And the constraint on the fleet as well is that, we are probably going to be acted by temporarily unique costs that’s going to be a little bit higher given the causes associated to return on the on the aircraft. And at the same time, we’re not extracting gains for potential new deliveries that used to have, if we receive all the deliveries according to the original plan. So basically, we have been very committed to drive the unit cost, the CASK in U.S. dollars to a similar level 2019. If you look to this quarter, maybe it is about $0.5 in U.S. dollar of CASK that is deviated, mostly related to that capacity constraint. If you remember in the first guidance that we provided, we are expecting to increase more towards to 15% to 20% of ASKs this year, and now we are reducing to maybe a low end of, low double-digits area.
So that’s, of course, that impacts, most of that cost because there is some limitation on what we can do in terms of reducing the fixed cost. And given the uncertainty, of course, this is structural overhead. It is something that’s temporarily, but it is that there is no a lot of room to reduce until, we have a more clear view of what’s going be happen in the future. And if you look to the baseline, the Company is generating a healthy profit a healthy EBITDA, that’s why it means that for every aircraft that we are going to be adding back to the operation, we are going to be creating additional EBITDA, additional cash flow that can help, of course, the next coming year cash flow in order to address higher CapEx going forward.
Daniel McKenzie: Thank you for that answer. And just following up on that last point, Mario, as we think about 2024, as we think about some of these structural costs going away, what is the level of EBITDA next year that gets you to say free cash flow breakeven just based on the CapEx that you are looking at? So I am not asking for a forecast, I am just trying to get a sense the hurdle rate for generating cash next year. And then, just kind of as a follow on to that to what extent is GOL’s loyalty program, unencumbered currently and could it be used as a source of refinancing future debt that comes due in 2025?
Mario Liao: Sure. For your first question, if you look this year, even with the EBITDA margin that we are providing, now GOL is reaching a neutral cash flow for the ongoing operations arrive. So for the current obligation, we can cover not only all the necessity related to the P&L, but also the CapEx for the ongoing operation. Of course, one of the main challenges right now is how we can address the balance sheet issues, right, and also, the CapEx that has been remained from the previous years. So some of the engines that you need to cover also this lack of new aircraft that was going to be supposed to be delivered, that that’s the impact on the cash flow. And the main problem, especially in this year was not the level of what GOL can generate in terms of digital, but also the lack of credit of availability, especially during the first half of the year.
That is something that we are working in order to establish that credit capacity, especially for the CapEx. That has been one of the important sources that we have been able to create as financing support in the previous years. So the point is that, going forward, if you can consider that the recovering capacity can help the Company in order to start to dilute fix the cost and also to drive the CASK ex-fuel going down. At the same time, the market is still very aligned in terms of the discipline of continue to keep yields and fares in a sustainable way. That’s going to be a natural expansion in terms of EBITDA. If you look prior to 2018 was a number that’s much closer to 28%, 29% to 30%. So, we don’t expect that the death recovery is going to be taken so fast.
So maybe 1 percentage point every single year is something that is reasonable, if you think that we can add capacity in conjunction to yield preservation going forward, and that definitely, if we resolve thatabout15 to 20 idle aircraft in our fleet and put that back on operation producing that EBITDA the level that it has been healthy definitely that can add as additional source in order to handle the CapEx going forward.
Daniel McKenzie: Yes. If I had to squeeze one last quick one in here that the 15 MAXs that we’re planned for this year, the final expectation for 2023, if you could just remind us, and are those all going to get bunched into 2024? Or are there additional discussions with Boeing at this point for either additional compensation or for a kind of a re-pacing of the order book?
Celso Ferrer: Yes. Hey, Dan, sorry, I was answering your question and I had a connectivity problem. I was answering exactly this, and we had — we took delivery of one plane and we expect to take delivery of at least additional four until the end of the year. That’s what we are working really close to Boeing now to — it’s like a kind of a — almost every day call to make sure that we take this capacity, which is now a little bit to the right of what we were expecting on the fourth quarter. And our main discussion today is how can we make sure that we, I mean, we catch up, as soon as possible next year on the delivers because today the MAX — the best case scenario today is to take five out of 15. So, we need the extra 10 sooner than later at the beginning of the year. And this is what we are discussing with Dan. No answer yet.
Operator: Our next question comes from João Frizo from Goldman Sachs. Please Mr. Jon your microphone is open.
João Frizo: I have two from our side. The first one relates to the guidance you guys updated. So we were just wondering if you could help us reconcile the downward revision in net revenue guidance. If you were to take into account your capacity guidance for the year and your new net revenue guidance this implies on a deterioration quite it over quarter in RASK in 4Q. So, I’m just trying to understand to what do you attribute this worsening? And the second question is related to the new exchangeable senior convertible notes. If you could just help us with the calculations to the 3.9 billion you guys recognizes as a derivative liability? Those are my two questions.
