foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:And yes Geneva is a stupid choice for 5 times daily
BRU-GVA is actually served 7x daily. Your suggestion to reduce the number of flights on this route clearly proves your lack of decent commercial/financial/business information and knowledge (for which I don't blame you, but don't act as a know-it-all if you don't have the necessary info to speak up).
foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:If all the planes are leased, then bru.air is doomed to fail.
Please enlighten us with a business case to explain your vision.
foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:As stated, the African network as well as the middle-east are the opportunities they need to take.
Again, I'm looking forward to a business case of those profitable routes SN's planning managers apparently never considered our thought of.
foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:And if those Avro' s are all leased, why can t they get rid of them and lease some real money-makers like the new generation of Embraer's?
Perhaps because carefully prepared studies proved that SN is currently better off with the ARJ?
foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:Am sure they can get good offers seen that Embraer is looking for customers for its new category of aircraft. AM sure banks are ready to give them the money too.
No offence, but it really looks like you are the missing link in SN's Purchasing department. Ever considered to apply for a job?
Flightmate wrote:Somebody should always be looking on the other airlines (Sky europe and Easy) to see what their prices are, and change our prices accordingly.
Looking at your posts, Flightmate, you obviously assume that "those from the offices" are sleeping on their desk all day, going home with another wage increase they all apparently got. Honestly, if SN is taking its airline business serious (of which I'm convinced they are), be sure that SkyEurope and Easyjet are being monitored VERY closely.
Flightmate wrote:Don't put Avros on fully booked routes (meaning leaving pax behind), instead use your half-filled A319 or B737...
SN certainly isn't putting 150-seaters on destinations without demand and ARJs on routes where "the flights are always full" on purpose. I assume it's much more profitable for SN to put a B734 with 164 seats on a route where you can attract 110 high yielding passengers, than putting an ARJ-100 on a route where you can even fill your plane with 200 seats but at very very low prices.
@MarkyUK: excellent posting, thanks a lot!