Approaching $7.20 Slowly, page-46

I should elaborate. TTV was high (before C19) largely because on-line ('low touch') TTV were at record levels (as part of the company's) long term strategy. This contributed to the low margins, as 'low touch' means low margin, though hopefully high volume (eventually). But the 'high touch' leisure revenues were also at historically low margins, at the time, I believe. I believe this latter was cyclical - though some may choose to believe it was part of a secular trend.

My point is that if the reasons TTV was high was largely because of the influence of on-line sales, then it becomes difficult to argue that FLT's 'new normal' will not capture much of this TTV because of it's reduced physical footprint.

The other thing to consider is that whilst C19 has inflicted a genuine wound to FLT, it should not be lost on anyone (without wanting to sound callous) that it was also the perfect opportunity for FLT to cull less profitable and less effective leisure operations - something that I suspect was desperately needed.

Finally, something that is very important here, is that the corporate travel operations have not been reduced (I don not believe) to anywhere near the same extent. These do not have the same fixed cost burden - and so I suspect there was no need to.

Long and short, I think that anyone that believes FLT's capacity has been reduced by anywhere near 50% in any meaningful sense, is likely to be very surprised.