SpiceJet Q4 Profit: SpiceJet posts record Q4 profit, marks first annual profit in seven years, ET TravelWorld

Advt
By ,
ETTravelWorld
Join the community of 2M+ industry professionals. Subscribe to Newsletter to get latest insights & analysis in your inbox.
All about ETTravelWorld industry right on your smartphone! Download the ETTravelWorld App and get the Realtime updates and Save your favourite articles.
SpiceJet has reported its highest-ever quarterly profit of INR 319 crore for the fourth quarter of FY25, a significant increase from INR 26 crore in the previous quarter. The airline also recorded a net profit of INR 48 crore for the full fiscal year, marking its first annual profit in seven years.Operating revenue rose by 17.6 per cent quarter-on-quarter to INR 1,942 crore, while EBITDA grew from INR 209 crore in Q3 to INR 527 crore in Q4. The airline achieved a passenger load factor of 88.1 per cent , signalling strong demand, while RASK stood at INR 5.66.For the full year, SpiceJet posted total revenue of INR 6,736 crore. Though down from INR 8,497 crore in FY24, the airline managed to improve profitability through cost controls and higher operational efficiency. Passenger RASK increased 9.3 per cent year-on-year, reaching INR 6.60.The airline's net worth turned positive in Q3 FY25 and rose to INR 683 crore by the end of the year, aided by a INR 500 crore equity infusion by the Promoter Group. The final tranche of INR 294.09 crore was received in the fourth quarter.In Q4, the airline added 24 domestic routes under its Summer 2025 schedule, including new destinations Tuticorin, Porbandar, and Dehradun. The carrier also launched special Haj operations from Srinagar, Guwahati, Gaya, and Kolkata, and resumed international operations with Kathmandu as the first destination of FY26.Ajay Singh, Chairman and Managing Director of SpiceJet, acknowledged the tragic Air India crash in Ahmedabad, offering condolences to the affected families.Singh added, 'Posting a profit for the second consecutive quarter and for the full financial year after seven years is a reflection of the tireless efforts of our team… With a strengthened balance sheet, renewed investor trust and continued network expansion, SpiceJet is well-positioned for sustainable growth.'The airline has also renewed its IATA Operational Safety Audit (IOSA) certification and received credit rating upgrades. Engine overhauls, in partnership with StandardAero Inc. and Carlyle Aviation, are underway to restore grounded fleet capacity.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

NDTV

4 hours ago

• NDTV

SpiceJet To Pay Rs 25,000 Compensation To Passenger For Issuing Wrong Ticket

Mumbai: A consumer commission has held that a senior citizen suffered "monetarily and mentally" after SpiceJet issued incorrect tickets while rerouting his journey in 2020, and directed the airline to pay a compensation of Rs 25,000 to the passenger. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban), in the order passed on June 17, held the budget carrier guilty of "deficient service and negligent behaviour" for the error which caused "mental harassment" to the passenger. In view of the urgent need of the passenger (age not specified in the order), the airline had made an alternate booking- where the wrong ticket was issued- after his initial flight was cancelled due to bad weather. The commission acknowledged that the flight cancellation was beyond the control of the airline, and the Air Traffic Control (ATC) had taken the decision in view of the passengers' safety. It noted the airline had taken all the necessary efforts to provide an alternate ticket to the complainant, However, the said ticket was incorrect and thereby the complainant suffered "monetarily and mentally", it said. The commission further stated the complainant also "acted negligently". "Had the complainant checked the ticket when it was issued, the mistake could have been rectified on the spot and the complainant could have saved himself from further hardship," it said. The complainant, a senior citizen residing in Ghatkopar area here, booked Spicejet tickets from Mumbai to Darbhanga for December 5, 2020, and a return journey two days later. While the Mumbai to Darbhanga leg of the journey was completed, the return flight was cancelled due to bad weather. The complaint said as he had to appear for a PhD online examination in Mumbai on December 8, 2020, he requested an alternate arrangement. SpiceJet then provided an alternate ticket for travel from Patna to Kolkata and then Kolkata to Mumbai on the same day. However, upon reaching Patna, airport authorities informed him that the issued tickets were incorrect, as the connecting flight from Kolkata to Mumbai was scheduled to depart before his arrival in Kolkata, the complaint claimed. This error forced the complainant to book another flight for the following morning at his own expense, causing significant hardship, mental agony and financial loss. In such a situation, he also missed his online examination due to delayed arrival in Mumbai, the complainant said. Hence, the man approached the consumer panel, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on part of the airline. He sought a refund of the fare amount of Rs 14,577 along with a compensation of Rs 2 lakh for mental agony and Rs 25,000 as the cost of litigation. SpiceJet, in its defense, argued the flight cancellation was due to bad weather, an instance beyond its control, and its liability is limited as per the Carriage by Air Act, 1972. The airline stated that an alternate flight was provided without additional charges and the full ticket amount had been refunded to the complainant through his booking agency. The commission noted the flight cancellation was "beyond the control" of the airline. It stressed that the flight cancellation had genuine reasons and the ATC took the decision in the interest of passenger safety. The airline had taken all the necessary efforts to provide alternate tickets to the complainant. However, the said ticket was incorrect, it observed. The opposite party (airline), after realising the mistake, reimbursed the complainant. "Hence, the opposite party had taken suo motu efforts to cover the financial damage to the complainant," the commission held. It, however, underlined that the airline cannot escape from the negligent act of issuance of wrong ticket to the complainant. "Hence, in our opinion, the opposite party is guilty of deficient service and negligent behaviour by issuing incorrect ticket, which threw the complainant in an unwarranted mental harassment," the commission ruled. It held that the complainant deserves to be compensated for the said mental agony as well as legal expenses. Hence, the commission directed the airline pay the passenger Rs 25,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 5,000 for the litigation cost.

Business Standard

4 hours ago

• Business Standard

SpiceJet to pay ₹25K compensation to passenger for issuing wrong ticket

A consumer commission here has held that a senior citizen suffered "monetarily and mentally" after SpiceJet issued incorrect tickets while rerouting his journey in 2020, and directed the airline to pay a compensation of Rs 25,000 to the passenger. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban), in the order passed on June 17, held the budget carrier guilty of "deficient service and negligent behaviour" for the error which caused "mental harassment" to the passenger. In view of the urgent need of the passenger (age not specified in the order), the airline had made an alternate booking- where the wrong ticket was issued- after his initial flight was cancelled due to bad weather. The commission acknowledged that the flight cancellation was beyond the control of the airline, and the Air Traffic Control (ATC) had taken the decision in view of the passengers' safety. It noted the airline had taken all the necessary efforts to provide an alternate ticket to the complainant, However, the said ticket was incorrect and thereby the complainant suffered "monetarily and mentally", it said. The commission further stated the complainant also "acted negligently". "Had the complainant checked the ticket when it was issued, the mistake could have been rectified on the spot and the complainant could have saved himself from further hardship," it said. The complainant, a senior citizen residing in Ghatkopar area here, booked Spicejet tickets from Mumbai to Darbhanga for December 5, 2020, and a return journey two days later. While the Mumbai to Darbhanga leg of the journey was completed, the return flight was cancelled due to bad weather. The complaint said as he had to appear for a PhD online examination in Mumbai on December 8, 2020, he requested an alternate arrangement. SpiceJet then provided an alternate ticket for travel from Patna to Kolkata and then Kolkata to Mumbai on the same day. However, upon reaching Patna, airport authorities informed him that the issued tickets were incorrect, as the connecting flight from Kolkata to Mumbai was scheduled to depart before his arrival in Kolkata, the complaint claimed. This error forced the complainant to book another flight for the following morning at his own expense, causing significant hardship, mental agony and financial loss. In such a situation, he also missed his online examination due to delayed arrival in Mumbai, the complainant said. Hence, the man approached the consumer panel, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on part of the airline. He sought a refund of the fare amount of Rs 14,577 along with a compensation of Rs 2 lakh for mental agony and Rs 25,000 as the cost of litigation. SpiceJet, in its defense, argued the flight cancellation was due to bad weather, an instance beyond its control, and its liability is limited as per the Carriage by Air Act, 1972. The airline stated that an alternate flight was provided without additional charges and the full ticket amount had been refunded to the complainant through his booking agency. The commission noted the flight cancellation was "beyond the control" of the airline. It stressed that the flight cancellation had genuine reasons and the ATC took the decision in the interest of passenger safety. The airline had taken all the necessary efforts to provide alternate tickets to the complainant. However, the said ticket was incorrect, it observed. The opposite party (airline), after realising the mistake, reimbursed the complainant. "Hence, the opposite party had taken suo motu efforts to cover the financial damage to the complainant," the commission held. It, however, underlined that the airline cannot escape from the negligent act of issuance of wrong ticket to the complainant. "Hence, in our opinion, the opposite party is guilty of deficient service and negligent behaviour by issuing incorrect ticket, which threw the complainant in an unwarranted mental harassment," the commission ruled. It held that the complainant deserves to be compensated for the said mental agony as well as legal expenses. Hence, the commission directed the airline pay the passenger Rs 25,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs 5,000 for the litigation cost.

Mint

4 hours ago

• Mint

SpiceJet asked to pay ₹25,000 compensation to passenger for issuing wrong ticket

Mumbai, Jun 22 (PTI) A consumer commission here has held that a senior citizen suffered "monetarily and mentally" after SpiceJet issued incorrect tickets while rerouting his journey in 2020, and directed the airline to pay a compensation of ₹ 25,000 to the passenger. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mumbai (Suburban), in the order passed on June 17, held the budget carrier guilty of "deficient service and negligent behaviour" for the error which caused "mental harassment" to the passenger. In view of the urgent need of the passenger (age not specified in the order), the airline had made an alternate booking- where the wrong ticket was issued- after his initial flight was cancelled due to bad weather. The commission acknowledged that the flight cancellation was beyond the control of the airline, and the Air Traffic Control (ATC) had taken the decision in view of the passengers' safety. It noted the airline had taken all the necessary efforts to provide an alternate ticket to the complainant, However, the said ticket was incorrect and thereby the complainant suffered "monetarily and mentally", it said. The commission further stated the complainant also "acted negligently". "Had the complainant checked the ticket when it was issued, the mistake could have been rectified on the spot and the complainant could have saved himself from further hardship," it said. The complainant, a senior citizen residing in Ghatkopar area here, booked Spicejet tickets from Mumbai to Darbhanga for December 5, 2020, and a return journey two days later. While the Mumbai to Darbhanga leg of the journey was completed, the return flight was cancelled due to bad weather. The complaint said as he had to appear for a PhD online examination in Mumbai on December 8, 2020, he requested an alternate arrangement. SpiceJet then provided an alternate ticket for travel from Patna to Kolkata and then Kolkata to Mumbai on the same day. However, upon reaching Patna, airport authorities informed him that the issued tickets were incorrect, as the connecting flight from Kolkata to Mumbai was scheduled to depart before his arrival in Kolkata, the complaint claimed. This error forced the complainant to book another flight for the following morning at his own expense, causing significant hardship, mental agony and financial loss. In such a situation, he also missed his online examination due to delayed arrival in Mumbai, the complainant said. Hence, the man approached the consumer panel, alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on part of the airline. He sought a refund of the fare amount of ₹ 14,577 along with a compensation of ₹ 2 lakh for mental agony and ₹ 25,000 as the cost of litigation. SpiceJet, in its defense, argued the flight cancellation was due to bad weather, an instance beyond its control, and its liability is limited as per the Carriage by Air Act, 1972. The airline stated that an alternate flight was provided without additional charges and the full ticket amount had been refunded to the complainant through his booking agency. The commission noted the flight cancellation was "beyond the control" of the airline. It stressed that the flight cancellation had genuine reasons and the ATC took the decision in the interest of passenger safety. The airline had taken all the necessary efforts to provide alternate tickets to the complainant. However, the said ticket was incorrect, it observed. The opposite party (airline), after realising the mistake, reimbursed the complainant. "Hence, the opposite party had taken suo motu efforts to cover the financial damage to the complainant," the commission held. It, however, underlined that the airline cannot escape from the negligent act of issuance of wrong ticket to the complainant. "Hence, in our opinion, the opposite party is guilty of deficient service and negligent behaviour by issuing incorrect ticket, which threw the complainant in an unwarranted mental harassment," the commission ruled. It held that the complainant deserves to be compensated for the said mental agony as well as legal expenses.