It has been stated before, the sale lease back transactions are NOT part of revenue, they are a line item on the balance sheet. Not a penny from a SLB is baked into the net profit. You can read about the SLB transactions in the 10k and 10q and you can see the actual line item on the balance sheet. You can also read the "fare revenue" as well as the "non-fare revenue", it is all in black and white. Please stop suggesting the only reason F9 turns a profit is because they execute a sale lease back, it has absolutely nothing to do with profits and losses.

The filing labels SLB's as "Gains recognized on sale-leaseback transactions" and the average return is around $5 million per SLB (each agreement is different, one might be $3 and one might be $7). The gains recognized on sale-leaseback transactions is entered AFTER net income. In other words, all expenses are deducted from all revenue (eight line items of revenue, none including SLB's) and then SLB's are added to the balance sheet.

Unrelated to SLB's but related to your post, comparing what Spirit is doing to what F9 is doing is futile and meaningless. We both fly airbus and we both operate a ULCC model. That is where the similarity ends. One turned another profit last quarter, one is operating at a negative double digit margin (with esimates going as low as -30% margin). One has zero long term debt (zero, only aircraft deliveries and PDP's which can be deferred), the other has more than $3 billion in debt. I could go on and on, but I hope you get the point.