Brussels Airport: figures per month for 2006

DannyVDB · Post by **DannyVDB** » 21 Aug 2006, 21:24

Atlantis wrote: But this result is not a good sign. July is the busiest month for BRU and there is only a small increase. Except the Sydney results is this the weakest of all in the portfolio of Macquarie Airports.

I think this is partially because of the véry good wheather in July. Less Belgians left for sunny destinations. We have to see what happens in August (bad wheather, HAINAN, ...?)

Birmingham did not good at all (-6%!) ...

Danny

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 21 Aug 2006, 21:58

Honestly, I had expected those results. When I was analysing with the same period last year, or the whole summer last year, it was very clear.

BRU received less big metal. Last year, Jetair was using MNG Airlines for flights to Turkey. They used the A300 and a lot of B737 for all those flights. Jetair is now using Inter Airlines with two A321. That made a difference for that part.

Egyptair used most of the time the A320 instead of the A330 on Sundays.

I don't have the traffic figures yet, but I think they will approx. the same. During the summer their was no segnificant increase of capacity. If the weather was good or not, the charters were full because most of the people used the early booking savings. That means, in January you don't know that we will have in July very hot days.

About Hainan, its a bit early to do some prospection. I expect that every flight is half full, it means 130 - 140 pax.

Like I have said, if you don't have a real homeplayer, the pax figures will don't take a huge flight. A homeplayer will play a key role in this. But with only 300.000 pax or less in a month on a total of approx. 1.600.000 pax it's very clear. A homeplayer have to transport at least half of those figures.

FlightSimCrew · Post by **FlightSimCrew** » 22 Aug 2006, 16:59

Indeed, lets create a homeplayer that uses 100 aircraft to reach that figure (800.000pax / month ) and losses 300mio EUR per year due to unprofitable routes. If you would like to expect to have a bancruptcy somewhere in 2008 again.. and don't start dreaming that any other lcc could carry millions of pax in BRU.. Lets face it..how much we would like to see 20-25mio pax in BRU we will need some time to get all elements into place : correct product offer, efficient fleet mix, balanced long haul activities and support from a big alliance wanting to invest in BRU..

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 22 Aug 2006, 19:51

Nobody is spreaking about 100 planes for a homeplayer.

But I can understand BIAC's point when they say they need a REAL homeplayer. That's also my opinion. We don't need a homeplayer who flies only in codeshare with other airlines. Then you create a virtual airline.
Or we can say, SNBA and Virgin are regional carriers nothing more nothing less.

And you have to admit, the European routes are now still in deep red. Therefore you didn't need 100 planes. Even with 32 small planes you can reach that.

ATC · Post by **ATC** » 22 Aug 2006, 21:33

Indeed, lets create a homeplayer that uses 100 aircraft to reach that figure (800.000pax / month ) and losses 300mio EUR per year due to unprofitable routes. If you would like to expect to have a bancruptcy somewhere in 2008 again.. and don't start dreaming that any other lcc could carry millions of pax in BRU.. Lets face it..how much we would like to see 20-25mio pax in BRU we will need some time to get all elements into place : correct product offer, efficient fleet mix, balanced long haul activities and support from a big alliance wanting to invest in BRU..

Relax... it's like Atlantis said nobody is speaking about this.
We all know that dreaming isn't enough. And big isn't always the same as being profitable. But being profitable isn't the only thing a company should be. A company should be ambitious and look in to the future.
We all now that Africa is the the golden egg for SNBA, but we also know that SNBA isn't the only player in this market. Where SABENA had an almost "African monopoly" , SNBA is in a very different African market.
Not only the European airlines come in, but also the U.S. and even the Asian airlines looking deeper into a concrete African network.

So I would say the big challenge for SNBA is keeping their current African market share. If this golden egg would change is "over and done" for SNBA.

Nevertheless BRU needs a real home player. Every mayor airport has a homeplayer(s). I think BIAC will wait two or three years if SNBA will not develop in a real airline, I'm convinced BIAC/Macquarie will look into other options to develop BRU airport.

ATC

FlightSimCrew · Post by **FlightSimCrew** » 23 Aug 2006, 12:07

Lets hear than what you consider as a REAL airline? I read a lot of comments but no recommendations or ideas,... .

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 24 Aug 2006, 16:53

BRU handeled 22.828 flights in July, that's an increase with 1,3% when you compare this with the same month last year.

Sabena_690 · Post by **Sabena_690** » 24 Aug 2006, 22:12

FlightSimCrew wrote:Lets hear than what you consider as a REAL airline? I read a lot of comments but no recommendations or ideas,... .

That's what strikes me as well: everybody complains, but nobody has a clue about what should be done (except for the ghost theories like "SN has to lease/purchase B777 aircraft").

For some strange reason, a lot of people seem to think that "SN hasn't decided about anything yet" because no press release with the new product details has been released yet. Those very same people seem to forget that big announcements like this are only communicated at press conferences, and not by simply writing a press release.

Just wait and see. When SN feels that the time is right to communicate, everything will be announced (which is the procedure for every company taking itself serious).

Last but not least: if I'm not mistaken, an airline flying 48 aircraft (VEX inclusive) is still classified as a "real airline". Fleet management is based on a lot of factors, and pleasing the spotters is not one of them! (flightsimcrew will be able to confirm

).

ATC · Post by **ATC** » 24 Aug 2006, 23:51

That's what strikes me as well: everybody complains, but nobody has a clue about what should be done (except for the ghost theories like "SN has to lease/purchase B777 aircraft").

With all do respect... I'm not an airline manager. Off course I've a few ideas, but I think everybody has ideas. I even have some dreams.

But what is the point to explain my ideas and dreams about SNBA.
I'm just a "simple" businessman who have an interest in aviation.
I think some people confuse the word "complain" with "criticism".

How long is the SNBA - Virgin Express merger going on and what are the concrete results. I'm one of the few people who think that losing "Rob Kuypers" was not a good move. Rob had some good ideas, ok ... maybe he was a little bit conservative... Rob wasn't an easy CEO, he tried to convince the board of directors with his ideas. But he discovered that this SN board of directors was even more conservative than himself.

For the moment SN holding hasn't a real leader... that's one of the big problems SN has now. I would even say the old Virgin Express management is the real and single "director" of the new SN strategy. Let's cross our fingers for the new CEO.

For some strange reason, a lot of people seem to think that "SN hasn't decided about anything yet" because no press release with the new product details has been released yet. Those very same people seem to forget that big announcements like this are only communicated at press conferences, and not by simply writing a press release.

Just wait and see. When SN feels that the time is right to communicate, everything will be announced (which is the procedure for every company taking itself serious).

ok... Let's some up what we already know...
We all remember the "spring" press conference.
We also know that this press conference was filled with "air".
some points (or should I say "ideas")

1) the new company will offer two products...
--> The public and the press asked what can we expect from these new products. Will the business class disappear ?
--> the SN answer: "hhheeuuu... It will be like on the "train", you will have two classes.

2) we want to expand our long haul traffic with 2, maybe 3 extra aircrafts.
--> On what timeframe do you want to introduce these new routes and aircraft. And can we expect some new international routes ?
--> the SN answer : We negotiate with A & B, and the leasing companies. (till the offer us something for "free" ). We're looking to expand our African network and maybe some USA destination(s). (Where, how and when ?)

3) We want to expand and reinforce our African network by looking into intra African connections and companies.
We have a number of African projects running. We're looking to concrete one are two of these projects.

Cameroon has the only project until now that has work out (a little). The last information about this wasn't very positive... but Africa will always stay Africa... so we can expect everything.
conclusion:
The SN African story: little answers and a lot of questions. What role will SN play in the future Africa knowing that every mayor airline is planning to expand their African network rapidly (Asian, European and U.S. airlines).

I'm convinced (and I might hope) SN already figured out the new strategy. But at this point I'm also convinced they still have al lot "intern" questions that haven't materialised yet. That's the reason why we discuss the same story over and over again the last few months. There isn't any new information...

Last but not least: if I'm not mistaken, an airline flying 48 aircraft (VEX inclusive) is still classified as a "real airline". Fleet management is based on a lot of factors, and pleasing the spotters is not one of them! (flightsimcrew will be able to confirm ).

To end and conclude my "story"...
A company with one airplane that flies to a destination is an airline. Ofcourse SN with their 48 aircraft is an airline. That's not the discussion. The discussion is if you can call SN an "important" airline that is interesting for BRU and other airline alliances. The answer is NO.
SN have more than 25 code share agreements going on

, SN only have 5 million passengers (SN/Virgin) and SN hasn't have an international network. So I would call the current SN a small airline with no or almost no international and even European importance.

To avoid any future discussions... I've a lot of respect for the people working for SN. The lack of funding and lack of ambition by the leadership is the reason SN hasn't really grown into a big player. The people on the other side should all get a medal, because they make the real SN. They're the "hart" of SN. I'm convinced SN has 5 million happy customers... something the BIG airlines have not ...

ATC

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 25 Aug 2006, 12:23

I'm totaly agree with ATC.

It's one of the reasons why it is so difficult for BIAC to find long haul airlines to come to BRU, because the home carrier, SNBA/Virgin, has only a very small market and no international network, except Africa.

Telspace · Post by **Telspace** » 26 Aug 2006, 15:10

Well... when you can take the train to Paris, London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt and flie almost everywhere in the world, who cares about BRU.

From BRU you just have few flights to Africa or USA, one to Asia, and intra-Europe off course....like all the other airports. Not such a big deal.
I would like to fly SNBA, but they never flie where I want to go...

Good luck to them anyway.

LJ · Post by LJ » 27 Aug 2006, 11:21

Well... when you can take the train to Paris, London, Amsterdam and Frankfurt and flie almost everywhere in the world, who cares about BRU.

Telespace sums BRU's biggest problem very good. With three major airports (AMS, CDG and FRA) nearby it's virtually impossblible to create a large hub. Moreover none of the aliances (except maybe oneworld) really need BRU for their strategy as they have plenty of other alternatives.

Furthermore when DHL moves its business to Leipzig, the number of movements (and cargo traffic) will drop even further. I hope for BIAC that they already have a plan to replace this revenue stream by then...

Thus BIAC hoping for a "real" homeplayer (not meaning SNBA) is something which they can do but will never materialise. But then again, press releases are usually full of hopes if you know reality is not something you can easily sell to your stakeholders.

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 27 Aug 2006, 12:37

You can also see it in this way: the major problem in caused by our own industry: travel industry.

I had this week contact with one of the biggest travel agencies in Belgium about the use of Hainan Airlines.

Till now they don't used it because they are using BA to bring pax, via LHR, to China. Even with the new wintertimetable there is no use of Hainan Airlines although the have the only direct link between Belgium and China.

The same for Thailand. BIAC is now in the final round with Thai to offer a direct link with BRU and BBK. The TO are using, in this case, LH and FRA to bring pax from Belgium to Thailand with Thai. The TO are offering DAILY flights. We have only one exception and that's the Sunday flight of Martinair. Those flights are month's and month's full and even there is no increase in capacity.

You can ask the same question for South Africa. BIAC is also in talk to bring a carrier to BRU. But also here is BA the carrier who fly to South Africa.

There is only one smart TO in Belgium who used a new long haul carrier: Etihad Airways. For that TO, all flights till THE END OF THE WINTERSEASON is sold out. It's not a surprise that the route AUH - BRU is one of the best for Etihad.

You can have hundred trade missions and BIAC can have talks with different potential carriers but if nobody, except business pax, is using them its not a surprise that we only see those new ones one single season at BRU.

Telspace · Post by **Telspace** » 27 Aug 2006, 13:57

Well, when I wrote " who cares about BRU ?", I mean, who could think that BRU will be in the near futur something else that what is it is today.

DHL :

I remember seeing on RTBF crow screeming " NO TO DHL", because they didn't wanted to hearnoise of planes anymore. DHL will leave BRU, thousands of people will loose their job, much less noise. Tthey should have plenty of times to dream or have nightmares about what they gonna do now with their life....Everytimes I am flying to CGH, ( that has the same configuration as HKG) , I am asking myself, why is it that people of Sao Paulo can stand this high rotation of planes that Belgians cannot do.
Few weeks ago, another RTBF's report (seen on TV5), shows the live of family around BRU. Kids crying, parents nervous, etc... During the half hour program, not even once was asked the basic question; that is : why have you decided to live in the vicinity of an airport knowing (I presume) that all the times planes are taking off or landing, thus creating noise....

POLITICS :

If you are used to watch news from Belgium medias, all the fuzz about the "dispersion" plans made by all possible authorities you can find in Belgium, from federal to local, has certainly created big confusion in the world of aviation.
If I was a airline manager, I would think twice about landing my planes at BRU.

SABENA :

The good old days of BRU are over, and I think for a long time to come. BRU high figures of passengers were linked with the existence of Sabena and it's network. Owned by the State and run probably by imcompetents, linked to political parties, Sabena should never be declared bankcrupt and stop flying during few months, but instead privatised while going through a process of deep restructuration. This would have kept a continuous flow of passagers to and from BRU. AF and KLM have taken advantages of Sabena failures and will keep doing so. Mariages with AF and Swissair were another blows, done more for political gains that for the real surviving of the national carrier.

SNBA :

I think personal of SNBA are doing their best for the company. Management seems more confused in regard of concrete plans for futur development.
European network is deep in the red, African network seems to do OK, but don't forget that Africa can be unpredictable, wars can start overnight, futur of Africa looks blink, planes can be grounded for a while for no valid reason, etc... Based on that the futur of SNBA will be a copy of what's going on in Africa, since SNBA does not have other market. Dangerous situation. Shareholders of SNBA are mostly banks (right ?), profits are low, returns on investments also. The first opportunity those shareholders will have to get rid off their assets and SNBA could be in deep financial problems.

ALLIANCE :

SNBA is part of no one. So passengers from around the world will fly SNBA if there is absolutly no other options to reach BRU, if it is a codeshare or if the travel agent makes a reservations on SNBA by mistake.
Next week I will flying from GRU to BRU.
BA, TP, IB, AF, LH, SR, AZ, KL, AA, UA, CO offer flights to BRU without even bording a SN plane, that is, remember, the home carrier of BRU. That says all.

Have a good day.

Denis

Post by **sn26567** » 28 Aug 2006, 09:16

LJ wrote:Telespace sums BRU's biggest problem very good. With three major airports (AMS, CDG and FRA) nearby it's virtually impossblible to create a large hub. Moreover none of the aliances (except maybe oneworld) really need BRU for their strategy as they have plenty of other alternatives.

This again shows the big mistake of the former government to drop Sabena like a sh.... Brussels had a home player with a world dimension, capable of attracting other world class airlines.

What a lossof revenues for the largest shareholder of BIAC at that time, what a mistake!

Airbus330lover · Post by **Airbus330lover** » 28 Aug 2006, 12:52

sn26567 wrote:This again shows the big mistake of the former government to drop Sabena like a sh.... Brussels had a home player with a world dimension, capable of attracting other world class airlines.

What a loss of revenues for the largest shareholder of BIAC at that time, what a mistake!

And it's always easier to hold, conserve and adapt a company compared with the creation of a new company started from zero.
Everyone know it .... not the belgian politicians

teddybAIR · Post by **teddybAIR** » 28 Aug 2006, 13:14

Airbus330lover wrote:
sn26567 wrote: What a loss of revenues for the largest shareholder of BIAC at that time, what a mistake!
And it's always easier to hold, conserve and adapt a company compared with the creation of a new company started from zero.
Everyone know it .... not the belgian politicians

Sorry, but I don't really agree on that one: continuing with an existing company means that you have to alter the structures, you'll still have the same cost structure, organigram, assets. Sabena's business plan was not designed to make profits, it was designed to provide jobs. A company that would have real economic responsability towards its shareholders cannot make losses during 74 years of its 75 year existence (from the top of my head)!
It might seem simple to somebody from the outside, as to them a restructuring is merely a news item on the 8pm news and they might have the opinion that it happened overnight. Yet, such restructuring soaks up a great deal of management time, employee sacrifices, frustration due to changes in company culture, discontent unions,...
Instead, in order to be able to change in a short period of time, it can be easier to start of as a new company. Nevertheless, this is only beneficial to the company, not to the other stakeholders. (Example: Pilots at SN still striked for several days although SN was going through dificult times. Without knowing it, they lost billions (they will neglect this offcourse)! All of a sudden SN was bancrupt - ok, for other reasons than those strikes, but they sure speeded up the process - and all contracts were open. And there you are with a pool of pilots wanting to fly for the new airlines and with negotiations totally open...kind of ironic don't you think?

lumumba · Post by **lumumba** » 28 Aug 2006, 16:03

Hi teddybAIR

I'm totaly agree with you.
Regards
Patrice

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 05 Sep 2006, 18:53

Macquarie Airports purchase an additional interest of 1,9% in BRU.

They announced this news some months ago, but today its finalised.
This means Map earns now 53,9% of BRU airport.

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 12 Sep 2006, 20:33

The cargo figures for June and July are released and they are.......bad.

June: total 53.857 tons. That's a decrease with 7,74%
July: total 51.747 tons. That's a decrease with 13,8%

With those figures, the record of last year will not be reached. But, we have to say that some of the carriers had a lot of cancellations during that period. Also in August. Those figures will follow later.

But maybe we have also to look at DHL. Have they also transported less, less movements??