.

Yes, sure.

And in terms of Net Promoter Score, we don't publicly comment about what the actual numbers are.

I can tell you that directionally, we're very pleased with the trajectory.

As you can imagine, running a much better operation in terms of on-time performance, in terms of completion factor.

Just to get the plug in for operations group, we have the best bag handling rates in the industry.

And we're also seeing it in a reduction in our DOT complaint levels as well.

They're at all-time lows for us as well and trending in the right direction.

And when we talk about the operation, it's not just about the aircraft taking off and landing.

It's also about what happens at the airport from an experience perspective.

So we spend a great deal of time looking at our data, which you'll hear me say a lot, and analyzing where the pain points are and working very closely with our operations group and to understand how to make the guest experience better at the airport.

And I think it's playing through in a very smart way.

Instead of having to swing really crude weapons around, we can go in very surgically and attack pain points that we see our guest is experiencing and can alleviate them.

And all of that shows up on our NPS at the end of the day.

And we also know that the better we get scored on an NPS basis, the better we see repeat purchase rates from our guests as well.

So it all plays in together.

Matt, can you say what that repeat rate is and what it compared to?

No.

Again, Helane, we haven't really talked about that one publicly.

I don't think we're prepared to do that right now.

But I can tell you that it's moved up nicely.

And it's not just moving up in terms of repeat rate.

What we're also seeing is that the better the NPS score is, then we also know that our guests spend a little bit more on ancillary purchases as well.

So again, it's on purpose.

We view this as an investment into how we view the future revenue streams of the company.

Our next questions comes from Michael Linenberg.

I just -- not to beat a dead horse here on the connections, but I know a lot of the conversation around connectivity has talked about improving yield.

And I'm just curious, just structurally, do you -- by taking a connecting passenger, do you preclude capturing as much ancillary as you would like -- as you would typically receive if you had 2 local passengers?

Look, I've flown Spirit before, but I've never flown on a connecting basis.

I mean, can you charge the same passenger twice for a carry-on bag, for example?

Or are the yields in the connecting itineraries sufficiently high that they more than compensate for whatever ancillary that you would forgo if you were taking 2 local passengers as opposed to one connecting?

It's Ted.

Yes, so look, we're still a local airline, okay, so the primary focus on us is pushing local traffic.

The design of the ancillary model favors that, but we will price connecting opportunities to optimize all-in yield, and by that, I mean TRASM, okay?

So we're always looking for opportunities to drive TRASM.

We measure ourselves based on T, not on the separate distinct items.

And so it's just one component.

It's one weapon or tool in the toolkit that we're -- we've -- we think we have more opportunity to use today than we did 3 or 5 years ago, that's all.

It's just because we're 121 airplanes rather than 21 airplanes, and that will just continue to refine over time.

Okay.

And just a follow-up on -- about percentages of connecting passengers.

I'm not sure if Matt actually said the number.

But if I approached it differently and said what percent of your Latin itineraries involve a connection, would you have that number, even a rough approximation?

Yes, Mike, we do.

So in terms of running through Fort Lauderdale, it's about half of our international traffic connection for Lauderdale and the other half is local out of Fort Lauderdale.

Most of our other international flying right now is going to be more of the local point-to-point nature.

And I don't -- I want to make sure that we don't over-rotate on this idea of connectivity.

Like Ted mentioned, it's important and it helps add to the network, but it's really augmenting what we already do.

We're very careful about utilization, and we're not going to do things that's going to hurt utilization in order to try to carry 1 or 2 more connect passengers.

So I just want to make sure we're clear on that.

Yes, it's really nothing new.

We've been doing it -- the company has been doing it for years.

We're just bigger in Fort Lauderdale.

Instead of being 50 flights where we were 2 or 3 years ago, we're -- it's in the 70s.

But it's one of our -- it's our key airport, with places like Orlando and Las Vegas are close seconds and thirds, okay?

Yes.

But Bob, as you said though, you're now in 10 cities, you're over 20 departures a day.

So it will become a by-product, and it sounds like it's going to be an accretive by-product from a profitability standpoint.

Well, it would be and it's just a matter of size.

And look, there's more -- generally more competition in local markets, and today, in actually connecting markets, the fares are actually relatively higher.

That's different than where we were 8 to 10 years ago.

So again, there's opportunities that actually come with size.

We've done things with automation.

And it will also vary by season because you have bigger opportunities in September and October than perhaps -- to carry connections versus the summer, where you can try to maximize local.

So it -- - again, as we get size and as the network evolves, it's just -- all networks are different, and ours evolves in a different way.

And I think quite frankly, we can -- have a lot of experience carrying connections, we can run an exceptionally low-cost airline.

It's -- and especially when you're dealing with narrow-bodies the way we are, it's -- other than customs, the operation is remarkably similar.

So we don't overcomplicate it.

Our next question comes from Joseph DeNardi.

Matt, I think in the past, you've kind of characterized the ancillary opportunity as maybe $1, $2 per passenger.

Wondering, now that the credit card is an opportunity, if that's changed, are we still looking at $1 increases?

Or is the opportunity more significant over the next, say, 12 to 24 months?

Yes.

So Joe, thanks for the question.

We have -- and we report some of this publicly, and so we know what the opportunity is on credit card.

I'm going to probably give you a little bit of a nonanswer here, Joe, so I'll just tell you in advance, but we know what the opportunity is.

That's typical with credit card questions.

Yes.

So specific to the credit card, we know where we've been.

In fact, our credit card program is underperforming right now compared to where we were a year ago, and we're bigger.

So right there, it shows you some opportunity.

I think we filed some numbers in the Q. And you can see the opportunity's there.

And not only do we know that the opportunity is there, but it's also in conjunction with how we think about the loyalty program, which -- as you know, those are clearly tied together.

So together, we believe there's really good opportunity there.

And we also have -- one thing that we don't talk about a lot but we talk about from time to time is that just as we evolve and as our customer base evolves and flies with Spirit more often, there are some challenges that we have with that, that are not heavy challenges, but there's things that we have to understand, which is when our customers start to fly us with a higher repeat rate, then they start to learn the model a little bit and then they'll join our $9 Fare Club, right?

So when they join the $9 Fare Club, we get added revenue from that, they get some discounts on their bag charges.

So we've created programs that help to take advantage of repeat rate and want to encourage repeat rate.

And what you'll see next year, as we come out with our new loyalty program, it's going to be an extension of our overall product.

Right now, our loyalty program and the credit card for Bank of America associated with it was developed years ago when our model was a certain way, and where we are today, it doesn't fit.

It doesn't fit our customer base and we see it.

And they're telling us with their behavior that it doesn't fit for them anymore.

And that's one of the major reasons why we're looking to change it.

And the opportunity, I think, is definitely there for us.

Okay, that's interesting, Matt.

And then Ted, a question for you.

If you had formulated the capacity plans for 2019 without Bob sitting next to you, would Spirit be growing at a faster rate?

Just trying to understand if you think the right rate of growth for Spirit is higher than Bob does.

I want to hear this story...

No, we're pretty unified on how we view the business.

We've always known, and in fact, we talked about this even before Bob took over as CEO, that as the airline got larger, the percentage growth was going to round.

It looks weird admittedly this year that we go from 23% to 14% or whatever, but remembering the 23% really should be around 18% or 17% or 18% when you figure out the problems that existed in 2017.

So I think we're on the right path.

I think we feel really good about that growth rate.

We're always going to look for opportunities within each individual year to optimize utilization of the fleet to take advantage of opportunities, principally in the peak.

But around -- and quite frankly, in times where it's not as good, you look to kind of draw down a little bit of your off-peak flying to compensate.

But nonetheless, I think we're very comfortable and have established a delivery profile that matches that.

That's not a coincidence.

Our next question comes from Brandon Oglenski.

This is actually Matthew Wisniewski on for Brandon.

Quick one for you.

You talked about the operational improvements due to the new pilot contract.

I was hoping you kind of expand a little bit on that.

Obviously, it seems to be working so far.

Should we expect continued improvements?

Is this something that could spool up over time?

Yes.

I think we're still collectively learning our agreement.

And as I mentioned, as we've mentioned before, the principal benefits come in our ability to recover in times of disruption, and I think that's where you see some of that benefit today.

As we've also mentioned, next year, we anticipate we will be deploying a preferential bidding system that we think should have some, we hope, benefit as well.

We haven't quantified, but we're looking at that happening in the late first quarter or early second quarter, we hope.

So while we've shown operational benefit today and we're running a much better airline, we're still making sure that we're optimized.

And I think that this gives us an opportunity to continue to kind of tweak the knobs going forward from here.

And our last question comes from Jack Atkins.

Just a couple of follow-up questions here.

Matt, going back to what you were saying on the credit card underperformance a moment ago, I mean, is that something that gets resolved in the next couple of quarters?

Or is that something that's really more of a couple of years out in terms of getting that fixed?

What's the time line there, if you can sort of help us think through that?

Sure.

We'll -- so we will see improvement on this in -- starting in next year.

But overall, it will probably take around 18 months for it to all kind of flow through and become annualized.

So as we go to -- right now, we've done some things to help.

We've increased the sign-up offer onboard the aircraft.

So we've improved the offer, we're working very closely with our flight attendant group on creating better strategies to drive more flight attendant engagement on the program in general.

And then as we mentioned, like next year, as we look at our loyalty program revamp, that will have an additive effect as well.

And side note, which I mentioned this recently -- well, previously as well -- is we expect our $9 Fare Club program to benefit from all these changes as well.

Okay, that's good to hear.

And then just as a follow-up to sort of the broader conversations around the optimism for earnings growth in 2019, I mean, Ted, I would just be curious to get a sense for your level of confidence around pretax margin expansion next year because I guess, as we sort of think about the significant revenue momentum in the business, as we're exiting the year, fairly easy comps in the first half of the year and then pretty modest unit cost growth in terms of the outlook, I mean, it seems like you guys are really well positioned to expand margins.

But I'm just curious if there are any puts and takes there we're not thinking about and just to know what your level of confidence is.

No, that's a great point, Jack.

Look, if we take a step back, we've talked about this.

As we look at the broader opportunity set for this business in the markets that we look to tackle, we've always used the mid-teens target.

And today -- and that's on the op line, by the way, and today, obviously, that's more -- we're a little below that on average.

Obviously, this quarter was good but on average.

And so we believe that over time, that we revert to a mean.

We may have, in certain years, overperformed that target and underperformed in others.

But over time, it kind of [focuses] around a mean on purpose and that's the targeted number.

So our objective always is to drive further margin expansion and earnings.

And we feel very good about the setup for next year.

Because of all the work that's been done over the last few years, all the things that Matt talked about in the revenue line and our continued discipline on costs, we just feel like the setup here has inflected in the right direction.

Well, thank you, everyone, for joining us today.

That's a wrap.

Thank you.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.

This concludes today's conference.

Thank you for participating, and you may now disconnect.