1) You can't terminate the 'human resources' on a flight to flight basis. The fixed costs [admin, etc] remain. As for flight crew, they are guaranteed certain minimum hours regardless whether they fly or not. As you saw, KQ can't even fire those it does not need!
2) There is often little difference in costs between buying & leasing except the initial cash outlay for leases is lower. KQ has to deposit 5-10% of the purchase price to get the loans. When it is acquiring 20 planes, that adds up fast.
3) The 767s served a purpose & stayed too long in service primarily due to delays in the delivery of 787s. Some destinations are better served with 767s due to increased cargo space. The narrow Embraers can carry passengers but little additional cargo when full.
4) When traffic is slow [see flights after 9/11 or during the GFC] it may be difficult to get a 'fair' price for the plane or get a great lease rate. There is often over-supply during this time & firms like GECAS have a leg up over small airlines like KQ. They can offer better rates & packages as well as have an extensive rolodex.

looks like bankruptcy might be closer than we thought www.businessdailyafrica....40/-/xes54o/-/index.html

ARE WE SEEING THE LAST DAYS OF KQ? NO. WE STILL HAVE 3 MORE YEARS BEFORE IT COLLAPSES

I smell a rat! There is no way government can allow KQ to go down. And it says something that Naikuni has been at the helm and continues to be so. Someone wants this share to hit rock bottom, before buying the same when revamping will happen.

Market manipulation at its best!

@Mukiri..please read the first post on this thread.

..operational inefficiency has eroded KQ asset value.. and those variables aren't controlled by persons outside KQ management..and if ur argument that there is market manipulation on this counter..then prove it. It's crap..Naikuni needs to go.. unfortunately..he is there probably out of political/ethnic patronage..not merit..unless merit on performance is gauged by pretty low standards.