穆迪全球航空企业信用评级方法

CORPORATES MAY 24, 2012

Each of the factors (except the Financial Policy factor) also encompass a number of sub-factors that we

explain in detail. Since an issuer’s scoring on a particular grid factor often will not match its overall

rating, in the Appendix we include a discussion of “outliers” – companies whose grid-indicated rating

for a specific sub-factor differs significantly from the actual rating.

This rating methodology is not intended to be an exhaustive discussion of all factors that Moody’s

analysts consider to be pertinent for ratings in the passenger airline sector. We note that our analysis

for ratings in this sector covers factors that are common across all industries (such as ownership,

management, liquidity, legal structure in the corporate organization, corporate governance) as well as

factors that can be meaningful on a company-specific basis. Our ratings consider qualitative

considerations and factors that do not lend themselves to a transparent presentation in a grid format.

The grid represents a compromise between greater complexity that would result in grid-indicated

ratings that map more closely to actual ratings, and simplicity that enhances a transparent presentation

of the factors that are most important for ratings in this sector most of the time.

Highlights of this report include:

»An overview of the rated universe

» A summary of the rating methodology

» A description of the key factors that drive rating quality

»Comments on the grid assumptions and limitations, including a discussion of rating

considerations that are not included in the grid.

The Appendices show the full grid (Appendix A), tables that illustrate the application of the

methodology grid to the covered issuers with explanatory comments on some of the more significant

differences between the grid-implied rating for each sub-factor and our actual rating (Appendix B)1.

About the Rated Universe

We presently rate fourteen passenger airlines using this methodology, covering approximately $30

billion of rated debt. These companies represent a diverse group of issuers with ratings (senior

unsecured rating or Corporate Family Rating) ranging from Baa3 to Caa1.

Seven of the rated airlines are based in the US; three are from Europe and the remainder come from

either Australia, Brazil, Canada or New Zealand. Of the rated airlines, only three are investment grade

being; Qantas, Air New Zealand and Southwest Airlines. The median rating for the industry is

situated at B1.2 The relatively low ratings for the sector reflect the effect of high fuel prices on these

companies ability to generate earnings and free cash flow at levels that would lead to more supportive

financial leverage measures. Additionally, sustained pressure on non-fuel costs, particularly labor as the

work force becomes more tenured and the need to replace older, less fuel-efficient aircraft should limit

the extent of any improvement in credit profiles in upcoming years.

1In general, the actual rating utilized for comparison to the grid-implied rating is the Corporate Family Rating (CFR) for speculative-grade issuers and senior unsecured rating for investment-grade issuers.

2For the purposes of comparability in this methodology, Moody’s compares individual corporate family ratings (CFR) and senior unsecured ratings. As both Air New Zealand (ANZ) and Scandinavian Airlines System (SAS) are partially owned by their respective governments, their corporate family ratings reflect implied government support. However for the purpose of grid outliers, we will refer to the Baseline Credit Assessment (BCA) of these airlines, which represents an assessment of their credit standing excluding government support. ANZ’s BCA is 11, equivalent to Ba1, and SAS’ BCA is 18, equivalent to Caa2.